House of Representatives
31 May 1972

27th Parliament · 2nd Session

  1. House of Representatives
  2. 27th Parliament
  3. 1972

Mr SPEAKER (Hon. Sir William Aston) took the chair at 2 p.m. and read prayers.

page 3307

PETITIONS

The Clerk:

– Petitions have been lodged for presentation as follows and copies will be referred to the appropriate Ministers:

Social Services

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled the petition of the undersigned electors of the Commonwealth of Australia respectfully showeth:

That on 10th December 1948, Australia signed the ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’. Article 25 reads: ‘Everyone has the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age and other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.’

Yet, 23 years later, in our country of great national wealth and abundance it is to the nation’s shame that many thousands of our people live in a state of being inconsistent with the dignity and worth of the human person - languishing in poverty and want, neglect and the lack of proper care necessary for their health and well-being.

We, the undersigned, respectfully draw to your attention that the conscience of the nation is not at ease while the records of our country show that social services are not comparable with that of other advanced countries administering such services, therefore, we call upon the Commonwealth Government to immediately legislate for:

Base pension rate - 30 per cent of the average weekly male earnings, all states, plus supplementary assistance and allowances based on a percentage of such earnings. Unemployed benefits equal to the foregoing.

Completely free health services to cover all needs of social service pensioners - hospitalisation, chronic and long-term illness, fractures, anaesthetics, specialist, pharmaceutical, hearing aids, dental, optical, physiotherapy, chiropody, surgical aids and any other appliances.

Commonwealth Government to promote a comprehensive national scheme in cooperation with the States and make finance available to provide for the building of public hospitals, nursing and hostel-type homes necessary to effectively meet the special requirements of aged people, in conjunction with a comprehensive domiciliary care programme to enable aged people to stay in their homes.

Mental illness placed in the same position as physical illness.

Substantial Commonwealth increase in the $5 subsidy a day per public bed pensioner patient in general hospitals.

Ten per cent of Commonwealth revenue to local government for general activities which now include social welfare, health, conservation and other community needs. Commonwealth subsidy for the waiving of rates for pensioners.

Commonwealth Government to increase the non-repayable grant to the States for low rental home units for pensioners.

Royal Commission or other form of public enquiry into Australia’s social welfare structure that Australia may be brought into line with accepted world standards of the most advanced countries. by Mr Calwell, Mr Bryant, Dr Cass and Mr Kirwan.

Petitions severally received.

Australian Tourist Industry

To the Honourable the Speaker of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of citizens of the Commonwealth respectfully showeth:

That we, citizens of the Commonwealth, earnestly request our government to:

  1. Take cognisance of serious financial difficulty facing the Australian tourist industry.
  2. Give the industry financial aid in the forthcoming Federal Budget.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Bonnett and Mr Kirwan.

Petitions severally received.

Education

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

  1. That the Australian Education Council’s report on the needs of government education services has established serious deficiencies in education, the most important areas being a severe shortage of teachers, inadequate accommodation, and, as a result, oversized classes.
  2. That extra Federal finance is urgently required to save the government school system.
  3. That while the needs of the government schools are being neglected, large amounts of public money is being given, in various and numerous grants, to private schools.

Your petitioners most humbly pray that the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled will take immediate steps to make emergency Federal finance available to the States for State school education, and divert the large sums of public money being spent on private schools, to the government school system for which the government is truly responsible.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Irwin.

Petition received.

Education

The Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of citizens of the Commonwealth respectfully showeth:

That the Commonwealth Parliament has acted to remove some inadequacies in the Australian Education system.

That there is a major inadequacy at present in the Australian education opportunity for all.

That more than 500,000 children suffer from serious lack of equal opportunity.

That Australia cannot afford to waste the talents of one sixth of its school children.

That only the Commonwealth has the financial resources for special programmes to remove inadequacies.

That nations such as the United Kingdom and the United States have shown that the chief impetus for change and the finance for improvements come from the National Government. Your petitioners request that your honourable House make legal provision for -

  1. A joint Commonwealth/State enquiry into the inequalities in Australian education to obtain evidence on which to base long term national programmes for the elimination of inequalities.
  2. The immediate financing of official programmes for low income earners, migrants, Aborigines, rural and inner suburban dwellers and handicapped children.
  3. The provision of pre-school opportunities for al] children from culturally different or socially and economically disadvantaged backgrounds.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Bennett.

Petition received.

Aboriginal Welfare

To the honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

That there is a crisis in Aboriginal Welfare in the South West Land Division of Western Australia resulting from a population explosion, poor housing and hygiene and unemployment and unemployability.

That there is a need to phase out Native Reserves in the South West Land Division of Western Australia over the next three years.

That town housing must be provided for all Aboriginal families where the bread winner has permanent employment or an age or invalid pension entitlement

That such housing must be supported by the appointment of permanent ‘Home-maker’ assistance in the ratio of one home-maker to every eight houses or part thereof.

That incentives of housing, ‘home-maker’ services and training facilities must be created in centres of potential employment for those who are currently unemployed or unemployable.

That insufficient State or Federal assistance has been made available to meet these requirements.

That adequate finance to meet these requirements can only be provided by the Commonwealth government.

Your petitioners most humbly pray that the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled will give earnest consideration to this most vital matter.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Kirwan.

Petition received.

Postmaster-General’s Department

The Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

That the Postmaster-General’s Department Central Office policy, of centralising Post Office affairs and activities under the various titles of Area Management, Area Mail Centres, Area Parcel Centres and similar titles is resulting in both loss of service and lowering of the standards of service to the public, directly resulting in the closing of Post Offices, which is detrimental to the public interest.

Your petitioners most humbly pray that the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled will take immediate steps to:

  1. Call a halt to all closing of Post Offices and reorganising within the Post Office until full details of the proposed savings and all details of alteration to the standards of service to the public are made available to Parliament, and
  2. Initiate a joint Parliamentary inquiry into the Postmaster-General’s Department, to assess the degree on which it should be run as a normal business undertaking and to what extent its unprofitable activities should be subsidised as a public service charged more correctly to national development.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Bonnett and Dr Everingham.

Petitions severally received.

Eyre Highway

To the Honourable the Speaker and the Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled, we, the citizens of the Commonwealth of Australia, residents in the State of Western Australia, do humbly petition and pray that all levels of Government responsible in Australia will take note of the wishes of we, the citizens, in so far as we request:

That the Commonwealth co-operate with all authorities to ensure the early sealing of the one east-west road link, the Eyre Highway, and that urgent consideration be given to increasing the maintenance of the road in the intervening period and endeavour to curtail the dreadful road toll, injury and vehicle damage.

That the Commonwealth consider this road as a Defence Measure for the whole of Australia and road link connecting the two coasts of the continent, and consideration to the sealing from the aspects of the increase of trade and tourism within Australia, thus encouraging the retention of the finance in Australia which is now going overseas. Consideration be given on the grounds of a better understanding between the people of the States of Australia, because of their improved ability to travel and meet one another.

That consideration be given to one of the most heavily taxed groups within the community, the motorist, and be given the opportunity to enjoy some of the tax fee as charged, by being able to travel with reasonable comfort and safety on the major highways of Australia.

That consideration be given to returning specifically for this purpose the increased revenue received from the increase in petrol tax.

We, the petitions humbly pray that the House of Representatives in the Parliament assembled would take immediate steps to ensure provision of funds to provide for the all weather sealing of this important highway, the Eyre Highway, linking east and west and your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Bennett.

Petition received.

Broadcasting and Television

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned showeth:

  1. That the Australian people both in Metropolitan and Rural areas should have the best of television programmes available to them and that television as a powerful means of communication should not be in the control of too few hands.
  2. The increased quota for Australian dramatic productions should not be imposed by the Australian Broadcasting Control Board at the expense of Australian professional variety or Australian documentary or educational programmes, but directed more towards cutting down expenditure on the purchase of imported productions, thus effecting a considerable saving in Australia’s overseas balance of payments.
  3. The Australian Parliament has a responsibility to encourage the development of our National identity, character and heritage and the promulgation, for the sake of our children, of an adequate picture of Australia, her standards, mores and way of life, particularly through the media of Radio and Television, which is in the immediate control of the Australian Government.
  4. Until constructive and positive action is taken by the Australian Government to promote Australian culture and protect the employment and professional standards of Australian writers, artists and producers in Australia itself there is little likelihood of stopping the flow of Australian talent from Australia to other countries.
  5. The Australian Broadcasting Control Board must insist that its new quota standards of Australian dramatic content on television are rigidly imposed and enforced on all commercial television stations.

Your Petitioners most humbly pray that the House of Representatives, in Parliament assembled, should -

Cause the Australian Government to recognise the right of Australian professional people engaged in the creative and performing arts to further develop their skills and talents in Australia, and to be protected from overseas programmes in a way that will encourage an Australian Television and Radio industry that can reflect and contribute to our identity and growth as a Nation.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will every pray. by Mr Dobie.

Petition received.

Aboriginal Embassy

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned electors (Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal, islander and nonIslanders) of the Commonwealth of Australia respectfully showeth:

  1. That the Aboriginal Embassy established on the lawns opposite Parliament House Canberra is less offensive aesthetically, more comfortable and hygienic than conditions under which many Aboriginal people are presently living.
  2. That it has been recognised by Foreign Governments and its Officials have always acted with due dignity and decorum becoming their Official Status.

And we, the undersigned, respectfully request that:

  1. Proposed legislation to enable the Government to abolish this Aboriginal Embassy be immediately withdrawn, and
  2. That the Aboriginal Embassy be given free and dignified accommodation befitting Ambassadorial Status in a suitable building in Canberra City.

Further- we protest against the proposed legislation as being undemocratic, unAustralian and a threat to the freedom of all Australian citizens.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Bryant.

Petition received.

Social Services

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

That due to higher living costs, including increasing charges for health services, most aged persons living on fixed incomes are suffering acute distress.

That Australia is the only English-speaking country in the world to retain a means test for aged pensioners and that a number of European countries also have no means test.

That today’s aged persons have paid at least 7i per cent of their taxable incomes towards social services since the absorption, of Special Social Services Taxation in Income Tax and continue to make such payments. (7i per cent of all taxable incomes for 1966-67 amounted to $783,082,150 and this year will produce more than $800,000,000, more than sufficient to abolish the means test immediately.)

That the middle income group, the most heavilytaxed sector of the community, subsidises the tax commitment of the upper income bracket through the amount of social services contributions collected by the government and not spent on the purposes for which they were imposed.

That the abolition of the means test will give a boost to the economy by -

  1. additional tax revenue from pensions
  2. swelling of the work, force, and
  3. increased spending by pensioners.

That it is considered just and right to allow people who have been frugal, have lived their lives with dignity and have been anything but an encumbrance on the nation, to maintain that dignity to the end of their lives free from fear of penury.

Your petitioners most humbly pray that the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled will take immediate steps to abolish the means test for all people who have reached retiring age or who otherwise qualify for social service benefits or pensions.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Bennett

Petition received.

Pakistani Refugees

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned respectfully sheweth:

That death from mass starvation and disease is occurring among Pakistan’s refugees on a scale unprecedented in modern history.

That, as part of the world community, the Australian Government has an immediate responsibility for concerted action.

That present Government atd to the refugees in India is meagre and shameful for a country of Australia’s position and wealth.

Your petitioners most humbly pray that the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled, should:

Increase monetary aid for the refugees in India to at least SI. 00 per capita immediately and make provision for a further and extra grant for the victims of the famine in East Pakistan.

Grant tax deductibility to donations of S2.00 and over to Australian voluntary agencies working with the refugee problem.

Ensure that the Australian Government does all in its power to help bring about a political settlement which would be acceptable to the people of East Pakistan.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Wallis. Petition received.

Richmond Airport

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition from certain residents of the western suburbs in the Sydney Metropolitan area and surrounding districts respectfully showeth:

That due to an expanding passenger air travel business together with larger and more powerful jet aircraft, aircraft noise has already become a serious problem for people living in the vicinity of airports.

That jet aircraft operations have a detrimental effect by way of air and noise pollution on the environment and airports should be situated so as to preserve the environment of populated areas.

That protest should be made against the proposal to establish an international airport at Richmond owing to the detrimental effect it would have for the environment there and in surrounding districts.

Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that this House take appropriate steps to ensure that the Government does not proceed with the proposal to site the second, twenty four hour international airport for Sydney at Richmond or anywhere else in the far western suburbs of the metropolitan area. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Luchetti.

Petition received.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. This humble petition of citizens of the Commonwealth of Australia showeth:

That in January 1972 the Soviet Secret Police, the KGB, arrested 19 prominent intellectuals in Ukraine on charges of alleged anti-Soviet activities.

That in fact the activities of the arrested intellectuals consisted of: Opposing -

  1. Secret trials and harsh sentences of imprisonment;
  2. The forced Russification of Ukraine;
  3. The destruction of Ukrainian culture; and demanding:
  4. Greater cultural and political autonomy for Ukraine;
  5. The implementation of the Civil Liberties guaranteed by Soviet Law.

That the abovementioned activities are all in accordance with the provisions laid down and guaranteed by Articles 124, 125 and 17 of the Soviet Constitution.

Your petitioners most humbly pray that the Federal Government -

  1. Take the necessary diplomatic steps to defend the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which is being violated by the Soviet authorities.
  2. Urge the United Nations to effectively intervene on behalf of the arrested and jailed Ukrainian intellectuals.

And your petitioners as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Fox.

Petition received.

page 3311

QUESTION

WOOL: RANDALL COMMITTEE OF INQUIRY

Mr WHITLAM:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Minister for Primary Industry a question. Has the Randall Committee reported on the remaining areas into which it has been inquiring? If so, has Cabinet yet considered the report? If the Government has received the report but has not yet considered it, when does the honourable gentleman expect that Cabinet will consider it? In any case, how soon would he expect to be able to make an announcement on the result of Cabinet’s deliberations on the report?

Mr SINCLAIR:
Minister for Primary Industry · NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– The answer to the first part of the honourable gentleman’s question is yes; the answer to the second part of his question is no; and the answer to the third part is ‘as soon as possible’. As soon as the Government has made a decision it will be announced publicly, well in advance of the opening of the new wool selling season.

page 3311

QUESTION

PROJECT N AIRCRAFT

Mr ERWIN:
BALLAARAT, VICTORIA

– I ask the Minister for Supply a question. Now that the Government has agreed to produce 20 of the Project N aircraft manufactured by the Government Aircraft Factories, will the Minister inform the House of the action that is being taken to promote sales and whether the aircraft has yet been named?

Mr GARLAND:
Minister for Supply · CURTIN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · LP

– The Government is pursuing a vigorous campaign to sell the aircraft, which at present is known as Project N, and is examining several alternatives to find an experienced sales representative or representatives with a world-wide network of contracts. The Government believes that there is cause for confidence in selling this aircraft. Although it is probable that the aircraft can be sold in lots of one’s and two’s only, the interest which has been shown indicates that it should be possible to sell a considerable number of the aircraft. For that reason it is necessary to find an experienced sales organisation. I hope to be able to announce before very long that one has been found. However, on this point I would say that the Australian aircraft industry has a great opportunity to sell many of these aircraft, provided that it can maintain fairly stable cost of production. As to the second part of the question, honourable members will be aware that the Government has received many suggestions for a name for this aircraft and that competitions have been held by radio stations and newspapers for this purpose. The Government has taken advice about the sort of name that would be more acceptable in the markets to which it looks, namely, in North America and Europe, and has decided that the name of the aircraft should be Nomad.

page 3311

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL LINE: INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE

Mr DAVIES:
BRADDON, TASMANIA

– My question is directed to the Minister for Shipping and Transport. In the event of the compulsory conference in Sydney this afternoon not reaching a decision, will the Minister give urgent consideration to convening immediately a conference of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, together with officials of the union concerned and the Australian National Line, in at attempt to avert a tie-up of all ANL ships which, if it occurs, would have very serious effects on the economic life of the island State of Tasmania?

Mr NIXON:
Minister for Shipping and Transport · GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA · CP

– The honourable member’s question refers to the fact that the Professional Radio Employees Institute of Australasia has threatened to withdraw its operators from Australian National Line ships in protest at the use of the ship Echuca’ on the run from Melbourne to Tasmania to service that State’s export container trade. As the House may recall, the ANL purchased the ‘Echuca’ specifically for the Melbourne to Tasmania run and provision was made for the use of a radio telephone operator rather than the usual wireless telegraphers - the sort of dit-dit-dit-dash men - that ships traditionally carry.

Some time last year the members of the Professional Radio Employees Institute went out on strike and, as a result, tied up the ships of the Australian National Line. After a great deal of consultation with all the unions involved it emerged that no other union believed that safety of life at sea was imperilled or that ships were endangered in any way by transferring from wireless operators to radio telephonists. Finally, the ‘Echuca’ was allowed to sail and the National Line ships put to sea on the condition that there was set up a committee consisting of technicians from the Postmaster-General’s Department and from, I think, Amalgamated Wireless (Australasia) Ltd, or some other experts in radio, as well as representatives of the unions involved, to study the effect of the use of radio telephony as against wireless operation.

It has always amazed me that although we can talk by radiotelephone to men on the moon, members of the Professional Radio Employees Institute refuse to believe that we can talk to people half way across Bass Strait without impairing safety. .There has been reasonable peace since the committee was set up. The facts are that the committee is about to report back to me and, I imagine, to the President of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, and to the employer representatives, on the long term use of radio telephonists as against wireless operators. 1 am absolutely staggered to think that the Professional Radio Employees Institute should take strike action at a time, when, shall we say, the umpire is about to make a decision. It seems to me a quite irrational and irresponsible thing to threaten to tie up the Australian National Line ships and to place in jeopardy not only the freight from the island State of Tasmania, with all the troubles that that foreshadows, but also the operations of the overseas ships of the Australian National Line.

It has taken us years, of course, to get back into the overseas shipping business and now, by some irresponsible action on the part of one union, we can see the possibility of all the ships of the Australian National Line being tied up. I deplore the attitude that has been taken by the Professional Radio Employees Institute on this occasion. I think it is totally deplorable and quite irresponsible. I cannot use strong enough words to describe it.

Mr Whitlam:

– Hear, hear.

Mr NIXON:

– I am fascinated to find that the Leader of the Opposition agrees with me.

Mr Whitlam:

– There is no doubt about our attitude on that.

Mr NIXON:

– I can only hope that he will use his good offices with the President of the ACTU, Mr Hawke, to do something to pull this union into line.

Mr Whitlam:

– He has the same attitude.

Mr NIXON:

– It is his responsibility. He ought to do something to pull this union into line.

page 3312

QUESTION

NAVY: DISCHARGES

Mr BONNETT:
HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

– My question is directed to the Minister for the Navy. Some weeks ago, I think in answer to a question from the Opposition, the Minister indicated that he hoped to introduce a system whereby naval personnel could get a full discharge by giving 18 months notice. How is this plan developing? How will this affect the numerical strength of the Service, especially of senior personnel?

Dr MACKAY:
Minister for the Navy · EVANS, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– It is quite right that a few weeks ago I was asked a question about this matter - I think by the honourable member for Sydney - and I indicated that I had hopes that a scheme of free discharge, after giving 18 months notice subsequent to certain requirements of return of service being fulfilled, could be instituted. I am happy to say that agreement has been reached on this scheme and it will be announced in the course of a few days. The details of the scheme, roughly speaking, are that a junior recruit now entering the Navy at ISi years of age at HMAS ‘Leeuwin’ will not be required to serve the full 12 years of his engagement. He will have to fulfil a minimum requirement of 4i years service. As to the effect on the numbers borne in the Service, of course the basic idea behind it is to make the Service more attractive as a career for young men. It is hoped that this scheme will improve the enlistment rate, which is not entirely satisfactory at the moment. Nevertheless there are indications that the naval service is being seen as more and more attractive. The re-entry rate has risen by over 100 per cent in recent months. Re-engagements of senior sailors are running at the rate of about 70 per cent which is, as everyone will appreciate, a very high figure. 1 will not be satisfied until I see the institution of a scheme whereby sailors can enter the Service for a lifetime career, not simply for stipulated periods of 12 years or 9 years. The scheme would envisage their being able to remain in the Navy throughout their working life with the possibility of discharge after 18 months notice, which would be the minimum requirement. I believe that this will make the Navy still more attractive and will increase the numbers rather than otherwise.

page 3313

QUESTION

FRUIT MARKETING

Mr SINCLAIR:
CP

– As I have explained in this House and elsewhere, there have been very real problems in the horticultural sector of primary industry. It is true that there have been discussions at various levels about the way the industry could be helped. In addition, following the submission of the report by Professor Grant to the previous Tasmanian Government to the Commonwealth Government a representation was made concerning the constitution of either a national export board or an Australian marketing board. As a third alternative the Tasmanian Government itself was to consider the constitution of a State board. At this stage I have, through consultations with the Apple and Pear Board and with others in the industry, been able to identify a few of the particular areas where perhaps further assistance is needed. As the honourable gentleman knows, rising freight rates have been one of the particular problems that the industry has faced on export markets. This, in conjunction with the problems of excess production in some sectors of the industry, and declining market opportunities, have placed the whole industry in a very difficult position. At the moment a CommonwealthState committee of officials is examining the alternatives available. Discussions are to be held shortly with State Ministers on some aspects relating to canned deciduous fruits. The whole area is still under active deliberation by the Commonwealth and the States. Unfortunately it is not an area which lends itself to easy solutions. Nonetheless I recognise and the Government recognises the quite critical problem that faces many growers in this area and we are doing all we can to ensure that in respect of the complex arrangements that exist on a Federal basis between the Commonwealth and the States everything that we can do will be expedited.

page 3313

QUESTION

DARWIN PORT DEVELOPMENT

Mr CALDER:
NORTHERN TERRITORY

– I ask a question of the Minister for National Development. I refer to the Government’s $23m plans to develop the port of Darwin and also to the report concerning it made to the Northern Territory Legislative Council which, along with other considerations, is occupying the attention of an interdepartmental committee. Can the Minister advise the House what stage the reconsideration of the developmental plans has reached as the port of Darwin is of vital importance not only to north Australia but also to the whole country?

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

– The planning stage for the development of the new port of Darwin was completed last year. As the honourable gentleman is aware, the case had been examined by the Public Works Committee and it was shortly thereafter that there was a downturn in the steel industry throughout the world. This caused a falling off in the estimated additional requirements for iron ore from Frances Creek in the Northern Territory. Because this was one of the keys to the major bulk facility development at East Arm this meant that the matter had to be reviewed. So we called upon the steering committee to review the situation there. It has been considering proposals in relation to not proceeding with the bulk facility at East Arm but to proceeding with continued use of the existing facility which is in the main harbour area, and also to provide some additional permanent normal loading facilities in the main harbour itself. These proposals, of course, will not be as costly, but they will include the major facility for normal cargo handling and the small ship facility. The bulk loading facility will only be deferred until such time as there is an upturn in the world steel industry and the demand for iron ore increases. We expect that additional contracts would then be available to the producing company in the Northern Territory. At the present time the steering committee has come up with 2 alternative proposals. We are in the process of examining those at the moment and I do hope that my colleague, the Minister for the Interior, and I will be in a position to make an anouncement regarding this in a matter of the next month or so.

page 3314

QUESTION

MONETARY AND CREDIT CONTROL

Mr CONNOR:
CUNNINGHAM, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I direct my question to the Prime Minister. Does he agree that control of the volume of money and credit is the prime function of a national government? Has he noted that in the last 20 years control of money and credit through the Reserve Bank of Australia and the orthodox banking system has dropped from nearly 70 per cent to less than 46 per cent? To what extent has the para-banking system, particularly merchant banks, contributed to this? What action does his Government propose in respect of the excessive inflow of overseas funds which have swollen Australian exchange reserves to a dangerously high level?

Mr McMAHON:
Prime Minister · LOWE, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– As to the first part of the honourable gentleman’s question, monetary and interest rate policy is obviously one of the instruments that the Government must use in order to control inflationary pressures, but I think that the honourable member will know that on this occasion they have worked only at the margin because the real cause of difficulty was the increase in average wages in excess of productivity.

Mr Connor:

– Make a tape recording of that.

Mr McMAHON:

– You asked the question. As to the second part of the honourable gentleman’s question, it is regrettable that so much of the income flows has gone out of the banking system into what shall be called the extra-mural finance institutions of this country.

Mr Connor:

– You have the power. Why do you not use it?

Mr McMAHON:

– As I explained to the honourable gentleman, in this case the real cause is the increase in average earnings, particularly in relation to the increase in productivity. Nonetheless, this matter is kept under very close control, and it is one of the matters that no doubt will be dealt with when we are looking at this whole question.

Mr Uren:

– Close control? You have no control.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member for Reid will cease interjecting. There are far too many interjections.

Mr McMAHON:

– Because there have been so many interjections from the Opposition and as it is obviously frightened to hear the answers that can be given, I will treat the third part of the honourable gentleman’s question as being on the notice paper.

page 3314

QUESTION

INDONESIA AND AUSTRALIA: SEABED BOUNDARY

Mr STALEY:
CHISHOLM, VICTORIA

– My question is directed to the Prime Minister. Did he notice a report in the Melbourne ‘Sun’ referring to the cancellation of talks between Indonesia and Australia on the subject of the continental shelf? Did the report accurately portray Australia’s position?

Mr McMAHON:
LP

– I have seen a report of the statement alleged to have been made by the Leader of the Opposition. If the report is correct, then both parts of his statement are inaccurate. He could have ascertained the truth by, first of all, reading the communique which I issued at the time of President Suharto’s visit to Australia, and secondly, he could have easily obtained the information by making an inquiry of the Minister for Foreign Affairs.

The Leader of the Opposition said that the Government had failed to live up to an undertaking. That is absolutely untrue. No undertaking was involved. In the discussions with President Suharto I agreed with him that all outstanding issues should be negotiated at an early date. The negotiations, which have taken place over a period of close to 2 years, have not been cancelled. They have been deferred; and only deferred. As and when we find that it is desirable to continue with the negotiations, we shall do so. I assure the House that this will be done at an early date.

page 3315

QUESTION

HOUSING: SERVICEMEN

Mr FOSTER:
STURT, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– ‘My question is directed to the Prime Minister and concerns a proposal for a housing finance scheme for servicemen. Does the Prime Minister recall assuring the House when replying to a question 6 months ago ‘by the honourable member for La Trobe that the Minister for Housing had already presented a submission for the setting up of a home finance scheme for members of the regular forces? Did the Prime Minister assure the House also that Cabinet would consider the submission on that same day? What was the Cabinet decision on this question? When was it made and when can servicemen expect to derive benefit from that Cabinet decision?

Mr SPEAKER:

-The Minister for Housing.

Mr Kevin Cairns:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · LP

– Mr Speaker, as was indicated io this House some few weeks ago-

Mr Foster - I rise to order. I asked my question of the Prime Minister. I ask members who are interjecting not to get too anxious. Mr Speaker is in charge of the House, not you babblers of the brook.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! I suggest that the honourable member for Sturt address his remarks to the Speaker and not to honourable members.

Mr Foster:

– Thank you, Mr Speaker. I asked my question of the Prime Minister because he made the statement to which I referred in the Press and in Hansard on 7th December last. Why cannot he answer it?

Mr SPEAKER:

– On that point of order, I have been a little lenient in respect of the question. In fact it involves a question of policy. If the Minister for Housing wishes to answer the question I will allow him to do so.

Mr Foster:

– But he is not a member of the Cabinet.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member will resume his seat

Mr Kevin Cairns:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · LP

– As was indicated in this House some few weeks ago, this matter has been under consideration. The undertaking given by the Prime Minister in the last session of 1971 has received attention. Matters of detail are continuing to receive attention, and when it is appropriate to make an announcement, it will be made. Perhaps at that stage even the honourable member for Sturt might understand it.

Mr Foster:

– Where is the man of decision?

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member for Sturt will cease interrupting the business of this House continually, and cease interjecting.

Mr Daly:

– Put him out.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! I do not want to break a magnificent friendship on the last day.

page 3315

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN SERVICEMAN: AMERICAN AWARD

Mr JESS:
LA TROBE, VICTORIA

– I ask the Minister for the Army whether he has seen a report that an Australian Army major has been recommended by United States forces for the award of the United States Soldiers Medal for gallantry in Vietnam. Is the report correct that this award cannot be accepted? If so, can the Minister give the House the policy on overseas decorations and awards?

Mr KATTER:
Minister for the Army · KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · CP

– I am afraid that my reply to the honourable member will have to be brief. Actually the question of an award to Major Clark or any serviceman involves the 3 Services, and therefore the matter comes under the authority of my colleague the Minister for Defence. I am quite sure that the honourable member will have no difficulty in conferring with his colleague on this matter.

page 3315

QUESTION

WHEAT SALES

Mr STEWART:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES

– My question is directed to the Prime Minister. Has he or any member of his staff undertaken to investigate serious allegations made by Mr Jedlin of Crest Mills, Sydney, regarding trafficking in black market wheat and difficulties in the way of exporting grain in bulk? Is he aware that Crest Mills has been ordered by the New South Wales Maritime Services Board to quit its water frontage property on Monday despite its having contracts to provide binding needed for the manufacture of 220,000 sausages in Tasmania, soya products for Queensland and flour for the Northern Territory? Will he ask his office to move urgently to help the mills continue in operation until the allegations by Mr Jedlin are fully investigated?

Mr McMAHON:
LP

– I have no knowledge of the statements contained in the first 2 parts of the question asked by the honourable gentleman. As to the last part of the question, if a letter from Mr Jedlin or representations from Mr Jedlin are in my office I will ask the officials to look at them immediately and see what we can do.

page 3316

QUESTION

DAIRYING INDUSTRY

Mr LLOYD:
MURRAY, VICTORIA

– Is the Minister for Primary Industry aware of rumours being circulated, allegedly by New Zealand dairying interests, including the New Zealand Dairy Board, that Australia is in the process of restricting her dairying industry and will therefore not be able to service long term contracts being offered at the present time? Will the Minister reject any allegations of this nature so that Australian dairy companies will not be disadvantaged in their negotiations for satisfactory long term dairy contracts with other countries? Will the Minister ensure that the New Zealand Dairy Board is made aware of our position, and will he request the New Zealand Dairy Board to co-operate more with the Australian Dairy Produce Board?

Mr ANTHONY:
Deputy Prime Minister · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

-I shall answer the question. Some comment was made by a correspondent about this subject. I do not know from where he got his information, but he made a quite unnecessary statement that is causing unnecessary anxiety among some of the people in the Australian dairying industry. Last week I had talks with the New Zealand Minister for Overseas Trade and following those talks I joined him in issuing a statement saying that we would endeavour to set up a Government and industry panel to promote co-operation and the exchange of information on mar keting in third markets. To avoid any cutthroat competition or confusion in the market it was agreed that there would be a very close understanding between the 2 Governments. With Britain going into the European Common Market and with the likelihood of both Australia and New Zealand having difficulty in disposing of their excess production, it is quite vital that we work more closely together. But a suggestion that we would cut our production back for the benefit of New Zealand is quite wrong. We have been aiming to create a mechanism whereby Australia would be able to control her situation if we got into difficult marketing circumstances. That is what the Minister for Primary Industry has been endeavouring to do, and I hope that he will come to some arrangement and agreement with the industry before long. There has also been some rumour, a mischievous rumour, that New Zealand might hope to get dairy pro, ducts - butter - into Australia. Anybody who talks this way does not understand the stabilisation and orderly marketing system in this country, which could not allow any imports to necessitate still further exports to other markets. Our orderly marketing arrangements are complicated. They depend on complementary legislation of all State governments.

Mr Uren:

– Not only does the Country Party gerrymander the electorate, it takes up all the time of Parliament as well.

Mr SPEAKER:

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

Mr Uren:

– Why does he not-

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! If the honourable member for Reid does not heed my warning I shall deal with him. I warned him earlier this afternoon.

Mr ANTHONY:

– This continual interruption from the Labor Party indicates either a lack of interest in something that worries a big sector of the rural community or an attempt on the part of the honourable member for Reid to defend the statement by the President of the Australian Council of Trade Unions that he hoped that New Zealand butter would come into Australia.

Mr Charles Jones:

– I take a point of order. The Labor Party is interested in the problems of the dairying industry. What we are sick and tired of is this continual

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member for Newcastle will resume his seat. What he has stated does not constitute a point of order.

Mr ANTHONY:

– It is not my custom to give Dorothy Dix questions out for people to ask me, and this one is not such a question either. However, I can understand the honourable member for Murray, who comes from one of the best dairying electorates in Australia, being very interested in and concerned about this subject. Thank goodness there are a few members in this House who display an interest in the topic. I do want to assure the Australian industry that the New Zealand Ministers understand our domestic marketing arrangements. They know that there is no possibility of New Zealand butter being sold on this market while we arc a major butter exporter, and it would not make sense to displace Australian buller merely to put more on the export market.

page 3317

QUESTION

RAILWAY SLEEPERS

Mr KIRWAN:
FORREST, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I direct my question to the Minister for Shipping and Transport. I ask the Minister whether any decision has been made as to the use of concrete sleepers in preference to timber sleepers on certain Commonwealth railway lines. Is the honourable gentleman aware of the importance of sleeper production to the timber industry of Western Australia and, indeed, to the employment situation and the economy of Western Australia? Will he see that no decision is taken which will have serious repercussions in the western third of this continent?

Mr NIXON:
CP

– 1 have received representations from several members of Parliament for Western Australia - the Minister for Supply, the Minister for Air, the honourable member for Canning and the honourable member for Moore - and I have had representations from the timber milling industry in Western Australia about this problem. I am delighted that the honourable member is now taking a belated interest in the subject. I have received various deputations on this matter and I point out to the House that the honourable member has not been on any of them, nor has he sought to lead one. I say that as justification for my comment. I have informed members of the deputations that no decision will be taken about the use of concrete sleepers by Commonwealth Railways until the Bureau of Transport Economics reports to me on an economic evaluation it is making of the use of concrete sleepers vis-a-vis timber sleepers. No decision will be taken on the tenders that have been let until such time as that evaluation is available to me so that a proper judgment can be made on the subject.

page 3317

QUESTION

UNITED STATES TRACKING STATIONS

Mr DRURY:
RYAN, QUEENSLAND

– My question is directed to the Minister for Supply. Will the Minister confirm or deny the accuracy of reports that some of the American tracking stations are shortly to be closed?

Mr GARLAND:
LP

– The Department of Supply deals with the United States space agency, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, on behalf of the Government. There are at present no approved programmes for the period between the end of America’s ambitious Skylab project, which will be complete by the end of next year, and the first orbit of the space shuttle project, which will not be before 1978. NASA has advised that it has under consideration a number of changes brought about by its changed activity in space. It is in the process of amalgamating 2 specialist networks - that which supports manned satellites and that which supports unmanned earth satellites - and this, on a world-wide basis, will lead to a reduction in the number of tracking stations from, I believe, some 23 or 25 to about 15. The Honeysuckle Creek tracking station will be converted to a deep space station as part of the deep space network and this will lead eventually to the closing down of the Island Lagoon tracking station, which is a sort distance from Woomera. As regards Carnarvon - and these plans by NASA are tentative - it is expected that there will be a diminution of activity there after 1974. Up to that time it will be supporting the Sky Lab programme and will be taking information from the packages which have been left on the moon. It is an important station for the first orbit of manned vehicles which are put into orbit from Cape Kennedy and is expected to have a role there up to 1974 or 1975.

I know that there has been a great deal of concern about this matter. As I have said, the position is that these are only tentative plans by NASA. I had to consider whether, in view of the fact that they are only tentative, this information ought to be disclosed. It was thought that such information as could be disclosed should be made available to the contractors and, of course, to their employees. So high level consultations and discussions are going on in respect of this matter. I will do my best to see that information, when it becomes more specific, is given to them. I would like to add that the recent announcement of a possible cooperative effort between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics has not yet been taken into account in these discussions because, as yet, there is not sufficient information on it.

page 3318

QUESTION

ELECTORAL: CENSUS

Mr WHITLAM:

– I ask the Prime Minister a question. The right honourable gentleman doubtless has taken the opportunity, since my reminder at question time last Thursday, to follow up the instruction he gave Treasury officers after a question to him by the honourable member for Canning 5 week earlier, to seek final census results from the Commonwealth Statistician. As the Statistician had advised the Chief Electoral Officer on 7th December last that final population totals were most unlikely to vary significantly from the preliminary results published on 25th October I ask him what he has found to be the reason for the delay in taking action to ensure that Western Australia gains the additional electorate to which it is entitled in the next Parliament and that all States have electorates based on the current population.

Mr McMAHON:
LP

– I took this matter up with the Commonwealth Statistician through the relevant Minister and I was advised that unless other very important work was set to one side it would be extremely difficult to get this matter through. I believe it is correct to say that it would be difficult to get it through within the period relevant to the purpose mentioned by the honourable gentleman. Nevertheless, I will have a further inquiry made today, but I think he will find that it is probably now too late to be able to take action. I will find out from the Statistician through the Minister himself.

page 3318

QUESTION

CHILD-MINDING CENTRES

Dr SOLOMON:
DENISON, TASMANIA

– Is the Minister for Labour and National Service aware of the impending study by the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners to find what mental harm may be caused to young children deposited in child minding centres and thereby repeatedly deprived of their mothers’ company? Has the suspicion that the deprivation of maternal association for 3 to 5-year old children may give rise to later personality defects been a factor in the Government’s recent inclination not to increase expenditure in this quarter? What is the position now?

Mr LYNCH:
Minister for Labour and National Service · FLINDERS, VICTORIA · LP

– I have not received any official advice along the lines suggested by the honourable gentleman but I have certainly seen a Press report indicating that such a study would be carried out by the College. The position in relation to childcare centres, which has been made clear in recent days by the Prime Minister, is that this has been the subject of detailed consultations in recent months by the Government with Commonwealth and State government departments and also with a diverse series of voluntary agencies involved in this field. That research having been completed, the matter is now before the Government, and a decision will be taken in due course. But I can assure the honourable gentleman that, so far as the research which is available to me from my Department is concerned, there is no evidence which points to the fact that children of working mothers are necessarily more prone than others to juvenile delinquency, psychological problems or any form of disturbance of the type that I recall the honourable gentleman suggested. As the Prime Minister recently made clear, there is an absence of child-care centres in Australia at present. The last figures which were taken out late in 1969 indicated that of approximately one quarter of a million children under the age of 6 whose mothers worked only 7 per cent were in registered child-care centres. The matter is before the Government. It would not be proper for me to make any indication of any forward intention, and certainly I will not do so.

page 3319

QUESTION

OIL TANKERS

Mr CHARLES JONES:

– I direct a question to the Minister for Shipping and Transport. If Ampol Petroleum Ltd succeeds with its takeover bid for R. W. Miller Ltd, will this mean that all tankers operating on the coast will then be owned by oil companies, having in mind that Howard Smith Ltd has a substantial interest in oil through its shareholdings in the Broken Hill Pty Co. Ltd and Esso, besides being the managing agents for Caltex? Does R. W. Miller Pty Ltd, the only Australian independent tanker operator, own 23.7 per cent of the Australian tanker fleet and does this compare very badly with overseas countries where independent tanker operators own 63.8 per cent of the world tanker fleet? If this takeover is successful, will the oil companies then be in a position to falsify their freight charges and illegally establish a case for a price increase in petroleum products? Finally, is it in the best interests of the Australian economy for all tankers to be owned by oil companies? If not, what action does the Government propose to take to prevent this creation of a monopoly?

Mr NIXON:
CP

– In the first place this is a hypothetical question and I do not propose to go into any detail in answering it. The answer to the main part of the honourable member’s question rs no; there will not be a monopoly created because Howard Smith is an independent operator.

page 3319

QUESTION

SHIPPING

Mr O’KEEFE:
PATERSON, NEW SOUTH WALES

– 1 ask the Minister for Shipping and Transport a question. Is there a strike of Japanese seamen manning Japanese vessels carrying Australian coking coal and iron ore to Japan? Will this have a serious effect on our exports of these products? Is there any way in which Australia can overcome this urgent shipping problem?

Mr NIXON:
CP

– 1 understand that there has been a strike of Japanese seamen since about 5th May. The honourable member asked about the effect that this strike has had on the iron ore and coal industries. In the first place, about 50 per cent of coal is carried by Japanese flag operators and about 50 per cent under flags of other foreign operators. My understanding is that the coal companies are able to stockpile sufficiently and to clear stockpiles with ships that are now operating. Therefore, they are not yet seriously embarrassed by the strike. Insofar as iron ore is concerned, I understand that all the companies are stockpiling. There has been some difficulty for one company but I am told that only in the last few days 2 foreign flag ships called to load iron ore and this is relieving that company’s situation.

The companies have invoked a force majeure clause which releases them from their contractual obligations. But as best as 1 can make out no real trouble has yet been created for either the iron ore or coal companies. So far as the last part of the honourable member’s question is concerned, the cartage of iron ore and coal is arranged on f.o.b. contracts by Japanese importers and therefore the use of ships is very much a matter for the importers themselves. They would have to pay regard to the situation of the Japanese seamen being on strike and the political or industrial repercussions if they tried to use other flag operators as well.

page 3319

QUESTION

EDUCATION

Mr BRYANT:
WILLS, VICTORIA

– I address my question to the Minister for Education and Science in his capacity as representing here the posh private schools. Is it correct-

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! The Minister for Education and Science is not representing anybody-

Mr BRYANT:

– I understand that, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Other than those who come within the ambit of his Department. Any comment on that is out of order. I suggest that the honourable member address his question to the Minister for Education and Science.

Mr BRYANT:

– Is it correct as stated in a letter to the Melbourne ‘Age’ from the headmasters of private schools that Melbourne Grammar School will receive $280,000 per annum under the scheme for assistance for non-state schools announced recently by the Prime Minister? Is the Minister aware that the approximate cost of conducting an average state high school in Victoria of 800 to 900 students is about $220,000 per annum? I have calculated that figure from a school with which I am closely associated. How can he justify paying out a larger amount of public money to private institutions which accept no public responsibility than it takes to maintain an equivalent state high school?

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

– I find it hard to believe that the honourable gentleman does not know that the payments to independent schools will be based upon enrolments and that the only way in which a payment to a particular independent school could be greater than that made for a particular state high school would be if that independent school had a very much greater enrolment than the state high school. Under the proposals which for its part the Commonwealth has adopted and in which the Prime Minister has suggested the Premiers should join - one State has indicated its firm intention to agree to this proposal and at least two others have shown a keen interest - the Commonwealth has proposed that 40 per cent of the cost of education in a government primary school or secondary school should be made available to all independent schools.

Mr Bryant:

– That is not the way it is calculated at all.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member has asked his question.

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

-The honourable member may interject for as long as he wishes, although he will be contravening the Standing Orders, but his interjections cannot alter the facts. The calculations are based on the number ot enrolments. They will be based on a percentage of cost of education in government primary or secondary schools. If the criticism which has been made about the 8 schools which certain people attended is to be taken as meaning that other independent schools with equivalent fee levels would receive no support from the Government, under the policy of the Opposition 32 per cent of all pupils attending secondary schools which provide education to a full matriculation standard would be excluded from any government support.

page 3320

QUESTION

HOUSING

Mr BURY:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– My question is directed to the Minister for Housing. Yesterday on the 7.45 a.m. news on the Australian Broadcasting Commission radio network I picked up this statement: ‘A Labor Federal government might have to support guerrilla tactics to safeguard its regional development plan. Under a Labor government, a national planning task force would assist regions to develop. It would have to act as a guerrilla force within the region if they met resistance from other States’.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! For all I know the honourable member might have picked this up anywhere. The question being asked at this time does not come within the Minister’s ambit. I suggest that the honourable member ask his question.

Mr BURY:

– I ask the Minister for Housing - -

Mr Webb:

– Mr Speaker, I take a point of order. The honourable member for Wentworth said that he had picked up the statement. Does he not have to vouch for the accuracy of the statement?

Mr SPEAKER:

– No; the honourable member for Wentworth did not say where it came from.

Mr Whitlam:

– He said he heard it on the ABC news.

Mr SPEAKER:

-I am sorry; he did say that.

Mr BURY:

– I ask the Minister for Housing what has occurred in the realm of housing to justify bellicose language of this character.

Mr Kevin Cairns:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · LP

– In answer to this unexpected question, it should be made quite clear that co-operation in the field of housing between the Commonwealth and the States has remained a cornerstone of Australian housing policy. It should remain the cornerstone of Australian housing policy if anything meaningful is to be done to house the Australian people and to maintain the standards to which they have been accustomed. It is also clear that co-operation between the States in this field is mirrored by the co-operation between the Commonwealth and the States in the whole field of financial policy. Therefore, it was with some concern that one heard the announcement, to which the honourable member for Wentworth has referred, which stated:

A Federal Labor government might have to support guerrilla tactics to safeguard its regional development plan. Under a Labor government, a National Planning Task Force would assist regions to develop.

I like that word ‘assist’ under those circumstances. The announcement continued:

It would have to act as a guerrilla force within the region if they met resistance from other States.

That statement was transmitted nationally as coming from the Opposition spokesman on housing and urban affairs on 30th April this year. The House can be assured that this Government will not use a threat of guerrilla force to impose its own programmes within the States.

Mr Uren:

– I raise a point of order. The Minister for Housing has attributed to me something which I have never said.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member for Reid can make a personal explanation, to indicate where he has been misrepresented, after question time, if he wishes.

Mr Kevin Cairns:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · LP

– That statement and the philosophy enunciated in that statement are clearly un-Australian. It would deny the traditional right of Australians to choose their own home sites and it would deny the personal rights of Australians which they have always exerted in these areas. Finally, that statement was reported on 30th April on the Australian Broadcasting Commission national news as having been made by the Labor spokesman on housing and urban affairs. It has never been denied.

page 3321

QUESTION

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

Mr DALY:
Grayndler

– I move:

When this motion is agreed to I will move similar motions in respect of the Senate Elections Bill 1971 and the Referendum (Constitution Alteration) Bill 1971. On 31st March 1971 - exactly 14 months ago today - the Minister for the Interior (Mr

Hunt) introduced the Commonwealth Electoral Bill 1971 and 2 complementary Bills, namely, the Senate Elections Bill 1971 and the Referendum (Constitution Alteration) Bill 1971. These Bills still remain on the business paper and no effort has been made by the Government to proceed with the debate on them.

