28th Parliament · 1st Session
Mr SPEAKER (Hon. J. F. Cope) took the chair at 10 a.m., and read prayers.
page 4681
– Petitions have been lodged for presentation as follows and copies will be referred to the appropriate Ministers:
To the Honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled:
The humble petition of undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:
That the proposed ‘free’ national health scheme is not free at all and will cost many citizens more, particularly single people and working wives.
That the proposed scheme is in fact a plan for nationalisation of health services which will lead to impersonalised and mediocre standards of medical care, the creation of a huge new bureaucracy, and will limit the citizen’s freedom of choice.
That the present health scheme can be amended to overcome existing deficiencies, and that the proposed scheme is totally unnecessary.
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Government will take no measures to interfere with the basic principles of the existing health scheme which functions efficiently and economically.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Charles Jones, Mr Berinson, Mr Drummond, Mr England, Mr Jacobi, Mr McLeay, Mr McVeigh, Mr Reynolds and Mr Wilson.
Petitions received.
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:
That they oppose the Australian Health Insurance Program and any National Health Scheme. That they wish to retain the right to choose their own medical care by selecting a general practitioner, specialist or any other medical classification of their own choice under the present conditions in private consulting rooms and also the right to choose an intermediate ward or private hospital of their own choice.
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Government will take no measure to interfere with the existing health scheme.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Adermann, Mr Bonnett, Mr Donald Cameron, Mr Cooke, Mr Corbett, MrDrury, Mr Killen and Mr Eric Robinson.
Petitions received.
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:
That the undersigned men and women of Australia believe in a Christian way of life; and that no democracy can thrive unless its citizens are responsible andlaw abiding.
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the members in Parliament assembled will see that the powerful communicator, television, is used to build into the nation those qualities of character which make a democracy work - integrity, teamwork and a sense of purpose by serving, and that television be used” to bring faith in God to the heart of the family and national life.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Cross, Mr Fairbairn, Mr Keith Johnson, Mr Luchetti, Mr Eric Robinson, Mr Ruddock and Mr Thorburn.
Petitions received.
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:
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Charles Jones, Mr McMahon, Mr Cross, Mr Fulton, Dr Gun and Mr Uren.
Petitions received.
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 shows:
That the undersigned men and women of Australia believe in a Christian way of life; and that no democracy can thrive unless its citizens are responsible and law abiding.
We, therefore, humbly request that the members in Parliament assembled will aim to put a stop to all the pornographic material shown on Television, Drivein and Theatre screens and in printed literature.
We ask that these forms of communication, be used to build into the nation those qualities of character which make a democracy work - integrity, teamwork and a sense of purpose by serving, and that they be used to bring faith in God to the heart of the family and national life.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Stewart.
Petition received.
To the Honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled:
The humble petition of the citizens of Canberra below respectfully showeth:
The petitioners protest at the imminent closure and demolition of the Occasional Care Centre of the Department of the Capital Territory in Alinga Street, Civic Centre, Canberra. The buildings and grounds of the centre provide unmatched facilities for occasional child care: particularly