Another Bill, the Commonwealth Electoral Bill 1971 (No. 2), which I introduced on behalf of the Opposition on 1st April 1971, still remains undebated on the notice paper. As there is little chance of the Government supporting a motion to debate the Opposition’s Bill, I move this motion in the hope that the Government, or at least the Liberal Party, will support the motion to debate its own legislation. In the course of his second reading speech the Minister stated that the purpose of the Bill was to effect changes in the Commonwealth Electoral Act to improve voting facilities for electors. He further stated that a review of the Commonwealth Electoral Act and regulations had been in progress prior to the 1969 House of Representatives elections, and that the proposed amendments incorporated in the Bill were the result of that inquiry.

This Bill is a product of investigations which commenced prior to the 1969 elections - more than 3 years ago - and after lengthy investigation and preparation it was introduced 14 months ago, yet the Government, for some mysterious reason, will not proceed with the debate. It is a most important Bill affecting the democratic processes in Australia. It must be assumed that the Government approved of the Bill and was ready to proceed with it at the time of its introduction. Why then the delay? This is the reason I am moving this motion for the suspension of Standing Orders. If the legislation is not debated today it will not be debated for some months - until the Budget session - or probably not at all. The Opposition considers that it has a responsibility in seeking to have this Bill debated, amended and enacted prior to the coming Federal elections. We will be happy to assist the Government to debate its own legislation and, at the same time, we will seek to move appropriate amendments in line with Labor Party policy and with the needs of the nation.

What sinister reason prevents the Government from allowing the Parliament to debate this important Bill? 1 suggest a few reasons for the delay. They are the reasons which have prompted me to move this motion. At about the time of the introduction of the Bill, fierce jungle warfare broke out in the Queensland State Parliament between members of the Liberal Party and members of the Country Party over the gerrymandering of electoral boundaries. It produced unprecedented scenes and events in the Queensland Parliament, even carrying to this chamber. The Minister for the Army (Mr Katter), speaking of certain Liberals who crossed the floor to vote against the Country Party’s greatest gerrymander of all time, spoke in these terms:

Traitors walked across the floor of Parliament in Queensland.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member is a well experienced member of this House. He knows quite well-

Dr Patterson:

– Can you speak up, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! If there were less noise in the chamber I would be able to be heard. The honourable member for Grayndler knows full well that a debate on a motion for the suspension of Standing Orders does not enable an honourable member to canvass other matters as the honourable member now is attempting to do.

Mr DALY:

– 1 realise that, Mr Speaker. I was just making passing reference to the reason why the House is not being allowed to debate this Bill. At the time to which I was referring, desperate words were spoken by desperate Country Party members opposite who were prepared to use every known device to stop the democratic processes which would enable this legislation to be enacted. If the debate had proceeded in this Parliament at that time - this is another reason why we want it to proceed today - members of the Opposition would have exposed to the Australian people, particularly those in Queensland, the pressure that the Country Party exerts on electoral reform in this and other parliaments. This is why we believe that my motion will be opposed. The Country Party has indicated that, at all costs, it will not support the Government’s legislation. The results of the Queensland elections held last Saturday show that members of the Country Party have good reason for delaying this legislation. On Saturday last in Queensland the Country Party, which secured only 19 per cent of the total votes recorded, is now the premier party in that State. The combined Liberal and Country Parties gained 56,000 votes fewer than the Labor Party, yet the coalition is in government. That is one reason why today it is important for the Parliament to consider this legislation. We should be able to debate it and amend it in order to prevent gerrymandering and the prostitution of democracy by the Country Party and others who sit opposite. I believe they have a good reason for not wanting to debate it today, particularly in view of the Queensland election results.

Another factor - I raise these points because they are important - could be the disunity that exists in regard to this legislation. People know that there is disunity in the Government Parties concerning the continental shelf, the wool industry, decentralisation and leadership.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! I suggest that the honourable member for Grayndler discuss his reasons for moving for the suspension of Standing Orders.

Mr DALY:

– I mention this aspect, Mr Speaker, to show that there must be some reason why my motion will be opposed and the debate not proceed. I ask: Is there electoral disunity on this question? It is a strange thing, but it is the Government’s own legislation that we seek to have debated. The legislation had been investigated and was introduced to the Parliament by a Country Party Minister. It has remained on the notice paper for 14 months. Something must be wrong when this is the situation and that is why I seek to have the Bill debated. The Commonwealth Electoral Act needs reform more than any other Act in the nation. A Federal election is pending. In addition to the reforms incorporated in the Bill, some of which the Labor Party supports, the Labor Party seeks to review completely the Act to provide for other reforms. This cannot be done unless my motion is carried. In addition to some of the proposals in the Bill which are good the Labor Party would like to see incorporated in the Act before the next Federal elections provision to enable 18-year olds to vote. Additionally the Labor Party would like to see equality of population in the various Federal electorates and ‘one man one vote’. Further the Labor Party would like to see provision made in the Australian Capital Territory for an additional member of the House of Representatives and for senators. The Labor Party would like to see the designation of Party affiliation on ballot papers. Also the Labor Party would like to see written into the Act a complete negation of gerrymandering processes that are part and parcel of Country Party representation and policy in Australia.

Mr Speaker, as a member of the Liberal Party, you know that in Queensland the Liberal leader should be the Premier. Country Party members have prevented that and they seek now to prevent debate on legislation in this House. I say that it should be debated. It is significant how silent members of the Country Party are on this issue. They will probably have a Liberal Party Minister defend their stance because they know that what I say is true. The Country Party might well consider changing its name to ‘The Party for Gerrymanders’. Does the Government intend to deny the people the reforms necessary to bring the Commonwealth Electoral Act into line with modern-day thinking in all democratic countries? Because of the delay, the evasion and the complete failure of the Government to take this legislation beyond the second reading stage, one may well be entitled to say that the Government, and particularly the Country Party section of it, is opposed to reform of the Electoral Act, even by its own legislation. 1 move for the suspension of Standing Orders for the reasons I have mentioned. You, Mr Speaker, have curtailed my activities somewhat, but I think I have made my message clear. There can be no excuse for a delay of 14 months in debating proposals which were instigated prior to 1969 and which have remained on the notice paper for so long. The Opposition believes that this delay is another step in the Country Party’s well-known policy of denying all the principles applying to democratic elections. The delay must be taken as an indication that it is intended, if at all possible, to gerrymander the Australian electorates to the advantage of the minority group - the Australian Country Party - and to prevent electoral reform and its effect on the democratic functions in Australia. The delay in presenting the Commonwealth Electoral Bill and the Senate Elections Bill and carrying them through to completion is scandalous and inexcusable. They should be debated and that is why I move for the suspension of Standing Orders.

Mr CROSS:
Brisbane

– I second the motion which has been moved by the honourable member for Grayndler (Mr Daly) because it is an urgent necessity to suspend the Standing Orders to give effect to the sentiments expressed in his second reading speech by the Minister for the Interior (Mr Hunt) on 31st March 1971. I draw attention to the first paragraph of the Minister’s speech when, by way of apology for the late introduction of the Commonwealth Electoral Bill, he said:

During the last session of the previous Parliament, the then Minister informed the House that a review of the provisions of the Commonwealth Electoral Act and the Regulations thereunder had been in progress for some time, and that, although it was not possible to reach the point where amendments to the Act could be presented to the Parliament for consideration before the 1969 House of Representatives election, the Government’s intention was that the review should be resumed immediately after the elections and taken to finality as soon as possible.

I emphasise the words ‘as soon as possible’. The Minister continued:

This has been done and the amendments we propose are the subject of this Bill.

While certain of the proposed amendments are formal or machinery in character and need little or no explanation, other provisions of the Bill seek to bring about much needed changes in the electoral laws-

I emphasise ‘much needed changes in the electoral laws’ - and it is to these that I will devote most of my remarks.

I support the motion for the suspension of Standing Orders because the Labor Party agrees with the urgency conveyed by the Minister in his speech on 31st March 1971. We had reached the stage where the Minister said that a review had been commenced during the previous Parliament and he was bringing in this legislation halfway during the last Parliament. Shortly we will go into recess and will return for a short Budget session. This will be followed by the Federal elections later this year. If we do not take the action which has been advocated by the honourable member for Grayndler in his motion, consideration of matters which the Government regarded as vital in March 1971, and which the Labor Party regarded as vital then and still does now, will probably not and almost certainly not be given by the Parliament until after the next elections.

The question arises whether this matter is urgent. The Government proposes to extend absent voting facilities on an Australia wide basis so that an elector can vote outside the State or Territory for which he is enrolled. The Minister in his second reading speech explained that there were anomalies and that voters were unable to exercise the franchise as was their right. Apparently the Government considered that to be urgent in March 1971 but it is not given urgent consideration today. A further proposal of the Bill - the Labor Party will support this one - is to improve voting facilities for patients and inmates of hospitals, convalescent homes and institutions, and to enable mobile booths to be established at convalescent homes and hospitals. In March 1971 the Government regarded this as urgent. The Minister in his second reading speech said that it was a matter of great importance that the law should be amended in this way. Therefore the Opposition is advocating the suspension of the Standing Orders today in order that effect might be given to the proposed amendments. The Bill also proposed to tidy up a number of other matters. They include the matter of people who lose their franchise when they are posted overseas; the removal of a person’s name from the roll although he has not ceased to live permanently in the subdivision for which he is enrolled; the eligibility of a member of the Legislative Council for the Northern Territory to nominate for election as a senator or a member of the House of Reprsentatives; and electoral expenses, a matter on which the Labor Party has some very sound and profound views.

For those reasons, for the reasons stated by the Minister in his second reading speech which was made a long time ago, in March 1971, and also because the Labor Party wishes to take an opportunity to move amendments to this Bill in line with Labor Party policy to reform the Commonwealth Electoral Act to make our franchise more democratic, to extend the franchise to 18-year-olds and to ensure that the electoral system is run as honestly and efficiently as it may be run, I support the motion moved by the honourable member for Grayndler for the suspension of Standing Orders.

Mr SWARTZ:
Minister for National Development · Darling Downs · LP

– It is rather strange for this matter to be raised now because I understand the Opposition has indicated to you, Mr Speaker, that it has for discussion a matter of public importance to be introduced by the honourable member for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones). We are now in a curious position because we take it that that matter is not so urgent after all seeing that the honourable member for Grayndler (Mr Daly) has taken precedence and has proceeded with an obvious move to delay the business of the House, firstly, in having an opportunity to debate the matter of public importance, which we now understand cannot be so urgent after all, and I suspect therefore that the Opposition would not wish to proceed with that matter, and secondly, because the honourable member for Grayndler knows full well that the Minister for the Interior (Mr Hunt), who handles these matters and who introduced these Bills, is this week in Western Australia and in the Northern Territory attending government conferences.

The honourable member knows also that this motion is designed only to try to interfere with a debate on the amendments to the Conciliation and Arbitration Bill which we expect will be received from the Senate very shortly. These things are, of course, well known and this motion is obviously too blatant an attempt by the Opposition to firstly, delay the business of the House and, secondly, to try to take control of the business of the House which has been laid down by the Government. In these circumstances and in view of the arguments that have been put by the 2 Opposition members who spoke to the motion - those arguments were almost facetious in their intent, the comments in most cases being completely irrelevant and dealing with matters other than those relating to the Electoral Bill - this also is an obvious indication of the intention of certain members of the Opposition to try to delay the business of the House by moving this motion.

Mr Daly:

– I raise a point of order. The Minister said that the remarks of my colleague and myself were facetious, but I do not take a point of order on that. My point is that the Minister said we did not speak to the the Bill. You, Mr Speaker, should take action on that. 1 take his remarks as a reflection on you because I know full well that you keep all speakers within the provisions of Standing Orders. Therefore I would like you, Mr Speaker, to reprove the Minister for the remarks he made which, although they did not reflect so much on me, reflect on you.

Mr SPEAKER:

– It is my opinion that the Minister’s remarks are in order.

Mr SWARTZ:

– The honourable member for Grayndler is t particularly sensitive today but he has not denied the fact that, as I said, a lot of the points that’ he and the honourable member for Brisbane (Mr Cross) raised were not related to the Bills before the House but to other matters which concern a certain State. Having said that, and in view of the fact that the motion for the suspension of Standing Orders is designed only to waste the time of the House, we reject it. In the circumstances, to save time so that we can get on with the important business of the House with which we have to deal, I move:

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

– Order! The question is that the question be now put.

Mr Cope:

– 1 have a personal explanation to make Mr Deputy Speaker. The Minister reflected on every back bencher in this House when he said-

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member for Sydney knows-

Mr Cope:

– 1 am one of those concerned because-

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member knows that a personal explanation can be made only when an individual has been personally misrepresented.

Mr Cope:

– He reflected on me because 1 am a member of this House.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member will resume his seat. He knows that a personal explanation can be made only when a member has been individually misrepresented, not. when there has been a general comment relating to all members of the House.

Mr Cope:

– I am saying that if the honourable gentleman referred to me-

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:
Mr Cope:

– It puts it in order.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-The honourable member knows that that is not a point of order.

Mr Cope:

– Mr Deputy Speaker-

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-The question is that the question be now put:

Mr Cope:

– Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to move dissent from your ruling.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Order! There is a motion before the Chair that the question be now put.

Question put:

That the question be now put.

The House divided. (Mr Deputy Speaker - Mr P. E. Lucock)

AYES: 44

NOES: 49

Majority . . . . 7

Majority . . 5

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Original question put:

That the motion (Mr Daly’s) be agreed to. (Mr Deputy Speaker - Mr P. E. Lucock)

Question so resolved in the negative.

page 3326

PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS

Dr KLUGMAN:
Prospect

– I should like to make a personal explanation.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock:

– Order! Does the honourable member claim to have been misrepresented?

Dr KLUGMAN:

– That is’ right. Mr Deputy Speaker, you will recall, as you participated in the debate, that last night soon after midnight we were discussing the question of the circulation of a letter to members of this House. It was claimed by some members that they found that letter offensive and 1 think ‘obscene’ was the word used. On page 3285 of yesterday’s Hansard the following is reported as having occurred:

Dr MACKAY:
Minister for the Navy · Evans · LP

… I was glad to receive this material for one reason.

Dr Klugman:

– Do you like reading that sort of stuff?

Dr MACKAY:

– That is hardly worth commenting on.

I have been misrepresented. I did not say that. I certainly did not query whether the Minister liked reading that sort of stuff. I am convinced in my own way that he does. But that is not the point. The point is that my interjection was:

That is the way you get your orgasms.

I said that last night. This may well be offensive to somebody, in which case I am quite prepared to have that withdrawn from Hansard. It seems ridiculous to me to put an interjection in that I did not make instead of the particular interjection which I did make. I therefore ask that Hansard be corrected in that way.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-In the circumstances of the personal explanation of the honourable member for Prospect, I think it would be advisable if I checked this matter with Mr Speaker and referred to him the personal explanation and the comment of the honourable member for Prospect.

Mr PEACOCK:
Minister for External Territories · Kooyong · LP

– I wish to make a very short personal explanation.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Order! Does the Minister claim to have been misrepresented?

Mr PEACOCK:

– Yes. On reading the Hansard report of 24th May, I realised that a question asked of me by the honourable member for Leichhardt (Mr Fulton) and an answer supplied by me may well be open to misinterpretation. I therefore wish to clarify one aspect. I said amongst other things:

Both contract officers and permanent officers are covered by legislation that does give them an opportunity to resume careers back in Australia.

It is of course correct that permanent officers are covered by legislation. It is also correct that contract officers seconded from the Commonwealth or the States who have their rights preserved in their home services are also covered by legislation, but other contract officers are not. I wanted to clarify that point.

Mr UREN:
Reid

– I wish to make a personal explanation.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Order! Does the honourable member claim to have been misrepresented?

Mr UREN:

– I do. During question time the Minister for Housing (Mr Kevin Cairns) attributed words to me which I said were false. Even after my drawing his attention to the fact that they were false he continued to make further accusations. I point out that standing order 76 provides that all imputations of improper motives and all personal reflections on members shall be considered highly disorderly. I repeat that the words attributed to me by the Minister during question time were false, lt is regrettable that the Minister may use question time in this House to get down to gutter politics because of his precarious position in retaining his seat.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member is now debating the matter.

Mr UREN:

– He also said that the words that were attributed to me were unAustralian. My record is well known as an Australian and as a member of the human race. Unlike that of the Minister he is a sectarian hater.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Order! I think the honourable member for Reid is now developing the subject matter.

Mr UREN:

– He is a sectarian hater.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-The honourable member for Reid knows that in this instance all he is entitled to do is explain where he has been misrepresented. He has done that. If he takes the matter any further he will be going beyond Standing Orders.

Mr UREN:

- Mr Deputy Speaker, 1 bow to your decision. I only wish to say that the words attributed to me by the Minister during question time were false, and even though I drew his attention to that fact he continued to contravene standing order 76.

Mr Kevin Cairns:
Minister for Housing · LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · LP

– In the answer to the question to which the honourable member for Reid (Mr Uren) referred I read a quote of a speech which was reported to have been delivered by the honourable member for Reid at the University of Sydney on either 28th or 29th April. That speech was reported on the national Australian Broadcasting Commission network at, I think, 7.45 a.m. on 30th April. The quote was from the speech reported on the ABC national network. That quote has never been disputed. That quote has never been denied. As far as I know-

Mi Foster - I take a point of order. Recently in this House the Minister took strong objection when something was said about newspaper reports in which his name was involved. Is he making a personal explanation? He has a lot of explaining to do if he is.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Order! I remind the honourable member for Sturt that the Minister for Housing is explaining the basis upon which he made his statement in answering a question on housing. At this point, as far as I can recall from what I have been able to hear above the interjections, the Minister has only quoted the source of his information. The Minister is entitled to explain from where he got the information.

Dr Klugman:

– Mr Deputy Speaker, I rake a point of order.

Mr Kevin Cairns:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · LP

– My only intention has been-

Dr Klugman:

– Mr Deputy Speaker-

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Order! I suggest that if members come to order the person who is speaking in the House might be aware of the fact that a point of order has been taken. I call the honourable member for Prospect.

Dr KLUGMAN:
PROSPECT, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– Mr Deputy Speaker, the Minister in developing his case, which as you have just mentioned he is entitled to do, referred to an alleged statement on the ABC news at 7.45 a.m. on 30th April. May I point out to you that when he handed the question to the honourable member for Wentworth that honourable member got it mixed up and asked a question about an alleged statement in yesterday’s news broadcast.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

– No point of order arises.

Dr J F Cairns:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

– Further to the point of order, I listened to the Minister at question time and I have listened to him now. I submit that he is saying nothing that he has not already said at question time. Therefore he is out of order. The honourable member for Reid has made a certain statement. The Minister is adding nothing to what he said before. He cannot be making a personal explanation because he is saying exactly the same things he said at question time.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-In regard to the point of order raised by the honourable member for Lalor, I point out that the honourable member for Reid made a personal explanation in which he said that a statement made by the Minister for Housing was incorrect. The Chair is not competent to decide whether that statement was incorrect. When the Minister for Housing made a personal explanation he stated the source of his information. Even though the Minister may have stated certain things in answer to a question, as long as he does not develop his personal explanation into a debate or go beyond the substance of the personal explanation, he is entitled to say where he obtained the foundation for his remarks. Whether that is correct is not within the competence of the Chair to decide.

Mr Kevin Cairns:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · LP

– Standing order 76 refers to imputations of improper motives. I never intended to nor did I in fact impute improper motives. My intention was in fact to expose the motives.

Mr UREN (Reid)- As a further persona] explanation, I point out that the Minister for Housing (Mr Kevin Cairns) misrepresented me when he said that I made these utterances in a speech at Sydney University. I would be prepared, if I am given the time, to go to my office and obtain copies of the speeches I have made at Sydney University, and to table them in this House. It so happens that each time I present papers or address gatherings at universities my speeches are prepared and they are distributed to the Press before I deliver them. I will therefore go up to my office, with your permission, get the document and table it. The Minister says the speech was made on 29th April?

Mr Kevin Cairns:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · LP

– Yes.

Mr UREN:

– Would the House grant me the right to get that speech so that I can have it incorporated in Hansard?

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock:

– Order! In regard to the point made by the honourable member for Reid (Mr Uren) about going to his office, that is a place over which I do not have any control. The other matter, on the tabling of papers, is beyond the control of myself.

Mr KIRWAN:
Forrest

– I wish to make a personal explanation.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

– Does the honourable member claim to have been misrepresented?

Mr KIRWAN:

– Yes, indeed I do. During question time, in order to try to score a cheap political point-

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

– Order! 1 think the honourable member might explain where he says he was misrepresented.

Mr KIRWAN:

– I am attempting to do so. It is difficult when the Minister is from your own party, Sir. The Minister claimed that I had shown no interest previously in the question that I raised with him today. I refer him, as one small example of my representations to him over a long period, to my question of 6 weeks ago No.5653, asked on 20th April, which, although simple, remains unanswered.

page 3329

CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION BILL 1972

Bill returned from the Senate with amendments.

Clause 2. (1.) The following provisions of this Act shall come into operation on the day on which this Act receives the Royal Assent, namely, Part I. and sections 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 17, 21, 39, 40, 43, 45, 46, 47, 50, 52, 54, 55, 57, 58, 59, 60, 67 and 69. (2.) Sections 41, 49, 51, 53 and 68 of this Act shall come into operation on such respective dates as are fixed by Proclamation. (3.) The remaining provisions of this Act shall come into operation on a date to be fixed by Proclamation.

Clause 12.

Sections 16 to 21, inclusive, of the Principal Act are repealed and the following sections inserted in their stead: - “16. - (1.) A Commissioner shall be paid salary at the rate of Sixteen thousand two hundred and fifty dollars a year, and the Consolidated Revenue Fund is appropriated accordingly. “(2.) A Commissioner shall be paid such allowances (not including an annual allowance) as are prescribed. “17.- (1.) A Full Bench of the Commission consists of at least three members of the Commission, each of whom is either a Presidential Member or an Arbitration Commissioner. “(2.) A Full Bench of the Commission shall include at least two Presidential Members. “(3.) The members of the Commission to constitute a Full Bench shall be determined by the President.”.

Clause 41.

Section 104 of the Principal Act is amended by inserting after paragraph (a) of sub-section (2.) the following paragraph: - “(aa) proceedings for an offence against section forty-six of this Act;”.

Clause 49.

Section 145 of the principal Act is repealed and the following section inserted in its stead: -

“145.- (1.)

“(4.) A resignation of membership of an organization is valid notwithstanding that it is not effected in accordance with this section if the member is informed by or on behalf of the organization that the resignation has been accepted.

Clause 51.

After Part VIII. of the Principal Act, the following Part is inserted: - “PART VIIIa. - AMALGAMATION OF ORGANIZATIONS. “ 158a. In this Part, unless the contrary intention appears - “ 158k. - (1.) If approval in respect of the amalgamation is given in accordance with the last preceding section, the Industrial Registrar shall arrange for the conduct, in respect of each of the existing organizations concerned in the amalgamation, of a ballot of the members of that organization on the question whether they approve the proposed amalgamation of that organization with the other existing organization or organizations concerned. “ (2.) A ballot referred to in the last preceding sub-section shall be a secret ballot by postal voting and the Industrial Registrar shall -

Clause 68.

Part VIIIa. of the Principal Act as amended by this Act does not apply in relation to an amalgamation in relation to which, before the date of commencement of this section -

Senate’s amendment No. 1 -

In clause 2, leave out sub-clause (2.), insert the following sub-clauses: “(2.) Sections 41, 49 and S3 of this Act shall come into operation on such respective dates as are fixed by Proclamation. “(2a.) Sections 51 and 68 of this Act shall be deemed to have come into operation on the twenty-sixth day of May, One thousand nine hundred and seventy-two.”.

Senate’s amendment No. 2 -

Clause 12, leave out the clause.

Senate’s amendment No. 3 -

After clause 12, insert the following new clause: “12a.- (1.) Sections 16 to 21, inclusive, of the Principal Act are repealed and the following sections inserted in their stead: -

Senate’s amendment No. 4 -

Clause 41, leave out the clause, insert the following clause: “41.- (1.) Section 104 of the Principal Act is amended -

Senate’s amendment No.5-

After clause 41, insert the following new clause: “41a. Section 105 of the Principal Act is amended by omitting from sub-section (1.) the word ‘two’ and inserting in its stead the word three’.”.

Senate’s amendment No. 6 -

Clause 49, in proposed section 145 (4.), after informed’, insert ‘in writing’.

Senate’s amendment No. 7 -

Clause 51, at the end of proposed section 158k add the following sub-sections: “ ‘(7.) Where-

Senate’s amendment No. 8 -

Clause 68, in paragraph(a) leave out ‘or’, insert ‘and’.

Motion (by Mr Lynch) agreed to:

That the amendments be taken into consideration in Committee of the whole House forthwith.

In Committee

Mr LYNCH:
Minister for Labour and National Service · Flinders · LP

– I move:

That amendments Nos 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 be agreed to.

Mr Webb:

– Will you explain how you intend to handle that?

Mr LYNCH:

– I understand from discussions with honourable members opposite that the amendments bearing the numbers that I have read to the Committee, which therefore are the subject of this motion, will be the subject of debate by members of the Opposition, but will not be the subject of a division. At a later hour of this day 1 will move separately in relation to the 2 amendments, Nos 1 and 7, which the honourable member for Stirling (Mr Webb) has foreshadowed to me will be the subject of a division. The amendments that have been specified in the motion have in fact been the subject of canvass in the Senate already. It would not be my intention at this stage to go over again ground that has already been covered in that place. Therefore I have simply moved that amendments Nos 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 be agreed to. That is in accordance with the understanding which I made with the honourable member for Stirling.

Mr WEBB:
Stirling

– We agreed to take these amendments as the Minister for Labour and National Service (Mr Lynch) has suggested. There are 2 amendments made by the Senate on which we want a vote; they are Nos 1 and 7. However, at the moment the Committee is dealing with the other amendments, and I want to pass some comments on them although we do not intend to vote against them. I will explain the reasons. Let us take clause 12, for example, which is amendment No. 3. Of course, the Labor Party opposed the clause in this place as it proposed giving commissioners an increase in salary to $16,250. It was opposed also in the Senate, and the result is that the salaries of the commissioners remain as they are at present, and the Government has now accepted that situation. Even some Government Senators voted against increasing the salaries of the commissioners while the Government was keeping down the salaries of others. Of course, the Government has got its desserts.

The commissioners are already in receipt of a salary of $11,800, and it was intended to give them an increase of $4,450 per annum, and to make the payment retrospective to 4th November 1971. These are the men who increased the minimum wage by $4.70 only a few weeks ago and gave tradesmen a miserable increase of $2 a week. The Government tries to adopt a double standard, as is clear when one looks at the legislation now before the House. It is willing, in fact, to grease the fatted pig. The Government has 2 standards. It goes before the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission and argues that in the interests of the national economy the wages of the workers must be kept down, and it uses all the forces of the machinery at its command to do this. Then it proposes to give these large increases to persons on very high incomes.

I point out to honourable members, as I have done before, that if the workers want their wrongs righted, they must produce witnesses, must call evidence, and must prove conclusively that their claim is justified. Even then the Commission can refuse to grant those just claims if to do so would not be in the public interest, in accordance with the Commission’s interpretation of the public interest. Employers, on the other hand, can raise prices at their own whim and fancy. They do this in the secrecy of the board room without any thought for the public interest or without calling witnesses to give evidence. The Prime Minister (Mr McMahon) and the Minister for Labour and National Service lay the blame for increased prices on the workers and on their demands for increased wages to meet increased costs of living. Yet they will do nothing about prices. ‘Public interest’ has been expanded in this amending Bill to take into account the state of the economy.

I ask the Government: Did it take into account the state of the economy when Broken Hill Pty Company Ltd recently increased steel prices by 5i per cent and in some instances, particularly in regard to building materials, caused price rises of between 9 per cent and 10 per cent? No charge is ever made by the Government that such companies are taking too much of the national income, thereby endangering the economy and causing living costs to rise. Is it any wonder that the workers take direct action and threaten to withdraw from arbitration and to rely on negotiation to have their wrongs righted? The Government is even trying to interfere at the present stage in the waterside workers case. The worker has never been in a worse position financially than he is in today. At one time the worker’s wage was adequate to meet the ordinary financial needs of the home. Today no worker and his family can live on the base wage. Consequently, he has to have 2 jobs or work overtime or his wife must work in order to make ends meet. That is the situation in which families find themselves these days.

The Government supports an increase of $4,250 a year, or about $84 a week, retrospective to November 1971 for certain statutory office holders while at the same time it adds sections to the Act to lessen the workers’ chances of getting increases which may be approved by the employers. I instance again the intervention that is presently taking place in the watersiders’ case before the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission. The Government wants to stop employers and employees reaching amicable agreements on wage claims. The Opposition opposes strongly any suggestion of a wage freeze. It believes in the 2 main principles of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act, which are to promote goodwill in industry and to encourage conciliation with a view to amicable agreement, thereby preventing and settling industrial disputes. Unfortunately, this Government seems to have lost track of those principles. The amendments since the Act was initiated in 1904, whether they were entirely satisfactory or not, had a set purpose - to try to improve those principles. But this Government seems to have got away from that.

This amending Bill works in the other direction. It is purely political. No attempt is made to improve the Act in line with the thinking of the trade union movement and the more advanced employers. In fact, its aim is to create dissension in the community for political purposes. Before the Minister for Labour and National Service brought down the December 1971 statement of intent, meetings had taken place between the employers and the Australian Council of Trade Unions to investigate ways in which the Act might work more smoothly. A lot of progress was made in 1971 and a satisfactory stage of agreement had been reached between the parties. It was at this stage that the Minister stepped in and refused to accept the understanding that had been arrived at. What had been achieved by the unions and the employers was sabotaged by this Government. All that the Minister would do, following on earlier successful meetings, was to hear views, but he would not enter into worthwhile discussions. After hearing the views he said he would consider them. The next move was the statement of intent. The attitude of the unions was not even considered when that took place. Then this Bill was introduced.

The other clause on which I wish to comment briefly is clause 41. I draw attention to the fact that this deals with the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction. The Australian Labor Party moved an amendment in the Senate to the Government’s

Bill. I do not want to quote it all but I think that some extract from it would be worth while. The amendment is headed Exercise of Court’s jurisdiction’. It was moved to improve the workings of the Act as far as we could see it. A further amendment proposed by the Senate was accepted by the Australian Labor Party Opposition in the Senate, and consequently the amendment to which I have referred was withdrawn. The Opposition does not oppose the amendment as it now appears. I will leave it at that. I have expressed my views on these matters. The Opposition does not intend to call a vote on the matter.

The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (Mr Corbett) - The question is:

That amendments Nos 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 be agreed to.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Mr LYNCH (Flinders - Minister for Labour and National Service) - I move:

That amendments Nos 1 and 7 be agreed to.

Mr WEBB:
Stirling

– The Opposition intends to oppose both the amendments to which the Minister for Labour and National Service (Mr Lynch) has referred. I draw attention to the fact that when this Bill was before the House and the matter was being debated clause 2 read:

  1. – (1.) The following provisions of this Act shall come into operation on the day on which this Act receives the Royal Assent -

Then it numbered all the clauses, including the clauses which are now in dispute. When this matter was before the Senate the following sub-clauses were proposed to be inserted: (2.) Sections 41, 49 and 53 of this Act shall come into operation on such respective dates as are fixed by Proclamation. (2a.) Sections 51 and 68 of this Act shall be deemed to have come into operation on the twenty-sixth day of May, One thousand nine hundred and seventy-two.

The amendment from the Senate backdates the operation of 2 vital sections of this Act to 26th May 1972. That is why we are opposing it. Let me explain the reasons why.

These are the sections dealing with amalgamation of organisations. It will be remembered that when the debate was taking place here in Committee I raised the question under clause 68 as to whether it affected the amalgamation of the Boilermakers and Blacksmiths Society, the Sheet Metalworkers Union and the Amalgamated Engineering Union which was in process at the time. These unions had been working on this amalgamation for a period of about 3i years and had almost completed the necessary procedures. The House will remember that the Minister was very reluctant to answer the question I put to him. He said that section 68 was a mere tidying up. It was clear that the Minister was hiding something - in my opinion anyhow and, I think, in the opinion of some other members of the House - and that the aim was to prevent if possible the amalgamation taking place. Finally, after repeated questioning he admitted that the unions could be disadvantaged depending on the decision of the court on the question of deregistration of some of the unions which was before it at that time.

So the Government was in a very awkward situation as far as the amalgamation of these unions was concerned. It is clear that the Government, under pressure from the Democratic Labor Party, was trying to make amalgamation more difficult. The Minister, somewhat reluctantly, was dancing to the tune of the DLP. My accusation can be proved. Honourable members will recall his statement of intent of December 1971. At paragraph 95 of that statement of intent he said:

We will amend the Act to prevent unions from enforcing compulsory unionism.

This did not stop the Democratic Labor Party, because most of its support in the industrial movement comes from the Federated Clerks Union, which would be a difficult union to organise without compulsory unionsim. I am not casting any reflection on that union. It has every right to try to keep compulsory unionism and we are pleased that it has been successful. From then on the Minister forgot all about the matter and let it drop. So his intention to abolish compulsory unionsim disappeared entirely.

However, something that was not mentioned in his statement of intent was included in this Bill. That was a proviso to make amalgamation of the unions more difficult. His speech at the Central Industrial Secretariat dinner on 2nd March showed his earlier attitude towards amalgamation. This was a dinner connected with the formal opening of the Central Industrial Secretariat for the purpose of amalgamating 2 employer bodies - the Employers Federation and the Chamber of Manufactures - to co-ordinate their industrial relations policies. At that dinner the Minister said:

Basically, the philosophy of the current and previous Governments in relation to organisations registered under the Conciliation and Arbitration Act is that they are voluntary organisations and the Government should not interfere in their affairs unless it can be demonstrated that there are or are likely, to be dishonest practices which would prejudice the rights of members or groups of members.

He also ridiculed the idea that 50 per cent plus of the total membership should vote. He pointed out to this body that the reasons which prompted them to form their body were no doubt those that motivated the metal trades unions to amalgamate. He pointed out the advantages of amalgamation. In fact, his whole speech showed that he supported the amalgamation of smaller unions into bigger unions. Then at the behest of the DLP he brought in these amendments designed to make amalgamation much harder. However, the progress of the metal trades unions was too great and despite the efforts of the DLP their amalgamation has become an accomplished fact.

However, the backdating of the commencement of this proposed new section to 26th May means that other unions which have made considerable progress towards amalgamation will have to start all over again. I do not know the names of all the unions which are in the process of arranging amalgamation, but there are several. They include the Ironworkers and Chemical Workers Union and the Theatre Managers Association is another. Also, the Bacon Employees Union in Queensland is seeking amalgamation with the Australian Meat Industry Employees Union; I know that negotiations in this case have been going on for about 2 years. The amalgamation of the metal trades unions as the Minister well knows took about 3 years to complete. There are several other unions which under this legislation will have to start their negotiations all over again.

I would like to quote from an article entitled: ‘Union Law Backdated’. It reads:

The Ironworers’ national secretary (Mr Short) yesterday condemned the retrospectivity issue and sent a telegram asking the Federal Government to defer the proposed legislation.

Late tonight the Senate was still debating additional clauses of the Bill. . . .

This shows that the union was opposed to this measure because it interfered with the steps it had already taken. If the Bill had been returned in the form in which it left this chamber - that is, to come into effect on a date to be proclaimed - unions would have been able to commence and complete the amalgamation proceedings. If the proclamation had been held up for a period they would not have been disadvantaged.

These amendments seem to be aimed at the amalgamation of the ironworkers, chemical workers and the others I have mentioned. Why should this control be restricted to the unions? If this is to be the new way of life why does it not apply to employer bodies and companies which amalgamate? The Government should be making amalgamation easier instead of more difficult. The Minister, if he were free to do so, would admit this. For example, amalgamation could prevent all of the demarcation disputes that occur. Mr Morgan of the Metal Trades Employers Federation saw the wisdom of this. He supported the unions being free to amalgamate. Instead this Government is placing obstacles in the way of amalgamation. How different it is when commercial interests are concerned. It has taken the Government over 10 years to do something about the Trade Practices Act which is not yet law. The Bill has not even been introduced despite many promises. But when it comes to interfering with the unions legislation becomes a matter of extreme emergency. This Government will go down in history as being biased towards trade unions and not interested in industrial relations except to stir up strife for political purposes.

So much for that part of the legislation. There is just one other point to which I would like to refer. We oppose the amendment to clause 51 to which the Minister has referred. I refer here to amendment No. 7 in the schedule of amendments made by the Senate. I do not want to go into the details of it. What we wanted in our amendment, which I do not have time to quote, was that in circumstances when a union which had membership of less than 5 per cent of the membership of the host union was being absorbed, the host union would not be required to have a ballot.

This was a reasonable provision particularly if we look at paragraph (a) of our amendment which states:

  1. . which special circumstances the Industrial Registrar could refuse the exemption.

The Government’s amendment now before the House was obviously moved by the DLP with the connivance of the AttorneyGeneral (Senator Greenwood) who no doubt assisted with its drafting. It is indefinite and leaves ground for a lot of litigation. Our amendment was a definite proposition, was reasonably clear and in fact left it to the Industrial Registrar, to decide whether he did not want to grant the amalgamation, even though the question that was at issue was only whether the union seeking amalgamation had a membership equal to only 5 per cent of the host union’s, the host union did not have to take a ballot. I think that was a reasonable amendment. I regret that the Government did not see its way clear to do something about it. The Opposition intends to vote against this amendment as well as the other one which I have mentioned.

Mr Keith Johnson:
BURKE, VICTORIA · ALP

– I rise to support my colleague the honourable member for Stirling (Mr Webb). I join him in opposing as strongly as I possibly can amendments Nos 1 and 7 sent back to us from the Senate. To refresh the mind of honourable members I point out that amendment No. 1 - and it is not explained why this is the case - seeks to vary the date of operation of the Bill. I refer to clause 2 (2.) to which this amendment applies. This clause deals with proposed new sections 41, 49, 51, 53 and 68. The Bill states that the legislation will come into operation on the day on which this Bill receives Royal Assent. In fact, the amendment which was moved and carried in the Senate makes the date of operation, as I understand it, Friday of last week. Surely this action poses the question why it was necessary to back-date the legislation and why the original provisions of the Bill were not agreed to. The Government must have thought when the Bill was drafted that it would come into operation from the date of Royal Assent. In the short time in which I have been in this House this seems to have been in line with the common terminology of Bills. Yet, in this legislation an amendment has been moved by the

Government In the Senate and agreed to after opposition from the Australian Labor Party in that place. This amendment would make the date of operation a day before the Bill even received Royal Assent or the concurrence of members of this Parliament.

When one reads the clauses that axe to be affected by the date being set back I think the position starts to become a bit clearer. Clause 51, which is the clause on which I placed some emphasis before, is one of the clauses which will be affected by the back-dating of this Bill. We should bear in mind the fact that only on Tuesday of this week, I believe, Dr Sharp, the Industrial Registrar, finally came to execute all of the instruments necessary for the amalgamation of the metal trades unions. There were still some arguments going on in the metal trades unions, particularly in regard to the Boilermakers and Blacksmiths Society, on Friday of last week in regard to several pipelines which are to be laid in Port Phillip Bay. Does the Government or the Minister for Labour and National Service (Mr Lynch) intend that this new provision in the Bill should now be used to upset that amalgamation that has taken something in excess of 12 months - very nearly 2 years - to go through the procedures? Is the Government with one stroke of its pen going to place all of these negotiations and agreements and everything that has been done in jeopardy and require the union to go right back to square one and start again? I well remember the honourable member for Stirling, when this Bill was last in this place, asking the Minister at a very early hour in the morning whether this Bill in any way would affect the amalgamation of the 3 metal trades unions. The Minister could not answer because his adviser was not present. Only when finally pressed by the honourable member for Hindmarsh (Mr Clyde Cameron) did the Minister say that there was no guarantee that the effects of this Bill would not be made applicable to these unions that had come within one inch, after having run a distance of many miles, of consummating their amalgamation.

It is very obvious that the amendments are aimed at the amalgamation or nonamalgamations of unions and nothing else.

Amendment No. 1 and amendment No. 7 are the critical amendments that deal with amalgamation. I think that members of my own Party in this place canvassed the question of amalgamtion very well when the Bill was originally in this chamber. We made it quite clear that in our view this Bill ought to be retitled as a Bill for an Act to prevent amalgamations. Just before he resumed his seat, the honourable member for Stirling mentioned that the Minister for Labour and National Service had spoken about the need for amalgamation and, in fact, had lauded employer organisations which, for a variety of reasons, had chosen to amalgamate. The Minister has made it clear publicly that he believes there are too many unions and that there should be an amalgamation of unions, yet he has been instrumental in introducing this type of legislation which makes the amalgamation of unions virtually impossible.

I wonder whether this Government, which is placing all these impediments upon the amalgamation of trade unions, which it seems to regard as different from every other organisation in the country, would be prepared to introduce into this House as an amendment to the Companies Act, the Trade Practices Act or any other Act, guidelines, rules and regulations to resolve the amalgamation of organisations such as Thomas Nationwide Transport Ltd and Ansett Transport Industries Ltd, in respect of which we recently experienced a fiasco. Is there any need for organisations of this ilk to be bound by the very restrictive processes that will be established by this Bill in respect of organisations of working class people who come together to further their aims? Perhaps in the Government’s view - once again, my friend the honourable member for Stirling mentioned this - trade unions’ standing in the community is different from that of other organisations. Is this Government really an anti-union government? Does it oppose the amalgamation and establishment of organisations that are formed primarily to support the interests of that section of the community which is not in the best position to protect itself? Or does this Government come down on the side of the very wealthy and powerful organisations and leave them to their own devices when it comes to a question of amalgamation?

It is well known that the provisions contained in the amendment were asked for by the Federal Secretary of the Federated Ironworkers Association of Australia, Mr Laurie Short, who, of course, was ably assisted by the Federated Clerks Union of Australia, whose general president Mr Maynes was seen skulking around the corridors of Parliament House only last week. He was conferring with his mouthpieces in the Senate. The amendment which has been produced is a direct result of the pressure which was applied by a minority political party in this Parliament, supported by a minority group in the community. As I see it, this leads to a cynical arithmetical exercise by any union which wishes to amalgamate with another union. The amendment provides that if the membership of the host union is not increased by more than 5 per cent in an amalgamation, the union can make an application to be exempted from a ballot. This amendment does not set out conditions that would preclude an unscrupulous act by somebody or any act which would be legitimate within the wide application of the amendment. A large union could say to a smaller organisation: ‘We will dispense with enough of your membership to leave you with only the required 5 per cent and then we will not need a ballot’. Dangers of that sort are inherent in this situation.

This amendment initially, is bad. We said that it was bad when it was proposed in this place and it has not been improved by the Democratic Labor Party, whose masters in the community insisted that certain amendments be carried. The provision has been worsened and, like my colleagues in the Labor Party, I intend to vote against it. Divisions will be called on these matters and we will vote solidly against them. We trust that enough wisdom will prevail on the Government side of the House for Government supporters to listen to the reason of the arguments that have been put forward and that they will join with us and have this iniquitous legislation thrown out.

The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN - (Mr Corbett) - Order! The honourable member’s time has expired.

Dr GUN:
Kingston

– It seems to me that amendment No. 7 which has been proposed by the Government is completely hypocritical. My disquiet is not in any way alleviated by the fact that, when this amendment was moved by the Democratic Labor Party in the Senate, no explanation was given by the Minister in charge of the Bill in that chamber. I hope that the Minister for Labour and National Service (Mr Lynch) will give some explanation now as to why the amendment originally moved by the DLP in the Senate was so worded. 1 invite the House to examine the amendment that was proposed in the Senate by the Australian Labor Party. This amendment provided that paragraph (b) should read: the total number of members of the de-registering organisation or organisations is not more than five per centum of the number of members of the first-mentioned organisation.

The amendment moved in the Senate by the DLP and supported by the Government purports to assist the amalgamation of unions or the absorption of little unions by big unions. I strongly suspect that the amendment moved in the Senate by the DLP, wilh the connivance of the Government, was brought about with the connivance also of the draftsmen of the Department or, perhaps, the Parliamentary Draftsman. The draftsmen certainly appear to have helped the Government to overcome certain problems in this regard. The Government’s amendment states that (b) should now read: the total number of members that have been or could be admitted to the organisation upon and by any reason of the amalgamation. . . .

It appears to me that the insertion of the words ‘and could be’ is quite critical. The Government would like to have us believe that the amendment will enable small unions, after a plebiscite, to be absorbed into bigger unions. A plebiscite would not need to be conducted in the larger union. However, the phrase ‘and could be’ which was introduced by the DLP with the connivance of the Government in actual fact will frustrate the supposed purpose of the amendment. No explanation was given by the Government in the Senate and I think that the House is entitled to some explanation now.

In conclusion, I support completely the remarks of previous speakers from this side of the House. This is a very sorry attempt on the part of the DLP to try to block union amalgamations all along the line. The DLP is completely opposed to such amalgamations because it knows that union amalgamation is in the interests of industrial peace and of the advancement generally of the cause of trade unionists and workers. This is a sorry tale of betrayal of the working people by the DLP and, from speeches which he has made in the past supporting the cause of amalgamation, I think that the Minister for Labour and National Service knows this very well. I am saddened to see that once again the Government has connived with the DLP to defeat yet another amalgamation. I hope that the Minister will give some explanation to the House as to why the Government has taken this action on this occasion.

Mr STREET:
Assistant Minister assisting the Minister for Labour and National Service · Corangamite · LP

– The basic philosophy behind the amendments that have been moved is a simple one. The Government believes it is important that new Part VIIIA of the Act which deals with amalgamations of organisations should begin to operate as soon as possible. Honourable members opposite appear to believe that the amendments now being considered are aimed at inhibiting or preventing union amalgamation. I would like to make it quite clear to the Committee that these provisions are designed specifically to ensure that the control of organisations remains with the rank and file members of those organisations. Part VIIIA constitutes a new code as to what is required of organisations seeking to amalgamate and it is clear and specific in its detail. For the first time, it presents to organisations a set of provisions dealing specifically with amalgamation and, therefore, the Government believes that it should operate as soon as possible. The old provisions should not be continued, save for a limited time during an interim period.

I would like to make clear to the honourable member for Burke (Mr Keith Johnson) that the amendment is not designed to interfere with the projected amalgamation of the various metal trade unions. If the honourable member reads clause 68 of the Bill carefully, he will find that that is made abundantly clear. That clause provides that the new Part dealing with the amalgamation of organisations is not to apply in relation to an amalgam as to which, before the commencement of clause 68, certain applications had been made to the registrar and a valid request for deregistration had been lodged with him under the principal Act. As to the Amalgamated Metal Workers Union and the applications for deregistration by the Boilermakers and Blacksmiths Society and by the Sheet Metal Workers Union, the Registrar signed the instruments of deregistration on 30th May, and deregistration will operate 3 months from then, that is on 30th August 1972. The objections to the deregistration were withdrawn when the Registrar had the matter before him on 29th May.

Turning now to amendment No. 7, to which I think the honourable member for Kingston (Dr Gun) specifically referred, this amendment is an amalgam of the amendments brought into the Senate not only by the Australian Democratic Labor Party but also by the Opposition and accepted by the Government. It proposes that a new subsection be added to section 158k which forms part of the new Part VIIIa which deals with amalgamations. The purpose of this amendment is to allow some flexibility as to the holding of ballots in connection with amalgamations, where a small body is to amalgamate with a large one. Part of the amalgamation processes provided for by the Bill requires all organisations involved in the proposed amalgamation to hold a ballot of their members, but the amendment recognises that it would be unsatisfactory, for example, if where a relatively small organisation was proposing to amalgamate with a large one, the latter should be required to have a ballot of its members.

Therefore, the amendment provides that where an organisation proposes to deregister and, by amalgamation agreement, have its members absorbed into an existing organisation, which would be the host body in an amalgamation, there need not be a ballot of the members in the host organisation if the total number of members in the deregistering organisation or organisations complies with the formula set out in the amendment. Under the amendment the host body would be required to seek from the Registrar an exemption from the ballot provisions, and the Registrar would be given a discretion not to grant an exemption if he considered there were special circumstances which could cause him not to grant it. There would, however, be certain limita tions, as set out in the amendment, on the circumstances in which an exemption could be granted. That is a brief explanation of why the Government has proposed these 2 amendments.

The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (Mr Corbett) - I call the honourable member for Swan.

Motion (by Mr Giles) proposed:

That the question be now put.

Mr Bennett:

– You are ramming me down like you are ramming the legislation down. It is an absolute disgrace.

The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN - Order! The honourable member will resume his seat.

Question put.

The Committee divided. (The Deputy Chairman- Mr J. Corbett)

AYES: 52

NOES: 43

Majority . . 9

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Question put:

That Senate amendments Nos 1 and 7 be agreed to.

The Committee divided. (The Deputy Chairman - Mr J. Corbett)

AYES: 50

NOES: 44

Majority . . . . 6

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Resolution reported; report adopted.

page 3339

BILLS RETURNED FROM THE SENATE

The following Bills were returned from the Senate without amendment:

Seat of Government (Administration) Bill 1972.

Northern Territory (Administration) Bill 1972.

page 3339

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Mr SWARTZ:
Minister for National Development · Darling Downs · LP

– I move:

That the House, at its rising, adjourn until a date and hour to be fixed by Mr Speaker, which time of meeting shall be notified by Mr Speaker to each member by telegram or letter.

I move this motion at this point to enable the honourable member for Dawson (Dr Patterson) to move an amendment to it. After this matter has been disposed of, the House can consider the matter of public importance.

Dr PATTERSON:
Dawson

– I move:

At end of motion add: ‘that such date and hour be not later than 30th June 1972’.

The reason for this motion, of course, is obvious. It is obvious from their mirth that members of the Liberal Party in no circumstances wish to come back early to the Parliament to discuss wool. The other objective is to see the response of the Country Party, which has been so vocal in wanting urgent legislation on wool. Members of the Country Party have been making a great song and dance inside and outside this Parliament about the need to legislate and the need to make decisions in respect of wool marketing. In particular, the honourable member for Moore (Mr Maisey), the honourable member for Hume (Mr Pettitt) and the honourable member for Canning (Mr Hallett), to mention 3, have expressed grave concern about the Government’s non-decision with respect to wool marketing. Other honourable members have expressed similar views. Speaking on behalf of members of the Labor Party, I can say we agree with them. We have made that quite clear. But the principal objectives of asking that the Parliament be recalled before 30th June 1972 are, firstly, to consider the Randall wool report, which the Minister for Primary Industry (Mr Sinclair) today informed the House has been received by the Government, and, secondly, to enable effective action to be taken to rectify the current uncertainty on wool marketing. I move this amendment because, as honourable members well know, on 7th October last year the Wool (Deficiency Payments) Bill was introduced into the Parliament by the Minister for Primary Industry. The long title of that Bill read:

An Act to provide for Payments on behalf of the Commonwealth for the purpose of ensuring a Minimum Standard of Financial Returns to Producers of certain Australian Wool sold or otherwise dealt with on or after the second day of July, One thousand nine hundred and seventy-one, and before the first day of July, One thousand nine hundred and seventy-two.

In other words that Act officially concludes on 30th June next, and wool deficiency payments will not be made after that date. There has been no indication from this Government on whether wool deficiency payments will continue to be made after 30th June or whether amendments will be made to the Act before that time. This Act authorises the appropriation of money to make wool deficiency payments to ensure an average return at a certain level as specified in the Act within the prescribed period. The prescribed period is clearly defined in the Act as the period ending on 30th June 1972. Can any member of the Country Party or the Liberal Party tell me what will happen after 30th June 1972? What do they say to that question which every wool grower they meet asks them? The honourable member for Hume (Mr Pettitt) and the Minister for Shipping and Transport (Mr Nixon) are trying to interrupt my speech with interjections. The honourable member for Hume will get his chance to vote and we will see how good he is. We all know how he will vote, just as he talks outside this Parliament. We know how the Minister for Shipping and Transport will vote. He will vote in the same way as he always does. The point I make is that the provisions of the Wool (Deficiency Payments) Act 1971 cease to operate after 30th June this year. This House will shortly commence the winter recess. No amendment has been made to this Act, no amendment has been foreshadowed and no decision has been taken in regard to any new legislation to enable these payments to continue to be made after 30th June. The 30th June is an important date because the new wool selling season commences on 1st July. It is important that the whole scheme of wool marketing be clarified. Before this Parliament rises we should at least be in a position to know what will happen after 30th June. We have heard in recent weeks, both inside and outside this Parliament, a number of statements made by members of the Country Party about the need for an acquisition scheme, the need for a drastic reform with respect to wool marketing and the need to treat these things as a matter of urgency. We will test those honourable members in this House on their statements just as the Opposition tested 3 key Liberals on the Territorial Sea and Continental Shelf Bill. We all know what they did. We will see the same thing happen in regard to this matter. Members of the Liberal Party and of the Country Party make big brave statements outside this Parliament but it is a different thing when it comes to saying them in this Parliament and showing how fair dinkum they are and whether they are prepared to back up their statements.

After the Government has had a week or so to consider the Randall report the Parliament will debate it and the conclusions in it, and the Government will introduce an amendment to this Act to enable deficiency payments to be made for a further prescribed period or introduce new legislation with respect to a wool acquisition scheme or the marketing of wool. The Parliament knows full well that this Government is incapable of giving competent leadership. A prime example of this is the Government’s stalling in this place month after month with the excuse that it is waiting for the Randall report. The Randall report has now reached the Government. We do not say that next week a decision should be taken on that report, but what we do say is that because this Act expires on 30th June 1972 a positive decision has to be taken. If the decision involves money - obviously it must - some explanation should be given to the Parliament on whether an amendment will be made to the Act or new legislation will be introduced. What will the Government do? Will it introduce some airy-fairy scheme which it will announce in the Budget Speech?

The provisions of this Act will not apply from 1st July 1972. Until this Parliament resumes in August where will the wool growers stand? Every wool grower in Australia is asking the same question: ‘What will the Government do?’. The honourable member for Moore (Mr Maisey) has asked time and again: ‘What will the Government do?’ In the television series ‘This Day Tonight’ the honourable member referred to the Randall report as a subterfuge.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock:

– Order! I appreciate that the honourable member has to give the reasons for moving the amendment which seeks to resume the sittings of the Parliament on a date prior to that suggested in the motion moved by the Leader of the House. I have allowed the honourable member to mention certain points which need to be mentioned to make the amendment relevant, but I ask the honourable member not to debate, for example, the reasons behind the Randall report, otherwise this could develop into a debate on the substance of the wool industry.

Dr PATTERSON:

– I thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. The reasons why we on this side of the House believe that the Parliament should resume before 30th June are obvious. The whole wool industry wants to know what the Government intends to do. What action will the Government take? This action can be voiced only by an Act of Parliament such as the Wool (Deficiency Payments) Act. As I have said, the Randall report is now before the Government. We can only assume that this is the final report because we thought it had been finalised some weeks ago. We have had no statement from the Government on how long the Government is to consider the report. All that is needed is some indication that a statement will be made prior to the next wool selling season which commences on 1st July. This is not good enough. This is the Parliament of the Commonwealth in which members represent electorates throughout Australia, including wool growing electorates. It is completely unsatisfactory for this Parliament to rise today without an effective decision being taken by this Government in regard to the important matter of wool marketing especially when we know that by an Act of Parliament the wool deficiency payments scheme will conclude on 30th June.

For that reason it is of paramount importance that this Parliament be recalled at some time prior to 30th June to consider this most important question and if necessary, if the Government holds this opinion, to consider introducing legislation to do one of 2 things, either to completely nullify the wool deficiency payments scheme or to extend the period for payments. The Government could also consider introducing new legislation with respect to wool marketing in Australia. It is for those reasons that I have moved the amendment which seeks to have the House recalled at some date to be fixed prior to 30th June.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock:

– Is the amendment seconded?

Mr KIRWAN:
Forrest

– I second the amendment. This afternoon the Opposition has made an attempt to discuss the Commonwealth Electoral. Act and the 75 other items on the notice paper before the House goes into recess, but no matter requires debate or finalisation before this House goes into recess more than does the marketing of the wool clip. However, as the Government has decided that the House will go into recess today, it is important that the House should reassemble before 30th June, for the reasons given this afternoon by the honourable member for Dawson (Dr Patterson). I remind members that in his report for 1971 the Chairman of the Australian Wool Board made a most important statement. I use it to illustrate the importance of the wool industry to Australia as well as the seriousness of the situation that is confronting the industry. In that report he said:

This year was perhaps the most difficult experienced by the industry. Gross value of wool production slumped SI 88m to $547m - the lowest in money terms since 1949-50. Over wide areas this income fall has been disastrous for thousands of farm families and others in the rural community dependent upon them.

Many are still suffering the consequences of this decline. Even though the situation has improved on last year, it still is serious and it is causing concern to people in rural electorates. The report continued:

As income has fallen, farm debts have arisen alarmingly. Many of the industry’s biggest debtors are its otherwise efficient producers.

That is known to be true by any member representing a rural electorate. While the honourable member for Dawson was addressing the House, Government members were interjecting: ‘Where are the wool growers?’ In reply one might well ask them: ‘How will the wool growers vote on this particular issue? How concerned are they about their fellows on the farms and about the situation in the rural industries because of the inactivity of this Government over a long period?’ It is all very well for Government members to say that the situation has improved. It has, but in spite of the Government not because of action taken by it. The Government now has an opportunity to show the level of its concern for electors in rural industries. It is of immense importance that this Parliament should reassemble to debate the Randall report, and that this report be tabled in this Parliament for distribution. As the member for Dawson said, we need to come back here to learn what the Government will do about the support scheme during the coming 12 months.

Thousands of wool growers and their families and rural communities throughout Australia are in desperate need, but their needs can be met only as a result of Government decision and action. In the present circumstances it should be decision and action taken after regard has been had to the Randall report. Surely such decision and action ought to have been taken long ago. As I said in a speech I made in this House last week, in 1964 responsible individuals were advocating that total acquisition of the wool clip would be the answer to the industry’s problems and that effect should be given to certain recommendations of the Australian Wool Industry Council. The present position has not come upon the Government unexpectedly. As I said in my earlier speech, it should have been prepared for it. It should have prepared legislation for submission to this Parliament before it went into recess, but now that the Government has decided that the House shall go into recess, surely it should ensure that the House will reassemble in order to debate the business that we have been advocating this afternoon. One Government member, who is a member of the political Party to which the Minister for Primary Industry (Mr Sinclair) belongs - the Minister responsible for this matter - said last week that the Government had resorted to a subterfuge in this regard.

Mr Grassby:

– Who said that?

Mr KIRWAN:

– The honourable member for Moore (Mr Maisey).

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock:

– Order! I point out to the honourable member for Forrest (Mr Kirwin), as I pointed out to the honourable member for Dawson (Dr Patterson), that the subject matter before the House is the sittings of the House. I have allowed certain references to be made because I felt that it was fair to allow the mover and seconder of the motion to illustrate briefly the reasons for the amendment. However, I suggest to the honourable member for Forrest, as I suggested to the honourable member for Dawson, that we should not develop the argument into a debate on the subject matter of wool acquisition.

Mr KIRWAN:

– I agree, Sir, but I remind the House that the honourable member for Moore has said that the Government has resorted to subterfuge. Here is an opportunity for the honourable member for Moore-

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock:

– Order! I ask the honourable member for Forrest not to continue along the lines of debating the wool industry.

Mr KIRWAN:

– Very well, Sir. Here is an opportunity for the honourable member for Moore to avoid resorting to subterfuge. By voting for the amendment he has an opportunity to stand on the side of the people whom he represents in this place. Indeed, so can the honourable member for Canning (Mr Hallett). As both those honourable members well know, grave concern is felt throughout the rural electorates of this country, no less in Western Australia than in any other State of the Commonwealth. Because of the lack of security felt in the industry because people do not know what the Government intends to do at the end of this month or the end of next month in relation to the support scheme or in relation to wool marketing, it is essential that they should know what is to be done. All we get from the Government are statements. We do not want statements. What we want is legislation passed through this House. But first we want a debate on the Randall report before any decision is made and any legislation is passed through here. So I support wholeheartedly the amendment that has been so ably moved this afternoon by the honourable member for Dawson. I commend it to the House and I commend in particular that the House reassemble before 30th June in order to debate the Randall report and the state of the wool industry, and in order that appropriate legislation be passed through this House.

Mr GRASSBY:
Riverina

– I support the amendment.

Mr SINCLAIR:
Minister for Primary Industry · New England · CP

– Over the past few weeks honourable members have become accustomed to hear motions being moved by the Opposition in order to change the pattern of progress of business in this place especially so that Opposition members can gain some short term political advantage on policies affecting primary industries.

Mr Bryant:

– I desire to raise a point of order. Mr Deputy Speaker, I refer to your previous ruling when my colleague from Forrest (Mr Kirwan) was addressing the House. It is obvious that the Minister is not directing his remarks to the amendment and is using this opportunity to indulge in a little political diatribe. If the Minister is to address the House as you required the honourable member for Forrest to do, I submit that he can refer only to the amendment.

Mr Grassby:

– It is all right for one side and not for the other.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock) Order! The honourable member for Riverina is being disorderly. I suggest that the honourable member for Wills might take into consideration that the Minister has been speaking for approximately 30 seconds. I call the Minister for Primary Industry.

Mr SINCLAIR:

– The motion we are considering is for the adjournment of the House. To it the Opposition has moved an amendment relating to the time for the resumption of the House and the purpose of that resumption. I have suggested, and I repeat my suggestion, that there must be some motivation behind the Opposition’s action. If there is no such motivation, again the Opposition is revealed as having neither understanding of rural policy nor sound motives for wishing to pursue its course of action.

Mr Bryant:

– I raise another point of order. The matter before the Chair is whether or not the motion should be amended. That has nothing to do with rural policy. The amendment was moved succinctly.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock:

– Order! I point out to the honourable member for Wills, as I did to the honourable member for Dawson and the honourable member for Forrest, that I do not want them to develop the debate on the amendment into a debate on the wool industry and the Randall report. These were all matters that the honourable member for Dawson and the honourable member for Forrest mentioned. If the honourable member for Wills had been listening he would know that both honourable members were allowed to mention those 2 subjects. I asked them not to develop their remarks into a debate on these 2 matters. I suggest that what the Minister for Primary Industry has said has related to the amendment and the motion before the House.

Mr SINCLAIR:

– We have before the House a motion that relates to the time when we would normally resume. I see no reason why the House should countenance the amendment which the Opposition has moved. The reason for the amendment relates to the 2 matters which have been initially raised in this place by the honourable member for Dawson and his seconder. They have suggested reasons why there should again be a meeting of Parliament before the scheduled resumption date. If legislation relating to the matters raised is to come into force of course it must come before the Parliament, and at that time there will be adequate opportunity for the Parliament to debate the substance of that legislation. In the meantime the position is that we have had over the course of the last few months adequate opportunities to discuss a report which was submitted by the Australian Wool Industry Conference. As I understand the amendment moved by the honourable member for Dawson, it suggests that a further opportunity should be given to this Parliament to discuss the Government’s attitude to that report. I suggest that there is no reason for this House to meet at a time when it normally would not meet to discuss our attitude to the AWIC report. I believe at the same time that it is essential-

Dr Patterson:

– I take a point of order. At no stage did I mention the AWIC report. I mentioned the Randall report. I accept the difficulty of the Minister for Primary Industry. Normally I would have given him notice that I was to move this amendment, but he took me by surprise this afternoon. The blue paper setting out the programme for today listed a matter of public importance. It was only by mere luck that I happened to be here when other business was given precedence over this matter. I can understand the Minister’s problem, but it is not the AWIC report with which we are concerned; it is the Randall report and the fact that the Wool (Deficiency Payments) Act concludes on 30th lune. They are the only 2 reasons for my amendment. On 30th June the Wool (Deficiency Payments) Act concludes. What are we going to tell the wool growers after that date?

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock:

– I think the point of order raised by the honourable member for Dawson is fairly reasonable. As far as I am aware, the honourable member for Dawson did not mention the report he was concerned with.

Mr SINCLAIR:

– The reason I mentioned the AWIC report - I appreciate the explanation given by the honourable member for Dawson - is that the Randall report is a document relating to the AWIC report, and presumably the purpose of the amendment is to enable us to discuss the attitude taken by the Government to the AWIC report. In essence what we are looking at is a matter of principle, the question of wool marketing, plus the second issue which the honourable gentleman raised, the question of wool deficiency pay ments. Both these matters will necessarily have to come before the Parliament in the next session. Both are matters of consequence to the industry. As a result of questions from both sides of the House I have explained that a statement will be made by the Government on the attitude that it takes towards the AWIC report as soon as possible. It has been dependent upon the receipt of a report from the Randall Committee, which has just been received. It is the third report from the Committee. There have been 2 earlier reports relating to other aspects of wool marketing. The Government will be taking a decision, and it will be taking it in time to allow the industry to be advised of what the policy of the Government will be for the season that will commence on 1st July next.

I do not believe that a case can be substantiated for this Parliament to resume to debate these matters prior to the commencement of the new wool selling season. I believe there have been opportunities for matters relating to the AWIC report to be raised in this Parliament and for subsequent debate to take place. I believe that the fact that this report was distributed in this Parliament, or was distributed through the agency of the ad hoc committee, the Vasey Committee of the AWIC, which is of course the body that prepared the report, enabled every member of this Parliament to debate the issues. For that reason I do not believe that it is a matter which has been debarred from debate prior to this time. Of course it is important that members of a Parliament have an opportunity to debate significant policy matters. Of course it is significant for them to be able to consider matters of principle, but it is important that they take opportunities to do so while the Parliament is normally and customarily in session.

I do not believe that in circumstances in which the Opposition has not taken advantage of opportunities previously available to it the Opposition should disrupt the customary proceedings in the course of a recess, which is designed to enable the preparation of the Budget and the planning of a wide ranging series of programmes which are normally undertaken by the Government before the commencement of the Budget session in August. I do not believe that an adequate case has been established for accepting the amendment which the honourable member for Dawson has moved. I believe that members from both sides of this House have had adequate opportunity to raise the matters which the honourable member for Dawson has suggested should again be canvassed. The second matter which he suggests we need an opportunity to debate, the question of the wool deficiency payments, is also a matter which I believe either could have been debated prior to this or can be debated during the Budget session. It is a fact that this was the procedure that was followed with respect to the 36c price support scheme which was introduced by the Government for the present wool selling season. As to the statement by the honourable member for Forrest that this Government only makes statements, I think the fact that the wool market has recovered, the fact that the Australian Wool Commission has been constituted and the fact that there is a wool price deficiency payments scheme all speak for themselves. For that reason the Government does not accept the amendment moved by the honourable member for Dawson that the House should meet prior to 30th June 1972.

Motion (by Mr Giles) put:

That the question be now put.

The House divided. (Mr Deputy Speaker - Mr P. E. Lucock)

AYES: 47

NOES: 44

Majority .. .. 3

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Question put:

That the amendment (Or Patterson’s) be agreed to.

The House divided. (Mr Deputy Speaker - Mr P. E. Lucock)

AYES: 44

NOES: 48

Majority . . 4

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock)The question now is that the motion proposed by the Leader of the House relating to the adjournment of the House be agreed to.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 3346

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Motion (by Mr Swartz) 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 sitting.

page 3346

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Mr WHITLAM:
Leader of the Opposition · Werriwa

– I seek to make a personal explanation.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock)Does the honourable member claim to have been misrepresented?

Mr WHITLAM:

– Yes. The Prime Minister (Mr McMahon) misrepresented me at question time today. In answer to a question by the honourable member for Chisholm (Mr Staley) the Prime Minister said that a Press statement I had made yesterday was untrue. He also said that if I had checked the communique which President Suharto and he had issued last

November I would have known it was untrue. I am going from memory, of course, but I remember quite clearly the use of the word ‘untrue’ and the reference to the communique. I have just been able to obtain the transcript of the question I asked the Prime Minister yesterday on the negotiations which were due to start yesterday between representatives of Australia and Indonesia about the delineation of the seabed boundary between the 2 countries, and of the answer which the Prime Minister asked the Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr Sinclair) to give.

Looking at the report in the Melbourne Sun’ yesterday of my Press statement and the report of the question and answer, I notice divergences between the newspaper account and the Hansard. I have had to wait until I obtained the Hansard proof. It transpires that the Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs has altered the green copy. What I said yesterday - and what the Prime Minister says was untrue - was this.

We now have the position where the Australian Government cannot fulfil an undertaking given to the president of our nearest and largest neighbour.

We also have the position where the State governments will decide whether the national Government can negotiate with other governments.

The answer which the Acting Minister gave me yesterday is reported in Hansard as follows: . . already consultations are under way with the States on this matter. The Government hopes to advance these consultations and as a result of them we believe that in due course we may be able to come to more meaningful conclusions with the representatives from the Government of Indonesia. For that reason the talks have been deferred, they have not been postponed indefinitely.

The same passage appeared in the green copy in these terms: . . already there are consultations under way with the States on this matter. The Government hopes to advance these consultations and as a result of them we believe that in due course we will be able to come to more meaningful conclusions with the representatives from the Government of Indonesia.

Mr Whitlam:

– So the talks have been deferred to a date?

From my recollection I said ‘to a date subsequent to the consultations with the States’ but that is not recorded:

Mr SINCLAIR:
CP

– This means that the talks have been deferred. They have not been indefinitely postponed.

I was very careful in framing my question to the Prime Minister, which he referred to the Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs, to use the very words which Foreign Minister Bowen used on 20th April this year in answer to a question on notice updating an answer which the present Prime Minister had given me on 23rd February last year on this very matter of the continental shelf, or shelves, in the Timor Sea. The wording which the Foreign Minister gave me on 20th April was:

In February 1972, during the visit to Australia of President Soeharto, it was agreed to hold an early meeting of representatives of Indonesia and Australia with a view to completing the delineation of the boundary.

I used precisely those words in my question yesterday. Referring to the communique by the President and the Prime Minister of 7th February last I find that the words were:

They agreed that all the outstanding seabed boundary questions should be negotiated at an early date.

I believe the comments I made, which were reported in the Melbourne ‘Sun’ this morning, were not untrue. I believe my question was framed with complete regard to the facts coming from successive Foreign Ministers, one of them being the present Prime Minister.

page 3347

AUSTRALIAN SHIPPING, DREDGING, SHIPBUILDING AND DOCKING INDUSTRIES

Discusion of Matter of Public Importance

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock)I have received a letter from the honourable member for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones) proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The Government’s failure to plan the orderly development and expansion of the Australian shipping, dredging, shipbuilding and docking industries.

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

Mr CHARLES JONES:
Newcastle

– The Opposition has brought forward this matter of public importance because the Government has been sitting on the Tariff Board report for almost 12 months. It has made various promises of bringing the report before the House but until today we have been unsuccessful in obtaining this information. I am pleased to say that as a result of the discussion of this matter of public importance we will finally flush the fox out of his lair. I believe that the Minister for Shipping and Transport (Mr Nixon), when he follows me, will make reference to the Tariff Board report. So at least thi. decision of the Opposition to bring forward this matter of public importance will pay dividends, will produce a result and will force the Government into making a decision.

About 5 years ago the Government announced a policy of introducing Australian shipping into the overseas conference lines. This decision was supported strongly by the Opposition. Some 4 years after this decision was made the Government has found itself in the position where we have only 4 ships trading in the overseas tonnage - namely, the ‘Australian Endeavour’, the ‘Australian Enterprise’, the Munga’ and the ‘Matthew Flinders’, and some time in the next 12 months no doubt there will be the ‘Australian Exporter’. I think this is a disgraceful situation. We have some 5,000 sailings a year from Australian ports handling exports to the value of $4,400m and representing something like 100 million to 110 million tons of cargo. So there is any amount of trade for an Australian merchant fleet to carry. The Government should be getting on with the job.

Even though the then Minister for Trade and Industry, Sir John McEwen, stated that the object of the exercise was to get a window into the conferences, up to this point if there is a window into the conferences the Government has not told the Parliament what it is. Members of the Opposition have tried to obtain information as to what is actually transpiring in this trade and what the window is disclosing. The report of the Australian National Line discloses no confidential information or no information of value to honourable members. All we know is that it would appear that the venture into the European conference in particular has been a failure, that the recommendations that were made originally for roll-on roll-off ships to be used have been borne out and that the decision of the Government to go into cellular container ships has not been the success that it was hoped it would be.

As far as the coastal trade is concerned, at present I believe 17 Australian ships are laid up with a displacement of 600 men who normally would man those ships. When another 300 complete their leave there will be a total of 900 Australian seamen unemployed because of the policy of this Government. We on this side of the House believe that something positive should be done about it. We believe that the Government should have taken action to move into the crude oil trade. In 1970-71 there were 3,001 million gallons of crude oil imported into Australia. All of this was brought to this country in foreign owned and manned ships. At the present time all ships in the New Guinea to Australia trade are foreign owned and manned. In the period including all of 1971 and up to February 1972- that is, a period of 14 months - 27 ships carried phosphate from Nauru to Australia; 25 ships carried phosphate from Christmas Island to Australia; and 12 carried phosphate from Ocean Island to Australia. I seek leave to incorporate in Hansard a table which I have already shown to the Minister for Shipping and Transport which very clearly gives the picture of the amount of phosphate that is carried from these islands to Australia.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Is leave granted? There being no objection, leave is granted. (The document read as follows):

Mr CHARLES JONES:

– I thank the Minister and honourable members. Another matter with which I wish to deal in the limited time left to me - one has to gallop when one has only a quarter of an hour in which to speak - is dredging. I commence my remarks on this subject with statements which were made in Newcastle and which appeared in the ‘Newcastle Morning Herald’ of 17th April 1972. The article stated:

The Chairman of Westminster Dredging Australia Pty Ltd (Mr C. A. Alexander) said the

Federal Government had forced his company and other companies to build dredges in Australia.

It had then let foreign companies, which could operate at lower costs, compete for dredgingcontracts.

This is where I condemn the Government for its decision first of all to allow foreign dredges on to the coast. To give the picture I once again seek leave to incorporate in’ Hansard a table setting out the number of dredges at present laid up.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! Is leave granted? There being no objection, leave is granted. (The document read as follows):

Mr CHARLES JONES:

– I thank the House. At the present time, as this table discloses, there are 13 dredges tied up throughout Australia. Approximately 500 men, who would normally have been working full time on these dredges, have been laid off. Dredging contracts in Australia have been let to foreign owned dredging companies. This is being done while we have unemployed Australians and ships, some of which were built in Australia, that are tied up on the coast. I take one case in particular, namely that of Bunbury. Some 2 years ago an acrimonious debate took place in Western Australia where the trade union movement was trying to get work in Bunbury harbour carried out by Australian dredges manned by Australian crews. But the then Liberal Government of Western Australia insisted on acceptance of the lowest tender which went to a South Korean dredging company. A South

Korean ship manned by a South Korean crew was sent here to do the work. Today that company is well behind in its time schedule. It has run into problems that Australian dredging companies knew existed. The Australian companies knew about a hard rock shelf which would present great problems. The South Korean company did not have the equipment to do the job at the time the contract was let and it still is in the same position. The result is that work that should have been reaching completion has been held up. It is well behind schedule. These are some of the things that have developed because of the Government’s allowing foreign dredging companies to come onto the Australian coast to do work which should be done by Australian dredges manned by Australian seamen.

Another matter I want to deal with relates to shipbuilding. Whilst the Government has made orders available, one of the tragedies of ‘the Australian shipbuilding industry is that at present the yards do not have a clear plan of continuity of employment. Once a tender for a ship has been submitted and accepted it takes about 6 to 9 months to organise the work and materials and get everything flowing. Unfortunately this Government has a stop-go programme of shipbuilding. This statement was made only recently in regard to the activities of Evans Deakin Industries Ltd in Brisbane:

The immediate survival chances of Evans Deakin Industries Ltd shipbuilding activities at Brisbane appear to depend on one of 2 tenders it has submitted to the Australian Shipbuilding Board coming to fruitation within the next few weeks.

On a sober market assessment of this happening, the chances appear to be very, slim.

Here is a large industry - the second largest industry in Queensland - which is in a position where employment for approximately 3,000 men could be lost to that State. It is time the Government did something about shipbuilding. A Tariff Board inquiry commenced in 1969. The report of the Board was presented to the Minister on 12th June 1971. It has taken almost 12 months for the Government to make up its mind on the policy that has been recommended by the Tariff Board. If it had not been for the raising of the matter of public importance this afternoon I doubt very much whether the Government would even at this point of time table the Tariff Board report. In any case, we on this side of the House look forward with interest to what the report will contain. I would like to take the opportunity of commenting on it later. At least we are going to get the report tabled this afternoon- or I hope the Minister will deal with it in a few moments.

At present there are 38 foreign built ships operating interstate and 14 operating intrastate on the Australian coast. This makes a total of 52 ships. Also there are 3 oil drilling ships and one drilling platform, all of which were built overseas. The replacement of these ships by Australian built ships would make an excellent ship building programme for Australian yards. At least if such a policy were adopted the shipbuilding yards could plan their work and get on with the job of providing employment for Australian workers. I seek leave of the Minister to incorporate in Hansard another list of ships which shows all of the ships built overseas and operating on the coast.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! Is leave granted? There being no objection, leave is granted. (The document read as follows): ‘

I thank the Minister and honourable members. Whilst the shipyards throughout Australia at the moment have current orders and work is under way, there is not sufficient work in the programme that is already under tender to keep any one of the 3 major shipyards operating in Australia fully occupied for 12 months. The tenders that are still open - even throwing in the extra 3 ships for which tenders have been called - when added to those yet to be allocated would not provide employment for one of the 3 major yards in Australia. Any number of ships built overseas are operating on the Australian coast. Replacements for these ships should be built in Australian yards. This Government should take action to do something about the situation.

The other matter to which I wish to refer deals with docks. Once again the Government has taken too long to make a decision in this case. It has received the report from the Cabinet sub-committee which is tied up with the Tariff Board’s report into shipbuilding. This report should have been tabled long ago. Very strong demands have been made on the Government by the Australian Chamber of Shipping. The Government was taken to task at a transport conference held in Canberra in March 1971 when speakers from various shipping interests strongly condemned the Australian Government’s failure to do something about docks, and to provide adequate docks throughout Australia so that work could be carried out by Australian companies and not be given to overseas companies. I ask leave to incorporate in Hansard a question I asked about this matter.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! Is leave granted? There being no objection, leave is granted (The document read as follows):

Mr CHARLES JONES:

– I thank the House and the Minister. We on this side of the House are strongly in favour of ships operating on the Australian coast being repaired by Australian workmen in Australian shipyards and in Australian docks wherever possible. I wrote to the Minister only this week to draw to his attention the fact that a little old ship, the liquid gas carrier ‘Arago’, was to go to Hong Kong for a 4-year survey although this work could be carried out in Australia. This survey will entail a good deal of work. When I heard about this I got in touch with some of the shipyards that would be interested in this work. The State dockyard in Newcastle has a slip which is available, which will be made available and on which the work can be done immediately for the company which owns the ship. The position is that these overseas companies bring to Australia ships manned with overseas crews and, as soon as a quid can be made for the Australian workman and the Australian economy from the repair of these ships, the companies want to take them overseas to Hong Kong, Singapore or somewhere else. We on this side of the House are totally opposed to this policy of allowing foreign-built ships to operate on our coast when the ships which are needed could be built in Australian shipyards. The same remark applies to ship repair work.

In conclusion I summarise the attitude of the Labor Party on the 4 questions relating to shipping that have been raised in this discussion of a matter of public importance. We believe that a reasonable amount of Australian trade should be carded in Australian ships, built and manned by Australians. I accept that countries which buy commodities such as coal, ore and other minerals from Australia have the right to transport these materials in their own ships but, in turn, we are entitled to transport in Australian ships our imports of crude oil, phosphates and other goods of that type which require a one-voyage journey. We believe that all dredging in Australia should be carried out by Australian dredges manned with Australian crews so that, at least, the work can be done to Australian standards of employment. We believe that it is time that there was a long-term, planned, shipbuilding programme to replace all foreign-built ships operating on our coast with ships which have been built in Australia. I have already provided the House with details relating to this aspect We believe that sufficient docks should be built, not financed completely by the Commonwealth but at least with reasonable Commonwealth assistance, to provide on our coast facilities to carry out the repair of ships that are operating around our coast and any other ships that could need assistance. If this were done, all this work would be carried out by Australian workmen in Australian shipyards.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member’s time has expired.

Mr NIXON:
Minister for Shipping and Transport · Gippsland · CP

– I am a little inclined to wonder why the Opposition has proposed this matter of public importance for discussion at this time. Let me relate to the House the wording of this matter of public importance. It states:

The Government’s failure to plan the orderly development and expansion of the Australian shipping, dredging, shipbuilding and docking industries.

Each of those subjects is fairly wideranging. In all fairness to the honourable member for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones), whilst I recognise that he has a keen interest in shipping, I must say to him that he has made no attempt to make a fair presentation of the facts in relation to Government policy towards shipping. I believe that, contrary to what the honourable member has said, the Government has policies which have led to the orderly development and expansion of the very things that he mentioned.

I believe that I can easily prove my assertion by reading an account of each of the matters that I have before me. Regrettably, time will preclude me from establishing my case fully. Let me deal firstly with the report of the Tariff Board. The honourable member for Newcastle expressed a belief that he had flushed me out in regard to the Tariff Board report. The facts are that when I first heard that this matter of public importance was to be raised today, I rang the honourable member for Newcastle and said to him: ‘I have been working on a statement relating to the Tariff Board report because the Government has come to decisions and I was hoping to have the statement finally prepared so that I could give it to you, in accordance with the normal courtesies of the House, 2 hours before I hoped to make the statement in the House. But if you proceed with this matter of public importance, I will be unable to complete the preparation of the statement on the Tariff Board report and to make the statement to the Parliament.” That is exactly what has eventuated. I am now forced by the actions of the honourable member for Newcastle in raising this matter of public importance to make a statement on the Tariff Board report, on which Government decisions have been made, outside this Parliament, after the Parliament rises, because 1 have not had time to complete the statement. This is quite contrary to the Government’s wishes in regard to the statement. We were working at full steam to present it to the House and make the statement properly.

Dr Patterson:

– You can make it tonight.

Mr NIXON:

– I regret that I will be unable to make it then because, as I have said, I have had to devote my time completely to this matter of public importance. I sat in the House for about 2 hours this afternoon while honourable members opposite wasted the time of the House with cheap political stunts.

Dr Patterson:

– How did you vote? Against the wool grower?

Mr NIXON:

– The wool grower knows full well the value of Labor Party policies on rural industries. Do not start me on that. The honourable member for Dawson appeared on television one night recently and I happened to see the programme. I thought it was a delightful programme. It was a great credit to the producers of This Day Tonight’ that the programme should show him thundering forth in such fine fashion and denouncing the Labor Party’s approach to rural industries, knowing full well that any chance he had of capturing a few votes in the rural areas had been destroyed by the Federal Conference of the Australian Labor Party. The rural electorates are fully aware of the cheap stunts that members of the Labor Party get up to in this House.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! I think that the Minister is getting a little wide of the subject matter that is before the House.

Mr NIXON:

– Yes, Mr Speaker, I am a little wide of the matter of public importance. I have been precluded from adopting what is the normal, customary procedure when making a statement on Government policy in this Parliament because the statement could not be prepared. The honourable member for Newcastle knows that; I told him that would be the case. I suppose he is prepared to take it as it comes.

Mr Charles Jones:

– Mr Speaker, I take a point of order. The Minister said he would use this information in his reply to me.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! There is no substance in the point of order.

Mr NIXON:

– There is no substance in the point of order because what the honourable member for Newcastle said is not correct. You are quite right, Mr Speaker; I agree with you entirely. I am very grateful for your proper ruling on the matter. The statement on the Tariff Board report will be made as soon as I can get to it.

The honourable member for Newcastle referred to the number of imported ships that are in this country and made a case to suggest that they were displacing Australianbuilt ships in the coastal trade. The Government has been impeccable, when allowing a foreign-built ship into this country for a special task or for a short time or for any purpose, in studying carefully whether an Australian ship should be built to take its place. We have had complete co-operation from the shipping industry and there has been a complete understanding by the shipbuilding industry of our policy in this regard. Indeed, I have a list of ships that have been imported, showing the purposes for which they have been imported, whether they have been imported for a short term one-off job or, if imported for a longer period, whether they have to be rebuilt.

I would like to name just one or two of these ships. The reason I do so is to point out to the honourable member for Newcastle that I do not believe that he has an understanding of what is required in the fast changing technological shipping industry.

For instance, the discovery of oil off the coast of Gippsland has caused a complete new set of problems in the Australian tanker-building industry. We had to import tankers to cope with the short term problem, but they are being replaced by Australian ships or replacements are being built for them. I will just name a few of the ships to which I have referred. The Bayou Chico’ came into Australia for a seismic survey. It was a specific short term survey task. In those circumstances it would have been quite irresponsible for me as Minister to ask that this task be fulfilled by an Australian-built ship. It was a short term, one job task and a proper survey was made of the Australian shipping industry to see whether there was available a ship comparable to the ‘Bayou Chico’ that could have done the job. However, none was available. So, it is quite ridiculous for the honourable member to suggest that an Australian-built ship should be used for this task.

The ‘Coral Sea’, which is a grab dredge, came in for a specific task at Cape Lambert. Exhaustive investigations were carried out to ascertain whether an Australianbuilt dredge was available for the task. The same remarks apply to the ‘DB1’, the DB2’ and to many others. One of the bigger ships to arrive here was the ‘Ida Clausen’ which was brought to Australia as a transport for livestock. She was brought in on the assumption that there would be a building commitment when the viability of the operation was established. I say to the honourable member for Newcastle that it would be quite irresponsible of me, as Minister, to refuse to allow a company to bring in a ship and try it out to see whether or not the company could establish a long term operation. The company brought in this ship to see whether the operation is viable. If the operation is not viable, of course, the ship can be sent back overseas. It is on charter. The company can do this instead of investing a great deal of capital and losing it. We have used some imagination in our policy and we have given consideration both to the commercial interests involved and to the employment of the Australian fleet.

The facts are that all the ships used on the Australian coastline have to meet very vigorous Australian conditions, and this is one of our difficulties. The honourable member for Newcastle talked so blithely about the use of Australian seamen and even Australian docks for repair work. He totally ignores the commercial considerations and the added costs that have to be incurred because of the vigorous conditions which ships are obliged to meet, and which have a consequential effect on Australian exporting industries. In regard to overseas ships, the honourable member for Newcastle talked about our getting a window into the Conference system. The fact is that we have had a window into the Conference system and it has proved to be a great success. The Australian Government has received interesting and useful information from it. For commercial reasons this information is not made public. We cannot publish everything that we learn.

I shall mention one or two developments that have taken place as a result of our participation in the Conference system. The first is that the Australian National Line has joined with the Associated Container Transportation Ltd in setting up a pendulum service within the European Conference, and we believe that a much more viable, economic and efficient service will result from this venture. Our joining with ACTL has resulted from knowledge we have gained inside the Conference system. As I have said, we are using the Conference as a window. The second development is that a second ship, the ‘Australian Explorer’ is joining the run on which the Australian Endeavour’ is engaged. We have the ‘Australian Enterprise’ on the Japan run. We are engaged also in the Pacific Australia Direct Line, or PAD, service. The Australian overseas shipping industry, through the Australian National Line, has become very important to the economy of Australian exporting industries.

We have completely protected the Australian coastal shipping industry. The industry is fully aware of the steps which have been taken to protect it, and I believe that the claims of the honourable member for Newcastle fall quite flat. The honourable member also referred to the use of overseas dry docks. Again, this is a commercial decision; it has to be taken by the people concerned. The facts are that, regrettably, some of the demarcation disputes and political disputes that occur in Australian docks increase costs so greatly that commercial interests are unable to meet the higher charges imposed by Australian docks. It is all very well to be nationalistic in approach, but there also has to be some realism. In his opening remarks the honourable member for Newcastle said that a reasonable amount of Australian ships or a reasonable amount of employment-

Mr Charles Jones:

– A reasonable amount of Australian trade.

Mr NIXON:

– The honourable member referred to a reasonable amount of Australian trade. That is open to any sort of interpretation. I suggest to the honourable member that in point of fact the Australian Government is meeting the needs and the wishes of the industries involved. Both in the Australian coastal trade and in overseas trade I believe that our policy has been successful. The honourable member for Newcastle also referred to dredges. I believe that we have taken every precaution to ensure that Austraiian dredges are used wherever practicable. He referred to a one-off situation. As I say, we have taken every precaution. Most of the Australian dredges that are not being used at the moment are too small and inefficient to be able to undertake big jobs.

The last question which the honourable member for Newcastle raised referred to dock development. There is an IDC report, as the honourable member well knows, and the Government will make a statement on that report at the appropriate time, after consideration has been given to the final details. I reject the charge of Government failure made by the honourable member for Newcastle. _ Mr HANSEN (Wide Bay) (5.55)- It gives me pleasure to support the honourable member for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones) who raised this matter of public importance which refers to the Government’s failure to plan the orderly development and expansion of the Australian shipping, dredging, shipbuilding and docking industries. I understood from the honourable member for Newcastle that the Minister for Shipping and Transport (Mr Nixon) was going to table a report that has been eagerly awaited, by all sections of the shipping and shipbuilding industry, since it was first indicated, almost 3 years ago, that an investigation would be made into the shipbuilding industry. The report has been in the hands of a member of the

Cabinet for 12 months, but this evening, the Minister now says that he has not had time to prepare a statement on the report. He may have had some difficulties within the Government parties, and I would not expect him to mention those difficulties in the House. The Minister said - and I take it that he said it in good faith - that the report would be presented during this session of the Parliament. I can only conclude from that statement that there are some difficulties within the Government parties concerning the recommendations contained in the report. But this has further confused the position for the people in the industry who are expecting some assistance from the Government.

Mr Nixon:

– That is not right.

Mr HANSEN:
WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND

– Why has the tabling of the report been delayed for 12 months? The Minister spoke for about 5 minutes before he referred to the questions raised in the matter of public importance. As I say, he said that he has not had time to prepare a statement on the report, and that he will release a statement after the House rises. The Minister mentioned a policy going back, I think, to just after World War I when ships were allowed to operate on the Australian coastline with the permission of the Minister. This policy has not been changed, but what has happened is that there is some laxity in the application of the policy. I am informed that 52 ships which have been built overseas are operating in the Australian interstate and intrastate trade at the present time when, as the honourable member for Newcastle has said, 17 ships of the Australian National Line are tied up. It seems to me that the Minister is lax in allowing these overseas vessels to operate on the Australian coastline.

As the Minister has said, there are new types of vessels. There have been some changes in vessels and in their operations. I agree with him that it would be better to bring in a ship and allow it to operate for a while before building a replacement ship in Australia and manning it with an Australian crew. I do not think that the Minister will receive any opposition on this score from the Australian Labor Party or from the maritime unions. This has been our policy ever since the days when the Millers brought their first tanker to operate on the Australian coast line. I am not alone in my thoughts that the Minister is being lax in allowing overseas ships to operate on the Australian coast line. I refer to a report in the Brisbane ‘Courier Mail’ of 2nd May in which the honourable member for Griffith (Mr Donald Cameron), who is a member of the Liberal Party, referred to the Government’s policy and said:

My inquiries indicate that this policy is not beingstrictly applied, and extensions of permission to use imported vessels are frequently granted.

He referred to the ‘Iron Cavalier’ and the Iron Clipper’ which are owned by the Broken Hill Pty Co. Ltd. The point is that there is a particular problem facing the Evans Deakin shipyard, which is in the electorate of the honourable member for Griffith. This is an election year in both the Queensland and Commonwealth spheres and, Mr Speaker, I want to diverge for a minute because there is some concern about what is happening at the Evans Deakin shipyard and the possibility of the shipyard obtaining further orders. In fact on 6th May the Liberal Treasurer and Deputy Premier of Queensland said that the State Government was negotiating with the Commonwealth in an attempt to obtain forward orders for Evans Deakin.

In shipbuilding there is a need for a definite programme of continuity so that people know where they stand. The industry can maintain a competent work force and it can train apprentices to take the place of those who drop out of the industry. It should not be one of stop and go where people are employed for a short period and then discharged. They may be picked up by or they may wander off into other industries and never come back. Evans Deakin has a particular problem. It has built a graving dock - primarily a construction dock - at the Kangaroo Point yards. There is a possibility that a bridge will be built across the river downstream from this shipyard. This will limit, to some extent, the size of vessels that can be built in that shipyard.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! The time is now 6 p.m. when it is usual for the Speaker to vacate the chair. Does the House wish the honourable member for Wide Bay to continue his remarks for an additional four or five minutes in view of the circumstances? I have no personal objection to that course being followed.

Mr Charles Jones:

– What will happen then, Mr Speaker?

Mr SPEAKER:

– That is not within my province. The honourable member for Wide Bay may continue.

Mr HANSEN:

– I thank the House. In shipbuilding and ship repair work there is always a system of job to finish and I hope that this is the way this debate will work out. According to a statistical report concerning Australian shipping and shipbuilding there are 13 dry docks in Australia, the newest of which were constructed during the war. The Cairncross Graving Dock in Brisbane was never completed to its original size, nor was the Captain Cook Graving Dock in Sydney. From the total number of dry docks can be deleted the Frank Nicklin Dock, which is a building dock, and the South Brisbane Government dry dock which will close shortly. In the post-war period there has been no construction of floating docks or graving docks in Australia.

As the Minister for Shipping and Transport said, there have been technological changes in shipbuilding. Today ships are built deeper and wider and they draw more water. An article in the ‘Courier Mail’ refers to the problems that will confront the ‘Clutha Capricorn’ after it is launched at Evans Deakin shipyard. It will then enter the Cairncross dock. The article points out that it will be a tight squeeze. The ship is 835 feet long with a 106 foot beam and the Cairncross dock can accommodate a vessel up to 860 feet in length with a beam of 110 feet. This will give this vessel a 2 foot clearance on either side, so it will be a tight squeeze.

I believe there is need for some action. I can understand the concern of the honourable member for Newcastle in this respect. In 1970 a deputation from Newcastle spoke to the State Minister for Works, Mr Hughes, and asked that a new dock be built as quickly as possible at Newcastle. The Minister said that his last approach to the Commonwealth had been in 1969 when a British expert estimated that a graving dock would cost $20m. A Japanese team had designed a scheme which would cost half that amount. The Minister said that the graving dock planned by the Government would be 900 feet long, 150 feet wide and would take ships up to 100,000 tons dwt, which is by no means the largest ship operating on the overseas trade at present. The Minister said that because of the shortage of dry dock facilities in Australia he believed it vital for the New South Wales maritime industry to have a new graving dock built at Newcastle as quickly as possible and asked for a Commonwealth subsidy - a one-third shipbuilding subsidy and an additional one-third subsidy because of the significance of the dock to Australia as a whole. It is recognised that there is a need for a policy. The New South Wales Liberal Minister for Works agrees that there is a need. The Minister for Shipping and Transport has had time to study the report, even if he has not had time to make a statement. I look forward to his statement. I disagree with him that the present policy is in the best interests of the shipbuilding industry or of the operations of ships along the Australian coastline.

Motion (by Mr Swartz) proposed:

That the Business of the Day be called on.

Mr Bryant:

– Mr Speaker, am I to understand that the Minister is interrupting this important debate?

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! We have been debating a matter of public importance and the only motion that can be moved is that the Business of the Day be called on, on which motion there is no debate.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 3356

ADJOURNMENT

Motion (by Mr Swartz) proposed:

That the House do now adjourn.

Mr DALY:
Grayndler

– Mr

Speaker, I want to deal with the record of the Government over the last 2 years.

Motion (by Mr Swartz) agreed to:

That the question be now put.

Original question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned at 6.6 p.m. to a date and hour to be fixed by Mr Speaker

page 3357

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS UPON NOTICE

The following answers to questions were circulated:

Air Pollution: McWade Control Unit (Question No. 5866)

Mr Grassby:

asked the Minister for Shipping and Transport, upon notice:

  1. Will his Department investigate the McWade Emission Control Unit which the inventor, Mr Duncan McWade submits is a means of reducing car pollution and which it is claimed will also reduce engine wear, ensure better performance and greater engine power.
  2. Did Mr McVVade offer his invention to the Commonwealth Government in 1969; if so, what were the reasons for its rejection.
  3. Can he say whether the New Zealand Government has announced its intention to make emission control units compulsory for al] cars.
Mr Nixon:
CP

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

  1. The CSIRO has already arranged for tests to be made on the McWade Emission Control Unit. I understand these were undertaken in 1970 by Dr H. C. Watson, of Melbourne University. Under the circumstances, unless it is necessary for additional tests to be undertaken, the Department will not be making further investigations.
  2. As a result of Mr McWade’s representations to the Prime Minister in 1970, the tests referred to in (1) were undertaken. I am not aware, however, that Mr McVVade offered his invention to the Government.
  3. I am making inquiries through the High Commission in Wellington regarding this matter. I will inform the honourable member in writing of the result of my inquiries.

Rural Reconstruction (Question No. 5816)

Mr Kennedy:
BENDIGO, VICTORIA

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice:

Will he bring up to date for the months of (a) March and (b) April 1972 the figures on rural reconstruction given in reply to Question No. 5042 (Hansard, 29 March 1972, page 1390).

Mr Sinclair:
CP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is set out in the attached tables which provide information supplied by the State reconstruction authorities in respect of the period from the inception of the scheme up until the end of March and April:

Capital Gains (Question No. 5432)

Dr Everingham:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

What was the (a) amount and percentage of previous value at stock exchange rates and (b) percentage of the Gross National Product of capital gains by (i) trading banks in Australia owned overseas, (ii) other Australian private trading banks, (iii) the Commonwealth Banking Corporation and State Banks, (iv) hire purchase and other fringe banking’ organisations, (v) private insurance companies in Australia and (vi) Government insurance companies in Australia in the last year for which figures are available, and in the years 10, 20 and 30 years previously.

Mr McMahon:
LP

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

The Commonwealth Statistician has advised that information on capital gains is not available.

Capital Gains (Question No. 5431)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

What was the amount and percentage of capital and reserves of revenue, net of subsidies, from (a) the Commonwealth Banking Corporation and State banks and (b) government insurance offices in the last year for which figures are available, and in the years, 10, 20 and 30 years previously.

Mr McMahon:
LP

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

The Commonwealth Statistician has provided the following information:

The information requested is not available. However, the amounts of net earnings of the Commonwealth Banking Corporation and State banks for 1969-70 and 1959-60 were $21 3m and $78m respectively. These figures expressed as a percentage of the total figures reported for capital and reserves of those banks in those years were 62 per cent and 37 per cent respectively. Net earnings are defined as ‘discount and interest earned, net exchange, commissions and other items (including transfers from contingencies accounts) after deducting interest paid and accrued on deposits, rebate on bills current at balance date, amounts written off assets and losses on realisation of assets and transfers to the credit of contingencies accounts (out of which accounts provisions for all bad and doubtful debts have been made)’. Details of net earnings were not collected prior to the introduction of the Banking Act 1959.

No information is available.

Foreign Investment (Question No. 5370)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

  1. What was the total profit before taxation of foreign-owned companies in Australia in (a) 1960- 61, (b) 1965-66 and (c) the latest year for which information is available.
  2. What was the total tax levied on foreignowned companies in each of these years.
  3. What was the total profit before taxation of all companies registered in Australia in each of the 3 years.
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

  1. Some information in respect of foreign-owned companies is collected by way of surveys of overseas investment conducted by the Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics. Although information is not available from these surveys on profits earned or taxes paid by foreign-owned companies, the Commonwealth Statistician has advised that the investment income (including interest) payable overseas by all companies in Australia amounted to $239m, $309m and $673m, respectively, for the 3 years 1960-61, 1965-66 and 1970-71.
  2. No taxation statistics are available that would provide a basis for a reliable estimate of the amount of income tax assessed to foreign-owned companies. Furthermore, the information which I am supplying in answer to parts (1) and (3) of the honourable member’s question would not provide the basis for a satisfactory estimate of the tax payable by foreign-owned companies.
  3. The Commonwealth Statistician advises that company income, as estimated for the purposes of the Australian National Accounts, would be the closest approximation to the total profit, before taxation, of all companies registered in Australia. Estimated company income for 1960-61, 1965-66 and 1970-71 is $ 1,394m, $l,898m and$3,021m, respectively. The estimate, 1970-71, is preliminary and subject to revision.

Graduate Clerks (Question No. 5369)

Mr Bryant:

asked the Prime Minister. upon notice:

  1. How many graduate clerks were admitted to the Commonwealth Public Service in 1971 and 1972.
  2. What disciplines are represented in each year’s intake.
  3. What criteria were adopted in selecting qualifications for entry.
  4. How many qualified applicants for entry to the Service were rejected.
Mr McMahon:
LP

– The Public Service Board has advised me as follows:

  1. The preliminary total of graduate clerks who took up duty in 1971 is 386. 309 offers of appointment have been made in the first three months of 1972 but the number who will take up duty is uncertain at this stage.
  2. The table below shows preliminary figures for the disciplines represented in each year’s intake’. The 1971 percentages refer to those graduates who took up duty. The 1972 percentages refer to those who have been offered appointment.
  1. Eligibility for appointment as graduate clerk is open to persons under the age of 51 years who have been admitted, or are eligible to be admitted, to a degree of an Australian university or a degree of an overseas university which, in the opinion of the Board, is of a standard at least equal to the standard of a degree conferred by an Australian university.
  2. In 1971, 550 applicants for appointment as graduate clerk were unsuccessful. The recruitment of graduates for 1972 has not yet been finalised; at this stage 1241 graduate applicants have been unsuccessful.

National Service Act ‘ (Question No. 5208)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister for

Labour and National Service, upon notice:

  1. Has his attention been drawn to a letter from David Martin, of Taringa, Queensland, in ‘The Australian’, of 2nd March 1972.
  2. Was David Martin, a Quaker pacifist, sent to Boggo Road Gaol, Brisbane, as a result of a conviction for failing to register for national service.
  3. Does he accept any responsibility for the treatment of offenders who are gaoled for offences under the National Service Act.
  4. Will he immediately investigate David Martin’s allegations regarding his treatment at Boggo Road Gaol.
  5. If the allegations are substantially correct, will he (a) insist that offenders against the National Service Act are treated in a civilised fashion and (b) inform his colleague the Attorney-General so that similar instructions are given in respect of other offenders against Federal legislation.
Mr Lynch:
LP

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

  1. to (5) Persons who are convicted and sentenced for offences against laws of the Commonwealth are detained in the prison system of the appropriate State and are subject to normal disciplinary arrangements which apply to prisoners generally in that system.

I have noted the letter to which the honourable member has referred and have drawn the matter to the attention of my colleague the AttorneyGeneral.

The offence oi failure to register for national service does not of itself carry a penalty involving imprisonment. The National Service Act prescribes only a penalty of a fine of not less than $40 nor more than $200. Mr David Martin was imprisoned in August last, at the direction of the Court on account of his failure to pay a fine imposed on him when convicted of failing to register for national service as required. He was sentenced to 7 days imprisonment in December, when upon being convicted of failing to attend for medical examination he refused to undertake to attend for examination at a future date. He failed to report for service as required on 4lh January 1972.

Mr Martin has written to me regarding his views on national service and has indicated that he is a Quaker. He is currently the subject of a direction under the National Service Regulations that the question of whether he holds beliefs which do not allow him to engage in military service should be determined by a court, a previous reference of this question having been struck out.

South African Cricket Team (Question No. 5192)

Mr Kennedy:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

  1. Can he say whether the South African Government announced on 2nd April 1971 that black cricketers would be barred from the South African cricket team which was expected to visit Australia later that year.
  2. Did he assure the House on the afternoon of 6th April 1971 (Hansard, page 1456) that he has already communicated a protest to the South African Government against its exclusion of black South Africans from this team.
  3. Did he later omit to answer that part of Question No. 3801 (Hansard, 22nd February 1972, page 73) which specifically asked when this communication was sent.
  4. Did be inform the House on 29th February 1972 (Hansard, pages 336-7) that on the morning of 6th April 1971 he had spoken to the Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs and had instructed him to convey urgently and immediately to the South African Embassy his personal concern at the exclusion of non-white players from the cricket team.
  5. In view of his statement that his protest was communicated to the South African authorities before he made his statement on the afternoon of 6th April 1971, will he now state at precisely what time (a) he instructed the Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs to convey the protest and (b) the Secretary conveyed the protest.
  6. Will he now say where this protest was conveyed and to whom it was conveyed.
  7. Will he table a record of the conversation in which the protest was conveyed.
  8. On what date did he inform his Cabinet colleagues that he had arranged for the protest to be sent and which colleagues did he inform.
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

  1. I am advised that on 2nd April 1971 the South, African Minister of Sports confirmed to the

Press that he had refused the South African Cricket Association permission to include 2 non-white cricketers in the South African cricket team which was to tour Australia later in the year.

  1. to (8) I have nothing to add to my statement and answers to questions with and without notice on these matters which already appear in Hansard,

South African Cricket Team (Question No. 5178)

Mr Kennedy:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

  1. Was a letter drafted for him last year to send to the Government of South Africa in relation to that Government’s decision to exclude nonwhite players from the South African cricket team.
  2. If so, (a) on what date and by whom was the letter drafted and (b) on what date and on what grounds did he decide not to sign and send this letter.
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

  1. Yes. I have already advised the House to this effect.
  2. I do not consider it appropriate to disclose the further details about the’ internal processes of Government sought by this question.

Overseas Investment (Question No. 4989)

Mr Calwell:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

  1. Is it a fact that four Japanese companies propose to invest $94m in an alumina project in the north-west of Western Australia.
  2. If so, does this amount to a further takeover of Australian resources by our enemies in World War II.
  3. Is it the intention of the Government to approve this investment.
  4. For how long will the Government stiffer Japanese capitalists to invest in Australian industries, or to make investments by their own companies, to the future danger to the security of this nation.
  5. When does the Government propose to block all further investment of British, United States and Japanese capital in Australian secondary and primary industries.
  6. What have the Japanese people, who perpetrated such dreadful atrocities on Australian servicemen and women and on the natives of New Guinea, done since World War II to deserve the sort of preferential treatment which they are now receiving from Australia with the seeming support of Australian capitalistic monopolies.
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

I am informed that four Japanese companies intend participating in an alumina project in the north-west of Western Australia along with American and European interests. The consortium has indicated clearly its willingness for Australian interests to participate. On the basis of current plans (he total estimated cost of this venture could be of the order of from $300m to $3 50m of which Japanese investment could be approximately one-third.

Overseas investment in Australia has played an Important role in the development of our natural resources. Japanese investment in Australia in the development of the resources is relatively small in the total of overseas investment.

Japan is aware of and accepts our policy for projects to be carried out in association with Australian equity and management and for some of our natural resources to be processed in Australia, where economically feasible, before export.

In implementing our policy on overseas investment in Australia no preferential treatment is extended to any investing countries.

The right honourable member will be aware that the Treasurer tabled in the House on 16 May (972 the Treasury economic paper ‘Overseas Investment in Australia’. This paper analyses, from the Australian viewpoint, the principal economic issues raised by overseas investment in Australia and provides a basis for policy discussion. As has been announced, the Government has under review, following tabling of the paper, the policy issues which are raised by overseas investment in Australia in its various forms.

Military Service (Question No. 4099)

Dr Everingham:

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

  1. What are the (a) cumulative and (b) last available year’s statistics of physical, psychological and educational unfitness for military service in (0 volunteers for each of the three military services and (ii) national servicemen (A) on induction and (B) as grounds for discharge in each case since the inception of the National Service Act.
  2. What are the principal differences in the criteria of unfitness among these categories of examinees.
Mr Lynch:
LP

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

  1. and (2) The standards of fitness for national service are those which apply to general volunteer enlistments in the Regular Army. All men liable for national service are required to be medically examined against these standards prior to call-up. In the period 1st January 1965 to 30th June 1971, 64,454 men were rejected on medical grounds and 6,456 on education or psychological grounds. The figures in the year 1970/71 are 13,047 and 1,198 respectively.

The Department of Defence has provided the information below regarding entry to the Regular Forces and discharge from all Forces. Men may volunteer for enlistment in the Regular Armed Forces in a specific function for which particular set standards relating to a necessary aspect of fitness have been determined. Medical examinations take place at various stages of the enlistment process and not all applicants are medically examined.

The honourable member will readily appreciate the implications of these factors, particularly, vis a vis comparability among the Services and between the Regular Army and national servicemen.

Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act (Question No. 3530)

Mr Clyde Cameron:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

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

  1. Has the Commonwealth sought an opinion on whether the Parliament has the power to pass legislation to provide that voluntary industrial agreements shall be enforceable under the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act.
  2. If so, will be make available the terms of this advice.
  3. If no opinion has been sought, will he take steps to obtain clarification of the Commonwealth’s powers in relation to voluntary agreements especially, in cases where (a) there is no dispute as defined by the High Court, (b) the agreement relates to a non-interstate dispute, (c) the agreement was made without the existence of a third party conciliator or arbitrator and (d) the industrial agreement relates to undertakings or callings that have been defined as nonindustrial by the High Court.
Mr Lynch:
LP

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

  1. and (2) The parties to a voluntary industrial agreement may take advantage of the provisions of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act to have their agreement certified if the circumstances are such that those provisions apply to it. Certification of an agreement enables it to be enforced in the same way as an award of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission. The Act has no application to agreements which the parties do not intend to be enforceable, and there would be no purpose in legislating to enforce such agreements, even if it were practicable to do so.
  2. Should the need arise for clarification of the legislative powers of the Commonwealth in relation to any of the matters raised in this part of the honourable member’s question I would obtain legal advice in accordance with my usual practice.

China: Visits by Officials (Question No. 5463)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

  1. Which employees of the Commonwealth and of Commonwealth statutory authorities have made visits to China since his predecessor’s answer on 16 February 1971 (Hansard, page 98).
  2. What were the dates of their visits.
Mr McMahon:
LP

– I am informed that the answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. and (2) Since 16 February 1971 employees of the Commonwealth and its statutory authorities have made the following official visits to the People’s Republic of China:

Mr P. Koch, Journalist

Mr D. McKendry, Cinecameraman both of the Australian Broadcasting Commission

July 1971

Mr T. M. Saint, Mr E. Flegler, Australian Wheat Board Members

Mr J. M. Williams, Deputy General Manager, Australian Wheat Board

November 1971

Mr C. E. Johnson, Mr R. J. Maskiell, Commonwealth Banking Corporation Officers April 1972

Defence Properties in New South Wales (Question No. 5489)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Defence, upon notice:

What stage has been reached in negotiations with New South Wales for the transfer or lease of defence properties (Hansard, 23rd February, 1971, page 549).

Mr Fairbairn:
Minister for Defence · FARRER, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

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

The legal requirements associated with transfer of the properties mentioned in section A (i) of the reply of 23rd February 1971 are in hand.

In respect of section A (ii) of the earlier reply, general agreement has been reached with the State in the negotiations on lands in the Middle Head, South Head, Liverpool/Holsworthy, North Head and Dobroyd Point areas.

However, there are still some outstanding issues to be resolved relating to boundaries, conditions of tenure and the occupancy of certain buildings. The Prime Minister has been in correspondence with the Premier on these matters and it is expected that future discussions will take place in the near future to seek agreement on the outstanding details.

The release of the other Commonwealth owned lands referred to in the previous reply - Newington, Bumborah Point and Moore Park - is still the subject of discussion and negotiation with the State authorities.

Referring to Section B of the reply of 23 February 1971, the Commonwealth has vacated 14 of the 40 acres leased from the State at Maroubra (Heffron Park). It is anticipated that the remaining 26 acres will be vacated in 1973. The acquisition of land at Holsworthy for Army purposes has not yet been finalised.

Australian Industry Development Corporation (Question No. 5550)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

Does his Department lay down guidelines for the operation of the Australian Industry Development Corporation; if so, what are the terms of these guidelines.

Mr McMahon:
LP

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

The Australian Industry Development Corporation Act 1970, which lays down guidelines for the operation of the Corporation, is administered by the Minister for Trade and Industry. The Act does not empower the Treasury to lay down guidelines.

Public Service (Question No. 5558)

Mr McIvor:
GELLIBRAND, VICTORIA

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

  1. How many officers are employed at inspectorial grade in Commonwealth defence establishments throughout Australia.
  2. How many are employed (a) at each establishment and (b) in each State.
Mr McMahon:
LP

– The Public Service Board has advised me as follows:

  1. At 30th June 1971 the total number of officers employed at inspectorial grade in Commonwealth defence establishments throughout Australia was 841.

  2. (a) The number employed at each establishment is shown at Attachment ‘A’.

    1. The number employed in each State is shown in Attachment ‘B’.

Employment (Question No. 5656?

Mr Reynolds:
BARTON, NEW SOUTH WALES

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

  1. How many people became unemployed in each of the last five years as a result of automation?
  2. To what extent is there a tendency in Australia not to employ workers in any particular age group?
Mr Lynch:
LP

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

  1. It is not known how many persons actually became unemployed in each of the last five years as a result of automation or technological change. However, some indication can be gained from he series of National Surveys of the Employment

Effects of Technological Change which have been conducted in the last few years by my Department. The first four stages of this series have been completed and covered manufacturing and tertiary industries. In these surveys, results obtained from 2,704 firms employing 937,000 persons, indicate that over a three year period 3,615 employees were retrenched as a result of technological change, a rate of retrenchment of 0.13 per cent per annum. It should not be assumed that all of the 3,615 employees experienced unemployment following retrenchment. My Department’s studies indicate that some of those retrenched obtain other employment either immediately or after an interval. In fact quite a number of employers actively assist their employees in obtaining alternative work.

  1. There is a certain amount of discrimination against the older worker in Australia. The effect of this discrimination, and the age at which it may be experienced, varies according to occupation, industry, locality and the skill required; it is however not possible to specify its extent. Generally speaking, semi-skilled and unskilled workers and some categories of executives are likely to suffer most from this discrimination. The Commonwealth Employment Service, operated by my Department, seeks to counteract this prejudice, where it exists. The Commonwealth Employment Service encourages employers to recognise that many older workers bring to their employment experience, judgment and stable attitudes. Unless there is evidence that an individual’s age has caused a decline in his capacity to perform a particular job, there is no reason why age _ should become an overriding factor in his selection.

Taxation (Question No. 56781

Dr Klugman:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

  1. What would be the estimated loss to revenue of the proposal to raise the income tax exemption to the minimum award wage for a taxpayer with 2 dependants.
  2. What would be the estimated loss to revenue of the proposal to reduce the maximum marginal rate of tax deduction to 50 cents in the dollar.
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

  1. There is no national minimum award wage as such in Australia. However, the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission has inserted in Commonwealth awards provision for a minimum wage for adult males. The 6 State Capital Cities average minimum weekly wage for adult males under awards made by the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission is at present $51.10 per week which is equivalent to $2,657.20 per annum.

To ensure that a taxpayer with 2 dependants earning an income of $2,657.20 per annum is exempt from income tax on that income it would be necessary to exempt from tax taxable incomes up to and including $2,137, i.e., it would be necessary to raise the minimum taxable income to $2,138. It has been assumed that the 2 dependants maintained by the taxpayer are a wife and a child for whom the taxpayer would be entitled to a deduction from assessable income of $520 for a full year.

The cost to revenue in a full year at levels of income estimated for the 1971-72 income year of raising the minimum taxable income to $2,138 is estimated at about $300m.

In this estimate, allowance has been made for shading-in’, i.e., a reduction in tax otherwise payable on taxable incomes somewhat higher than the amount of $2,137. The purpose of ‘shading-in’ is to ease the transition from complete exemption from tax to liability for tax at normal rates. Under the ‘shading-in’ arrangement assumed for purposes of the estimate, the tax payable on the excess of the taxable income is limited to 47 per cent, i.e., the approximate rate (after inclusion of additional tax payable under section 8 of the Income Tax Act 1971-72) to which the tax payable on income falling within the ‘shading-in’ range under the present law is limited. Reduced tax therefore applies to taxpayers with taxable incomes up to the level at which the amount of tax calculated at normal rates equals the amount of tax payable under the ‘shading-in’ arrangement. This level would be $3,087 if the assumptions made for the purpose of the estimate were realised.

  1. At present, general rates of tax, when combined with additional tax payable under section 8 of the Income Tax Act 1971-72, exceeding 50c per dollar apply to that part of an individual’s taxable income which exceeds $10,000. If the combined rates were limited to 50c per dollar and applied to the parts in excess of $10,000 of taxable incomes estimated for the 1971-72 income year, the resulting full-year loss to income tax revenue would be approximately $75m.

Population Statistics Breakdown (Question No. 5679)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

  1. How many (a) age pensioners, (b) males over 65, (c) females over 60, (d) females over 65 and (e) taxpayers were there, and what was the total population, in the years 1954, 1961, 1966 and 1971.
  2. What was the percentage of the sum of males over 65 and females over 60 to the total population in each of the same years.
  3. Can he provide estimates of the information sought in parts (1) and (2) in respect of the years 1976, 1981 and 1986.
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

The Commonwealth Statistician has provided the following information.

Particulars for the years 1954, 1961, 1966 and 1971 are shown in the table below.

  1. The percentage of the sum of males aged 65 years and over and females aged 60 years and over to the total population in each year is: 1954, 10.52 per cent; 1961, 10.50 per cent; 1966, 10.39 per cent; 1971, 10.32 per cent.
  2. Estimates of the numbers of age pensioners and of taxpayers are not available for the years 1976, 1981 and 1986. Projected population figures for these years are as follows:

The figures are based on projections of the population of Australia (1970 base year) and the following assumptions: 1970 age-specific birth rates and masculinity of births; average agespecific mortality rates of the three years 1965 to 1967; and average annual net migration intake and age-sex composition of net overseas migration of the five years ended 30 June 1970.

The percentage of the sum of males aged 65 years and over and females aged 60 years and over to the total population for each year, based on the projections in the table above is: 1976, 10.49 per cent; 1981, 10.51 per cent; 1986, 10.48 per cent.

Cigarette Advertising (Question No. 5718)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

  1. Would a 2 per cent levy on cigarettes produce revenue about equal to the expenditure required to provide (a) equal time on television to combat cigarette advertising or (b) finance for television stations to compensate for loss of cigarette advertising.
  2. If so, will he investigate the possibility of such a levy and expenditure and publish his conclusions.
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

  1. Insufficient information is available to say whether a 2 per cent levy on cigarettes would produce revenue about equal to the expenditures mentioned in the honourable member’s question.
  2. Duties on cigarettes, like duties on a number of other commodities including beer, potable spirits and motor spirit are levied by the Commonwealth for general revenue purposes. The revenue derived from these and other taxes is, under Section 81 of the Constitution, paid into the Consolidated Revenue Fund where it is used to meet the overall financial commitments of the Commonwealth.

To hypothecate, for particular uses, the revenue raised from a 2 per cent levy on cigarettes would cut across the principle that the need for particular expenditures should be determined having regard to the priorities applying to competing expenditure demands rather than the revenue yield of a particular tax.

Committee on Aboriginal Land Rights (Question No. 5727)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

  1. Which Ministers served on the Committee on Aboriginal Land Rights which he established in May 1971.
  2. Has the Committee completed the work entrusted to it.
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

  1. On 6 May 1971 1 announced the appointment of a Ministerial Committee to review the Government’s policies relating to the Aboriginal people and their aspirations and indicated which Ministers would be participating in the work of the Committee. I would not propose to go into the detail of which Ministers were co-opted at relevant stages or of the changes in the core committee which may have occurred from time to time.
  2. On 26th January 1972 I issued a statement entitled ‘Australian Aborigines- Commonwealth Policy, and Achievement’ which, inter alia, outlined the new decisions the Government had taken as a result of the first stage of the work of the Ministerial Committee on Aboriginal Affairs. This Statement was tabled in the House of Representatives on 23rd February 1972.

Aboriginal Reserves: Mining Operation (Question No. 4674)

Mr Hayden:
OXLEY, QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister for the Environment, Aborigines and the Arts, upon notice:

  1. Can he give details of any occasion during the post World War II period when (a) Federal and (b) State Governments have decreased the size of Aboriginal reserves to allow mineral extraction operations.
  2. If so, in relation to part (1) can he give details of (a) the area excised and date of excision, (b) the type of mineral extraction, (c) the company involved and the proportion of foreign ownership or control, (d) the value of production for each year of ownership or control, (d) the value of production for each year of operation and royalties paid annually (i) to the Government and (ii) to the Aboriginal people, giving details of how this money is either held or distributed by or for these people, (e) any other form of annual payment or compensation to Aboriginal people and methods of holding or distributing these funds, (f) any trade and vocational training programmes for Aboriginal people and the number of Aboriginal people each year (i) undertaking and (ii) successfully completing training under these programmes, (g) the annual cost of these training programmes, (h) the number of Aboriginals employed and this number as a percentage of the total workforce of the company for each year of operation and (i) total profits of the company (i) before tax, (ii) after tax, (iii) retained and (iv) repatriated overseas for each year of operation.
Mr Howson:
Minister for Environment, Aborigines and the Arts · CASEY, VICTORIA · LP

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

  1. and (2) The following information has been supplied by the State authorities responsible for Aboriginal affairs and by the Department of the Interior.

Northern Territory

On IS March 1963 the reservation of an area of about 140 square miles on the Cove Peninsula, Arnhem Land Reserve, was revoked to facilitate bauxite mining operations on Special Mineral Leases 2, 3 and 4 granted earlier to Gove Bauxite Corporation Ltd., and on Special Mineral Lease 1 held by the British Aluminium Co. Ltd. Mining operations on these leases did not proceed beyond the exploration stage and on 9 June 1966 the area was again reserved.

Queeastsad

A special Bauxite Mining lease over 1,750 square miles of land formerly set aside for Aborigines at Weipa has been granted to COMALCO.

The Company has agreed to the Department of Aboriginal and Island Affairs retaining grazing rights. Mined out areas will be progressively restored, surrendered and again reserved for Aborigines.

No royalties are paid to the Aborigines. The Company donated $300,000 to the Presbyterian mission authorities to provide new houses for the Aborigines.

The Queensland Government has taken up an offer of 40,000 shares in the Company and these shares are being held in trust for the Weipa Aboriginal community.

Approximately 60 Aborigines are employed by the Company and in ancillary industries. Aborigines employed by the Company have equal rights with other employees to purchase shares.

Aborigines employed at Weipa receive on-the-job training- there are no special training programmes.

As Aborigines receive the same wages as other employees for similar work there is no differentiation by race in employment records.

Information regarding taxation, profits and their distribution is being obtained by the Queensland authorities and I will communicate this to the honourable member by letter. acres were excised on 17 September 1969, for the purposes of bauxite mining by the Amax Bauxite Corporation.

There has been no production of minerals from these excised areas.

Other States

Inquiries indicate that no reserves in New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia or Tasmania have been reduced in size to allow mineral extraction operations in the post World War II period.

Rural Loans (Question No. 5563)

Mr Collard:
KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister for the Environment, Aborigines and the Arts, upon notice:

  1. In relation to the Commonwealth Capital Fund for Aboriginal Enterprises, how many applications for rural loans have been received from each State and the Northern Territory in each year since the Aboriginal Enterprises (Assistance) Act was assented to.
  2. How any of these applications (a) were successful, (b) were rejected and (c) are still under consideration.
  3. What sum was applied for in each (a) successful and (b) unsuccessful application.
Mr Howson:
LP

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

(1)

Qld N.S.W. Vic Tas. S.A. W.A. NX

(2)

Und consider-

Approved Declined ation Total

Western Australia

  1. Tambourah Reserve (No. 21802): 103,000 acres were excised on 4 February 1955.
  2. Central Australian Reserve (No. 17614): 4.798,700 acres were excised on 18 November 1955. The area was returned to Reserve No. 17614 on 11 February 1972.
  3. Finucane Island Reserve (No. 16937): 1,542 acres were excised on 28 August 1964 for iron ore export facilities.
  4. Port Hedland Reserve (No. 26362): 5 acres, 2 roods, 16 perches were excised on 5 July 1968, also for iron ore export facilities.
  5. Admiralty Gulf Temporary Reserve for Natives (now Reserve No. 36642): 47,000

1968-

Queensland New South Wales Victoria Tasmania South Australia Western Australia Northern Territory

Housing for Army Personnel (Question No. 5564)

Mr Les Johnson:
HUGHES, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister for the Army, upon notice:

  1. Is it a fact that his Department will occupy 200 acres of land in Broadmeadows previously occupied by the Commonwealth Serum Laboratories.
  2. Is it also a fact that this land will be used for housing Army personnel as an alternative to using houses constructed by the Housing Commission of Victoria.
  3. If so, how many houses are to be constructed and when will construction commence.
  4. if the land is not to-be used for this purpose, will he state the purpose for which it will be used.
Mr Katter:
CP

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

  1. Yes. (2), (3) and (4) Master planning of the 200 acres of land is dependent upon the completion of a current rationalisation study of supply and transport arrangements for the three Services in the Melbourne area. However, present plans indicate that about 175 to 180 acres will be required for the construction of working and administrative accommodation for transport and technical units and to provide for the expansion of units currently located at the Army complex at Broadmeadows.

It is expected that the balance of the land will be master planned for Army housing to be constructed by the Victorian Housing Commission or the Department of Works. Such construction is unlikely to commence for some time.

Airline Operations (Question No. 5694)

Mr Charles Jones:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Civil Aviation, upon notice:

What was the annual cost of advertising airline operations by -

Trans-Australia Airlines;

Ansett Airlines of Australia and each of its airline subsidiaries;

East-West Airlines; and

Qantas during the last live years.

Mr Swartz:
LP

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

The funds allocated to advertising by the airlines are regarded by them as confidential and it would place them at a competitive disadvantage if these details were divulged. It is regretted therefore ‘that’ the information sought cannot be provided.

Telephone Service at Toprain (Question No. 5828)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Postmaster-

General, upon notice:

  1. Was telephone service promised to Brigalow developers between Comet and Rolleston for not later than March 1971 at a meeting at Memooloo in April 1970.
  2. If so, was the promise withdrawn in 1971 due to lack of finance.
  3. Is lack of finance the true reason for delays so often attributed to lack of various essential supplies which take many months to obtain.
  4. Is lack of finance justifiable for lucrative development works when the telephone service is working at a profit.
  5. Would this position be improved by conducting most of the Department’s undertakings as a normal business enterprise; if not, why not.
Sir Alan Hulme:
Postmaster-General · PETRIE, QUEENSLAND · LP

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

  1. and (2) At the meeting at Memooloo it was indicated that the Post Office could provide exchange facilities at Toprain within twelve months if the applicants reached agreement on the construction of lines to the exchange point at their expense. However, they were unable to agree between themselves on this aspect. At a later meeting in Brisbane in August 1971 between the Director, Posts and Telegraphs, Queensland, and Members of Parliament who were pursuing the matter on behalf of the applicants, the offer was repeated as a temporary measure pending the provision by the Post Office of standard Departmental lines which could not be programmed for some years.

The position now is that, in the current 3-year works programme, an amount of $20,000 has been allocated for the construction of a trunk line from Blackwater to Toprain for the establishment of exchange facilities at the latter centre. It is expected that the trunk line will be constructed by the end of the 1972-73 financial year and the work on subscribers’ line reticulation and supporting trunk line provision on main routes will then be undertaken, with completion of the project in its entirety being scheduled for 1975-76. However, when the Toprain trunk line is constructed, it is proposed to utilise it for the establishment of a public telephone in) the area so that a measure of service will be available to the residents pending connection of their services.

  1. Funds for the Post Office capital works are allocated to the various States as far as practicable in proportion to the demand for services and the physical capacity to meet the demand. However, it is not just a question of finance. The telephone system is complex and the provision of new services often involves the establishment of new exchanges and trunk line facilities, as in the case of Toprain. Projects of this nature, requiring as they do highly trained staffengineers, technicians and the like - must be preceded by detailed surveys and exchange area planning to ensure that available resources are utilised in the most effective manner. Even if unlimited funds were available, this would not in itself mean that telephone services could be installed in all instances without delay, since the ability to expand capital within a given period is dependent on the extent to which resources of skilled manpower and materials can be devoted to the task.
  2. and (5) The Government looks to the Post

Office to conduct its activities on sound commercial lines as far as practicable. However, it seems clear that, if an organisation were operating purely and simply as a business undertaking, it would not be prepared to provide telephone services in many of our rural areas. Rural telephone services are generally not an attractive financial proposition because of the heavy costs involved in their provision and maintenance for a relatively low revenue return. For example, in the Toprain case, total revenue was estimated in 1970 at $4,500 per annum for a capital investment of some $100,000. Such uneconomic projects can only be undertaken by the Post Office in its role as a public utility with the responsibility for providing telephone services in unprofitable as well as profitable areas.

Migrants (Question No. 5829)

Mr Armitage:
CHIFLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Immigration, upon notice:

Will he state:

  1. the number of migrants of non-European origin admitted to Australia for permanent residence in each of the last 5 years ended 31st December 1971; and
  2. the number of people of Turkish origin admitted to Australia on a permanent basis over the same period?
Dr Forbes:
Minister for Immigration · BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP

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

  1. The number of persons of non-European descent admitted to Australia for residence or permitted to remain for residence following entry for temporary residence, and the number of persons of part-European descent admitted for residence during the past 5 years is as follows:

National Service Act (Question No. 5830)

Mr Berinson:
PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister for

Labour and National Service, upon notice:

  1. How many persons have had proceedings instituted against them with the consent of successive Ministers under section 51a(4) of the National Service Act since 1968.
  2. Against how many persons are current warrants in force.
  3. What are the names of persons referred to in part (2) and on what dates were their respective warrants issued.
Mr Lynch:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (1), (2) and (3) Section 51A of the National Service Act provides in effect that a person, who has been called up for national service and who fails to perform duties lawfully required of him in the course of rendering service with the Army, shall be guilty of an offence.

No person has been charged with an offence against the section since its introduction in 1968.

Increasing Air Travel in Australia (Question No. 5863)

Mr Calwell:

asked the Minister represent ing the Minister for Civil Aviation, upon notice:

Because of ever increasing air travel in Australia and between Australia and foreign countries, will the Minister direct Trans-Australia Airlines, Ansett Airlines of Australia and all airlines using the international sections of Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) and Tullamarine Airports to increase the number of aerobridges that are now in service and, where none exist, will the Minister take early action, particularly at Sydney (KingsfordSmith) Airport, to have these modern facilities installed.

Mr Swartz:
LP

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

The number of aerobridges which can be used is partly related to the aircraft type.

For example, they are not suitable for F.27 aircraft.

The existing range of domestic jet aircraft permits the readyuse of one aerobridge only per aircraft.

The same may be said of the Boeing 707.

On the other hand, the Boeing 747 required 2 aerobridges and these are already provided at a limited number of positions in both Sydney and Melbourne. As the percentage of Boeing 747 operations increases the number of Boeing 747 positions with 2 aerobridges is being increased.

Both TAA and Ansett Airlines of Australia are planning to effect major improvements to their domestic terminals at Sydney and your request for the provision of aerobridges will be brought to their notice. They also have in mind to increase the number of domestic aerobridges at Melbourne, for example, as the frequency, of use justifies the expenditure.

Child and Social Welfare Ministers (Question No. 5903)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Social Services, upon notice:

  1. Where and when has he attended meetings with State Ministers since: he became Minister.
  2. What were the names and portfolios of the other Ministers who attended each meeting.
  3. What requests or suggestions were made at each meeting for legislative or administrative action by (a) the Commonwealth, (b) the Territories and (c) the States.
Mr Wentworth:
Minister for Social Services · MACKELLAR, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

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

  1. to (3) In connection with matters within my present portfolio I have attended meetings of the Australian Health Minister’s Conference held in Darwin in June 1968; South Australia in June 1969; Victoria in June 1971; Queensland in March 1972. It is understood that information required in connection with these Health Conferences has been sought by the honourable member from the Minister for Health. I also attended a Conference of Child and Social Welfare Ministers held in Tasmania in March 1971 for which the particulars sought were given in my answer to Question No. 2971 (see Hansard, page 168 of 17th August 1971).

Tinplate (Question No 5165)

Mr Lloyd:

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry, upon notice:

  1. What is the annual (a) rate of production and (b) consumption of tinplate in Australia.
  2. What tariff protection is afforded to Australian tinplate.
  3. What amount of tinplate was exported in 1971, and to what countries.
  4. What amount of tinplate was imported in 1971, and from what countries.
  5. What percentage of total tinplate consumption is used in (a) the canning fruit industry and (b) other food preserving industries.
Mr Anthony:
CP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows (the Commonwealth Statistician has supplied the information in reply to parts (1), (3), (4) and (5) of the question) -

  1. (a) Production of tinplate in Australia during 1970-71 was recorded as 304,138 tons.

    1. Statistics on consumption of tinplate in Australia are not available. However, ignoring movements of stocks, for which figures are not available, and ignoring minor differences in coverage between trade and production statistics, the apparent consumption of tinplate in 1970-71 was about 260,000 tons.
  2. Tariff duties applicable to tinplate are7½ per cent (General) and Free (Preferential).
  3. and (4) Export and import statistics are compiled on a financial year basis and final figures for calendar year 1971 are not yet available. Exports and imports of tinplate in 1970-71 were as follows’.

Motor Cars: Bumper Bars (Question No. 5435)

Mr Barnard:
BASS, TASMANIA

asked the Minister for Ship ping and Transport, upon notice:

  1. Is there any requirement in Australia that car bumper bars be a certain height from the ground.
  2. If so, what is this height and which car models comply with this requirement.
Mr Nixon:
CP

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

  1. and (2) No. However, the Australian Transport Advisory Council’s Advisory Committee on Safety in Vehicle Design is examining the question of bumper bars as a safety feature in the design of motor vehicles.

Privy Council: Appeals from State Supreme Courts (Question No. 5466)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister repre senting the Attorney-General, upon notice:

  1. How many appeals to the Privy Council from each State Supreme Court were (a) instituted and (b) heard in each of the last 5 years (Hansard, 28th September 1967, page 1551).
  2. Have further discussions taken place in the Standing Committee of Commonwealth and State Attorneys-General concerning the attitude of State Governments towards the abolition of appeals to the Privy Council from State Supreme Courts since the enactment of the Privy Council (Limitation of Appeals) Act 1968 (Hansard, 4th April 1968, page 883).
Mr N H Bowen:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. The following information has been supplied by the States in relation to the number of appeals to the Privy Council from State Supreme Courts (a) instituted and (b)heard since 1st January 1967:

    1. New South Wales- One in 1968 and two each in 1969, 1970, 1971.

Victoria- Since August, 1969, when the maintenance of statistics was commenced, two each in 1971 and 1972.

Queensland- One in 1969 and one in 1970.

South Australia - Nil.

Western Australia - Nil.

Tasmania - Nil.

  1. New South Wales- One in 1968, two in 1969, one in 1970, one in 1971.

Victoria- Since August, 1969, when the maintenance of statistics was commenced, two in 1971.

Queensland- One in 1969 and one in 1970.

South Australia - Nil.

Western Australia - Nil.

Tasmania - Nil.

  1. There have been further informal and confidential discussions in the Standing Committee of Commonwealth and State Attorneys-General concerning the abolition of appeals to the Privy Council from State Supreme Courts. It would be inappropriate for me to indicate the nature of those discussions. It is a matter for each State to determine its own attitude with respect to this matter.

High Court of Australia: Appeals (Question No. 5467)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister repre senting the Attorney-General, upon notice:

  1. How many appeals to the High Court from the Supreme Court in each Territory and from each Federal Court were (a) instituted and (b) heard in 1971.
  2. How many (a) taxation matters and (b) industrial property matters were heard by (i) single justices and (ii) the Full Court of the High Court in 1971.
  3. How many cases were (a) set down for hearing and (b) heard by single justices of the High Court in 1971.
Mr N H Bowen:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. The number of appeals (including applications for leave or special leave to appeal) to the High Court from Territory Supreme Courts and Federal Courts in 1971 was as follows:
  1. The number of taxation matters and industrial property matters heard by single Justices and by the Full Court of the High Court in 1971 was as follows:

  1. The number of cases set down for hearing and heard by single Justices of the High Court in 1971 was as follows:

    1. set down- 103
    2. heard- 88.

Commonwealth Police (Question No. 5471)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister repre senting the Attorney-General, upon notice:

Has consideration yet been given to those recommendations of Colonel Sir Eric St Johnston which might be adopted with advantage in the Commonwealth Police Force or which concern co-operative action between the Commonwealth and State Police Forces; if so, with what result (Hansard, 20th April 1971, page 1746).

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

– The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

Because of differing functions, organisation, procedures and terms and conditions of employment in the Commonwealth Police Force, the recommendations contained in Colonel Sir Eric St Johnston’s report on the Victorian Force which are relevant are those of a general character relating to police training, study schemes for police and police communications. The recommendations on these matters are being taken into consideration in reviewing training programmes and the introduction of a study assistance scheme for members of the Commonwealth Police Force. In co-operation with professional engineers of the Postmaster-General’s Department radio communication requirements for the Force are also being reviewed.

In the field of co-operative action Colonel Sir Eric St Johnston recommended that officers from the Victorian Force should attend a course each year at the Australian Police College and that the Commonwealth Police should conduct the National Central Bureau of Interpol in Australia. As to the first point, places are available for members of the Victoria Police at the Officers’ Course conducted each year at the Australian Police College. Discussions are continuing with Victoria on the second point.

Foreign Judgments and Arbitral Awards (Question No. 5475)

Mr Whitlam:

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

  1. (a) Have New South Wales and South Australia yet passed Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Acts, as agreed by the Standing Committee of Commonwealth and State AttorneysGeneral in February 1968 (Hansard, 16th February 1971, page 92); if so, when did each do so.

    1. With which foreign countries have the States and Territories made arrangements for the enforcement of judgments.

  2. Have any States and Territories legislated for the implementation of the 1958 United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards to which Australia decided to accede in June 1969 (Hansard, 29th September 1970, page 1844; 25th November 1971, page 3777 and 2nd December 1971, page 4106); if so, when did each do so.

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

– The AttorneyGeneral has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. (a) I am informed that legislation has not been introduced in New South Wales. In South Australia, the Foreign Judgments Act 1971 has been enacted. The Act came into operation on 23rd December 1971.

    1. I am informed that the Victorian legislation has been extended to Japan and that the Western Australian legislation has been extended to Italy. The Victorian, Queensland, Western Australian, Tasmanian, Australian Capital Territory and Northern Territory legislation has also been extended to a number of Commonwealth countries.

  2. No State or Territory has yet enacted legislation for the implementation of the Convention. In the Australian Capital Territory, the relevant legislation will form part of a new Ordinance dealing with commercial arbitration generally. The drafting of the Ordinance is at an advanced stage.

Roads: Expenditure and Sources of Finance (Question No. 5539)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Shipping and Transport, upon notice:

Can he give figures showing (a) expenditure on construction and maintenance of roads and (b) sources of finance, by level of government, for 1970-71. (Hansard, 20th April 1971, page 1748.)

Mr Nixon:
CP

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

Estimates of road expenditure and finance in 1970-71 and revised estimates for 1969-70, are given in the following Table. These figures are subject to further revision as additional statistics become available.

Federal Judges (Question No. 5831)

Mr Whitlam:

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

How many Federal judges (other than High Court judges) were there in December 1962, when Cabinet authorised Attorney-General Barwick to design a Commonwealth Superior Court, and how many are there now.

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

– The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

In December 1962, there were 8 Federal judges, other than High Court Justices. There are now 10 Federal judges other than High Court Justices.

Housing: Public Servants (Question No. 4711)

Mr Enderby:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

  1. What percentage of Commonwealth public servants transferred to Canberra in each of the last 10 years was allotted Government accommodation immediately upon arrival.
  2. What percentage of persons who arrived in Canberra in each of the last 10 years, in circumstances where they would be entitled to a housing allowance of the Regulation 97 type, received this type of allowance instead of being allotted Government accommodation immediately.
  3. What was the average period that the persons referred to in part (2) received the Regulation 97 type allowance before being allotted Government accommodation.
  4. What was the longest period for which a person had received a Regulation 97 type allowance in Canberra.
  5. What sum has been paid by way of Regulation 97 type allowance in each of the last 10 years.
  6. Were payments made to the public servant concerned or to a landlord or to someone on his behalf; if the payments were made to someone on his behalf, to whom were the payments made.
  7. How many persons received the benefit of a Regulation 97 type allowance in each of the last 10 years.
  8. In determining the amount of a Regulation 97 type allowance in Canberra, (a) what procedures are followed to ensure that an equitable sum is paid and (b) what safeguards exist to ensure that the allowance is not excessive.
  9. Was it ever a requirement that premises in respect of which a Regulation 97 type allowance was sought should be fair rented under the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Ordinance of the Australian Capital Territory before the allowance was given; if so, for how long did this requirement exist.
  10. Has the requirement now been discontinued; If so, when and why.
  11. If the requirement has been discontinued, will be ensure that it is re-introduced.
  12. Are there any records or estimates available to indicate whether Regulation 97 type allowances increased substantially or at all following the discontinuance of the requirement for premises to be fair rented; If so, what do they reveal.
  13. Can lie say whether there is any relationship between the significant drop in overall applications to have fair rents determined following the years 1965 and 1966 as indicated in his answer to question No. 4317 (Hansard, 2nd November 1971, pages 2881-7) and the decision not to require premises to be fair rented before a Regulation 97 allowance is granted.
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

  1. The Department of the Interior has advised that an average of approximately 60 per cent of compulsorily transferred Public Servants are housed immediately on arrival in Canberra. This figure relates to the last 5 years as earlier statistics are either not reliable or readily available.
  2. I have been advised by the Public Service Board that because Government housing is allocated immediately where required, compulsorily transferred Public Servants do not qualify as a group for Regulation 97 allowance. As regards other Public Servants moving to Canberra, while actual figures are not readily available, it can be said that in almost all cases, Government housing is not made available immediately and therefore these officers would be entitled to Regulation 97 allowance pending the allocation of a Government house in the normal manner.
  3. and (4) The Department of the Interior has advised that an average waiting time for the allocation of a new 3-bedroom house during the last 10 years is about 3 years. It would be reason able to assume that the average waiting time for public servants in receipt of Regulation 97 allowance would be about the same.

As the longest waiting time for a Government house was 42 months in the .10 year period, it is assumed that the longest time for which public servants were in receipt of Regulation 97 allowance would be the same.

In relation to the remaining parts of the question the Public Service Board has advised:

  1. and (7) That records on which to base an answer to these questions are not available. But so far as sums payable under Regulation 97 are concerned Hansard, 27th August 1968, page 609 gives a figure of some $400,000 for the financial year 1966-67. Figures for 1968-69, 1969-70, 1970- 71 are in round figures $519,000, $637,000, $903,000 respectively. So far as the numbers of public servants receiving allowances are concerned a survey made in June 1971 produced a figure of 946 as at 30th June 1971.
  2. Payments under Regulation 97 are made only to the officer involved. (8), (9), (10) and (11) Regulation 97 payments are made on the basis of an upper rental limit which is fixed by the Public Service Board from time to time after a survey of the market of suitable available houses. Each officer contributes according to a scale based on what he might reasonably have been expected to pay if a suitable unfurnished house were available. The amount of contribution is greater for officers on higher salaries than for officers on lower salaries. The detailed procedures to be followed by Departments are set out in instructions issued by the Public Service Board.

Payment of a rental subsidy has never been restricted to officers occupying premises which have been fair rented following application under the Landlord and Tenant Ordinance. An officer choosing to rent premises above the rental limit set by the Public Service Board must normally bear the excess rental whether or not the premises are fair rented. The intention is to give an officer freedom to select premises which best meet his needs within the framework of an upper limit which is known to him.

For a period which concluded in 1965 an officer in Canberra renting furnished premises which had been fair rented had applied to him a slightly higher upper rental limit for allowance assessment purposes. This arrangement was discontinued in 1965.

  1. There are no records or estimates available to allow a clear conclusion to be drawn on this point. It appears, however, that there was an increase of some 10 per cent in average Regulation 97 rental subsidy payments in Canberra between 1968 and 1971. A spot check in 1968 showed an average subsidy of SI 5.91 per week (see answer to Question No. 252, Hansard, 10th September 1968, page 878) and the Board’s survey of June 1971 showed an average subsidy of $17.55 per week.
  2. Details are not available of the occupations of applicants for fair rents which would show whether there is any relationship between the lower number of applicants referred to by the honourable member and the changed practice introduced in 1965 as referred to above.

National Health Scheme: Prescriptions (Question No. 5094)

Mr Berinson:

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

  1. How many general and pensioner prescriptions were dispensed under the National Health Scheme in each of the first 3 months after the prescription contribution was increased from 50 cents to$1.
  2. What were the comparable figures for each of the 3 previous years?
  3. How many prescriptions were dispensed each month at the 50 cent concessional rate since 1st November 1971?
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. and (2) On the basis of the month of dispensing, figures are not recorded separately for prescription benefits provided as general benefits and as pensioner pharmaceutical benefits.

The following table contains information which closely relates to that requested. Figures are given by month of payment as distinct from month of dispensing. Because the majority of prescriptions in the month in which a claim is paid are dispensed in the previous month, the months used, December to March, should largely reflect the dispensing months November to February. Payments for the month of December were however, exceptional because, due to a greater than usual carryover of outstanding claims, approximately 45 per cent of the prescriptions paid were dispensed in October.

Prescription figures relating to claims paid in March are included, in order to provide 3 clear months not significantly affected by the inclusion of prescriptions dispensed prior to the increase of the patient contribution for general benefits from 50 cents to $1.

Number of benefit prescriptions included in claims paid in the months of December to March inclusive.

Cyclone Damage (Question No. 5205)

Mr Hansen:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

  1. Has the Queensland Government requested Commonwealth assistance in restoration work following damage by cyclone Daisy.
  2. If so, when was the request made and have specific sums been requested.
  3. If specific sums have been requested, how much was for (a) beach restoration work and (b) other work.
  4. What action has been taken by the Government in respect of any request. (Question No. 5939)
Mr Hansen:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

When does he anticipate that he will be able to give me his promised answer on aid to Queensland for restoration work following cyclone Daisy (Hansard, 12th April 1972, page 1493).

On 12th April Mr Hansen asked the Prime Minister, without notice:

My question is directed to the Prime Minister. I ask: Has he as yet received a request from the Premier of Queensland for Commonwealth assistance for restoration work on damage caused by cyclone Daisy in February? Has the Commonwealth Government agreed to provide funds for that purpose? If so, on what basis will the money be made available? How much will be made available for beach restoration work? If no funds have as yet been made available, what are the reasons for discriminating between Althea aid and Daisy aid?

Mr McMahon:
LP

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

  1. Yes.
  2. and (3) The request was received on 17th February 1972. No specific sum was requested but it was stated that reports then to hand indicated that damage to government and semi-government assets could exceed $1.5m.
  3. After full examination of the circumstances, and of detailed information concerning the damage subsequently supplied to the Commonwealth, I have informed the Premier that the Commonwealth has been unable to accept this damage as coming within the ambit of established Commonwealth arrangements for natural disaster assistance to the States.

Pollution (Question No. 5265)

Mr Enderby:

asked the Minister for the

Environment, Aborigines and the Arts, upon notice:

  1. Canhe say whether the United States of America has legislation requiring high pollution industries like the steel industry to provide funds to control and limit the pollution caused by that industry.
  2. Can he also say whether the proposal to establish a steel mill at Jervis Bay is motivated in part by a desire by American steel interests to avoid having to provide funds for controlling pollution in the United States and to take advantage of the lack of any such requirement in Australia.
  3. If so, is this a case of the United States exporting its pollution problem to Australia.
  4. Is the proposal to establish a steel mill at Jervis Bay restricted to making billets which would be sent to the United States and not final rolled merchant and structural sections of steel so that the Australian made billets would be converted into rolled sections in the United States.
  5. Is it a fact that most air pollution comes from the steel production process up to the billet stage and that relatively little pollution comes from the rolling operations stage.
  6. If Australia does not require its steel mills to be as clean as steel mills in the United States, can he say whether it is cheaper for the United States manufacturers to pollute Australian air than to pollute air in the United States.
Mr Howson:
LP

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

  1. I understand that the promulgation of standards under the United States Clean Air legislation is proceeding. In some cases compliance with the standards could be expected to require industry to outlay funds.
  2. to (6) I invite the honourable member’s attention to my answer to Question No. 2991 (Hansard of 18th August 1971, page 272).

Medical Funds: Administration Costs (Question No. 5311)

Dr KLUGMAN:
PROSPECT, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

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

  1. What was the total administration cost of all registered medical funds in 1970-71.
  2. What is the estimated cost for 1971-72.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. Total management expenses of the registered medical benefits organisations in 1970-71 amounted to $14,433,831.
  2. The organisations’ estimates of management expenses for 1971-72 total approximately $16.5m.

Hospital Funds: Administration Cost (Question No. 5312)

Dr Klugman:

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

  1. What was the total administration cost of all registered hospital funds in 1970-71.
  2. What is the estimated cost for 1971-72.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. Total management expenses of the registered hospital benefits organizations in 1970-71 amounted to $12,805,570.
  2. The organizations’ estimates of management expenses for 1971-72 total approximately $15.3m.

National Health Service: Dispensing (Question No. 5427)

Dr Everingham:

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

  1. Does the submission of the Department of Health to National Health Service pharmacists rely on experience in Australia and the United Kingdom as evidence to support its method of costing National Health Service dispensing.

    1. If so, is the United Kingdom’s National Health Service regarded as the best external reference model available for this purpose.
    2. Will the Minister make a reasoned reply to the Guild Chemists’ case for (a) regression analysis in place of random activity sampling and (b) an interim updating as for medical fee benefits as a basis for assessing National Health Service dispensing fees.
    3. If not, will the Minister explain his alternative methods for reconciling pharmacists with Government policy and creating job satisfaction and efficiency in the service.
Dr Forbes:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (1), (2), (3) and (4). It is incorrect to refer to the submission of the Department of Health to National Health Service pharmacists’, since no such submission has been made.

Following the consideration of submissions made by the Pharmacy Guild of Australia and discussions the Minister has had with Guild representatives, the Government recently increased by 7 cents the fees paid to chemists for dispensing pharmaceutical benefits to 39 cents for readyprepared items and 64 cents for extemporaneous preparations. The new fees are effective for benefit prescriptions dispensed on and after 1st January 1972.

During the Minister’s recent talks with Guild representatives the conduct of a new inquiry into National Health dispensing costs was discussed. The Minister has suggested to the Guild that the new inquiry provide the information required under both -

  1. the regression analysis method which had recently been proposed by the Guild; and

    1. the method favoured by the Government, sometimes referred to as the cost-accounting method, which includes random activity sampling and is basically similar to the method used in the United Kingdom.

In this way both approaches could be evaluated and compared.

Other arrangements agreed to in the discussions included the periodic updating of the rates of chemists’ remuneration for National Health dispensing, with special arrangements to operate until comprehensive information is available from the new inquiry.

Public Hospitals: Outstanding Fees (Question No. 5439)

Mr Hayden:

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

  1. Can the Minister say what amount in outstanding fees was due to public hospitals for (a) out-patient and (b) in-patient treatment, recovery of which has been sought through (i) court and (ii) other action during the latest year for which figures are available.
  2. If so, will the Minister also express these amounts as a percentage of the total fees charged for these forms of treatments.
  3. What authority has met the cost of the outstanding fees.
Dr Forbes:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (1), (2) and (3) The information sought by the honourable member is not available.

Hospital Finances (Question No. 5440)

Mr Hayden:

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

  1. Can the Minister say what amount was waived in hospital fees in each State because of (a) inability of the patient to pay and (b) the writing off of bad debts in respect of (i) public, (ii) intermediate and (iii) private ward treatment during the latestyear for which figures are available.
  2. If so, will the Minister also express these amounts as a percentage of the total fees charged in each category.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. and (2) The information sought by the honourable member is not available.

Aborigines: Infant Mortality (Question No. 5459)

Dr Klugman:

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

When will the Minister next contact Alice Springs Hospital to enable an answer to be given to Question No. 4452 which I placed on the Notice Paper on 13th October 1971.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

The honourable member is referred to the reply to Question No. 4452 (Hansard, 10th May 1972, pages 2382-3).

Doctors’ Incomes (Question No. 5518)

Mr Whitlam:

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

Can the Minister provide the information which his predecessor promised to seek on 16th February 1971 (Hansard, page 16) and which he himself was unable to provide on 6th May 1971 (Hansard, page 2927) on the average income of doctors and the percentage of their income which is derived from Commonwealth and medical funds benefits.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

No. The information requested is not available for the reasons stated in answer to the honourable member’s question on 6th May 1971 (Hansard, page 2927).

Education: Adult Migrants (Question No. 5523)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Immigration, upon notice:

  1. How many migrant students attend parttime accelerated courses (a) in the daytime and (b) in the evening (Hansard, 10th March 1971, page 824)
  2. Where are the courses held.
  3. What allowances are paid.
  4. What progress has been made on Professor W. F. Connell’s proposals for vocational preparation.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. (a) and (b) Approximately 1,600 adult migrants are currently attending part-time accelerated courses held in morning, afternoon and evening sessions. The greater proportion (880 students) are attending evening sessions.
  2. The courses (which are of 12 to 20 weeks duration) are being held at 15 centres in New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia and the Australian Capital Territory. The centres have in all an annual capacity of some 3,550 students. The actual centres where courses are held, and the number of classes at each centre, are:

New South Wales- New South Wales Institute of Technology - Anthony Hordens annexe (7 classes), Cleveland Street Boys’ High School (5), Darlinghurst Public School (6), Christian Brothers’ College, Burwood (7), Westbridge

Migrant Hostel (5), East Hills Migrant Hostel (3), Smith’s Hill Girls’ High School, Wollongong (4) and Fairy Meadow Migrant Hostel, Wollongong (2).

Victoria- State Migrant Education Centre, 200 Little Collins Street, (20 classes), St Kilda Primary School (4), Enterprise Migrant Hostel (5).

Queensland - Wacol Migrant Hostel (2 classes).

South Australia- B.H.P. Whyalla (2 classes).

Australian Capital Territory - Canberra Hospital (3 classes) and North Ainslie Primary School (2).

Additional part-time accelerated courses are planned for development in Adelaide, Perth, Hobart and Newcastle in the new financial year.

  1. There has been no variation in the policy previously stated that students attending part-time accelerated courses, the majority of whom are in at least part-time employment, should not be paid living allowances.
  2. In the past 12 months the results of the Tregillis Mission, to which my predecessor earlier referred, have been implemented and trade selection criteria in relation to trades covered by the Tradesmen’s Rights Regulation Act have now been extended to virtually all the European migrant source countries. The work of the Committee on Overseas Professional Qualifications which is directed towards facilitating the employment of professional migrants is continuing, and it has already concerned itself with 20 professions. No special vocational preparation courses have been introduced for migrants in Australia. There has been, of course, a substantial development of the migrant education programme with full-time intensive courses, part-time accelerated courses and courses for migrants in industry, all designed to equip migrants more readily for suitable employment in Australia.

Medical Practitioners: Specialists In Ophthalmology (Question No. 5590)

Mr Stewart:

asked the Minister represent ing the Minister for Health, upon notice:

How many legally qualified medical practitioners specialising in ophthalmology are there in (a) Australia and (b) each State.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

Under the provisions of the National Health Act, medical practitioners may be recognised as specialists or as consultant physicians for the purposes of payment of higher rates of medical benefits to referred patients. The numbers of medical practitioners recognised in the specialty of ophthalmology as at 31st December 1971 are as follows:

Commonwealth Medical Benefits: Visual Aids (Question No. 5593)

Mr Stewart:

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

  1. What are the reasons for the non-payment of a Commonwealth medical benefit to members of medical funds who are prescribed visual aids by either legally qualified medical practitioners or optometrists.
  2. Will the Government consider amending the National Health Act to provide for payment of both Commonwealth and fund benefit when visual aids are prescribed by a medical practitioner or optometrist.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. The National Health Act makes provision for the payment of Commonwealth medical benefits to contributors to registered medical benefits organisations who incur expenses in relation to services rendered by qualified medical practitioners, or prescribed medical services rendered by approved dentists. The Act does not cover services rendered by optometrists, nor does it provide for payment of a benefit towards the cost of spectacles.

However, in order to avoid discrimination between patients in the allied fields of optometry and ophthalmology in cases where spectacle lenses are prescribed, the Act specifically excludes the payment of Commonwealth benefits for attendances by medical practitioners which result in the prescription of spectacles. In this way, the patient is left in the same position whether the spectacles are prescribed by an optometrist or an opthalmologist.

  1. From time to time, the Government has given consideration to extending the Health Benefits Plan so that it includes ancillary services but, to date, such an extension has not been practicable. As the honourable member will appreciate, any proposal for the provision of benefits in respect of any particular type of ancillary service requires to be considered in the light of claims for benefits over the whole range of ancillary services. This raises a major consideration, namely, the additional burden which would be placed on the Australian taxpayer who, in 1971-72, is expected to provide some $510m from the National Welfare Fund for health services.

While the matter is thus kept under review, I cannot promise that any early action will be taken to include optometry in the plan.

However, most health insurance organisations pay ancillary fund benefits where spectacles are prescribed, and pay fund benefits towards the cost of spectacles. The major organisations provide these benefits only where the services are rendered, or the spectacles are prescribed, by medical practitioners. Certain other organisations pay fund benefits for optometrical as well as medical practitioner prescriptions. The question of whether, or the extent to which, health insurance organisations pay such ancillary benefits is regarded as essentially a matter for decision by the managements of the organisations.

International Labour Organisation: State Attitudes to Conventions (Question No. 5645)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Labour and National Service, upon notice:

  1. In view of the considerable changes since his Department published the Review of Australian Law and Practice Relating to Conventions Adapted by the International Labour Conference up to 1968, will he prepare a table showing, in respect of each International Labour Organisation convention which Australia has not yet ratified, which States have still not agreed to ratification.
  2. Where and when has the Departments of Labour Advisory Committee met to consider unratified conventions since April 1971 (Hansard, 18th August 1971, page 274) and which conventions were considered at each meeting.
  3. In answering this question will he incorporate his answer to my question to him without notice on 19th April 1972 (Hansard, page 1773).
Mr Lynch:
LP

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

  1. The following information relates to Conventions not yet ratified by Australia which are still open to ratification, are applicable to Australia and are not exclusively within Commonwealth jurisdiction or within State jurisdiction to solimited an extent that ratification could proceed on the basis el Commonwealth law and practice alone.
  1. With the addition of the Conventions adopted at the 56th (1971) Session of the International Labour Conference, the Conventions considered at the meeting of the Department of Labour Advisory Committee on 18th and 19th April 1972, were essentially those listed in my answer to the honourable member’s previous question on this matter (No. 3366, page 274 of House of Representatives Hansard for 18th August 1971).
  2. I wrote to the honourable member on this matter on 24th April 1972.

Health Insurance (Question No. S673)

Mr Hayden:

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

  1. What amounts have been paid (a) by the Commonwealth, (b) by medical benefit funds, (c) by patients and (d) in total to (0 general practitioners and (ii) specialists for services covered by voluntary health insurance during each of the last 10 years.
  2. Will the Minister also supply the information sought expressed as a percentage of the total amount paid.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. and (2) The detailed information sought by the honourable member is not available. Information as to total Commonwealth and fund benefit payments under the Medical Benefits Scheme is available, but not details of payments to general practitioners and specialists, respectively.

Handicapped Persons: Assistance (Question No. 5684) 1

Dr Everingham:

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

  1. Did the Senate Standing Committee on Health and Welfare recommend overall planning of rehabilitation for the handicapped to increase efficiency. > >
  2. If so, will the Minister take steps to set up a semi-governmental authority for this purpose, including representatives of Departments concerned with education, social welfare and vocational matters, and voluntary organisations.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. The Senate Standing Committee on Health and Welfare made a number of recommendations concerning some areas of assistance to the handicapped where, in the view of the Committee, further governmental assistance both Commonwealth and State would be appropriate; and also concerning the co-ordination of Commonwealth activities in this field.
  2. The Committee’s report is far reaching in its implications for both the Commonwealth and the States and the recommendations cover a wide range of issues which could affect questions of major policy in several Commonwealth Departments. The report and its recommendations are receiving, and will continue to receive, serious consideration.

Radar for the Blind Chib (QuestioD No. 5685)

Dr Everingham:

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

  1. Has the Minister’s attention been drawn to a circular, dated 3rd April 1972, from the blind treasurer of the Radar for the Blind Club which shows that foreign interests are negotiating to take over this non-profit Club.
  2. If so, will he negotiate urgently, in concert with rehabilitation officers of the Department of Social Services and electronics experts attached to the Commonwealth Acoustic Laboratories and other public instrumentalities, a semi-governmental authority in partnership with the Club to ensure the stability and Australian control and development of this Australian lead in technology and rehabilitation.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. and (2) Yes. I have read the circular mentioned but I have no knowledge that any foreign or other interests are negotiating to take over the Radar for the Blind Club.

Health Insurance (Question No. 5773)

Mr Hayden:

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

Will the Minister provide details of (a) all Acts and (b) the relevant sections of those Acts in (i) each State and (ii) the Commonwealth which give legislative authority, for the setting up, administration and operation of voluntary health insurance schemes.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

The National Health Act provides the authority for the registration of . medical and hospital benefits organisations for the purposes of that Act.

Tbe information sought by the honourable member in respect of State legislation is not available in my Department.

Health Insurance (Question No. 5774)

Mr Hayden:

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

Is there any provision in any of the Acts covering the operation and administration of voluntary health insurance funds which permits the distribution of surplus contribution income; if so, will the Minister give full details of the legislative authority.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

The National Health Act is the only relevant Commonwealth Act administered by the Commonwealth Minister for Health.

There is no provision in that Act which permits the distribution of surplus contribution income by medical benefits organisations and hospital benefits organisations registered under the Act.

Hospital Medical Staffs: Fees (Question No. 5795)

Dr Klugman:

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

  1. Will the Minister read my question No. 5316 again and then re-read the answer (Hansard, 10th May. 1972).
  2. What is the relevance of the statement in the answer to my question.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. and (2) Both honorary and salaried medical staff of public hospitals provide services to outpatients and public ward’ inpatients of public hospitals. Insufficient information is available of the number and nature of the services provided by honorary and salaried medical staff, respectively, to enable an estimate to be made of the fees which would be received if payments were made for services by practitioners at present classified as honorary. Nor is it possible to make a dissection between services to insured, uninsured and pensioner patients.

The amount of $18m mentioned in part A3 of the answer to question No. 4715 was the estimated additional cost of operating public hospitals that would be incurred in 1971-72 if sessional payments were made by the hospitals to general medical staff at present classified as honorary. This additional cost has no relevance to the fees at present collected by public hospitals for services rendered by, honorary and salaried medical staff.

Doctors’ Incomes (Question No. 5796)

Dr Klugman:

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

Will the Minister supply figures of increases in medical practitioners’ incomes for the quarter ended 31st December 1971, as supplied in answer to question No. 4453 (Hansard, 27th April 1972, pages 2175-6), as soon as they become available.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

The cost and number of medical services for the quarter ended 31st December 1971, on the same basis as the figures supplied in answer to question No. 4453, are as follows:

Aboriginal Children: Diet (Question No. 5800)

Mr Les Johnson:
HUGHES, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

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

  1. Who were the members of the medical team which the Minister announced on 1st December 1971 would visit Collarenebri to carry out basic tests to establish the Vitamin- C content of diets in Aboriginal children and its absorption by them
  2. Did this team co-operate with the Collarenebri medical practitioner Dr A. Kalokerinos whose studies on Vitamin C deficiencies among Aboriginal children have extended over a long period.
  3. What is the effect of the medical teams findings and when will they be made public.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. The members of the medical team which visited Collarenebri in March 1972, were:

Dr E. H. Hipsley, Medical OfficerIncharge of Nutrition Section, Commonwealth Department of Health.

Miss M. W. Corden, Nutritionist, Commonwealth Department of Health.

Mr C. Johnston, Biochemist, Canberra Hospital.

Miss P. Rosevear, Chemist, The Vitamin Laboratories, Roche (Aust.) Pty Ltd.

  1. Yes, the team worked closely with Dr Kalokerinos.
  2. An interim report on the tests indicates that the number of children under 5 years of age in Collarenebri were too small for statistically valid conclusion to be reached. Further tests are to be conducted in the Alice Springs area.

League of Rights (Question No. 5918)

Mr Enderby:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

  1. Has the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation taken any steps to investigate the activities and operations of the League of Rights.
  2. If so, have the investigations revealed anything that would be detrimental to the security of Australia.
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

It is not the practice to give information which would either confirm or refute allegations of particular activities of the Australian Security, Intelligence Organisation.

Public Servants Housing (Question No. 5919)

Mr Enderby:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

When may I expect an answer to question No. 4711, dealing with Public Service regulation 97, which I placed on the Notice Paper on 11th November 1971.

Mr McMahon:
LP

– I have this day answered question No. 4711.

Papua New Guinea Public Service: Appeals (Question No. 5731)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for External Territories, upon notice:

  1. Against how many provisional promotions of overseas officers were appeals lodged by local officers in 1971 and how many appeals were successful (Hansard, 23rd April 1971, page 2033).
  2. Against how many provisional promotions of local officers were appeals lodged by overseas officers in 1971 and how many appeals were successful.
  3. What are the names and positions of the persons who heard the appeals.
Mr Peacock:
LP

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

  1. 139 local officers lodged appeals against the provisional promotions of 78 overseas officers. 4 of these appeals were successful
  2. 442 overseas officers lodged appeals against the provisional promotions of 52 local officers. 9 of these appeals were successful.
  3. The appeals were heard by Promotions Appeal Committees, consisting of a Chairman and two members, established in accordance with Part IV, Division 4 of the Public Service (Papua New Guinea) Ordinance 1963-1971. During 1971 Mr J. B. Sullivan was the occupant of the office of Chairman of the standing Promotions Appeal Committee and was engaged full time on committee work. For part of the year a second Promotions Appeal Committee was established on a part-time basis to deal with a backlog of appeals and Mr F. E. Daveson, a senior officer of the Department of Education, was appointed Chairman pro tern of that committee. As required by the Public Service Ordinance the other members of both these committees represented the department concerned and the appropriate staff association. These two members would not be common for all appeal hearings conducted by the committees.

I mention for the information of the honourable member that the Public Service Ordinance was amended in March 1972 by the Public Service (Promotion and Recruitment Procedures) Ordinance 1971. The Ordinance now provides for appointments, promotions and transfers in the Public Service of Papua New Guinea to be dealt with by selection committees whose decisions are not subject to appeal by officers. The new system is designed to speed up localisation and incorporates procedures under which local officers can be advanced to positions at higher levels solely on the basis of their efficiency and without the requirement to win promotion in competition with overseas officers. (See also answer to question 5370).

Papua New Guinea Administration: Staff from Africa (Question No. 5733)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

External Territories, upon notice:

  1. Did the Administration of Papua New Guinea in 1971 engage further staff, including police, who were previously employed in African countries.
  2. If so, in which countries were they employed and how many were employed in each country.
  3. What are their present duties.
Mr Peacock:
LP

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

  1. Yes but not for Police Force.

  2. The countries and numbers involved are:

    1. Zambia - 3
    2. Libya- 1
    3. Kenya- 2
    4. Ethiopia - 1
    5. Tanzania - 1
    6. Malawi- 1
    7. Congo- 1

  3. The duties presently being performed by these employees are as follows:

    1. Six Education Officers
    2. Two Medical Officers
    3. One Specialist Medical Officer
    4. One Rural Development Officer

Papua New Guinea: Commonwealth Expenditure (Question No. 5739)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

External Territories, upon notice:

What expenditure was incurred by Commonwealth Departments and authorities in Papua New Guinea in 1970-71.

Mr Peacock:
LP

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

Expenditure incurred in Papua New Guinea in 1970-71 by Commonwealth Departments and authorities which receive financial support from the Commonwealth Budget is shown below:

Papua New Guinea: Picture Theatre Lease, Port Moresby (Question No. 5755)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for External Territories, upon notice:

What procedures have been followed in granting the picture theatre lease in Port Moresby since tenders were first called on 26th March 1970 and finally refused on 28th October 1970 (Hansard, 22nd April 1971, page 1967).

Mr Peacock:
LP

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

The matter referred to is one which falls within the authority of the Minister for Lands and Environment in the House of Assembly for Papua New Guinea. The Minister has provided the following information:

The picture theatre lease was readvertised on 22nd July 1971 and was granted to Mrs Opa

Galli on 17th February 1972.

Papua New Guinea: Legal Aid (Question No. 5758)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for External Territories, upon notice:

What progress has been made in preparing the ordinances relating to legal aid and the Public

Solicitor in Papua New Guinea (Hansard, 15th September 1970, pages 1089 and 1092, and 9th March 1971, page 754).

Mr Peacock:
LP

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

Detailed proposals for the establishment of a statutory office of Public Solicitor and the scope of legal aid which should be given will be presented shortly to the new Administrator’s Executive Council for its consideration.

Papua New Guinea: Town Councils (Question No. 5762)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for External Territories, upon notice:

Which towns in Papua New Guinea are not yet included in any local government council area (Hansard, 19th March 1970, page 725, and 2nd April 1971, page 1454).

Mr Peacock:
LP

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

The matter referred to is one which falls within the authority of the PapuaNew Guinea Minister for Local Government who has provided the following information:

towns not yet included in any local government council area are Buin, Bulolo, Kavieng, Kokopo, Kwikila, Mumeng and Wau;

Wau and Bulolo are about to be included in the adjacent council area;

the inclusion of Kavieng, which was to have proceeded earlier, did not receive approval from the established council with which it was to have been included, although it is now understood this attitude may have changed, and advice from the council is awaited.

Standing Committee of Commonwealth and State Attorneys-General (Question No. 5648)

Mr Whitlam:

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

  1. Where and when have there been meetings of the Standing Committee of Commonwealth and State Attorneys-General since 29th October 1971.
  2. What matters were considered at each meeting.
  3. What stage has now been reached in the attempt to secure uniform laws on the matters listed in bis answers on 25th November 1971 (Hansard, pages 3777 and 3778).
Mr N H Bowen:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– The Attorney-General has supplied the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. Adelaide, 20th and 21st April 1972.

  2. The proceedings of the Standing Committee are confidential. However, I am at liberty to disclose that the following matters were considered at the meeting referred to in part (1) of this answer:

    1. Proposal that the Attorneys-General participate in a joint review of off-shore petroleum legislation and its underlying agreements and other off-shore matters.
    2. Control of the storage and use of information concerning citizens, whether maintained by computers or otherwise, with a view to protecting individual privacy.
    3. Proposal that the States should seek legislation by the United Kingdom Parliament similar to the Statute of Westminster. .
    4. A report prepared for the Victorian AttorneyGeneral on fair consumer credit laws.
    5. The practice in accordance with which motor vehicle manufacturers exclude, by provisions of a warranty, the protection an owner would otherwise be afforded by common law or statute.
    6. Proposal that the Securities Industry legislation be amended to require brokers to pay all trust moneys received by them into. their trust accounts immediatelyon receipt instead of after 3 days as at present, required by most State legislation.
    7. Proposal that companies be requiredto maintain a register of all options granted in respect of their unissued share capital and that the public be allowed to inspect the register.
  3. The present position of the matters mentioned in answer to Question No. 2466 (Hansard, 25th November 1971, page 3777) is shown in the list set out below.

Money Lenders and Consumer Protection -

Present position: Draft legislation relating to unsolicited goods and services has been considered in the standing Committee. Any further action is a matter for individual Ministers responsible in this area and the topic has been removed from the agenda of the Standing Committee.

At its meeting in April 1972, the Standing Committee considered a report made to the Vic torian Attorney-General on fair consumer credit laws. The Ministers agreed to study the proposals contained in the report and to indicate at their next meeting the intentions of their Governments with respect to the implementation of the recommendations.

Amendments of Uniform Companies Act -

Present position: Reference should be made to the ministerial statement made in the Senate on 23rd May 1972, where the present position was described.

Control of Stock Exchanges and Sharebrokers -

Present position: Legislation has been enacted in New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia.

Unit Trusts-

Present position: The Standing Committee has appointed a sub-committee to formulate proposals for the establishment of a body to consider the need for legislation relating to unit trusts, mutual funds and syndication. The sub-committee, which consists of the Attorneys-General of the Commonwealth, New South Wales and Victoria, will make recommendations to the Standing Committee on the nature of the body that might be established and its terms of reference.

Fares (Question No. 4936)

Mr Charles Jones:

asked the Minister for Shipping and Transport, upon notice:

  1. Is he able to say in which year since 1950 fares were increased in respect of each State passenger tram, bus and ferry system.
  2. If so, what was the amount of the increase in each case.
Mr Nixon:
CP

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

Available- information on increases in fares levied and the dates on which these came into operation is contained in the attached tables.

TASMANIAN FERRIES

  1. TASMANIAN TRANSPORT COMMISSION BRUNY ISLAND FERRY

Ferry service commended 11 December 1954. Fare charged1s. 6d. (15 cents) til! passengers abolished in 1966 (I June)

  1. DEVONPORT MAKIN BOARD

Housing: Aborigines (Question No. 5933)

Mr Cross:

asked the Minister for the

Environment, Aborigines and the Arts, upon notice:

  1. Has his attention been drawn to a statement by the Queensland Minister for Housing in Hobart on 7th April 1972 that the Queensland Government had spent money provided by the Commonwealth to build or buy houses alongside the homes of ‘do-gooders’ who promote the Aboriginal cause in order to retard their efforts.
  2. If so, canhe say where houses have been bought or built under the policy expressed by the Queensland Minister.
  3. Does the Government agree that the views expressed by the Queensland Minister are not in the best interests of the Aboriginal and Island people.
Mr Howson:
LP

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

Although 1 have seen press reports of a statement of this kind, I have not seen the text of the statement.

National Development (Question No. 5793)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice:

  1. In answer to questions about the report which his Department completed in October 1970 on forward national development planning covering minerals, forests, water and energy, has he said that many of the matters have now been dealt with and public announcements have been made (Hansard, 9th December 1971, page 4383) and that as quickly as possible he would produce a document with a co-ordinated approach to natural resources development (Hansard, 13th April 1971, page 1S83).
  2. If so, on what dates and matters have the public announcements been made.
  3. When does he expect to produce the document.
  4. Although he himself has latterly refused to give information on interdepartmental committees (Hansard, 18th August 1971, page 284; 19th August 1971, page 387; 14th October 1971, page 2469; 2nd November 1971, page 2877 and 9th May 1972, page 2266) will he now give the names of the departments represented on the interdepartmental committee considering a number of the matters in his Department’s report (Hansard, 9th December 1971, page 4383) since such Ministers as the Ministers for Health (Senate Hansard, 9th December 1971, page 2360), Interior (Hansard, 28th September 1971, page 1607) and Primary Industry (Hansard, 29th September 1971, page 1703) continue to disregard the present Prime Minister’s ban on such information (Hansard, 7th September 1971, pages 888, 889 and 893).
  5. Has consideration yet been given to establishing a joint committee with Japan, similar to that which the Japan-Canada ministerial committee agreed to establish on 14th September 1971, to be composed of senior government officials and to maintain continuous review of trade in copper, coal, iron, uranium and other mineral commodities and further processing in Australia for the

International Market (Hansard, 28th September 1971, page 1525 and 30th September 1971, paste 1722).

Mr Swartz:
LP

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

  1. Yes.
  2. The document is in draft form and is confidential to the Government. It is not considered appropriate therefore to indicate the nature or extent of the contents of the document.
  3. It is not possible to indicate when the document will be brought to finality.
  4. No.
  5. The Australian and Japanese Governments have established a joint ministerial committee which will consider matters of the kind raised by the honourable member.

Motor Vehicle Purchases (Question No. 5887)

Mr Cohen:
ROBERTSON, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Supply, upon notice:

  1. How many motor vehicles have been purchased by his Department during the last 5 years.
  2. What were the makes and models of these vehicles.
Mr Garland:
LP

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

  1. and (2) The table below shows the required details of motor vehicles purchased by the Department of Supply on behalf of Commonwealth departments and authorities during the past 5 years.

Mr V. G. McGrath: Visit to Taiwan (Question No. 3790)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for Education and Science, upon notice:

  1. Did he tell me on 9th May 1972 (Hansard, page 2262) that Mr Vincent G. McGrath made a private visit to a number of countries in Asia, including Taiwan, during the second half of 1971.
  2. Has his attention been drawn to the report in ‘Asian Outlook’, published in Taipeh in September 1971 and distributed by the Embassy of the Republic of China in Canberra, that Mr McGrath was sent by the Australian Ministry of Education and Science.
  3. Will he clarify this apparent inconsistency.
Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (l)Yes.

  1. Yes. Through the honourable member’s pre sent question.
  2. I repeat that Mr McGrath was not commissioned by the Department of Education and

Science in any of his activities in any of the countries he visited. I am informed that Mr McGrath intended to collect audio-visual materials which might be used for social science studies in Australian schools.

Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport (Question No. 4995)

Mr Morrison:
ST GEORGE, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Civil Aviation, upon notice:

How many (a) landings and (b) take-offs occurred on each runway at Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport (i) for the week beginning 20th December 1971 and (ii) for each subsequent week up to and including the week beginning 14th February 1972.

Mr Swartz:
LP

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

The details requested are contained in the following table:

Taiwan (Question No. 5425)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Prime Minis ter, upon notice:

  1. Did he state in March 1972 that Australia would like Taiwan to be independent and that his Government still accepts the claim of both Chinese regimes that Taiwan should be part of one China.
  2. If so, will he provide an early opportunity for the Parliament to debate these conflicting attitudes.
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

  1. The honourable member may be referring to a reply I gave to a question put to me during the television programme’ This Week’ on Channel 7 Melbourne on5th March 1972. The text of my reply, was published at the time.
  2. The Foreign Minister made a statement to the Parliament on 9th May 1972 on international affairs, and there was an opportunity for debate on that statement.

Armed Services: Clothing (Question No. 5382)

Mr Kennedy:

asked the Minister for

Supply, upon notice:

  1. What are the main items of clothing which comprise uniforms worn by members of each of the three Armed Services.
  2. What are the fibres used in the production of these items of clothing.
  3. What percentage of these fibres consists of (a) wool, (b) each fibre other than wool and (c) all fibres other than wool.
Mr Garland:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (1-3) The main items of clothing which comprise the uniforms of the three Australian Armed

Services, and the fibres and proportion thereof In the material used for their manufacture are detailed in the table below. There are other items of dress uniform and working clothing but it has been assumed that information on them is not required by the question.

Homes Savings Grants (Question No. 5200)

Dr J F CAIRNS:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

ns asked the Minister for Housing, upon notice:

  1. ls it the practice of his Department to provide information to the Department of Labour and National Service concerning applicants for Homes Savings Grants.
  2. Was an application for a Homes Savings Grant made by a resident of Ferntree Gully, Victoria, and stamped with the reference V83804/G24 and date 10th November 1971.
  3. Did a Mr Block of the Department of Labour and National- Service ask for information about the applicant; if so. for what purpose.
  4. Was he given information and was a note to this effect made by a Mr K. Bowden at the foot of a copy of a letter to the applicant dated 18th December 1971.
  5. Was Mr Bowden’s note dated 21st January 1972 and did it state that Mr Block of the Department of Labour and National Service had called and was given particulars of the applicant.
  6. ls this normal procedure in his Department.
Mr Kevin Cairns:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · LP

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

  1. No.
  2. -(6). I am advised that while seeking to obtain from a registrant documentary evidence of his birth which was relevant to his national service liability, an officer of the Department of Labour and National Service was told by the registrant’s wife that it had already been provided to the Housing Department. The wife, a joint applicant with the registrant for a Home Savings Grant, suggested that the document might more conveniently be sighted there. It was then arranged for the information sought to be provided.

Australian Fisheries Council (Question No. 5358)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Primary Industry, upon notice:

  1. Where and when has the Fisheries Council met.
  2. What were the names and portfolios of the Ministers who attended each meeting.
  3. What requests or suggestions have been made since the first meeting for legislative or administrative action by (a) the Commonwealth (b) the Territories and (c) the States and what action has been taken on the requests and suggestions made at the first meeting (Hansard, 16th September 1970 page 1256).
Mr Sinclair:
CP

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

  1. The Australian Fisheries Council has met on 3 occasions

    1. First meeting, Darwin, 9th June 1969
    2. Second meeting, Adelaide, 21st September 1970
    3. Third meeting, Hobart, 27th March 1972.

  2. The names and portfolios of the Ministers who attended each meeting are as follows:

First meeting -

The Hon. J. D. Anthony, M.P., Minister for Primary Industry and Acting for Minister for the Interior.

The Hon. E. A. Willis, M.L.A., Chief Secretary (N.S.W.).

The Hon. W. A. Borthwick, M.L.A., Acting/Chief Secretary (Victoria).

The Hon. J. A. Row, M.L.A., Minister for Primary Industries (Queensland).

The Hon. C. R. Story. M.L.C., Minister of Agriculture (South Australia).

The Hon. G. C. MacKinnon, M.L.C., Minister for Health, Fisheries and Fauna (Western Australia).

The Hon. D. F. Clark, M.H.A., Minister for Development, Housing and Sea Fisheries (Tasmania).

Second meeting-

The Hon. J. D. Anthony, M.P., Minister for Primary Industry.

The Hon. P. J. Nixon, M.P., Minister for the Interior.

The Hon. E. A. Willis, M.L.A., Chief Secretary (N.S.W.).

The Hon. Sir Arthur Rylah, K.B.E., C.M.G., E.D., M.L.A., Chief Secretary (Victoria)

The Hon. W. A. R. Rae, M.L.A., Minister for Local Government and Electricity (Representaing the Hon. J. A. Row, M.L.A., Minister for Primary Industries (Queensland) ).

The Hon. T. M. Casey, M.L.C., Minister for Agriculture (South Australia).

The Hon. G. C. MacKinnon, M.L.C., Minister for Health, Fisheries and Fauna (Western Australia).

The Hon. D. F. Clark, M.H.A., Minister for Development, Housing and Sea Fisheries (Tasmania).

Third meeting -

The Hon. Ian M. Sinclair, M.P., Minister for Primary Industry.

The Hon. Ralph J. Hunt, M.P., Minister for the Interior.

The Hon. E. A. Willis, M.L.A., Chief Secretary (N.S.W.).

The Hon. R. J. Hamer, E.D., M.L.A., Chief Secretary (Victoria).

The Hon. J. A. Row, M.L.A., Minister for Primary Industries (Queensland).

The Hon. T. M. Casey, M.L.C., Minister for Agriculture and Forests (South Australia).

The Hon. R. Davies, M.L.A., Minister for Fisheries and Fauna (Western Australia).

The Hon. D. F. Clark, E.D., M.L.A., Minister for Industrial Development, Housing and Sea Fisheries (Tasmania).

  1. (a) The following matters requiring legislative or administrative action were considered by the Australian Fisheries Council at its Second meeting.
  1. (b) The following matters requiring legislative or administrative action were considered by the Australian Fisheries Council at its Third meeting.

Commonwealth Fisheries Commonwealth action Law:

  1. Fisheries Act

    1. Continental Shell (living Natural

Resources) Act 1968

  1. (c) The follow up action taken on the requests and suggestions made at the first meeting is listed below:

Standing Committee on Fisheries- Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedure -

These have been finalised and Standing Committee is operating under them.

Funds for Research, Education, Extension and Development -

In 1969 Parliament passed the Fishing Industry Research Act to establish a Fishing Industry Research Trust Account. Consolidated revenue is appropriated to an extent equal to contributions raised from the Fishing Industry under State legislation. All States except Queensland have now established trust accounts which are expended by those States and are matched by the Commonwealth. Queensland is preparing legislation to establish a fund. Grants totalling $464,000 have been approved for research projects from the Commonwealth fund in 1972-73.

Australian/Japanese Fisheries Agreement -

This agreement, which terminates in 1975, is continuing to operate satisfactorily.

Entry of foreign fishing vessels into Australian ports-

Administrative procedures have been adopted and are operating satisfactorily to prevent the entry of foreign fishing vessels into Australian ports except in cases of genuine emergency. The Australian Japanese Fisheries Agreement permits Japanese tuna long line vessels to enter Fremantle, Hobart, Sydney and Brisbane.

Foreign Fishing Vessels in Territorial Waters -

Diplomatic representations have been made to the Governments concerned in several cases involving illegal fishing activities by foreign boats.

Implementation of Continental Shelf Living Natural Resources Act 1968 -

This Act came into operation on 15th April 1970. It is being administered by the State Fisheries Authorities for the Commonwealth similarly to the Fisheries Act. The masters of 4 foreign fishing vessels have been successfully prosecuted for offences against this Act.

Fisheries Patrolling -

The whole question of surveillance by the Commonwealth has been under examination and the role of the States and the Commonwealth in the overall surveillance programme is at present being negotiated between the Commonwealth and the States.

Protection of Great Barrier Reef and Gulf of Carpentaria Waters -

The Government is maintaining its policy of reserving for Australia the maximum jurisdiction over the living resources in adjacent waters that international law permits.

Education Committee -

Educational courses and seminars have been arranged by the Committee.

South Eastern Fisheries Committee-

Discussions between the Commonwealth and the States on south-eastern Australian fisheries are continuing at research and management levels.

Northern Fisheries Research Committee -

Discussions between the Commonwealth and the States are continuing at a research level; particular attention has centred around northern prawn fisheries.

Gear Technology -

The Sub-committee of Standing Committee on Fisheries has been set up to consider the question of gear technology and to establish priorities of work. Partly due to the availability of the fishing industry research funds, all the high priority projects are now being undertaken.

Environment Pollution -

Close collaboration has been established between the Commonwealth and State Departments having responsibilities in this field and considerable progress has been made in the area of oil pollution and the dumping at sea.

Review of Commonwealth Fisheries Act -

The Fisheries Bill 1971 is at present on the notice paper. The Department of Primary Industry keeps all Commonwealth fisheries legislation under constant review.

Administration of Commonwealth Fishery Law -

The States are continuing to administer the Commonwealth fisheries legislation under delegated powers and close collaboration is maintained between the Commonwealth and State Fisheries Departments, both directly and through Standing Committee on Fisheries and Australian Fisheries Council.

Licensing and Processing Plants under Commonwealth Law -

The Fisheries Act was amended in 1970 to remove any doubts regarding the rights of the States to licence processing plants.

Uniform Fisheries Licences -

Reciprocity -

Commonwealth reimbursement - State fisheries authorities -

Negotiations are continuing between the Commonwealth and the States in relation to these matters.

Financial Assistance to the Fishing Industry -

This matter is being examined by the Commonwealth in collaboration with the Australian Fishing Industry Council.

Indo-Pacific Fisheries Council Delegation, 14th Session -

The Commonwealth and the States are continuing to co-operate in relation to Australian representation at the various international fisheries meetings.

Economic Research and Statistics-

The Fisheries Division of the Department of Primary Industry is continuing, with the active participation of the States, to carry out economic research into various aspects of the fishing industry.

Imports of Live Aquarium Fish -

This matter is continuing to create problems for the various administrations and is continuing to receive active consideration.

Abalone- Quality Control for Export -

The Department of Primary Industry has issued a code of practice for the handling and processing of abalone for export.

Proposed use of Nuclear Power in Harbour Construction -

This proposal was withdrawn and no further action on it was taken by Council.

Public Servants: Visits Abroad (Question No. 5395)

Mr Daly:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

When may I expect an answer to question No. 4941 which was placed on the Notice Paper on 9th December 1971.

Mr McMahon:
LP

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

Question No. 4941 was answered on 30th May 1972 (Hansard, page 3289).

Homes Savings Grants: Approved Credit Unions (Question No. 5519)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Housing, upon notice:

Which credit unions have been approved for the purposes of the Homes Savings Grant Act since the amending Act was assented to on 6th February 1970.

Mr Kevin Cairns:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · LP

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

No credit union has as yet made formal application for approval.

Election Promises: Amenities (Question No. 5545)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

Has a grant yet been made to any State for (a) swimming pools, (b) child-care centres, (c) civic centres, (d) showgrounds and (e) playing fields as promised by the former Deputy Prime Minister at the General Elections in 1969.

Mr Snedden:
Treasurer · BRUCE, VICTORIA · LP

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

I am not aware of any promise being given by or on behalf of the Government at the General Elections in 1969 that grants would be made to the States specifically for the particular purposes mentioned by the honourable member. The former Deputy Prime Minister did not make any ‘promise’ on the matter at that time; what he said related to the policy objectives of his party.

Australian Finance Conference (Question No. 5549)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

What has been the (a) date and (b) outcome of consultations between the Reserve Bank and the Australian Finance Conference since his predecessor’s answer on 10th March 1971 (Hansard, page 811).

Mr McMahon:
LP

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

The Reserve Bank has provided the following information:

23rd November 1971.

A further useful exchange of information and views on economic and financial conditions and prospects.

Housing: Age Pensioners (Question No. 5632)

Mr Cross:

asked the Minister for Housing upon notice:

  1. How many dwelling units has the Queensland Government completed under the States Grants (Dwellings for Aged Pensioners) Act 1969 since 1st July 1971.
  2. Where have these units been constructed and on what dates did they become available for tenancy.
  3. How many more units are expected to become available prior to 30th June 1972.
Mr Kevin Cairns:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · LP

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

  1. Eighteen units.
  2. Zillmere, 13th November 1971; Holland Park, 13th December 1971; Mount Isa, 20th December 1971; Hawthorne, 7th January 1972.
  3. Contracts are current for a further number of units and it is expected that of these 44 will become available for tenancy prior to 30th June 1972.

Primary and Secondary Industries: Subsidies (Question No. 5601)

Mr Charles Jones:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

  1. Does the Commonwealth pay a subsidy to some Australian primary and secondary industries? <2) If so, (a) what are the industries? (b) when was the subsidy granted in each case? and (c) what payments have been made to each industry since 1959-60?
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

Budget Estimates of payments to primary and secondary industry in 1971-72, together with the amount of such payments in each year since 1959-60, are shown below:

The dates of commencement of operation of the schemes under which payments to industry are being made in 1971-72 are as follows:

Grain Alcohol (Question No. 5686)

Mr Collard:

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice:

  1. What investigations are being carried out currently by his Department or any other Department in relation to grain alcohol production and use.
  2. If investigations are not in process or being arranged, does this indicate that he and his Department are convinced that (a) there is no value, (b) there are disadvantages, or (c) there are dangers in the use of grain alcohol for motor fuel purposes.
  3. If so, on what grounds were these convictions reached.
Mr Sinclair:
CP

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

  1. Numerous representations have been made by interested parties over a period of more than 2 years on various aspects of the production of alcohol from grain and Its use for blending with automotive fuel.

My Department has examined information, including reports prepared by various committees and research organisations, which has become available, mainly from Canada and the United States. It is not carrying out investigations. I am not aware that any other Department is doing so.

  1. and (3) Available information has left me in no doubt that under present circumstances the establishment of an industry to produce industrial alcohol from grain would be economically unsound.

Studies made in Canada and the United States in recent years have resulted in the conclusion that it would cost more to produce alcohol from grain, even if the grain were supplied free, than the current ex-refinery prices of petrol in the respective countries. A further aspect of these studies is that industrial alcohol cannot be produced from fermentable materials as cheaply as it can be synthesised from ethylene. For this reason virtually all industrial alcohol in most countries is derived from ethylene.

It is apparent that grain growers could not expect to receive a remunerative price for grain sold for the production of industrial alcohol.

Other factors to be considered, apart from technical aspects such as the comparative efficiency of normal automotive fuels and alcohol blends include:

  1. The blending with petrol of alcohol produced at costs substantially in excess of the ex-refinery price of that petrol would result, under present conditions, in higher fuel costs for all users of the blend.
  2. This is difficult to anticipate in view of the necessary commitment by the growers to provide given amounts of grain over an extended period and the uncertainty of levels of grain production through adverse seasonal conditions.
  3. The prospects of finding satisfactory markets for substantially increased quantities of carbon dioxide and spent grain, which are by-products of fermentation of grain, are anything but encouraging.

Grain Alcohol (Question No. 5687)

Mr Collard:

asked the Minister for Parimary Industry, upon notice:

  1. Can he say whether the Legislature of Nebraska, early in 1971, introduced an amending Bill to provide a reduced fuel tax on fuels containing grain alcohol and no lead.
  2. If so, did section 1 of the Bill declare that it is the public policy of the State that, in order to safeguard the life, health, property, and public welfare of its citizens, the production sales and use of motor fuels and the pollution caused by the additives in motor fuels is a matter affecting the public interest, and that a reduced tax on motor fuels containing grain alcohol as a substitute for lead additives is necessary for the reduction of pollution and will further serve as an incentive for the agricultural economy in the State.
  3. Has he sought information on this subject from Nebraska for the purpose of considering whether similar legislation should be introduced in Australia; if not, why not.
Mr Sinclair:
CP

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

  1. Legislation relating to the use of grain alcohol in gasoline was passed in the State of Nebraska in 1971. The legislation provides, inter alia, that after 1st January 1973 the rates of State excise tax on motor fuels are to be:

    1. on fuel containing grain alcohol but no lead, 5.5 cents (US currency) per gallon;
    2. on gasoline which does not contain grain alcohol, 8.5 cents (US currency) per gallon.
  2. Yes.
  3. Information on aspects of the Nebraska legislation has been obtained.

Points to be noted include:

  1. the legislation requires that the fuel be lead free in order to qualify for the tax concession;
  2. the tax concession proposed is implicit recognition that the blend cannot be produced to compete on equal terms with gasoline;
  3. Nebraska has contiguous borders with 6 other States. The need for even minor carburettor adjustments on vehicles using the blend would pose problems if those vehicles had to be refuelled in places where the blend was not available. This points up a major limitation on. the efficacy of this type of action on a localised basis;
  4. there is considerable controversy as to the effects of different blends on air pollution. Some eminent authorities have disputed claims that the blending of alcohol in gasoline would bring about significant reduction in air pollution.

Papua New Guinea: Public Service (Question No. 5730)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for External Territories, upon notice:

Has the Public Service Board in Papua New Guinea yet made any declarations that preference in promotion, transfer or appointment to an office or class of office in the Public Service shall be given to any efficient officer who is not an overseas officer. (Hansard, 9th March 1971, page 755).

Mr Peacock:
LP

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

No. The section of the Public Service (Papua New Guinea) Ordinance 1963-1971 relating to preference in promotion, transfer or appointment for local officers has been repealed by the Public Service (Promotion and Recruitment Procedures) Ordinance 1971 (No. 11 of 1972). The latter Ordinance provides for a new system of selecting officers for promotion or transfer and for appointments to the Public Service.

The new procedures require that all vacancies which are to be filled must be advertised. Applications are considered by Selection Committees consisting of a chairman (an officer of the Department of the Public Service Board), a representative of the department in which the vacancy exists and a representative of the appropriate staff association. The appropriate Committee is required to select the most efficient applicant within the Public Service for promotion or transfer to the vacancy. If an overseas officer is selected as the most efficient applicant the Committee is required to determine whether any local officer applicant has a level of efficiency which would enable him to satisfactorily carry out the duties of the office. If there is such a local officer applicant the Committee issues a ‘localisation certificate’ in respect of that officer. Where there is more than one so qualified the Committee certifies the most efficient. The successful overseas officer is then promoted but transferred to another position of equivalent classification, and the local officer named in the ‘localisation certificate’ is promoted to the advertised vacancy. The decision of a committee is not subject to appeal.

In relation to appointment to the Public Service the new procedures provide that vacancies may be filled by recruitment from outside the Public Service only where there are no applications from within the Service or where the Selection Committee is satisfied that no internal applicant is suitable for the position. The engagement of overseas staff is limited to those categories of employment for which local persons with the required qualifications or experience are not available.

Papua New Guinea: Female Administration Staff (Question No. 5732)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

External Territories, upon notice:

Will he bring up to date the information which his predecessor gave on 23rd April 1971 (Hansard, page 2031) on female staff employed by the Administration of Papua New Guinea.

Mr Peacock:
LP

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

Papua New Guinea: Indigenous Representation on Commissions (Question No. 5735)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for External Territories, upon notice:

Has indigenous representation been introduced in Papua New Guinea on the Electricity Commission (Hansard, 20th April 1971, page 1740) or the Superannuation Board (Hansard, 29th April 1971, page 2340).

Mr Peacock:
LP

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

Two Papua New Guineans have been appointed as Associate Commissioners of the Papua and New Guinea Electricity Commission. They are Mr John Akunai and Mr Toua Kapena, C.B.E.

There is no indigenous representation on the Papua New Guinea Superannuation Board which provides pension benefits for overseas officers. There is however, a Public Officers’ Superannuation Board which provides pension benefits for local officers on which there is indigenous representation.

The composition of that Board is:

Chairman (part-time) - M. Lavin, Representative of the Administration

Member (Ex-officio; part-time) - S. W. Caffin, Commonwealth Actuary

Member (part-time) - J. Natera, Contributors’ Representative (indigenous)

Herd Testing (Question No. 5810)

Mr Grassby:

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice:

  1. In view of the announcement of new United States meat inspection regulations enforcing considerably more restrictive provisions relating to tuberculosis in cattle, will he list the areas in Australia not now covered by the current tuberculosis testing and brucellosis eradication campaign which has been operating for the last 3 years.
  2. Will he confer immediately with the States and authorities concerned to ensure that the scheme is extended as a matter of urgency to cover all beef and dairy producing areas that are currently outside the operation of the scheme.
Mr Sinclair:
CP

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

  1. The current campaign is applicable to the whole of Australia. Due to progress made through past efforts of States, to differences in prevalence of each disease in various parts of the continent, to limitations in the availability of trained manpower, and to other factors, the nature and extent of the action so far taken in the campaign, varies from State to State and within States. Broadly the position is:

    1. Tuberculosis -

Tasmania is virtually free of the disease.

Dairy herds in the dairying districts of east and southern Australia and beef herds in pastoral South Australia are under regular herd test.

In the following parts of Australia, beef cattle herds thought (as a result of traceback from meatworks) to be infected are tuberculin tested -

New South Wales, Victoria and the South-Western Pastoral Division of Western Australia.

The following parts of Australia are not presently covered by tuberculin testing -

Western Queensland,

Northern Territory (with the exception of the Barkly Tableland),

Western Australia (with the exception of the South-Western Pastoral Division).

  1. Brucellosis -

Tasmania is virtually free of the disease.

In New South Wales, Western Australia and Northern Territory, blood sampling at slaughter is used to identify infected herds. Queensland proposes to adopt a similar practice.

As a result of this and other experience, the following areas of Australia are not under active scrutiny for brucellosis as they are believed to be virtually free -

Cape York Peninsula,

Northern Territory (with the exception of the Barkly Tableland),

Kimberley Pastoral Division of Western Australia.

Widespread vaccination campaigns are being conducted throughout -

Coastal Queensland, coastal New South Wales, Barkly Tablelands, the whole of Victoria and South Australia.

In the South-Western Pastoral Division of Western Australia, the Campaign has already advanced to the stage where it has been possible to move to brucellosis eradication by test and slaughter.

The following areas of Australia are not presently covered by brucellosis field activity -

Western Queensland,

Western New South Wales, and

Western Australia (other than the Kim berley Pastoral Division and the Southwestern Pastoral Division).

  1. On Commonwealth initiative, consultations are already taking place to further accelerate the Brucellosis and Tuberculosis Eradication Campaign. Commonwealth and State officers are considering urgently the technical and financial resources needed for expansion of the Campaign throughout the continent. Particular attention is being given to the problem of tuberculosis in beef cattle herds of northern Australia.

The need to step up the Campaign was given even greater emphasis through the recent United States gazettal of restrictions on the import of meat from T.B. affected animals or from animals showing positive tuberculin reaction. In the light of that United States action, the decision was taken here to prohibit the export of such meat in any form from Australia to any destination. The Australian Meat Board has made submissions about the problems facing the cattle industry following that decision. The submission includes proposals for an Australia-wide scheme for compensation against loss occasioned by bovine tuberculosis. Graziers organisations have made similar representations. These various submissions are also being studied as a matter of urgency.

Sinking of Ketch ‘One and All’ (Question No. 4488)

Mr DONALD CAMERON:
GRIFFITH, QUEENSLAND · LP

asked the Minister for Shipping and Transport, upon notice:

  1. In view of the information given by him to the House on 13th October 1971 concerning the vessel ‘One and AH’, will he now establish a fullscale marine inquiry. <2) Can he say why the ‘One and All’ travelled to the Middleton Reef if his Department refused to give the vessel a commercial licence.
Mr Nixon:
CP

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

  1. Following investigations by officers of my department which indicated that there were no grounds for further action under the provisions of the Navigation Act, I decided that in the circumstances a full scale marine inquiry was not justified.
  2. The owner of ‘One and AH’ did not apply for any form of licence or certificate from my department prior to the vessel’s departure on the voyage to Middleton Reef and my department was not aware of the owner’s intention to undertake the voyage.

Colleges of Advanced Education: Correspondence Courses (Question No. 4662)

Mr Kennedy:

asked the Minister for Education and Science, upon notice:

  1. In which (a) colleges of advanced education and (b) universities have correspondence courses been provided since 1960.
  2. What were the (a) numbers and (b) names of the courses offered in each institution in each year since 1960.
  3. How many students were enrolled in (a) each course and (b) all courses at (i) each institution and (ii) all institutions in (A) each State and Territory and (B) the Commonwealth in each year since 1960.
Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

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

Colleges of advanced education

(a) (2) and (3). The question was referred to the Commonwealth Statistician and he has supplied the following information.

The Statistician collects statistics of advanced level courses in which students were enrolled in colleges of advanced education. Data for individual colleges of advanced education are not available. Statistics have been provided by State for the only years for which complete data are at present available, being 1969 and 1970.

For the purposes of these statistics, colleges of advanced education are institutions listed in the appropriate States Grants (Advanced Education) Act as colleges of advanced education, together with the Canberra College of Advanced Education. Statistics for 1969 relate only to courses which are approved under .the appropriate Act for the purpose of financial assistance, while for 1970 the statistics relate also to other courses which are considered to be of equivalent standard. There were no correspondence enrolments in either year in colleges of advanced education in New South Wales, South Australia, Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory, nor in Queensland in 1969.

In Victoria in 1970, two separate colleges of advanced education had correspondence students enrolled for applied chemistry. Correspondence enrolments in other courses were at one institution for each course in each State.

Universities

  1. (b). The University of New England, the University of Queensland and Macquarie University conduct courses for significant numbers of external students on a regular basis. A number of other universities provides external courses for undergraduate students on a smaller scale. In addition, some other universities have accepted relatively small numbers of higher degree students on an external basis.
  2. and (3). The information in the table below has been compiled on the basis of information provided by the Acting Commonwealth Statistician who has indicated that, for the purpose of answering the Honourable Member’s question, correspondence students at universities have been regarded as those enrolled as external part-time students. These are students for whom special arrangements are made because they live too far away to attend scheduled lectures and tutorials regularly or who cannot attend or cannot reasonably be expected to attend a local university. Comparable data are not available for 1960.

The table below sets out the total enrolment of university correspondence students by States for the years 1961-71. Schedules, giving details of correspondence enrolments by faculty, by degree or non-degree course, by graduate and undergraduate study and by university for each of the required years, were made available by the Acting Commonwealth Statistician and these will be forwarded to the Honourable Member immediately.

Oil Slick Absorbent (Question No. 5066)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister for

Shipping and Transport, upon notice:

  1. Has his attention been drawn to a report in the Sunday Australian of 6th February 1972 that (a)Gamlen and Correxit, believed to have been donated by oil companies to the Queensland Government for oil slick dispersal, are toxic to coral at one part per SO million in sea water and to other marine life at one part per 10 million.

    1. Tankers using Torres Strait to save weeks of sailing time miss obstructions by inches.

  2. If so, will he raise these matters with the Queensland Government and investigate the effectiveness of vermiculite as an oil slick absorbent.

Mr Nixon:
CP

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

  1. (a) The Queensland Government have given assurance that no dispersant material named Gamlen and Correxit or any other name has been donated by the oil companies to the Queensland Government.

    1. The Queensland and Torres Strait Pilot Service emphatically deny that any ves sels seeking their advice, which are the majority transitting Torres Strait, miss obstructions by inches.

  2. The effectiveness of vermiculite as an oil slick absorbent will be considered, along with all other methods of combating oil pollution; when the materials and equipment to be stockpiled under the National Plan is examined.

Commonwealth University Scholarships (Question No. 5184)

Mr Reynolds:

asked the Minister for Education and Science, upon notice:

What was the (a) number and (b) percentage of the first year student intake in each faculty of Australian universities who were in receipt of Commonwealth University scholarships in each of the last seven years.

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

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

The following table shows the number and percentage of the first year student intake in each field of study at Australian universities who were in receipt of Commonwealth University scholarships in each of the last seven years.

Note: (a) The number of the first year intake in each field of study at Australian universities who were in receipt of a Commonwealth University Scholarship. The percentage of the first year intake in each field of study at Australian Universities who were in receipt of Commonwealth University Scholarships.

Aircraft Industry (Question No. 5575)

Mr Keating:
BLAXLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Supply, upon notice:

  1. What is the location and value of (a) real estate and (b) plant and equipment leased from the Commonwealth by (i) Hawker de Havilland Australia Pty Ltd and (ii) Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation Pty Ltd.
  2. What is the consideration involved for the leases.
Mr Garland:
LP

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

  1. Plant and Equipment -

The Commonwealth plant and equipment issued to the companies is made available free of charge for use on Commonwealth ‘cost reimbursement’ contracts. When the plant is used by the companies for other work, rental is charged at an hourly rate based on15 per cent of the installed book value of the plant concerned.

Native Members of the Forces Benefits (Question No. 5738)

Mr Whitlam:

-on 10th May, 1972 asked the Minister for External Territories upon notice:

How many claims have been met and how many are still -

outstanding, and

anticipated under the Native Members of the Forces (Papua and New Guinea) Benefits Regulations (Hansard, 30 March 1971, page 1192).

Mr Peacock:
LP

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

  1. Fifteen claims have been met.

  2. (a) Three formal applications are being investigated.

    1. There were five preliminary enquiries concerning eligibility. Information and application forms have been provided. It is not possible to estimate future applications.

Papua New Guinea: Legal Practitioners (Question No. 5760)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

External Territories, upon notice:

  1. How many legal practitioners reside in Papua New Guinea.
  2. How many of them do not hold Administration positions, retainers or appointments.
  3. How many of those in part (2) have their principal office in (a) Port Moresby, (b) Lae and (c) Rabaul.
  4. How many (a) indigenous and (b) expatriate students are sponsored by the Administration for law studies in (i) the Territory and (ii) Australia.
Mr Peacock:
LP

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

  1. There are 107 legal practitioners residing in Papua New Guinea. ,
  2. Of these, 37 do not hold Administration positions, retainers, or appointments.
  3. 28 have their principal offices in Port Moresby, 3 in Lae,5 in Rabaul and 1 in Kieta.
  4. Administration sponsored students for law studies are as follows:

Commonwealth University Scholarships (Question No. 5781)

Mr Kennedy:

asked the Minister for

Education and Science, upon notice:

  1. How many Commonwealth university (open entrance) scholarships were (a) offered and (b) accepted in (i) each State and Territory (ii) the Commonwealth in 1971 for use in 1972.
  2. What number and percentage of students who were offered these scholarships had undertaken their final secondary year at a school in (a) the Government, (b) the Catholic and (c) other private school system.
  3. What number and percentage of the students in each of the three systems (a) applied for and (b) were offered scholarships in (i) each State and Territory and (ii) the Commonwealth.
  4. If the information sought is not available, will he give special directions to have it provided.
Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

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

  1. The numbers of 1972 Open Entrance Commonwealth University scholarships which have been offered and accepted are:

It is expected that some students who have accepted awards will defer them to the following year or relinquish them.

Note: - Comprehensive statistics of Commonwealth scholarships are compiled at 30 June each year. The figures given here are subject to revision in the light of the final statistics on offers and acceptances which will be prepared then.

  1. and (3) Statistics in this detail are not maintained by my Department.
  2. The provision of this information would require resources which must at present be used for other priority tasks. I am not therefore prepared to direct that a special project be undertaken in order answer the Honourable Member’s question.

Uniform Laws on Lifts and Cranes (Question No. 5792)

Mr Whitlam:

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

On what occasions and with what results have the (a) Labour Ministers and (b) Departments of

Labour Advisory Committee discussed the introduction of uniform laws on (i) lifts and (ii) cranes?

Mr Lynch:
LP

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

The primary forum for consideration of uniformity in specialist technical areas has been the Standards Association of Australia Committees concerned with codes of practice.

Commonwealth Railways: Pollution Precautions (Question No. 5915)

Mr Wallis:
GREY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister for Ship ping and Transport, upon notice:

In the design of the additions of the Commonwealth Railways workshops at Port Augusta which will house the diesel electric locomotive servicing sections, have all precautions been taken to ensure that waste products from this area, such as oil, etc., do not run into the adjacent waters of Spencer Gulf and thereby endanger the marine growth in the immediate vicinity.

Mr Nixon:
CP

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

I am advised that such precautions have been taken by incorporation of oil traps in the design of the facilities.

Papua New Guinea: United Nations Resolutions (Question No. 5740)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Foreign Affairs, upon notice:

  1. What were the texts of resolutions adopted during 1971 in the various organs of the United Nations concerning Papua and the Trust Territory of New Guinea.
  2. Which members (a) voted in favour, (b) voted against, (c) abstained or (d) were absent.
Mr N H Bowen:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

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

Of the four organs of the United Nations- The General Assembly, The Security Council, The Trusteeship Council, and the Economic and Social Council, only two, the General Assembly and the Trusteeship Council, passed resolutions in 1971 on Papua New Guinea.

The General Assembly passed a resolution (No. 2865) on the ‘Question of Papua New Guinea’ on 20th December. The Trusteeship Council passed 2 resolutions. The first, numbered 2155, was a resolution on the ‘Report of the United Nations Visiting Mission to the Trust Territory of Papua New Guinea, 1971.’

The Second, numbered 2156, was a resolution on ‘Arrangements for the dispatch of a visiting mission to observe the elections to the Papua New Guinea House of Assembly in 1972.’ Both Trusteeship Council resolutions were passed on the 18th June.

The texts of the 3 resolutions, together with details of the votes recorded, are as follows:

General Assembly Resolution

Subject: Question of Papua New Guinea

Date and meeting: 20th December 1971; 2028th plenary meeting

Vote: 119 in favour, none against, with 1 abstention (recorded vote)

Document numbers

Report to assembly: Fourth Committee report A/8615

Resolution adopted: 2865 (XXVI) TEXT OF RESOLUTION

The General Assembly,

Recalling the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of l4th December 1960, containing the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.

Recalling its previous resolutions concerning Papua and the Trust Territory of New Guinea, in particular resolutions 2590 (XXIV) of 16th December 1969 and 2700 (XXV) of 14th December 1970,

Having considered the report of the Trusteeship Council covering the period from 20th June 1970 to 18th June 19711 and the relevant chapters of the report of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples,2

Having heard the statement of the representative of the administering Power,3

Taking into account the conclusions and recommendations of the Special Committee and the Trusteeship Council regarding developments in Papua and the Trust Territory of New Guinea, 1 Official Records of the General Assembly, Twentysixth Session, Supplement No. 4 (A/8404). 2 A/8423/ Add, 6 (Part III), chapter XIX; A/8423 (Part IV), chapter IV. 3 See A/C.4/SR. 1956.

Noting in particular the express desire of the people of Papua and the Trust Territory of New Guinea for national unity and independence as a single political and territorial entity,

Taking note of the decision of the House of Assembly ofPapua and the Trust Territory of New Guinea that the Territory formed from the administrative union of those 2 Territories should be named Papua New Guinea;

Bearing in mind the decisions taken during 1971 by the House of Assembly of Papua and the Trust Territory of New Guinea and the administering Power with regard to the attainment of full internal self-government during the period 1972- 1976, and the affirmation by the Government of Australia, as the administering Power, that the interval between the attainment of full selfgovernment and independence will be a matter to be determined by the then Government of Papua and the Trust Territory of New Guinea.

Noting further the decision of the Government of Australia to invite a special mission of the Trusteeship Council, including 2 members of the Special Committee, to observe the elections to the Third House of Assembly of Papua and the Trust Territory of New Guinea in 1972,

Mindful of the responsibility of the United Nations to render all help to the people of Papua and the Trust Territory of New Guinea in their efforts freely to decide their own future.

  1. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the people of Papua and the Trust Territory of New Guinea to self-determination and independence in accordance with General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) and the Trusteeship Agreement of 13th December 1946;
  2. Decides that, in accordance with the express desire of the peoples of the Territories, the name to be applied for United Nations purposes to the Territory of Papua and the Trust Territory of New Guinea shall henceforth be ‘Papua New Guinea’; -ti$
  3. Calls upon the administering Power to take all necessary steps to ensure the speedy attainment by Papua New Guinea of self-government and independence as a single political and territorial entity and, in that regard, to establish, in consultation wim the freely elected representatives of the people, a specific timetable for the free exercise by the people of Papua New Guinea of their right to self-determination and independence;
  4. Urges the administering Power to discourage separatist movements and to ensure that the unity of Papua New Guinea is preserved throughout the period leading up to independence;
  5. Requests the Trusteeship Council, while continuing to exercise its specific responsibilities towards the Trust Territory of New Guinea, and the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration of the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, to bear in mind the need to consider Papua New Guinea as a single political and territorial entity and to take account of this when determining the itineraries of future visiting missions in consultation with the administering Power;
  6. Further requests the Trusteeship Council to continue to include non-members of the Trusteeship Council in its periodic visiting missions on the basis recommended in Genera] Assembly resolution 2590 00av)
  7. Welcomes the invitation extended by the administering Power to the Trusteeship Council to dispatch a special mission to observe the elections to the Papua New Guinea House of Assembly in 1972 and the fact that the mission will be composed as recommended in General Assembly resolution 2590 (XXIV);
  8. Recommends that the reports of this special mission and those of future missions should be submitted both to the Trusteeship Council and to the Special Committee;
  9. Urges the administering Power to intensify its programme of political education in Papua New Guinea and to expedite the implementation of the programme for accelerated localisation of the Papua New Guinea public service;
  10. Requests the administering Power further to intensify and extend the educational services, including technical and administrative training, provided for the people to Papua New Guinea;
  11. Further requests the administering Power to continue to expand the measures being taken to promote ownership, management and participation by Papua New Guineans in enterprises throughout all sectors of the economy;
  12. Requests the administering Power to report to the Trusteeship Council and the Special Committee on the implementation of the present resolution;
  13. Requests the Trusteeship Council and the Special Committee to continue to examine this question and to report thereon to the General Assembly at its twenty-seventh session.

Recorded vote

In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Barbados, Belgium, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussia, Cameroon Canada, Central African Republic, Ceylon, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Dahomey, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gambia, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Khmer Republic, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen, Peru, Philippines, Polan, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, USSR, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia.

Against: None.

Abstaining: France

Absent: Albania, Bhutan, Bolivia, Chad, China, Congo, Gabon, Maldives, Mauritius, Niger, Qatar, South Africa.

  1. Trusteeship Council Resolutions 2155 (XXXVIII) Report of the United Nations Visiting Mission to the Trust Territory of New Guinea 1971

The Trusteeship Council

Having examined at its thirty-eighth session the report of the United Nations Visiting Mission to the Trust Territory of New Guinea, 1971.

Having heard the oral observations made by the representative of Australia concerning the report.

  1. Takes note of the report of the Visiting Mission and of the observations of the Administering Authority thereon;
  2. Expresses its appreciation of the work accomplished by the Visiting Mission on its behalf:
  3. Draws attention to the fact that, at its thirty-eighth session, in formulating its own conclusions and recommendations on conditions in the Trust Territory, the Trusteeship Counlil took into account the recommendations and observations of the Visiting Mission and the observations of the Administering Authority thereon;
  4. Decides that it will continue to take these recommendations, conclusions and observations into account in future examination of matters relating to the Trust Territory concerned;
  5. Invites the Administering Authority to take into account the recommendations and conclusions of the Visiting Mission as well as the comments made theron by members of the Trusteeship Council;
  6. Decides, in accordance with rule 98 of its rules of procedure, that the report of the Visiting Mission and the text of the present resolution shall be distributed in an appropriate form. 1387th meeting, 18th June 1971.

Recorded Vote

The vote was S in favour (Australia, China, U.K., France, U.S.A.), none against, with the U.S.S.R. abstaining. 2156 (XXXVIII) Arrangements for the dispatch of a visiting mission to observe the elections to the Papua New Guinea House Assembly in 1972

The Trusteeship Council

Being aware of the elections to the Papua New Guinea House of Assembly due to be held in the period March/ April 1972,

Having been invited by the Administering Authority to dispatch a mission to observe these elections,

Recalling the request made to the Trusteeship Council by the General Assembly, in paragraph 5 of its esolution 2S90 (XXIV) of 16th December 1969, to include non-members of the Trusteeship Council in its periodic visiting missions to the Trust Territory of New Guinea, in consultation with the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and ‘Peoples and with the Administering Authority, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

Noting that the consultations requested by the General Assembly cannot be completed until after the conclusion of its present session,

  1. Decides to send a visiting mission to observe the elections to the Papua New Guinea House of Assembly in 1972;
  2. Decides that the Mission should be composed of (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), (United States of America),

( ), ( )

the two latter to be designated by the President of the Council on the basis of consultations with the members of the Council, the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and the Administering Authority;’ 4 At its 1387th meeting, on 18th June 1971, the Council decided that the nominations to be submitted would automatically be approved when received. 5 Subsequently, and on the basis of the consultations, the President designated Afghanistan and Yugoslavia as the two States to nominate the other members of the Visiting Mission (see T/1729).

  1. Directs the Visiting Mission to observe the elections to the House of Assembly in Papua New Guinea in 1972, including electoral arrangements, the activities of candidates and political parties, the casting of votes the closure of voting, the counting of ballots and the declaration of results;
  2. Requests the Visiting Mission to submit to the Council, as soon as practicable, a report on its observations of the elections containing its findings, with such observations, conclusions and recommendations as it may wish to make. 1387th meeting, 18th June 1971.

Recorded Vote

There were 5 votes in favour (Australia, China, U.S.A., U.K., U.S.S.R.), none against, with France abstaining.

Home Care (Question No. 5980)

Mr Reynolds:

asked the Minister for Social Services, upon notice:

  1. What sum has been (a) available and (b) granted for (i) home care services, (ii) senior citizens’ centres and (iii) welfare officers at senior citizens’ centres under the States Grants (Home Care) Act 1969 to each of the States and Territories in each year of operation of the Act
  2. Which State Governments make a matching contribution towards the cost of each of these facilities.
Mr Wentworth:
LP

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

  1. See answer to question No. 4732, page 4539 of Hansard of 10th December 1971.
  2. The States Grants (Home Care) Act provides for the Commonwealth to, first, pay to a participating State an amount equal to half its expenditure for approved home care services; secondly, to contribute up to one-third of the capital cost of a senior citizens’ centre, on a matching basis with a participating State or a local governing body in a participating State; thirdly to pay half the salary of a welfare officer employed at, or in conjunction with, a senior citizens’ centre.

All of the States have now given notice to the effect that they will participate in each of these schemes.

Cambodian Royal Family (Question No. 5833)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice:

  1. What has the Government done to secure the release of Prince Sihanouk’s mother. (Hansard, 11th May 1972, page 2402).
  2. Can he say what members of Prince Sihanouk’s family have been put on trial, and with what result
Mr N H Bowen:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

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

  1. The situation of Queen Kossamak, Prince Sihanouk’s mother, was considered by my predecessor in December 1970 and January 1971, following upon receipt of letters on the subject from the former Cambodian Consul-General in Melbourne. It was decided that it would not be proper for the Australian Government to intervene in the domestic affairs of another State. I believe, however, that the former Queen could not be described as being under preventive detention. I understand that she sees members of her family and can move freely about Phnom Penh. Wartime restrictions on travel beyond the capital apply equally to all citizens of Phnom Penh.
  2. Since the deposition of Prince Sihanouk on 18th March 1970, members of his family have been tried as follows:

Prince Norodum Naradipo and Princess Bothum Bopha were tried on charges of treason between 31st March and 6th April 1971. Prince Naradipo was found guilty and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment. This sentence was later reduced to one year as a result of a general amnesty. The terms will be completed shortly.

Princess Bothum Bopha was acquitted.

Prince Ranaridh and Prince Naradipo were charged with murder and tried between 14th and 17th July 1971. Both were acquitted.

Vietnam: Geneva Conference (Question No. 5701)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Foreign Affairs, upon notice:

  1. Has either chairman of the Geneva Conference ever formally proposed to the other chairman that the conference be reconvened.
  2. If so, on what dates and by what chairman have such proposals been made.
Mr N H Bowen:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

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

  1. and (2) The Soviet Union has never asked the British Government to reconvene the Geneva Conference on Vietnam. The British Government has made a variety of approaches. These have ranged from explicit proposals to the Soviet Government to public calls for the Geneva Conference to be reconvened. Specific instances since July 1962 are as follows:

    1. Mr Wilson proposed the reconvening of the Conference during Mr Gromyko’s visit to London from 16th to 20th March 1965.
    2. Mr Stuart raised the question with Mr Gromyko in Vienna on 15th May 1965.
    3. Mr Stuart stated in Parliament on 3rd June 1965 his readiness to join Mr Gromyko in reconvening the Geneva Conference.
    4. Mr Wilson told Parliament on 19th July 1966 that he had pressed hard for reconvening during his visit to Moscow on 16th and 19th July.
    5. Mr Brown invited Mr Gromyko to reconvene the Geneva Conference in a speech to the Labour Party Conference on 6th October 1966.
    6. Mr Brown repeated this invitation in a speech to the General Assembly on 11th October 1966.
    7. Sir Alec Douglas-Home proposed the reconvening during Mr Gromyko’s visit to London in October 1970.
    8. On 7th April 1972 the Foreign and Commonwealth Office Permanent UnderSecretary suggested to the Soviet Ambassador in London the reconvening of the Conference.
    9. On 20th April 1972 the British Ambassador in Moscow reminded Mr Gromyko of this suggestion.
    10. On 10th May 1972 Sir Alec Douglas-Home summoned the Soviet Ambassador to reiterate this proposal.

Aborigines: Employment (Question No. 4975)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Foreign Affairs, upon notice:

  1. Does the Government’s decision on Aboriginal land rights on 26th January 1972 conform with the land provisions on International Labour Organisation Convention No. 107 and Recommendation No. 104 - Indigenous and Tribal Populations, 1957, (Hansard, 6th September 1960, page 856, 15th November 1962, page 2251, 27th March 1963, page 127, 15th October 1963, page 1824, 22nd September 1966, page . 1248, 19th November 1968, page 3007 and 24th April 1971, page 2122).
  2. Have Queensland and Western Australia yet agreed to ratification of the convention (Hansard, 19th November 1968, page 3008, question No. 708 (2) and 3rd June 1970, page 2902, question No. 925 (2) (b)).
Mr N H Bowen:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

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

  1. The question whether Commonwealth policy accords with the International Labour Organisation Convention No. 107 and Recommendatiin No. 104 involves the interpretation of those documents. Such interpreaation is a question of law and having regard to Standing Order 144, it is not appropriate to express any opinion on those questions.

Consultations with the International Labour Office are continuing in connection with the interpretation of the provisions of theILO instruments referred to in the question.

  1. No.

Gazelle Peninsula (Question No. 5064)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister for

External Territories, upon notice:

  1. What entitles a person to vote in elections for the Gazelle Peninsula Local Government Council, as regards age, nationality, domicile and other restrictions.
  2. What steps are taken to persuade eligible persons to vote at these elections.
  3. What qualifies a person as a taxpayer to the Council as regards age, nationality, domicile, occupation, property, income, dependents, education or other criteria.

  4. How many persons are in Kerevat Corrective Institution for failure to pay taxes, and what is

    1. their average length of stay, (b) the average amount of tax owing and (c) their commonest occupation.
  5. What opportunities have those in custody to earn the means to pay the tax, and how long will this take them.
  6. What is the daily cost of maintaining a person in custody in the Institution?
Mr Peacock:
LP

– The matters referred to are ones which fall within the authority of the Minister for Local Government and the Minister for the Interior in the Papua New Guinea House of Assembly, who have provided the following information:

  1. To be eligible to vote in the elections for the Gazelle Peninsula Local Government Council a person must not be less than 18 years of age and must have been resident in the proclaimed council areas. The proclaimed areas consist of areas deemed native customary usage to be occupied by members of certain specified village group or occupied by persons residing on specified native lands.
  2. Polling times and places are publicised at regular intervals before the elections throughout the Council area.
  3. A person is qualified as a taxpayer if he is eligible for enrolment as an elector.
  4. As at 19th May 1972 there were no persons at Kerevat Central Corrective Institution serving sentences for failure to pay taxes.
  5. The maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for non-payment of tax to a local government council is six months. Persons serving sentences of less than two years do not earn pay under the provisions of regulation 133 of the Corrective Institutions Regulations.
  6. The estimated daily cost of upkeep of a detainee at Kerevat Central Corrective Institution is one dollar seventy-nine cents ($1.79).

Tariffs (Question No. 5388)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry, upon notice:

  1. Did his predecessor ever, other than on 8th November 1967, refer to the Tariff Board any question as to whether a manufacturer was taking undue advantage of tariff protection, particularly by charging unnecessarily high prices or acting in restraint of trade (Hansard, 9th March 1972, page 762).
  2. What action has been taken on the Vernon Committee’s recommendation 14.40 that an undertaking be requested about price policy if high protection is given, especially where the product concerned is an essential raw material.
Mr Anthony:
CP

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

  1. No other reference in these specific terms was made. However, it has been general practice for many years for references to the Board to be made under Section 15 of the Tariff Board Act as a whole, which includes (Section 15 (1) (h)) the question of whether a manufacturer was taking undue advantage of the protection afforded by the Tariff in regard to charging unnecessarily high prices for his goods or acting in restraint of trade to the detriment of the public.
  2. I am not aware of any such undertaking being sought by the Government. The procedures followed by the Government in setting levels of protection are designed to ensure that tariffs are no higher than necessary to protect economic and efficient industry. The Tariff Board makes a very thorough examination of the protective needs of such industry. The Board makes recommendations on levels of protection which are the minimum necessary, having regard to prices of imports, to allow economic and efficient enterprises to realise a reasonable profit. This procedure appears to provide satisfactory safeguards against firms which obtain high protection being able to charge unduly high prices.

Vietnamese War: Cost (Question No. 5399)

Mr Daly:

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice:

  1. What has been the cost to date of our involvement in the war in Vietnam.
  2. What is the estimated total expenditure.
Mr Fairbairn:
LP

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

  1. The estimated cost of actual commitment to Vietnam from 1962-63 to March 4972 is S218.435m. This represents the excess cost of maintaining the Forces in Vietnam over the cost of maintaining them in Australia.
  2. The normal cost of maintaining the Forces engaged in Vietnam from 1962-63 to March 1972 is estimated to have been $246.726m. The total cost therefore of maintaining these Forces is estimated to have been $465. 161m, after the addition of the excess costs shown at (1) above.

National Trade Bureau (Question No. 5457)

Mr Grassby:

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry, upon notice:

  1. Has a study been made of proposals for the formation of a National Trade Bureau with membership open to all persons and organisations interested in international trade and foreign relationships.
  2. If not, is it intended to initiate a study.
  3. If a study has been made, will he indicate whether he favours the concept and whether consideration is being given to its implementation.
Mr Anthony:
CP

– The answer to the hon ourable member’s question is as follows: (1), (2) and (3) I understand that the idea has been canvassed with some industry organisations by a private person who is interested in such matters. Should private bodies or persons wish to form such an organisation then it is, of course, open to them to do so. If such a body were formed, and if it were representative of informed opinion on trade matters in Australia, then any advice it cared to give the Government would, of course, receive full and careful consideration. In 1958 the Government established two organisations through which it has since been able to obtain valuable advice from experienced and eminent businessmen on a wide range of matters including Australian trade. These organisations are the Export Development Council and the Manufacturing Industries Advisory Council.

Citrus Exports to Japan (Question No. 5640)

Mr Grassby:

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice:

  1. Has the Australian Government been asked for 10 years to facilitate the entry of Australian citrus to Japan.
  2. Did he tell me in answer to question No. 1320 (Hansard, 15th September 1970, page 1169) that negotiations began as long ago as 1962 and that the last case for the lifting of the Japanese ban on Australian oranges had been presented in 1967.
  3. What steps have been taken since then, and how many countries now supply citrus to Japan.
  4. What is the present position in relation to the matter.
Mr Sinclair:
CP

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

  1. Yes. The Government and Australian citrus producers have each had a concern to gain access for Australian citrus fruit to the Japanese market for many years.
  2. Yes. I also refer the honourable member to the answer given to question 3796 (Hansard, 26th August 1971, pages 796-7) relating to the nature of the research work needed as a basis for further negotiations with the Japanese authorities and to discussions which took place in Tokyo in July 1970 between Australian and ‘Japanese officials.
  3. The research work on the development of fruit disinfestation treatments which will satisfy the Japanese quarantine requirements is continuing.

Trade statistics indicate that 6 countries have supplied citrus fruit to Japan in recent years, namely, the United States of America, New Zealand, South Africa, Republic of China, Mexico and Ecuador.

  1. The research programme on disinfestation treatments has been given high priority but it involves extensive, time consuming original research of considerable complexity. The major problems in this type of research are the laboratory breeding of insects, the determination of the stage of the pest (i.e., larvae, etc.) which is most resistant to the treatment, the artificial infestation of fruit and phytotoxicity studies. To meet the Japanese requirements research is necessary on the Mediterranean fruit fly as well as the Queensland fruit fly, and, although much work had already been carried out on the latter pest, no previous research had been undertaken in Australia on sterilisation treatments for Mediterranean fruit fly.

This is the principle reason for the time lapse before the final results will be available. In spite of the urgency of this research present indications are that the work is not likely to be completed before 1975.

Industrial Research and Development Grants Act (Question No. 5665)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry, upon notice:

  1. What percentage of the Government’s financial assistance as (a) grants and (b) loans for research and development are at the disposal of private enterprises with discretion reserved for such enterprises as to the proportion of the assistance they use in research aimed at stimulating demand, increasing consumption and accelerating absolescence.
  2. Will he consult with appropriate State authorities regarding the possibility of providing incentives to industry to reduce artifically stimulated consumption, to retard obsolescence and to encourage waste re-cycling.
Mr Anthony:
CP

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

  1. In so far as grants to industry provided under the Industrial Research and Development Grants Act is concerned eligibility for a grant is confined to those Australian companies which carry out systematic experimentation or analysis in the fields of science, engineering and technology; with the objective of acquiring or applying knowledge that may be of use for devising or developing new or improved products or processes.

To May 1972 the Commonwealth Government has provided $38m to companies for industrial research and development

With the exception of loans that may be made available by an agency of the Commonwealth Banking Corporation the Commonwealth does not provide loans to industrial or mining companies for research and development activities.

  1. There are no arrangements at present to consult with State Authorities regarding the possibility of providing incentives to industry to reduce artificially stimulated consumption; to retard obsolescence and encourage waste recycling.

Uniform Building Code (Question No. 5717)

Mr Hansen:

asked the Minister for Housing, upon notice:

What progress has he made in obtaining State and industry acceptance of a uniform building code as prepared for his predecessor prior to her retirement.

Mr Kevin Cairns:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · LP

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

As I explained in an answer to the honourable member on 11th November 1971, the Tentative

Uniform Home Building Code published by my Department was made available to the Interstate Standing Committee on Uniform Building Regulations late in 1970. I am advised that the Australian Model Uniform Building Code prepared by the Interstate Standing Committee has been in the hands of the relevant State authorities since October 1971. As building regulations are a State responsibility it is now up to each State to decide whether to adopt the code, with or without amendment.

Papua New Guinea Public Service (Question No. 5729)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

External Territories, upon notice:

How many (a) local and (b) overseas officers are there in each division of the Public Service of Papua New Guinea (Hansard, 23rd April 1971, page 2032).

Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question as at 31st March 1972 is as follows:

There is a discrepancy between figures marked (a) and (b) and the corresponding figures given in answer to a similar previous question that the honourable member asked on the 23rd April 1971 (Question 2593). The statistics provided in relation to Question 2593 showed 59 officers as being in the second division who in fact were in the third division. The readjustment does not affect the total. The officers concerned were occupying certain positions which were eligible for second division status but they did not have the qualifications required for that status.

The above statistics do not include 3 local officers who hold statutory appointments which are equivalent to First Division positions in the Public Service.

Papua New Guinea: Local Government Councils (Question No. 5734)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

External Territories, upon notice:

Will he bring up to date the information which his predecessor gave on 22nd April 1971 (Hansard, page 1966) on the number and categories of

indigenous and

expatriate advisers to local government councils in Papua New Guinea.

Mr Peacock:
LP

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

Persons designated Administrative Advisers to local government councils include

22 indigenes and

109 expatriates.

Persons not designated Advisers but having duties wholly concerned with assistance to local government councils, including finance officers, assistant finance officers, local government officers, local government assistants and patrol officers, total

54 indigenes and

45 expatriates.

In addition there are 47 specialist advisers (11 indigenes and 36 expatriates) in the following fields -

Rural Reconstruction Scheme (Question No. 5950)

Mr Kennedy:

asked the Minister for

Primary Industry, upon notice:

What are the (a) numbers and (b) percentages of the processed applications that have been (i) lodged, (ii) approved and (iii) rejected for assistance to date under the Rural Reconstruction Scheme in (A) each State and Territory and (B) the Commonwealth for (1) debt reconstruction, (II) farm build up assistance and (III) both types of aid at the levels (1) $1 to $500, (2) $501 to $1,000, (3) $1,001 to $5,000, (4) $5,001 to $10,000, (5) $10,001 to $25,000, (6) $25,001 to $50,000, (7) $50,001 to $100,000, (8) $100,001 to $250,000, (9) $250,001 to $500,000 and (10) $500,001 and above.

Mr Sinclair:
CP

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

Information as to the numbers and percentages of applications received, accepted, and rejected for assistance under the debt reconstruction provisions and the farm buildup provisions of the Rural Reconstruction Scheme in respect of each State and the Commonwealth has already been provided to the honourable member for the latest available month in my reply to Question No. 5816.

Information on the numbers of applications falling into various levels of assistance is not maintained. If such information becomes available a further reply will be made.

Papua New Guinea: Leases (Question No. 5754)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

External Territories, upon notice:

  1. How many leases were granted in 1971 for-

    1. commercial,
    2. light industrial,
    3. heavy industrial and
    4. high covenant residential purpose in -
    1. Port Moresby,
    2. Lae,
    3. Rabaul,

    4. Madang and

    5. other gazetted towns.

  2. How many leases were granted in each case to-

    1. expatriates and
    2. indigenes. (Hansard, 6th April 1971, page 1527)
Mr Peacock:
LP

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

The matter referred to is one which falls within the authority of the Minister for Lands and Environment in the Papua New Guinea House of Assembly. The Minister has provided the following information.

and (2) (a) Commercial-

Port Moresby- Expatriates one, Indigenes 3. One lease held by an expatriate and an indigene as tenants in common.

Lae- Nil

Rabaul- Nil Madang - Nil

Other gazetted towns- Expatriates 24,

Indigenes 30.

  1. Light Industrial

Port Moresby- Expatriates 4, Indigenes nil.

Lae - Expatriates 19, Indigenes one.

Rabaul and Madang - Nil

Other Centres- Expatriates 23, Indigenes nil.

  1. Heavy Industrial

Port Moresby- Expatriates one, Indigenes nil.

Lae - Expatriates 3, Indigenes nil.

Rabaul and Madang nil

Other Centres - Expatriates 6, Indigenes nil.

  1. Residence, high covenant

Port Moresby - Expatriates 25, Indigenes one

Lae - Expatriates 33, Indigenes nil.

Rabaul- Nil

Madang - Expatriates 4, Indigenes nil

Other Centres- Expatriates 77, Indigenes 10.

It is relevant that, in accordance with policy, a large number of advertisements now include a stipulation that applications be received from indigenous people only. Alternatively it is stipulated that preference will be given to applications from companies containing or undertaking to contain a significant amount of indigenous equity.

Papua New Guinea: Industrial Tribunals and Awards (Question No. 5756)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

External Territories, upon notice:

Will he consolidate and bring up to date the information which his predecessor gave on industrial tribunals and awards in Papua New Guinea (Hansard, 7th April 1970, page 770 and 20th April 1971, page 1731).

Mr Peacock:
LP

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

The information which my predecessor gave on industrial tribunals and awards in Papua New Guinea (which appeared in Hansard of 7th April 1970 at page 770 and 20th April 1971 at page 1731) has been consolidated and brought up to date for the period 1st January 1965 to 25th May 1972 and is as shown in the following:

(a) No industrial councils have functioned.

Three Boards of Inquiry were appointed.

Five Arbitration Tribunals were appointed under the Industrial Relations Ordinance. In addition a Public Service Conciliation and Arbitration Tribunal was established in 1969 to replace the Public Service Arbitration appointed under the Arbitration (Public Service) Ordinance 1952-68.

The following table gives information on the date of establishment and membership of the boards of inquiry and arbitration tribunals:

1971

  1. Vanimo General Employment Award, 1971
  2. Kikori Sawmilling and Timber Industry Award, 1971
  3. Air Hostesses (Ansett Airlines of Papua and New Guinea) Award, 1971
  4. Naval Civilian Workers’ (Lombrum) Award, 1971
  5. General Employment (Amending) Award, 1971
  6. Samarai-Alotau Stevedoring Award, 1971
  7. Rabaul Stevedoring Award, 1971
  8. Kerema General Employment Award, 1971
  9. Bwagaoia General Employment Award 1971
  10. Samarai-Alotau General Employment Award, 1971
  11. South Pacific Post Pty Ltd (Printing Industry) Award, 1971
  12. Milne Bay District Shipping Award, 1971
  13. Port Moresby General Employment Award, 1971
  14. Port Moresby Building and Construction Industry Award, 1971
  15. Port Moresby Waterside Workers’ Award, 1971
  16. Cape Rodney Sawmilling and Tiimber Industry Award, 1971
  17. Air Pilots (Aerial Tours Pty Ltd) Awards, 1971

1972

  1. Kimbo Bay Stevedoring Award, 1972
  2. Air Pilots (Macair Charters Pty Ltd) Award, 1972
  3. Lae Stevedoring Award, 1972
  4. Papua and New Guinea Overseas Seamen’s Award, 1971

  5. Papua New Guinea Overseas Seamen’s Award (Liquified Gas Carriers Pty Ltd), 1972

    1. (a) No awards have been disallowed.
    1. Fifteen awards have been declared to be Common Rules by the Administrator-in-Council.

These are:

Kavieng Urban Cash Wage Award, 1965

Port Moresby Urban Cash Wage Award, 1965

Lae Urban Cash Wage Award, 1965

Rabaul General Employment Award, 1969

Madang General Employment Award, . 1969

Goroka General Employment Award, 1969

MtHagen General Employment Award, 1970

Lae General Employment Award, 1970

Samarai-Alotau General Employment Award, 1970

Kavieng General Employment Award, 1969

Lae Stevedoring Award, 1970

Milne Bay District Shipping Award, 1970

Port Moresby General Employment Award, 1970

Kavieng General Employment Award, 1970

Lorengau General Employment Award, 1970.

National Health Act (Question No. 4946)

Mr Keogh:
BOWMAN, QUEENSLAND

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

  1. What amount was paid by the Commonwealth to Queensland (a) under the ‘National Health Act as subsidies for both insured and uninsured occupied beds in public wards in

Queensland public hospitals during 1969-70 and (b) under the amended National Health Act as a result of the requirement to pay a full $2 subsidy on all occupied beds during 1970-71.

  1. What is the estimated difference between the amount paid under the amended Act during 1970-71 and the amount which would have been paid if the amendment had not been made.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. (a) During 1969-70 there were three rates of Commonwealth hospital benefits paid on behalf of patients who received treatment in free public ward beds of public hospitals in Queensland.

First, a benefit of $2.00 a day was paid for insured patients direct to the hospitals concerned by the hospital benefits funds. A separate figure of the expenditure involved with this benefit for public hospitals is not available in respect of 1969-70. However, $666,642 was expended in respect of insured patients occupying free beds in both public and private hospitals. It can be assumed that the greater proportion of this expenditure was in respect of public hospitals.

Second, a benefit of $5.00 a day was paid for pensioner patients who were enrolled in the Pensioner Medical Service.Expenditure of $4,132,574 was involved with this benefit.

Third, a benefit of 80 cents a day was paid for the remaining uninsured patients who were not enrolled in the Pensioner Medical Service. A separate expenditure figure in respect of uninsured patients treated in free public ward beds is not available for 1969-70. However, the expenditure during 1969-70 for uninsured patients treated in public, intermediate and private ward beds was $764,009.

  1. On 1st July 1970, as a result of an amendment to the NationalHealth Act, a Commonwealth hospital benefit at the rate of $2.00 a day was introduced in respect of all non-pensioner patients, whether insured or uninsured, receiving free treatment in approved hospitals. Insofar as patients occupying free public ward beds are concerned, this benefit replaced the benefits outlined above in respect of insured patients treated in free public ward beds and uninsured patients.

Total Commonwealth expenditure in 1970-71 by way of the new benefit introduced on 1st July 1970, in respect of non-pensioner patients occupying free public ward beds in public hospitals was $2,188,580.

  1. $988,543.

Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (Question No. 4524)

Mr Hayden:

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

  1. What was the cost to the Commonwealth of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme in each of the last 10 years.
  2. What was the (a) increased cost and (b) increased cost expressed as a percentage in each year compared with the preceding year.
  3. Of the increased cost in each year, what was the (a) amount and (b) percentage due to (i) increased population, (ii) new items added to the Scheme, (iii) relaxation of prescribing arrangements and (iv) any abnormal seasonal additional costs such as upsurge in winter compounding.
  4. What was the Commonwealth expenditure in each year when the cost of items mentioned in part (3) of the question is subtracted from the total in part (1).
  5. What was the (a) increased amount and (b) percentage increase in Commonwealth expenditure in each year when the subtraction in part (4) is carried out, using as the base the amount of Commonwealth expenditure for the preceding year as detailed in part (2) of the question.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. The cost to the Commonwealth of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme in each of the last ten years was -

(3),(4) and (5) Information sought in (3), (4) and (5) of the question is not available in the form requested for the following reasons:

  1. The cost of benefit drugs provided through public hospitals and miscellaneous services is re-imbursed to the appropriate authorities on a basis which does not require a record to be kept of the costs of separate drugs or prescription volume. It is therefore not practicable, to assess increased cost, in each year due to (i) increased population (ii) new items added to the scheme and (iii) relaxation of prescribing arrangements under this section of Commonwealth expenditure.
  2. Changes in the schedules of benefits, including the addition of new items and relaxation of prescribing arrangements, are introduced at varying stages during each financial year. The effect of such changes, in the year of introduction is therefore not a true reflection of the overall impact on costs. Records of changes in the schedule of benefits have been maintained on a total cost basis, including the patient contribution and not on a basis of Commonwealth expenditure.
  3. Changes in the schedule of benefits necessary to provide a service aligned with modern developments in the field of medicine have made it impracticable to assess separately, with an acceptable degree of accuracy, the effect of heavy prescribing, arising from abnormally severe seasonal conditions.

Although records are not available which would enable provision of answers in the precise form requested, the following tables contain closely related information. The tables cover prescription benefits supplied by approved pharmacies, doctors and private hospitals and do not include benefits provided in public hospitals and through miscellaneous services.

National Health Act (Question No. 4960)

Dr Klugman:

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

  1. How many medical practitioners in each (a) State and (b) Territory of the Commonwealth have been accepted as (i) specialists and (ii) physicians for the purpose of medical benefit refunds under the National Health Act
  2. How many of the (a) specialists and (b) physicians so accepted practise also as general practitioners. <3) What proportion of accounts rendered by medical practitioners in this dual classification are rendered at the (a) specialist and (b) general practitioner rate.
  3. If the information sought in parts (2) and (3) is not available to the Department of Health, will the Minister take urgent action to obtain it.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. The number of medical practitioners recognised as specialists and consultant physicians for the purposes of the National Health Act as at 31st December 1971 is as follows:
  1. (a) The National Health Act provides for the recognition of specialists solely for the purposes of payment for referred patients of higher rates of benefits. The Act provides that recognition shall be determined having regard to a medical practitioner’s ‘qualifications, experience and standing in the medical profession and the nature of his practice’. The question of whether a medical practitioner is practising full-time or part-time in his speciality is not an essential factor in the consideration of whether or not he is granted recognition as a specialist.

Furthermore, the Act provides for the automatic recognition of those medical practitioners registered as specialists under a law of a State. The criteria adopted by the State authorities for the registration of specialists vary and, as is the case with the Commonwealth, part-time or full-time practise in a particular speciality is not an essential factor in the registration.

Accordingly, information as to the number of recognised specialists who also practise as general practitioners is not available.

  1. The position in regard to consultant physicians differs from that of specialist in that only the National Health Act provides for the recognition of medical practitioners as consultant physicians and recognition is granted on the basis of exclusive engagement in the practise of a speciality of internal medicine. The number of medical practitioners recognised as consultant physicians is set out in ‘(1) (a) (ii) and (1) (b) (ii) above. (3 This information is not available.

    1. No. In view of (2) above it is not practical to obtain this information.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (Question No. 4980)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for Education and Science, upon notice:

What steps, if any, have been taken since Australia became a member of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in June 1971 for the organisation to review educational policy in Australia as it has already done in Sweden, Ireland, the Netherlands, Austria, France, Italy, the United States of America and West Germany and as it is at present doing in Belgium, Canada and Turkey.

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

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

No steps have yet been taken for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development to review educational policy in Australia. Preparation for reviews has begun in Austria, Belgium, Canada, Turkey and the United Kingdom. On the average, less than two reviews have been completed each year, and the present review procedure is currently being reassessed within the Organisation.

At this early stage of Australian membership of the Organisation, Australian education authorities are engaged in the process of gaining familiarity with the Organisation’s varied activities in education and in determining the areas in which Australian participation would be most valuable. Until such over-all assessments are made and priorities established, and any new forms of review established as a result of the current discussions within the Organisation are known, it would be premature for a decision to be made on the question of Australian participation in the programme of country educational policy reviews.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (Question No. 4981)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Education and Science, upon notice:

What steps, if any, have been taken since Australia became a member of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in June 1971 for the Organisation to review national science policy in Australia as it has already done in Sweden, Greece, Belgium, France, Britain, West Germany, Japan, the United States of America, Italy and Canada and as it is at present doing in Ireland and the Netherlands.

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

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

The OECD has recently concluded an examination of the directions that its future activities should take in relation to science and technology in Member countries. The Organisation is now planning to give greater emphasis to studies of selected aspects of science and technology which are of mutual interest and importance to a group of its Member countries. It appears that less emphasis will be given in future to studying in isolation the scientific and technological situation in individual Member countries. The activities of the OECD in relation to science and technology are being keptunder review. Continuing assessment will be made of their relevance and expected value to the development of science and technology in Australia.

Cigarette Smoking (Question No. 5022)

Mr Hayden:

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

  1. Did the Minister state in reply to question No. 3790 (Hansard, 9th November 1971, page 3202) that the preliminary findings of Professor Ford’s survey support medical evidence accepted by the Government that cigarette smoking has a causal relationship with carcinoma of the lung.
  2. What is the mortality rate from carcinoma of the lung and the degree to which this is believed due to cigarette smoking.
  3. Is there evidence accepted by the Department of Health suggesting that the incidence of carcinoma of the lung is higher among smokers man non-smokers; if so, what are the comparative rates.
  4. Is it accepted that carcinoma of the lung is a disabling disease causing direct economic cost through lost productivity as a result of illness as well as making demands on expensive health services, and are there also indirect social costs caused by the distress, disorganisation and other tensions imposed on families of persons affected by terminal carcinoma of the lung.
  5. Is it a fact that life insurance premium rates are higher because of the higher incidence of mortality among smokers as a result of this habit and because of the practice of insurance companies of not discriminating between smokers and non-smokers in striking premium rates charged.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. Yes.
  2. In Australia, 3,244 persons died from lung cancer in 1970. This represents a mortality rate of 25.9 deaths per 100,000 of mean population. It is not possible to assess the influence of smoking on this mortality rate with any certainty.
  3. The Department of Health is aware of the content of authoritative reports such as those of the Royal College of Physicians of London and the United States Surgeon-General, and the relevant recommendations of the World Health Organisation.

In a report to the Twenty-Third World Health Assembly in 1970 the main relationships revealed by prospective studies between smoking habits and mortality from all causes were presented. This report stated that the risk of developing lung cancer in heavy smokers is 15-30 times greater than in non-smokers. The risk of lung cancer was stated to increase directly in relation to the number of cigarettes smoked.

  1. Yes.
  2. This is a matter for insurance companies and I am unable to say whether premiums are affected by the factors mentioned.

Medical and Hospital Benefits Funds (Question No. 5023)

Mr Hayden:

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

  1. What percentage of those (a) medical and (b) hospital funds which provide for the election of contributor representatives have, in fact, an elected contributor representative on their governing bodies (Hansard, 8th September 1971, page 977).
  2. Was the election by all fund members in the area concerned in each case; if not, what other method was used.
  3. What percentage of open funds provides for the election of contributor representatives to their governing bodies.
  4. What percentage of the 3 largest open funds in each State makes this provision and has the provision been fulfilled; if so, in what way.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. (a) Medical 97 per cent;

    1. Hospital 97 per cent.
  2. It is assumed the honourable member wishes to establish whether contributors are given the opportunity to vote for contributor representatives. If so, the answer is yes.
  3. Medical 82 per cent; Hospital 74 per cent.
  4. New South Wales- 331/3 per cent

The one organisation represented by this percentage is a friendly society fund, the procedure for which is referred to in (2) above.

Victoria - 100 per cent

Two organisations are friendly society funds. The remaining organisation at present has 3 contributor representatives in its Governing body of 11.

Both organisations are friendly society funds; see (2) above.

South Australia - 662/3 per cent

Both organisations are friendly society funds and one of these makes specific provision in its constitution for the election of contributor representatives.

Western Australia -662/3 per cent

One organisation is a friendly society fund. The remaining fund fulfils the provision by the fact that members of the Management Committee are proposed and seconded by contributors and elected by ballot of contributors present at the Annual General Meeting.

Tasmania - Nil

One organisation in Tasmania observes the practice whereby 3 directors retire each year and the vacancies are filled by election at the annual general meeting of contributors. However, this is not specifically provided for in its constitution. (Question No. 5024)

Mr Hayden:

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

Canthe Minister give figures for (a) adults, (b) teenagers and (c) the community generally in respect of the incidence of each of the main forms of venereal disease in (i) each State and Territory and (ii) the Commonwealth for the years 1950, 1960 and 1970.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. and (b) Figures are not available for the incidence in States and Territories of the main forms of venereal disease, within various age groups.
  2. For the community generally, the figures in respect of syphilis and gonorrhoea, which are the main forms of venereal disease, are as follows:

Alcoholism (Question No. 5058)

Dr Everingham:

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

  1. Has his attention been drawn to statistics on alcoholism in New Zealand, published on page 14 of the A.M.A. Gazette of 2nd December 1971, comparing the economic and social burdens of alcoholism with those of typhoid in an earlier age.
  2. If so, will he provide similar statistics for Australia.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. Yes.
  2. While information specifically similar is not available for Australia, the following related informationcould be of interest to the honourable member.

In a comprehensive survey on alcoholism presented to the 29th International Congress on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence at Sydney in 1970, research participants stated that, in Australia, within the age group 15 years and over, approximately 80 per cent of men, and 70 per cent of women drink alcoholic beverages. It further showed that, within the same age group, 5 per cent of men and 1 per cent of women were estimated to be alcoholics.

In an article published in 1968 in the October issue of the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, an eminent research sociologist referred to New South Wales and stated that, during 1967, admissions and re-admissions for alcoholism to psychiatric centres and hospitals amounted to 21.7 per cent of all psychiatric admissions.

A substantial number of alcoholics are to be found amongst the patients of general hospitals. Some expert observers in surveys conducted in Australia during the last 10 years have judged that between 10 per cent and 14 per cent of adult medical admissions to general and private hospitals would have a basic alcoholic problem.

The Aust.& N.Z. Journal of Sociology - October 1968 - article by socioligist M/s Margaret Sargent.

Article in Medical Journal of Australia 1967 by

Drs Rankin, Santamaria and O’Day.

Medical and Hospital Benefits Funds (Question No. 5072)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice: (,1) What are the names of the 2 (a) medical and (b) hospital benefits organisations in each State with the greatest membership.

  1. Which of these organisations make provision in their constitutions for the election of contributor representatives to their governing bodies.
  2. In each of the organisations what is the number of (a) people and (b) elected contributor representatives on their governing body.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. The 2 medical and hospital benefits organisations with the largest memberships in each State are:

New South Wales-

Medical Benefits Fund of Australia Limited

The Hospitals Contribution Fund of Australia

Victoria -

The Hospital Benefits Association of Victoria

The Manchester Unity Independent Order of Oddfellows*

Queensland -

Medical Benefits Fund of Australia Limited

The Manchester Unity Independent Order of Oddfellows*

South Australia -

The Mutual Hospital Association Limited National Health Services Association*

Western Australia -

The Hospital Benefit Fund of Western Australia Incorporated

Friendly Societies Health Services*

Tasmania -

Medical Benefits Fund of Australia Limited

St Luke’s Medical and Hospital Benefits Association. (* Friendly Society funds).

  1. The constitutions of the Hospital Benefits Association of Victoria and the National Health Services Association in South Australia make specific provision for the election of contributor representatives to their governing bodies.

In respect of the Medical Benefits Fund of Australia Limited, the Articles of Association do not provide for the election of contributor representatives but do provide for the appointment of contributory members as contributors’ representatives on its Council (the governing body). This Council comprises 24 persons, 12 of whom are contributors’ representatives.

It is the practice of the St Lukes Medical and Hospital Benefits Association that 3 Directors retire each year and their vacancies are filled by election at the annual general meeting of contributors. However, this is not specifically provided for in its Constitution.

As regards friendly societies, the general procedure followed for the election of office bearers ensures contributor representatives can be elected. Although in friendly societies, contributors to medical and/or hospital funds need not become members of a lodge or branch of the society, usually all members of a society are contributors to the medical and hospital Funds.

The usual procedure for election of office bearers to friendly societies is that members of each branch or lodge elect a delegate or delegates to the annual meeting and the annual meeting elects the office bearers who form the governing bodies of the societies.

Agreement relating to Refugee Seamen (Question No. 5253)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Foreign Affairs, upon notice:

  1. What consideration has Australia given to acceding to the Agreement relating to refugee seamen which was done at The Hague on 23rd November 1957 and came into force on 27th December 1961.
  2. To what territories in the Indian and Pacific Oceans did Britain and France extend the agreement.
Mr N H Bowen:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

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

  1. The question of Australia’s acceding to the Agreement relating to refugee seamen is still under consideration. The answer given on 18th August 1971 by Senator Wright to Question No. 1178 asked by Senator Mulvihill (Hansard, Senate, page 70) is relevant. In the adjournment debate, on 26th October 1971 (Hansard, Senate, page 1467) Senator Wright made further reference to this matter. It has not yet been possible to resolve the difficulty concerning the application of the agreement to Papua New Guinea.
  2. Britain has extended the agreement to the following territories in the Indian and Pacific Oceans:

Fiji (now independent)

Gilbert and Ellice Islands

Mauritius (now independent)

British Solomon Islands Protectorate

Seychelles Islands

France has made no declaration of the applicability of the Refugee Seamen’s Agreement to its overseas territories.

General Practitioners (Question No. 5260)

Dr Klugman:

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

What was the percentage of general practitioner (a) consultations and (b) home visits in (i) each State and (ii) the Commonwealth charged for at or below the common fee (A) during the quarter ended 31st December 1970 and (B) during the latest quarter for which figures are available.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. The percentages of general practitioner sur gery consultations and home visits, by States, for which the most common fee or less was charged during the quarters ended 31st December 1970 and 31st December 1971 (the latest quarter for which figures are available) are shown in the table hereunder. These figures are based on surveys of claims processed by the principal registered medical benefit organisations in each State during the particular quarters.
  1. The surveys are undertaken on a State basis and comparable figures for the Commonwealth are not available.

General Practitioners (Question No. 5294)

Mr Berinson:

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

How many general practitioner services subject to National Health Scheme rebate were on account of (a) surgery consultations and (b) home visits in (i) die Commonwealth and (ii) each State and Territory in the latest 12 months for which figures are available.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

The numbers of general practitioner surgery consultations and home visits for which Commonwealth and/ or Fund benefits were paid for the year ended 31st December 1971, are as follows:

The total number of services is based on information supplied by all registered medical benefit organisations, and the allocation between surgery consultations and home visits has been derived from information submitted by the principal organisations in each State.

Health Insurance Scheme (Question No. 5296)

Mr Kennedy:

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

  1. ls it a fact that free outpatient treatment in the Australian Capital Territory is provided according to a means test.
  2. If so, what are the details of the means test.
  3. Under the subsidised health insurance scheme, would a man supporting a wife and 6 children and paying rent or housing repayments at the rate of $10 a week from a wage of $72 a week be excluded from any benefits of the scheme, but be entitled to free public hospital outpatient treatment in the A.CT.
  4. If so, what is the basis on which the subsidised health insurance scheme means test has been constructed and why is it at sharp variance with the means test establishing eligibility for free outpatient treatment in the Canberra Hospital.
  5. Will the Minister study the comparatively liberal means test applied by State Governments in determining eligibility for free treatment in (a) an outpatients clinic and (b) a public ward of a State public hospital as set out in the answer to question No. 4356 (Hansard, 7th March 1972, pages 658-60).
  6. Has his attention been drawn to figures given by the Treasurer in answer to Question No. 4162 (Hansard, 7th December 1971, page 4254) which show that only about 3,100 or 0.2 per cent of the nation’s adult male wage earners were earning in May 1971 the weekly income which qualifies a family for free health insuance under the subsidised Health benefits scheme.
  7. If the Minister is concerned at the small number of low income families who have applied for enrolment in the subsidised health benefits scheme, will he take steps to liberalise the means test which is now denying assistance to tens of thousands of families.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. Yes.

  2. A person, normally resident in the Australian Capital Territory, and his dependants are entitled to free outpatient treatment at the Canberra Hospital if the balance of the person’s gross income remaining after making certain deductions is equal to or less than a prescribed wage. Deductions allowable are:

    1. for dependants - the amounts specified in sub-section (2) of section 82B of the Income Tax Assessment Act, 1936-1971; and
    2. for house rent or repayment - the amount to be actual and not exceeding the average rent for government-owned rental dwellings as advised by the A.CT. Assistant Secretary (Housing), Department of the Interior.

Should a person not qualify under these provisions he may still be considered having regard to the following circumstances:

  1. periods of any recent hospitalisation and cost of treatment;
  2. illness among other members of the family; and costs of treatment; and
  3. unemployment or loss of wages through illness.

These conditions do not extend to dental treatment provided at the Hospital.

  1. Yes.
  2. The income limit applying to low income families under the Subsidised Health Benefits Plan, in respect of free health insurance, is based on the average minimum wage payable under Commonweaalth awards in the various States. In determining eligibility for free health insurance, no deductions are allowed from the gross weekly income amount.

With regard to assessing eligibility for free outpatient treatment at Canberra Hospital, certain deductions, as described earlier in this answer, are made from a person’s gross income to determine a net figure. If this figure is equal to or less than the wage prescribed for a ‘Labourer not otherwise specified’, employed under the Miscellaneous Workers (ACT.) Award 1968, the person involved will qualify for the full outpatient treatment.

  1. I am aware of the means test referred to.
  2. Yes.
  3. The question of varying the income tests applicable to applicants for subsidised health benefits will be reviewed by the Government at the appropriate time.

National Health Service (Question No, 5342)

Dr Everingham:

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

  1. What was the estimated average payment per family by the Commonwealth for (a) drugs for (i) social service pensioners, (ii) persons paying a reduced fee for National Health Service prescriptions and (iii) other persons on National Health Service prescriptions, (b) hospital costs including dispensing for (i) standard bed patients and (ii) sub-intermediate, intermediate and private bed patients and (c) private medical fees for (i) social service pensioners and (ii) others in the latest year for which figures are available.
  2. What percentage do these payments represent of estimated costs for these goods and services to (a) social service pensioners and their families and (b) the other relevant categories of families in each case.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

The Department of Health does not record these details on a family unit basis, and I am therefore unable to provide the information requested.

Drug Evaluation Committee (Question No. 5346)

Dr Klugman:

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

  1. Has the Minister’s attention been drawn to a statement by Dr William McBride deploring the absence of a medical statistician and an expert on congenital malformations from the Drug Evaluation Committee.
  2. Will he make the appropriate additions to the Committee.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. I understand that a statement was made by Dr W. G. McBride regarding the absence of an epidemiologist and an expert on congenital malformations on the Australian Drug Evaluation Committee.
  2. Whilst the formal membership of the Committee does not include such experts, the Committee is empowered to co-opt additional experts in these or any other disciplines, when this is necessary for the performance of its functions.

The honourable member may be interested to know that the Minister recently approved the establishment of a Sub-Committee to investigate and advise him through the Australian Drug Evaluation Committee on all matters relating to drug-associated congenital abnormalities.

The proposed membership of the Congenital Abnormalities Sub-Committee will include a physician, a pharmacologist, a paediatrician, an obstetrician, a teratologist and an epidemiologist.

Physical Education (Question No. 5380)

Mr Hansen:

asked the Minister for Edu cation and Science, upon notice:

  1. Has his attention been drawn to the excellent booklets on a wide range of sports provided by the New Zealand Government for use by teachers and coaches.
  2. If so, will he consider making similar material available to regional national fitness committees and schools for the purpose of improving fitness standards of young Australians.
Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

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

  1. Yes.
  2. I have been advised that some Physical Education Branches of State Education Departments do produce, for use in schools, similar booklets for some sports.

The provision of school text-books is, of course, a matter for the individual State Education Departments. However, 1 have arranged for my Department to advise the State Education Departments of these booklets which, I understand, are available on sale from the Australian Government Publishing Service Book Centres. I have also arranged for them to be brought to the notice of the Regional National Fitness Committees.

Psychiatric Hospital Fees (Question No. 5424)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister repre senting the Minister for Health, upon notice: (.1) Which States charge fees to patients in psychiatric hospitals.

  1. When did each of the States concerned first introduce these charges.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. and (2)-

    1. Fees have been charged to patients admitted ta mental hospitals in New South Wales since September, 1956. The level of fees payable is determined by a means test.
    1. No charges are made to patients in mental hospitals in Victoria.
    2. In December 1968, the Mental Health Regulations in Queensland were amended to allow for a ‘maintenance charge for treatment, care and control of a patient accommodated in a section of a special hospital recognised by the Commonwealth Department of Social Services for the purpose of payment of Social Service Benefits.’
    3. South Australia has, since September 1969, charged fees to patients in mental hospitals in that State. The level of fees payable is determined by a means test.
    4. In Western Australia, section 19 of the Mental Health Act 1962-1969 of that State provides that the cost of maintenance and treatment may be recovered from a patient It also provides that these fees, except in certain specified cases, may be waived by the Director of Mental Health. It is understood that, except in those specified cases, fees are normally waived for all patients treated in an approved mental hospital.
    5. No fees are charged to patients in the Royal Derwent Hospital in Tasmania.

Certain rehabilitation ward divisions of mental hospitals may be approved as benevolent homes under the provisions of the Social Services Act. Pensioners in these benevolent homes receive a pension at a rate fixed under Section SO of the Social Services Act. Any balance of the pension is paid to the authorities of the home for the maintenance of the pensioner.

Finance (Question No. 5433)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

What was the amount and percentage of outstanding loans received in interest payment, net of interest paid out, by (a) foreign lenders excluding banks operating in Australia, (b) trading banks in Australia owned overseas, (c) other Australian private trading banks, (d) the Commonwealth Banking Corporation and State banks (e) hire purchase and other fringe banking organisations, (f) private insurance companies in Australia and (g) government insurance companies in Australia in the last year for which figures are available, and in the years 10, 20 and 30 years previously.

Mr Snedden:
LP

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

The Commonwealth Statistician has advised that the specific information requested is not available from data compiled by the Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics. He has, however, advised that information of some relevance is available, and this is set out below in answer to each part of the question:

the amount of interest payable overseas by companies in Australia on loans, advances, deposits, debentures, notes, bank overdrafts, mortgages, etc., was $6m in 1960-61 and $106m in 1970-71. Details of the actual amounts of outstanding loans, etc., to which these interest payments relate are not available. For the year 1970-71, $55m interest was payable on direct investment and $51m on portfolio investment and institutional loans.

and (c) the amounts of ‘net earnings’ of the private trading banks for 1959-60 and 1969-70 were $155m and $374m respectively. These figures expressed as a percentage of outstandings on loans, advances and bills discounted of the private trading banks in those years are 7 per cent and 9 per cent respectively. Details in respect of the Bank of China, Bank of New Zealand and Banque Nationale de Paris are not included is these figures.

Net earnings’ are defined as ‘discount and interest earned, net exchange, commissions and other items (including transfers from contingencies accounts) after deducting interest paid and accrued on deposits, rebate on bills current at balance date, amounts written off assets and losses on realisation of assets and transfers to the credit of contingencies accounts (out of which accounts provisions for all bad and doubtful debts have been made)’. Details of net earnings’ were not collected prior to the introduction of the Banking Act 1959. Separate information for trading banks in Australia owned overseas is not available.

the amounts of ‘net earnings’ of the Commonwealth Banking Corporation and State banks for 1959-60 and 1969-70 were $78m and $213m respectively and the percentage of net earnings to outstandings on loans, advances and bills discounted of the banks was 8 per cent for both years.

no information is available.

and (g) interest receipts of life insurance companies are not collected separately but are included in the item ‘net interest, dividends and rents’ on returns supplied by life insurance business registered under the Life Insurance Act 1945-1965 and returns supplied voluntarily by the State Government Insurance Offices. The amounts of net interest, dividends and rents received by life insurance offices in 1940, 1950, 1960 and 1970 were $19m, $36m, $92m and $307m respectively. These figures expressed as a percentage of loans outstanding to life insurance offices in those years are 11 per cent, 13 per cent, 11 per cent and 21 per cent respectively. Details in respect of government insurance offices are not available separately.

Home Nursing Subsidy Act (Question No. 5434)

Mr DONALD CAMERON:
GRIFFITH, QUEENSLAND · LP

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

  1. What Commonwealth Government subsidies have been paid to individual organisations under the Home Nursing Subsidy Act since its inception in 1956 in the categories of (a) those in existence at the introduction of the Act; (b) those affected by the limitation clause whereby the full Commonwealth Government subsidy has not been paid but only subsidy matching State or local authority grants and (c) those which have commenced since the introduction of the Act
  2. What staff was employed by each organisation as at 30th June of each year since the introduction of the Act.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. and (2) Details of subsidies paid prior to 1962-63 are not readily available. The table hereunder contains details of subsidies paid and numbers of nurses employed for each year commencing in 1962-63. Details of numbers of nurses employed on 30th June each year are not readily available, and the figures contained in column A of the table represent averages of the numbers of nurses employed during the 4 quarters of each yearcommencing in 1962-63.

Doctors: Common Fee (Question No. 5448)

Dr Everingham:

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

  1. Are greater percentages of observance of the most common fee for (a) general practitioner surgery consultations and home visits and (b) other medical services to be found in South Australia and Western Australia as compared with other States.
  2. Will this difference exaggerate the differences among the States in common fee schedules for medical benefit subsidy purposes or will these schedules in the various States approximate each other leading to even greater disparities in observance of common fees among the States.
  3. Will the periodic review of the schedules be influenced by consumer prices and State price fixing legislation which may have also influenced the extent of common fee observance.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. Generally speaking, yes. However, there are some services for which greater levels of observance are recorded in States other than South Australia and Western Australia.
  2. No.
  3. Consumer prices (in index form) are one of various economic and other considerations, which have relevance in the periodic review of fees recommended by the Australian Medical Association to its members and the periodic review of medical benefits by the Government.

Aid to South Pacific Countries (Question No. 5510)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice:

Will he bring up to date the answer on aid to the South Pacific area which his predecessor gave on 7th April 1971 (Hansard, page 1653)7

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

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

The following tables set out aid flows (or as in the case of Britain, all official flows) to the following states and territories of the region:

Papua New Guinea

Fiji - Independent (formerly a British colony).

Tonga - Independent (formerly a British Protected State).

Western Samoa - Independent (formerly a New Zealand Trust Territory.

British Solomon Islands Protectorate and Gilbert and Ellice Islands Colony - British Territories.

New Hebrides - A condominium administered by France and Britain.

Niue and Tokelaus - New Zealand Territories.

Cook Islands - Self-governing (New Zealand continues to be responsible for external affairs and defence).

American Samoa and Guam - American Territories.

Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands - Administered by the United States of America under a Trusteeship agreement with the United Nations.

Education (Question No. 5497)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Education and Science, up on notice:

What has been the nature and outcome of his approach to appropriate authorities, including the States, for further research into the relation between pupil performance and class size. (Hansard, 5th October 1971, page 1855).

Mr MALCOLM FRASER:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

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

On 25th November 1971 I wrote to Mr Fletcher, the Chairman of the Australian Education Council, about the need for research into the relationship between class size and pupil perform ance and suggested that this matter could be considered at the next meeting of the Australian Education Council. The Council met on 25th and 26th May and resolved that, while recognising the need for some further reduction in class size, it would invite the Partridge Committee to consider sponsoring research into questions arising from the relationship between pupil performance and class size.

Local Government Authorities (Question No.5546

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

  1. Can he give information for 1968-69 and subsequent years on revenue, debt charges and percentage of debt charges to revenue in respect to local government authorities in each State (Hansard, 1st April 1971, page 1404).
  2. Can he yet give corresponding information for any year in respect to semi-government authorities.
Mr Snedden:
LP

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

  1. The Commonwealth Statistician has provided the following table in answer to this part of the honourable member’s question. Information for years later than 1968-69 is not available.
  1. Information is not available to answer this part of the honourable member’s question. The only statistics now compiled by the Commonwealth Statistician in respect of semi-government authorities as a group separate from other State government departments and authorities are those shown in the annual Bulletin, ‘Local and Semi-Government Authorities Debt’ (that is, relating to debt outstanding, annual interest liability, new money loan raisings, funds provided for redemption of debt and accumulated sinking fund charges). For purposes of that Bulletin, semi-government authorites are defined as those State government bodies other than local government authorities which have independent borrowing powers and which have in fact exercised these powers in borrowing from the public under the provisions of the Gentlemen’s Agreement.

This is regarded as an adequate definition for the purposes of debt and related statistics, but the Statistician considers that it would not be a satisfactory definition on which to compile other statistics, such as of semi-government revenues and expenditures, for the reason that there are in existence a number of bodies which have not borrowed but which would normally be regarded as semi-government authorities. A satisfactory alternative definition has not been found, the difficulty being to devise adequate criteria for distinguishing between State government departments and similar authorities on the one hand and State semi-government authorities on the other hand.

Figures of semi-government revenue have been supplied in answer to previous questions by the honourable member, but these have not been based on a consistent and otherwise adequate definition of what constitutes a semi-government authority. The Statistician is, therefore, no longer compiling such statistics.

Grants for Science and Library Facilities (Question No. 5554)

Mr Morrison:

asked the Minister for Edu cation and Science, upon notice:

  1. Does his Department require documentary evidence in the form of a report by the school architect and a statement by the school auditor to indicate that grants for science and library facilities have been used for the purposes for which they were intended.
  2. If so, will he make available the reports supplied by all schools which have received grants for science and library facilities.
  3. What arrangements are in force to ensure that these facilities continue to be used for the purpose for which they were intended.
Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

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

  1. Yes, as far as the construction of facilities under either Programme is involved. It is a condition of the offer of a grant to a nongovernment school for a building project that on completion of the project the school will provide the Minister with a report from the architect that the project has been completed to the standard shown on the approved sketch plans, and also a report from the school’s auditor, who should be a qualified accountant not associated with the administration of the school, which certifies the total amount which the school has expended on the building project. The conditions on which offers of grants for science teaching apparatus, library furniture, library equipment and books are made to a non-government school require the school’s auditor to submit a statement showing the items purchased and their prices and to certify that the grant has been applied exclusively to those purchases.
  2. Offers of grants to non-government schools are made separately for science and library building projects, science teaching ‘apparatus, library furniture, library equipment and for books. Architects’ statements in respect of each building project and auditors’ statements in respect of all grants listed above are required. Where grants for other than building projects are spread over more than one year and purchases are likewise spread, a separate auditor’s statement is required in respect of expenditure of each individual grant. The individual statements from architects and auditors provided since the Science and Library Facilities

Programmes began would certainly run into many thousands. My Department does not have the resources to extract these statements. If the honourable member wishes to see the statements from a particular school which has fulfilled the Conditions of grants made to it, and will advise me of its name, I shall arrange for copies of the relevant statements to be sent to him.

  1. As far as possible the future plans of nongovernment schools are taken into account when grants are made. Members of the Commonwealth Advisory Committee on Standards for Science Facilities in Independent Secondary Schools and members of the Commonwealth Secondary Schools Libraries Committee visit all completed projects. No such instances have been reported to my Department of misuse of facilities constructed with Commonwealth assistance.

Meetings of Housing Ministers (Question No. 5557)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for Housing, upon notice:

  1. Where and when have there been meetings of the Housing Ministers since 17th September 1971.
  2. What were the names and portfolios of the Ministers who attended each meeting.
  3. What requests or suggestions were made at each meeting for legislative or administrative action by (a) the Commonwealth; (b) the Territories and (c) the States.
Mr Kevin Cairns:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · LP

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

  1. The Annual Conference of State Housing Ministers was held in Hobart on 7th April 1972. The Commonwealth Minister was invited to attend to hear at first hand the views of the States.
  2. Honourable D. F. Clark, E.D., M.H.A.- Minister for Housing Industrial Development and Sea Fisheries - Tasmania. (Chairman) Honourable S. T. Stephens, M.L.A. - Minister for Housing and Minister for Co-operative Societies - New South Wales.

Honourable E. R. Meagher, M.B.E., E.D., M.P., Minister of Housing, Minister of Forests and Minister for Aboriginal Affairs - Victoria.

Honourable A. M. Hodges, M.L.A. - Minister for Works and Housing - Queensland.

Honourable D. A. Dunstan, Q.C., LL.B., M.P., Premier, Treasurer, Minister of Development and Mines South Australia.

Honourable A. W. Bickerton, M.L.A. - Minister for Housing and Minister for Fuel - Western Australia.

Honourable Kevin Cairns, M.P. - Commonwealth Minister for Housing.

  1. The requests and suggestions made by the State Housing Ministers to the Commonwealth for its consideration are summarised below:

Urban Renewal- The Commonwealth be requested to consider the provision of finance for urban renewal research.

Aged Pensioners - The Commonwealth give consideration to increasing the amount available under the States Grants (Dwellings for Aged Pensioners) Act 1969, extending the Act for a further period, and amending the eligibility requirements of the Act.

Home Savings Grant - The Commonwealth be requested to review its policy in respect of the Home Savings Grant Scheme so as not to exclude houses financed through the State housing authorities.

Aboriginal Housing- The Commonwealth to make additional grants to the States for Aboriginal housing.

Research Committee - A preparatory committee consisting of representatives from all States and one Commonwealth representative be appointed to prepare proposals for a research programme for remission to Commonwealth and State Governments; and that the subject of an Australian Housing Manager’s Institute be part of the studies to be undertaken by the committee.

Metric Conversion - the States agreed with the Commonwealth’s proposal that it contact the appropriate technical officers within the States to formulate ideas as to how this matter can be dealt with, as far as the housing industry is concerned, throughout Australia.

Medical Benefit Rebates: Shepherd Foundation (Question No. 5566)

Dr Klugman:

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

  1. Are patients referred for medical screening to the Shepherd Foundation (Melbourne) by a medical practitioner entitled to rebates from medical benefits organisations; if not, why not.
  2. If so, under what items in the schedule of benefits are they entitled to rebates.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. and (2) The National Health Act provides that Commonwealth medical benefits are payable in respect of medical expenses incurred for medical services specified in the First Schedule to the Act which are rendered by or on behalf of a medical practitioner.

However, under the rules of some medical benefits insurance organisations, a fund medical benefit is only payable where the medical service is rendered by a medical practitioner in private practice.

Accordingly, insured patients receiving such medical services at the Shepherd Foundation are entitled to receive Cammonwealth benefits. The eligibility for payment of fund medical benefits depends on the rules of the particular medical benefits organisation to which the patient contributes.

Medical Benefit Rebates: Medicheck (Question No. 5567)

Dr Klugman:

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

Are patients referred for medical screening to Medicheck (Sydney) by a medical practitioner entitled to rebates from medical benefits organisations; if not, why not.

If so, under what items in the schedule of benefits are they entitled to rebates.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. and (2) The National Health Act provides that Commonwealth medical benefits are payable in respect of medical expenses incurred for medical services specified in the First Schedule to the Act which are rendered by or on behalf of a medical practitioner.

However, under the rules of some medical benefits insurance organisations, a fund medical benefit is only payable where the medical service is rendered by a medical practitioner in private practice.

Accordingly, insured patients receiving such medical services at the Medicheck Centre are entitled to receive Commonwealth benefits. The eligibility for payment of fund medical benefits depends on the rules of the particular medical benefits organisation to which the patient contributes.

Qualified Optometrists (Question No. 5589)

Mr Stewart:

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

How many legally qualified optometrists are there in (a) Australia, and (b) each State.

This information is not available in the Department of Health.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

In Australia, registers of legally qualified optometrists are maintained by the respective States and mainland Territories. The registers could overstate the actual numbers of legally qualified optometrists in Australia or in a particular State or Territory for reasons such as the registration of one person in more than one State.

At the dates indicated the number of names shown on the registers were as follows:

Medical Benefits Funds: Benefits for Spectacles (Question No. 5592)

Mr Stewart:

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

Which medical benefit funds in Australia pay fund benefits for spectacles prescribed by (a) ophthalmologists only, (b) optometrists only and (c) both ophthalmologists and optometrists.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. The medical benefits organisations which pay benefits for spectacles prescribed by ophthalmologists only are:

New South Wales-

Australasian Holy Catholic Guild of St Mary and St Joseph Registered Friendly Benefit Society.

Hibernian Australasian Catholic Benefit Society of New South Wales.

Hospitals Contribution Fund of Australia.

*Local Government Employees’ Medical and Hospital Club.

Mechanics’ Medical Assurance Scheme.

Medical Benefits Fund of Australia Limited.

M.M. Hospital* and Medical Club.

Victoria-

Latrobe Valley Hospitals and Health Services Association.

Queensland -

Medical Benefits Fund of Australia Limited.

Western Australia -

Hospital Benefit Fund of Western Australia Incorporated.

Tasmania-

Friendly Health Services.

Medical Benefits Fund of Australia Limited.

Tasmanian Government Insurance Office Medical Benefits Plan.

  1. No medical benefits organisations specify that benefits are to be paid only when spectacles are prescribed by optometrists.
  2. The medical benefits organisations which pay benefits for spectacles irrespective of whether they are prescribed by ophthalmologists or optometrists are:

New South Wales; -

*Australian Chilling and Freezing Co. Limited Medical Benefit Scheme.

*Australasian Conference Association Limited.

*Commercial Banking Company Health Society.

*Commonwealth Bank Health Society.

*E.R. & S. Hospital and Medical Club.

Grand United Order of Odd Fellows, Friendly Society of New South Wales.

Hunter Medical Benefit Fund Limited.

Independent Order of Odd Fellows of the

State of New South Wales.

Manchester Unity Independent Order of Odd Fellows, Friendly Society, in New South Wales.

Newcastle Industrial Benefits Limited.

New South Wales District No. 85, Independent Order of Rechabites, Salford Unity, Friendly Society.

*New South Wales Teachers’ Federation Health Society.

Phoenix Welfare Association Limited.

Post Office Mutual Benefit Society of New South Wales.

Protestant Alliance Friendly Society of Australasia Grand Council of New South Wales.

*Reserve Bank Health Society.

South Coast Medical Benefits Fund.

Store Hospital and Medical Fund.

United Ancient Order of Druids Registered Friendly Society, Grand Lodge of New South Wales.

Western District Medical Benefits Fund.

Victoria-

Ancient Order of Foresters in Victoria Friendly Society.

Army Health Benefits Society.

Australian Natives’ Association.

Geelong Medical and Hospital Benefits Asociation.

Grand United Hospital Benefit Society (Incorporating The Grand United Order of Odd Fellows) in Victoria Friendly Society.

Hibernian Australasian Catholic Benefit Society. Victoria District No. 1.

Independent Order of Odd Fellows of Victoria.

Irish National Foresters’ Benefit Society.

Manchester Unity Independent Order of Odd Fellows in Victoria.

Naval Health Benefits Society.

Protestant Alliance Friendly Society of Australasia Grand Council of Victoria.

United Ancient Order of Druids.

Victoria District Independent Order of Rechabites Friendly Society.

Queensland-

Ancient Order of Foresters Friendly Society in Queensland.

Grand United Order of Odd Fellows Friendly Society.

Hibernian Australasian Catholic Benefit Society, Queensland District No. 5.

Protestant Alliance Friendly Society of Australasia, in Queensland (The Grand Council).

Queensland Branch of the Manchester Unity Independent Order of Odd Fellows Friendly Society.

Queensland District, No. 87, Independent Order of Rechabites, Friendly Society.

*Queensland Teachers’ Union Health Society. South Australia -

Manchester Unity Independent Order of Odd Fellows, Friendly Society in South Australia.

Tasmania -

*Associated Pulp and Paper Makers’ Council Medical Benefits Fund.

*Coats Patons Employees’ Medical Benefit Association.

*Electrolytic Zinc Employees’ Medical Union.

*Queenstown Medical Union Medical Benefits Fund.

*Rosebery Hospital and Medical Benefits Society.

St Luke’s Medical and Hospital Benefits Association.

United Ancient Order of Druids Grand Lodge of Tasmania.

*The benefits provided by these organisations are financed from separate funds and not within the range of services covered by the National Health Act. Members who contribute to these separate funds pay extra contributions over and above the usual contributions for medical and/or hospital benefits.

Number of Medical Practitioners Graduating in Australia (Question No. 5597)

Mr Calwell:

asked the Minister represent ing the Minister for Health, upon notice:

  1. Can the Minister say whether Russia graduates 30,000 fully qualified medical practitioners a year which is equivalent to one doctor for every 7,800 people in the USSR.
  2. Is it a fact that Australia is graduating only 1,000 fully qualified medical practitioners a year which is equivalent to one doctor for every 13,000 people in Australia.
  3. If so, can he indicate any reasons why Australia lags so far behind the USSR in graduating medical practitioners.
  4. Can he say whether the Australian Medical Association believes that Australia is producing (a) too many doctors or (b) not enough doctors, or whether it supports a plan to graduate just enough medical practitioners annually so as to preserve the present low ratio between doctors and patients as a result of which doctors from India and Pakistan are being imported to fill our current need for more medical practitioners.
  5. Have the Government or the universities in the various States any plans to facilitate the training of at least 1,000 more medical graduates a year.
  6. Why was this problem not given greater priority at least 10 years ago.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. Detailed information is not available concerning the number of fully qualified medical practitioners graduating yearly in the USSR. It is noted, however, that a report on ‘Post graduate Education for Medical Personnel in the USSR’, published by the World Health Organisation in 1970, indicated that over 30,000 doctors, stomatologists and pharmacists graduate each year in the USSR.
  2. In 1971, 893 students graduated as MB.BS from medical schools in Australia.
  3. See (1) and (2) above. The need for newly graduated medical practitioners is dependent on a number of factors such as the current availability of manpower, not only in the medical, but in the paramedical professions; the health facilities available; morbidity in the population; and the system of delivering health care. It is therefore extremely difficult to make valid international comparisons without taking these factors into account.
  4. I am not aware of an official policy of the Australian Medical Association concerning the level of output from medical schools.
  5. and (6) A number of universities have recently increased or propose to increase their intake of medical students and an additional medical school is opening in South Australia in 1974. The need for a further expansion of training facilities is currently being examined by a committee of the Australian Universities Commission.

Nimmo Committee (Question No. 5606)

Mi Whitlam asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice:

When did the Government (a) decide and (b) announce that it would not proceed with the Nimmo Committee’s recommendation that a National Health Insurance Commission be established (Hansard, 15th October 1970, page 2193; Senate Hansard, 7th March 1972, page 476).

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

In the reply to Question No. 1348 by Senator Poke (Senate Hansard, 7th March 1972, page 476) the honourable senator was informed that the Government does not intend to implement the Nimmo Committee’s recommendation that such a Commission be established. Similar information was provided in reply to the honourable member’s Question No. 3955 (Hansard, 12th April 197% page 1568).

It is not considered appropriate to disclose when this decision was made.

Companies Registered in Norfolk Island (Question No. 5649)

Mr Calwell:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

  1. Were 1,571 companies registered in Norfolk Island at 1st January 1972 and 1,531 on 3rd March 1972.
  2. Are all these companies registered in Norfolk Island for the purpose of evading taxation.
  3. Can he say whether Vila is another tax evasion haven.
  4. Is it a fact that the Reserve Bank has placed no insurmountable barriers to the movement of capital or funds because these are channelled to other places; if not, what is the real position.
Mr Snedden:
LP

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

  1. Yes.
  2. No. A relatively small number of companies, locally financed and operating normal commercial enterprises, have registered to obtain the normal benefits of incorporation and not for taxation avoidance purposes. A smaller number of companies - subsidiaries or branches of large non-

Island companies - have registered for reasons of commercial convenience rather than tax avoidance. The Commissioner of course applies the provisions of the law to stop in any way possible tax avoidance through Norfolk Island. Also the Government has under consideration some proposals for additional measures in relation to Norfolk Island.

  1. There is strong evidence that the New Hebrides are emerging as a tax haven.
  2. For Australian exchange control purposes, Norfolk Island is part of Australia. Accordingly, control is not exercised over the movements of funds to that Island. Transfers of Australian or foreign currency from anywhere in Australia or its Territories to any overseas country are subject to exchange control which is administered on behalf of the Government by the Reserve Bank. Such transfers are permitted only where the purpose of the transfer is in accordance with Government policy. This would include the making of a payment that is genuinely due to an overseas resident, the withdrawal by such a resident of his Australian funds which he has acquired in an acceptable manner, or the making of an investment which is in accord with the policy on investment overseas by Australian residents to which I referred in my statement of 22nd February 1972.

Tax Concessions for Educational Expenses (Question No. 5667)

Mr Solomon:
DENISON, TASMANIA

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

  1. What sum in tax concessions was granted in respect of taxpayers’ educational expenses in the latest financial year for which figures are available.
  2. What proportions of the total related to education at (a) State schools and (b) independent schools.
  3. How many taxpayers were involved in each category.
  4. If these figures are not available, what alternative means can be employed to adduce comparable statistics.
Mr Snedden:
LP

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

  1. Deductions allowed for education expenses in the assessments of taxable individuals included in the statistics tabulated for the 1968-69 income year (the latest year for which statistics of these deductions are at present available) amounted to approximately $235m. The cost to income tax revenue of allowing these deductions is estimated to be about $70m.
  2. and (3) Statistics of deductions allowed for education expenses are not classified by type of school or other educational institutions attended by the child or dependent in respect of whom the expenses were incurred.

  3. The Commonwealth Statistician publishes statistics which classify into a number of categories the numbers of persons attending various educational institutions. Also, numbers of children for whom education expenses were allowed in respect of the 1968-69 income year are shown in ‘Taxation Statistics 1969-70’, the Supplement to the 49th Report of the Commissioner of Taxation. These statistics may provide a basis from which a broad indication of the numbers of taxpayers claiming deductions for education expenses incurred in respect of children attending

    1. State schools and (b) independent schools may be derived. However, because of the various factors that influence the cost of allowing deductions to taxpayers who have children attending State schools or independent schools (or both types of schools) and other educational institutions, the statistics would not provide a firm basis for establishing the proportions of the total deductions for education expenses that related to education at (a) State schools and (b) independent schools.

Paramedical Services (Question No. 5668)

Mr Lloyd:

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

  1. When was a working party established in the Department of Health to examine the question of the inclusion of paramedical services within the scope of the National Health Scheme.
  2. What paramedical services are being examined.
  3. When will this examination be completed and a report presented to the Department.
Dr Forbes:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (1), (2) and (3) An examination concerning the Inclusion of paramedical services within the scope of the National Health Scheme was commenced in the Department of Health following the Government announcement of its decisions on recommendations of the Commonwealth Committee of Inquiry into Health Insurance (Nimmo Committee). I announced in the House in June 1970 that all paramedical services would be objectively examined and priorities determined to enable decisions to be taken by the Government to include specific types in the Scheme.

There is a wide range of paramedical services, including physiotherapy, optometry,- home nursing, chiropody, speech therapy, etc. Because of the diverse nature of these services and the interrelationships between them and medical and hospital treatment and Commonwealth and State financial arrangements, it will be appreciated that there are many implications associated with introduction of Insurance benefits in this area which must all be given full consideration.

The examination is proceeding but at this stage I cannot indicate when it will be completed.

Hospital Beds (Question No. 5672)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice

  1. What proportion of (a) hospital beds and tals in (i) each State and (ii) the Commonwealth in the latest year for which figures are available.
  2. What (a) number and (b) percentage of the private hospitals involved and (i) more than 1,000 beds, (ii) fewer than 1,000 beds but more than 500 beds, (iii) fewer than 500 beds but more than 200 beds, (iv) fewer than 200 beds but more than 100 beds, (v) fewer than 100 beds but more than 50 beds, (vi) fewer than 50 beds but more than 25 beds and (vii) fewer than 25 beds.
  3. Will the Minister provide a breakdown of the information sought in part (1) according to the categories referred to in part (2).
  4. Will the Minister also provide a breakdown of the information sought in each of the preceding parts showing which are (a) non-profit-making and (b) profit-making hospitals.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. (a) The proportions of hospital beds which are provided by approved private and public hospitals as at 30th September 1971 are as follows:

    1. Australian Capital Territory included in New South Wales and Northern Territory included in South Australia.
  2. (b) Statistics of bed days provided by private hospitals are not available.
  3. (a) and (b) The numbers and precentages of approved private hospitals, according to bed size as at 30th September 1971, are as follows:
  1. (1) The proportions of all hospital beds provided by approved private hospitals as at 30th September 1971, showing break-up between profitmaking and non-profit-making private hospitals, are as follows:
  1. (2) The numbers and percentages of approved private hospitals according to bed size, showing break-up between profit-making and nonprofitmaking private hospitals, are as follows:
  1. (3) Proportions of all hospital beds which are provided by private hospitals according to bed size, showing break-up between profit-making and non-profit-making private hospitals, are as follows:

Insurance Companies (Question No. 5675)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

  1. How many insurance companies handling workers’ compensation were there in (a) each State and (b) the Commonwealth in the latest year for which figures are available.
  2. What were the amounts of (a) premiums paid, (b) benefits provided, (c) costs of administration and (d) allocations to other sources, identifying those sources during the same year.
  3. Will he provide details of the accidents covered by workers’ compensation benefits during the same year in respect of absences from employment of (a) less than 1 week, (b) longer than 1 week but less than 1 month, (c) longer than 1 month but less than 3 months, (d) longer than 3 months but less than 6 months, (e) longer than 6 months but less than 1 year and (f) longer than 1 year.
  4. Can he say whether there is any State legislation providing for the vocational and occupational rehabilitation and re-training of workers injured where the injury attracts workers’ compensation benefits; if so, can he also say (a) what sum was expended and (b) how many persons benefited under this legislation during each of the last 5 years.
  5. How many applications for workers’ compensation were disputed in the courts and what was the average number as a percentage of the total applications during the same period.
  6. What is the (a) percentile distribution, (b) average, (c) mode and (d) median of delays from the time an application is originally made to when the matter is finally settled in court.
Mr Snedden:
LP

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

  1. The Commonwealth Statistician has advised -

The number of insurance companies handling workers’ compensation insurance in each State in 1969-70 (the latest year for which information is available for all States) is given below:

The total number of different companies handling workers’ compensation insurance in one or more of the 6 States is 200. A general insurance collection is not conducted in respect of the Australian Capital Territory or the Northern Territory but there are at present 82 insurance companies who hold approval to undertake workers’ compensation insurance in the Australian Capital Territory and the corresponding figure for the Northern Territory is 62. Of the companies approved to operate in these 2 Territories all but 8 are included in the above total for the 6 States.

  1. (i) The Commonwealth Statistician has advised -

The amounts of premiums receivable, claims, costs of administration, commission and taxation in respect of workers’ compensation insurance in each State for 1969-70 are shown in the following table. The statistics relate to the financial years of the various companies ending within the financial year 1969-70. Also, the figures reported for premiums are not adjusted to provide for premiums unearned at the end of the year, i.e. some of the amounts included are in respect of insurance cover during some or all of the subsequent year. The figures shown for claims do not include an allowance for possible claims against that part of the cover relating to the subsequent year.

  1. Premiums represent the full amount receivable in respect of policies issued or renewed during the year, less returns, rebates and bonuses paid or credited to policy holders during the year. They are not adjusted to provide for premiums unearned at the end of the year, and consequently the amounts differ from ‘earned premium income’ appropriate to the year. (b) Claims comprise payments made during the year, plus tho estimated amount of outstanding claims at the end of the year, less the estimated amount of outstanding claims at the beginning of the year.

    1. The Department of the Interior has advised that information is not available for the Australian Capital Territory from records held by the Department. So far as the Northern Territory is concerned the records show -
  2. Premiums paid in 1970-71 amounted to $1,776,943.71; and
  3. Benefits provided in the same year totalled $356,203.43.

In relation to sections (c) and (d) of this part of the question, so far as the Northern Territory is concerned, the details requested are not available because the Northern Territory legislation does not require the furnishing of such details.

  1. (i) State Legislation- The Commonwealth Statistician has advised that on the basis of statistics of duration of incapacity for employees covered by workers’ compensation legislation in each State, it is estimated that the distribution of the number of such claims for a typical year is approximately as follows:

    1. less than 1 week’s duration- 47 per cent;
    2. 1 week hut less than 4 weeks- 40 per cent;
    3. 4 weeks but less than 13 weeks - 11 per cent;
    4. 13 weeks but less than 26 weeks - 1 per cent;
    5. 26 weeks and over - 1 per cent.
    1. Territory Ordinances - The Department of the Interior has advised that it does not have any information on these matters so far as the Australian Capital Territory and Northern Territory are concerned.
    2. Commonwealth Legislation-The Department of Shipping and Transport has advised that statistics are not kept on the duration of benefits payable under the Seamen’s Compensation Act and the Office of the Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation has advised that the position is the same in relation to the duration of benefits payable under the Compensation (Commonwealth Employees) Acta.
    3. (i) The Workers’ Compensation legislation in New South Wales, South Australia and Western Australia contains provisions under which it would appear that rehabilitation benefits of the kind described by the honourable member would be provided tor injured workers where the injury attracts workers’ compensation benefits.

    4. No information is available from Commonwealth sources as to -

    5. the sum expended under this State legislation; and
    6. the number of persons who have benefited under this legislation.
    1. (i) In relation to State workers’ compensation legislation no information is available from Commonwealth sources on the total number of applications for workers’ compensation made during any period or the number of claims that an) disputed in the courts during any period.
    2. The Department of the Interior has advised that this information is not readily available in respect of the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory.
    3. The Department of Shipping and Transport has advised as follows, in relation to the Seamen’s Compensation Act:

The Commissioner has pointed out that there is usually a significant difference between the number of appeals lodged with the Courts and the number of appeals ‘disputed in the Courts.’ The latter category does not include appeals which were either not proceeded with or were settled without a Court hearing. The above table contains only those cases which were actually disputed in the Courts during each of the past 5 years. Also, statistics on the total number of applications for compensation are not kept, but the table contains the number of new cases in which the Commonwealth was found liable to pay compensation for each of the past 5 years.

  1. The information cannot be provided from the records that are maintained.

Medical Benefits Fund (Question No. 5681)

Dr Klugman:

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

  1. What are the names of the members of the Council of the Medical Benefits Fund of Australia.
  2. What are the names of the members of the (a) New South Wales, (b) Queensland and (c) Tasmanian Executive Committee of the Fund.
  3. What is the method of election or appointment of the Council and Committees.
  4. How many of the members of each of these bodies are registered medical practitioners.
  5. What was the (a) total Commonwealth Government contribution in various reimbursements to the Fund, (b) total income of the Fund and (c) surplus of income over expenditure of the Fund for the year ended 30th June 1971.
  6. What was the (a) value of reserves and (b) market value of investments of the Fund as at 30th June 1971.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. The names of the honorary members of the Council of the Medical Benefits Fund of Australia Limited are:

Mr J. L. Aimes, C.B.E., E.D.,

Dr S. P. Bellmaine,

Dr D. A. Brown,

The Honourable Sir Harry Budd, M.L.C.,

Mrs E. F. Byth, O.B.E.,

Dr R. S. Cohen,

The Honourable Mr Justice W. H. Collins,

Dr R. S. Day,

Mr R. A. Donald,

His Honour Judge H. H. Gibson,

Mr J. M. Gosper, O.B.E.

Sir Ronald Grieve,

Dr G. L. Howe,

Mr A. K. Lavis,

Dr J. F. Lee,

Mr J. P. McPhee,

Professor A. H. Pollard,

Dr C. Roe,

Dr N. L. Sherwood,

Dr W. F. Simmons, C.M.G,

Dr R. Wall,

Mr J. W. C. Wyett,

Dr A. W. O. Young.

  1. The names of the honorary members of State Executive Committees are:

New South Wales-

Sir Ronald Grieve,

Dr S. P. Bellmaine,

Dr D. A. Brown,

The Honourable Sir Harry Budd, M.L.C

The Honourable Mr Justice W. H. Collins,

Dr R. S. Day,

Mr R. A. Donald,

His Honour Judge H. H. Gibson,

Mr J. M. Gosper, O.B.E.,

Dr G. L. Howe,

Dr A. M. Johnson,

Professor A. H. Pollard,

Dr D. P. Roe,

Dr W. F. Simmons, C.M.O.

Queensland-

Mr J. L. Amies, C.B.E., E.D.,

Mrs E. F. Byth, O.B.E.,

Dr D. A. Cameron,

Dr R. S. Cohen.

Dr R. P. Godwin,

Mr A. K. Lavis,

Dr J. F. Lee,

Mr J. P. McPhee,

Dr C. Roe,

Dr N. L. Sherwood,

Dr H. Stuart Patterson,

Tasmania -

Mr J. W. C. Wyett,

Dr A. J. Dobson,

Dr P. F. Gill.

Mr J. Gray, D.F.C.,

Mr O. Groom,

Dr R. Wall,

Dr D. J. Walters,

Mr J. D. Watchorn,

Dr A. W. O. Young.

  1. (i) The method of election of medical members to the State Executive Commitee is by ballot Medical members of the Association whose registered place of address is in the State in respect of which such Executive Committees exist are entitled to vote in such elections.
  2. The Council appoints contributor’s representatives to the respective State Executive Committees (on the recommendations of the respective Committees).
  3. Each State Executive Committee nominates, from its members, persons to constitute the Council. The number of persons to be so nominated are:
  1. The numbers of registered medical practitioners on the Council and the respective State Executive Committees are:

Council - 12

Queensland Commitee - 7

New South Wales Committe - 8

Tasmanian Commitee -5

  1. (b), (c) (6) (a), (b) The honourable member will be aware that the first Annual Report on the Operations of Registered Medical Benefits and Hospital Benefits Organisations was tabled in Parliament on 18th May 1972. The Report tabulates for each fund the information requested, i.e. contributions and other amounts payable to the fund and the overall surplus or deficit for the 1970-71 financial year, as well as the balance of the fund and the details of the fund’s investment portfolio as at 30th June 1971. The value of the investments shown in this Report is the beck value. Total market value shown in the published accounts of the Medical Benefits Fund of Australia Limited is $36,026,675.

Cigarette Smoking (Question No. 5719)

Dr Everingham:

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

  1. As the Federation of Australian Commercial Television Stations claims that surveys show adult and peer behaviour is the main influence inducing children to smoke, will the Minister arrange for his Department to undertake or sponsor a similar survey to fmd what influences adults and children to stop smoking, or collate and publish existing findings on this subject.
  2. As the Federation further claims that cigarette consumption rose after a ban on television advertising when advertising expenditure in other media rose, will the Minister publish especially findings which refer to other advertising media.
  3. Will the Minister also publish replies to the 15 questions, quoted in the Federation’s last annual report, from the United States House of Representatives.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. I understand that the 1971-72 Annual Report of the Federation of Australian Commercial Television Stations contains statements along the lines suggested by the honourable member. The statements are based upon a review of the world literature on this subject, current in 1966, which was made as a preliminary to a survey of the smoking habits of Australian schoolchildren, conducted by an hoc sub-committee of the National Health and Medical Research Council and published by Council in 1969. They do not refer to the results of the Australian study. The full text of the sub-committee’s conclusions, which generally support the literature review, is as follows:

    1. Smoking prevalence varies widely from school to school and from group to group and depends on many factors including local community conditions.
    2. There is an initial stage of experimentation in smoking. Some children do not progress beyond this stage while others persist in experimentation until, at a variable time interval, a state of true dependence or habituation is reached.
    3. This study suggests that smoking patterns and attitudes set by parents are important. Parental disapproval has an effect on the smoking behaviour of children and the attention of parents needs to be drawn to the fact that they can have a positive effect on their children’s smoking status.
    4. Awareness of the health risks involved in snicking was iiic most powerful influence in those children who gave up smoking. Regular smokers were certainly as well informed as the non-smokers of the hazards involved in smoking. Health education campaigns have produced a tolerably wellinformed community among school children, but smoking among school children is still alarmingly high.
    5. The Sub-Committee does not see mass communications as an area where it is competent to undertake investigation but there are a number of unanswered questions in this field, the most important being whether the role of mass communications with regard to smoking is one of initiation or one of reinforcement. It is also possible that mass communications could influence opinion leaders among children.

It is not planned at this stage to conduct further surveys of the kind referred to by the honourable member.

  1. I am aware of these claims, but I am not aware of any relevant findings which would be appropriate for publication by or on behalf of the Government.
  2. No. The relationship between smoking and ill health is accepted by the Government.

Defence Forces Retirement Benefits Fond (Question No. 5771) Mr Hayden asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

  1. What sum was contributed to the Defence Forces Retirement Benefits Fund by (a) contributors and (b) the Commonwealth Government during the latest 12 months period for which figures are available.
  2. What sum was paid out of the Fund during the same period.
  3. What was the state of the Fund at the latest available date.
  4. Have any transfers been made from the Fund to consolidated revenue since the Fund came into operation; if so, what was the sura involved.
Mr Snedden:
LP

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

  1. During the year ended 30th June 1971, amounts received by the Defence Forces Retirement Benefits Fund were as follows:

    1. Total contributions from contributors $18,942,891.
    2. Net receipts from Consolidated Revenue for the payment of benefits- $16,923,872,
  2. Net payments from the Fund, after adjusting for repayments of amounts previously paid to members under section 42a of the Defence Forces Retirements Benefits Act 1948-1971, amounted to $27,480,081.
  3. The balance of the Fund as at 30th June 1971 was $136,323,257. The state of the Fund is determined by actuarial investigation and as at 30th June 1964 was:

The actuarial investigation of the Fund as at 30th June 1969, as required by section 22 of the Act, is in progress.

  1. Yes. Various amounts totalling $53,595 being amounts due to persons who could not be located and which had been unclaimed for more than 6 years, were transferred to the Consolidated Revenue Fund between 1954-55 and 1961-62. These amounts remain available for payment in the event of bona fide claims being received. Other amounts totalling $52,192, adjusting payments made to the Fund by the Commonwealth in respect of some invalidity pensions, were transferred to the Consolidated Revenue Fund between 1956-57 and 1961-62.

Health Insurance Schemes (Question No. 5772)

Mr Hayden:

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

What legislative and/or regulatory restrictions apply m relation to the use of reserve funds held by voluntary health insurance schemes for the purpose of investment.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

The National Health Act, under which medical and hospital benefits organisations are registered, does not specify any matters in relation to investments other than that the organisations must furnish the Director-General of Health with such financial accounts and statements as he requires to prepare his annual report under Section 76a. Section 76a (fi) specifies that the report shall include ‘details of how the reserves of the fund have been invested’. 1 have recently tabled the report in respect of the 1970-71 financial year. No regulations have been promulgated in relation to investments by health insurance organisations.

On 27th October 1971, in answer to a question asked by Senator Willesee, the Minister for Health summarised the policy adopted in regard to investments made by health insurance organisations.

The following is the text of the reply the Minister gave on that occasion -

The reserves of medical and hospital benefits organisations are held in various forms. These include cash at bank, short term money market, bank fixed deposits, Commonwealth bonds and inscribed stock, semi-government bonds, local government shares, debentures and mortgages. Most funds hold a very high proportion of their reserves in trustee type investments.

The various types of investments held are such that sufficient funds are always available to meet any contingencies in regard to the payment of claims. While there has been some investment in industrial type stock by some organisations, these have generally yielded satisfactory results.

The Government examined the question of the investment policies of organisations when considering the recommendations made by the Commonwealth Committee of Inquiry into Health Insurance (Nimmo report). It concluded that funds had generally exercised a proper sense of responsibility in the assessment of reserves and that non-trustee investments have provided good returns to the advantage of contributors. The Government therefore decided that the policies followed by organisations in regard to investments should continue without the imposition of specific restrictions’. (Senate Hansard, pages 1485-1486).

Insect Control (Question No. 5787)

Mr Scholes:
CORIO, VICTORIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice: (.1) Is it a fact that the Australian Consumers Association has published information which states that pest strip type insect control devices are dangerous to human health.

  1. If so, and as these claims are of concern to many people, has an examination of the safety of these devices been carried out by any Government agency.
  2. If an examination has not been carried out, will the Minister take steps to ensure that this is done.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. Yes.
  2. and (3) The National Health and Medical Research Council, which is an advisory body to the Commonwealth and State governments, has for a number of years continually reviewed’ the use of dichlorvos pest strips. Council has recommended that these strips should bear the following warning:

Warning Keep out of reach of children. If swallowed seek medical advice. Avoid contact with food.

Do not use in food cupboards.

Do not use in nurseries and sick rooms where people may be continuously exposed.

Council has also recommended a tolerance of 2ppm for dichlorvos in fruits, grains and vegetables.

Shipping (Question No. 5807)

Mr Clyde Cameron:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Shipping and Transport, upon notice:

  1. Is it a fact that Australian built vessels are now laid up while overseas owned vessels are operating under charter as a consequence of a permit issued by him under Section 286(l)(b) of the Navigation Act.
  2. Is it also a fact that as a consequence of bis action the ‘Iron Somersby’ is the centre of an industrial dispute which could lead to a national shipping strike.
  3. Does the Government agree with the contention of the Maritime Unions that Australian ships now laid up should be used for the transport of iron ore in preference to foreign owned ships.
  4. Will he give his reasons for issuing a permit to Broken Hill Pty Co. Ltd to operate the Iron Somersby’ when Australian built and subsidised vessels belonging to the Commonwealth are idle.
Mr Nixon:
CP

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

  1. No.
  2. and (3) As Standing Orders provide that questions which call for an expression of opinion should not be asked, I must refrain from providing an answer.
  3. A single voyage permit was issued to ‘Iron Somersby’ on 6th January 1972 for the carriage of ore from Port Hedland to Port Kembla. It would have been unreasonable to refuse the issue of a permit to this vessel when a coasting trade licence was to be issued to it a short time later.

Handicapped Persons (Question No. 5808)

Dr Everingham:

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

  1. When will the House debate the recommendations of the Senate Standing Committee on Health and Welfare in respect of mentally and physically handicapped persons.
  2. What action has the Minister taken to follow those recommendations.
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. The report of the Senate Standing Committee was presented to the Senate. The Senate debated the report on 11th May 1972.
  2. The report of the Senate Standing Committee on Health and Welfare in respect of mentally and physically handicapped persons is very far reaching in its implications for both the Commonwealth and the States, and the recommendations of the report cover a wide range of issues which could affect questions of major policy in several Commonwealth Departments. The Commonwealth already provides substantial assistance in many of the areas covered by the recommendations of the report. The recommendations disclose certain areas where, in the opinion of the Senate Standing Committee, further Governmental assistance, both Commonwealth and State, would be appropriate. The report and its recommendations are receiving, and will continue to receive, serious consideration.

Northern Ireland (Question No. 5811)

Mr Grassby:

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice:

  1. What was the basis of the reference made to Northern Ireland in the annex to the ministerial statement of 9th May 1972 on Australian foreign policy.
  2. Has he sought the views of the British and Irish Governments.
  3. Have these Governments put their points of view to the Australian Government; if so, when and in what form.
  4. If no expressions of views have been sought or given, what assurance is there that the reference is completely adequate and not one-sided.
Mr N H Bowen:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

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

  1. The references to Northern Ireland were based on information available to the Australian Government from public and diplomatic sources.
  2. , (3) and (4) The Australian Government is being kept aware of the views of the British and Irish Governments through normal diplomatic channels.

Rural Reconstruction Scheme (Question No. 5818)

Mr Kennedy:

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

  1. How many applications were made in (a) each State and Territory and (b) the Commonwealth by 10th May 1972 for retraining under the rural reconstruction scheme.
  2. What numbers and percentages of the processed applications were (a) accepted and (b) rejected in (i) each State and Territory and (ii) the Commonwealth.
Mi Lynch - The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The figures given are as at 30th April. Statistics are normally compiled only at monthly intervals. Applications received but not processed comprise in the main, applications withdrawn or applications not processed pending further advice from the applicant {:#subdebate-30-126} #### Tax Revenue (Question No. 5855) {: #subdebate-30-126-s0 .speaker-SH4} ##### Dr Klugman: asked the Treasurer, upon notice: >What is the immediate effect of each of Australia's double taxation agreements on Australian tax revenue. {: #subdebate-30-126-s1 .speaker-DQF} ##### Mr Snedden:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: >Immediate effects on tax revenue can arise in relation to all forms of income flowing from Australia to the other country concerned in an agreement and from that country to Australia. However, it is not practicable to provide readily a reliable quantitative estimate of those immediate effects. > >As the terms of the honourable member's question imply, double taxation agreements have longer-term effects also- however, these too do not easily lend themselves to the processes of identification and quantification. Pre-school Education (Question No. 5853) {: #subdebate-30-126-s2 .speaker-6U4} ##### Mr Whitlam: asked the Treasurer, upon notice: >Will he bring up to date and consolidate the Information which he and his 2 predecessors have obtained from his Department, the Statistician and the Commonwealth Grants Commission on comparative State expenditure on pre-school edu cation (Hansard, 24th September 1969, page 1922; 12th June 1970, page 3682; 20th August 1971, page 490 and 10th May 1972, page 2284). {: #subdebate-30-126-s3 .speaker-DQF} ##### Mr Snedden:
LP -- The answer to the hon ourable member's question is as follows: The Commonwealth Statistician has provided figures of expenditure on pre-school education by State authorities for 1970-71 in the following table. Figures for 1969-70 incorporating minor revisions to figures previously supplied (Hansard, 20th August 1971, page 490) are also given in the table. The honourable member's attention is drawn to the comments on these figures which accompanied the answer given to him on this subject by my predecessor (Hansard, 12th June 1970, page 3682). {:#subdebate-30-127} #### Primary Industry (Question No. 5864) {: #subdebate-30-127-s0 .speaker-8V4} ##### Mr Grassby: asked the Treasurer, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. What overseas companies have commenced beef raising and handling operations in Australia since 1969, where are these operations located and from what countries did the companies come. 1. How many overseas companies are now engaged in primary industry in Australia and what are their countries of origin. 2. What is the gross value of the assets of these companies. 3. How much overseas capital have these companies imported into Australia to date. 4. How much profit has been repatriated overseas by these companies. {: #subdebate-30-127-s1 .speaker-DQF} ##### Mr Snedden:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Commonwealth Statistician has advised that, although surveys of overseas investment are conducted regularly by the Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics, information on overseas investment in the rural industry in Australia is not available in the precise detail requested. However, some relevant information is available and this is set out below in answer to the individual parts of the question: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Details of the number of overseas owned companies engaged in beef raising and handling activities are not compiled separately. For purposes of overseas investment statistics, companies are classified by broad industry groups on the basis of their major activity only. Even then companies predominantly engaged in beef raising and handling would be classified to one or other of the industry groups 'agriculture, forestry and fishing', 'commerce' or 'transport, storage and communication', depending on whether the company in question is engaged in the breeding, transport or slaughtering aspects of the industry. However, it is not possible from data currently collected in the surveys of overseas investment to separately identify all the companies engaged in these activities. Moreover, the confidentiality provisions of the Census and Statistics Act would preclude the release of the names of individual businesses. 1. Information collected in the surveys of overseas investment show that for 1970-71 there were approximately 90 companies with direct overseas investment which were predominantly engaged in the 'agriculture, forestry and fishing' industry. 2. No information is available on the gross value of the assets of these companies. 3. Details of the total value of overseas capital invested in the above 90 companies are not available. However, the amount of direct investment capital (including undistributed profits) received by these companies from overseas during the 8 years from 1963-64 to 1970-71 was approximately S48m. 4. Details of total profits repatriated overseas by these companies are also not available. However, direct investment income (profits and interest) payable overseas by these companies during the period 1963-64 to 1970-71 amounted to minus S3m, indicating that these companies operated at a net loss over this period. {:#subdebate-30-128} #### Bananas (Question No. 5865) {: #subdebate-30-128-s0 .speaker-8V4} ##### Mr Grassby: asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Have research efforts over 3i years failed to produce an acceptable recommendation to control dieldrin resistant beetle borer in bananas. 1. Is there an urgency to have an improved recommendation before next summer. 2. Is he able to say whether this pest has been controlled successfully in South American countries. 3. Will he investigate the position with a view to applying any relevant overseas experience and materials to the solution of the problem in Australia and seek appropriate urgent action by State and Commonwealth authorities. {: #subdebate-30-128-s1 .speaker-5E4} ##### Mr Sinclair:
CP -- The answer to the hon ourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Difficulties in controlling banana weevil borer were first reported in 1968. Since that time State Departments of Agriculture have been investigating control measures. The reports available to my Department indicate that much of the damage attributed to banana weevil borers was, in fact, due to nematodes which damage the root system of the plant. Moreover, plants affected by nematodes are much more susceptible to banana weevil borer. The investigations have also demonstrated the value of plantation sanitation, trapping and cultural practices in the control of the pest. Although resistant insects are present in New South Wales, the occurrence of dieldrin resistant borers in Queensland has not been confirmed. 1. The insecticide diazinon has been found to be effective in controlling dieldrin resistant weevil borers, giving several months' protection. Other insecticides currently under test appear to offer promise of long-term control but some time will elapse before they can be cleared for use by growers. Recommended cultural practices should, however, continue to be observed. 2. The banana weevil borer is a cosmopolitan pest. It is a widespread problem in the banana growing areas of the Pacific Islands, Africa, Central and South America. Reports from Central and South American countries indicate that the insecticide chlordecone has been effective in controlling strains of banana weevil borer which are resistant to dieldrin. Chlordecone is currently being evaluated in Australia. 3. The State and Commonwealth authorities are in close touch with the research work which has been carried out overseas. The possibility of developing biological methods of control has been examined but there appears to be little chance of success based on existing knowledge. The New South Wales Department of Agriculture and the Queensland Department of Primary Industries are continuing research work to develop better control measures but in practice, control primarily depends on the quality of management of the individual plantations. It will probably be aided by new chemicals at present under test {:#subdebate-30-129} #### Members of Parliament (Question No. 5895) {: #subdebate-30-129-s0 .speaker-NH4} ##### Mr Keating: asked the Treasurer, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Has an actuarial comparison been made by the Government of the relative values of elective cash retirement benefits currently available to members of the Legislative Assembly of New South Wales and Members of the House of Representatives. 1. If so, win he make the information available to members. 2. If a comparative study has not been made, will he arrange for this to be done. 3. Will the Government introduce a similar scheme of retirement benefits to that available to Members of the New South Wales Legislative Assembly; if not, why not. {: #subdebate-30-129-s1 .speaker-DQF} ##### Mr Snedden:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. No. 1. Not applicable. 2. When examining possible changes in the Parliamentary Retiring Allowances Act 1948-1968 appropriate comparative studies, including a study of the relevant provisions of the various State Parliamentary retiring allowances schemes, would be made. 3. The structure of the Commonwealth scheme and the principles on which it is based differ from those of the New South Wales scheme. Any proposal to change the Commonwealth scheme to one that was similar to the New South Wales scheme would need careful consideration by the Government and the Parliament. {:#subdebate-30-130} #### Hospital Planning Bureau (Question No. 5911) {: #subdebate-30-130-s0 .speaker-6U4} ##### Mr Whitlam: asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. On what dates since 21st July 1971 has the New South Wales Department of Health convened meetings of Commonwealth and State officers to consider the proposal to establish a hospital planning bureau (Hansard, 21st October 1970, page 2612 and 7th October 1971, page 2133). 1. Has the bureau considered the planning of the projected teaching hospital at Westmead, New South Wales (Hansard, 7th October 1971, page 2133). {: #subdebate-30-130-s1 .speaker-KFH} ##### Dr Forbes:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. By agreement at the 1970 Australian Health Ministers' Conference, a Council comprising the permanent heads of the State and Commonwealth Departments of Health, known as the Hospital and Allied Services Advisory Council, was created. The Construction Planning Committee of the Council, which includes experts from all States and the Commonwealth, reports to Council on planning and equipping of hospitals and allied services. This Committee will carry out the work previously envisaged for the hospital planning bureau. Since 21st July 1971, the Committee hag met on 20th January 1972 and 18th May 1972. (2) No. {:#subdebate-30-131} #### National Roads (Question No. 5935) {: #subdebate-30-131-s0 .speaker-JOU} ##### Mr Bennett: asked the Minister for Shipping and Transport, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Did the National Council of the Australian Road Federation and the State regional committees recommend that the Commonwealth Government should accept full financial responsibility for the construction, maintenance and continued up-grading of a system of prime necessity national roads. 1. Did the minimum standards include (a) a sealed surface, 2-lane, all weather road, (b) a minimum of speed restricted areas and (c) a high standard of safety. 2. Did the National Council also recommend for immediate Commonwealth financing the roads from (a) Darwin to Townsville, (b) Townsville to Brisbane, (c) Brisbane to Sydney, (d) Sydney to Melbourne, (e) Melbourne to Adelaide, (f) Adelaide to Perth, (g) Perth to Darwin, (h) SydneyBroken Hill-Port Augusta, (i) HobartLauncestonBurnie and (j) Darwin-Alice Springs-Adelaide. 3. If so, does the Government agree with the expert recommendations and when will they be put into effect. {: #subdebate-30-131-s1 .speaker-009OD} ##### Mr Nixon:
CP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1), (2) and (3) On 6th April 1972 the President, Australian Road Federation, requested my consideration of the Federations programme as outlined in the October/December 1971 issue of its Journal 'Road News. {: type="1" start="4"} 0. The Commonwealth recognises the desirability of an efficient interstate highway system. Grants under the Commonwealth Aid Roads Act 1969 provide specific amounts for rural arterial roads, which include State roads forming part of the national highway network. The Federation's views are being taken into account in the examination of the effectiveness of the current Act and will be included in the Commonwealth's future consideration of financial assistance to the States for roads. {:#subdebate-30-132} #### Customs and Excise Duty (Question No. 5960) {: #subdebate-30-132-s0 .speaker-KFU} ##### Dr Gun: asked the Minister for Customs and Excise, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Are proposals to alter, impose, or remove a Customs or Excise duty normally kept secret prior to their anouncement in the House; if so, what are the reasons for the secrecy. 1. Can he instance where premature disclosure has occurred; if so, what action has been taken in each case. 2. What precautions are taken against premature disclosure. {: #subdebate-30-132-s1 .speaker-3V4} ##### Mr Chipp:
Minister for Customs and Excise · HOTHAM, VICTORIA · LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Yes. To prevent persons obtaining advance knowledge of duty changes which could be used to gain a commercial or monetary advantage. 1. I know of no case where there has been premature disclosure of this knowledge by an officer of my Department. 2. Documents are supplied to and handled by a restricted range of persons on a strictly 'need to know' basis. {:#subdebate-30-133} #### Highways (Question No. 5971) {: #subdebate-30-133-s0 .speaker-8V4} ##### Mr Grassby: asked the Minister for Shipping and Transport, upon notice: >Has (a) the Bureau of Transport Economics or (b) the Bureau of Roads made or is it making an economic evaluation of proposals to build modern highways between Canberra and (a) Yass, (b) Tumut and (c) Goulburn (Hansard, 9lh May 1972, page 2263). {: #subdebate-30-133-s1 .speaker-009OD} ##### Mr Nixon:
CP -- The answer to the honourable members question is as follows: >Neither the Bureau of Transport Economics nor the Commonwealth Bureau of Roads has carried out any specific economic valuations in connection with the roads between Canberra and the centres mentioned. The Commonwealth Bureau of Roads is, in conjunction with State and local authorities, at present carrying out an Australian Road Survey. The road improvement projects shown to be desirable by that survey will be evaluated to assess if they are economically justified in the same way as the Bureau of Roads assessed the economic justification of the programme prepared after the 1967-68 Survey, (n addition, as I indicated in the House on 30th May (in reply to a question without notice by the Member for Hume), my Department will confer with the Department of the Interior and wilh New South Wales authorities to see if it is desirable that a study be carried out concerning the carriage of goods between Yass and Canberra.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 31 May 1972, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1972/19720531_reps_27_hor78/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant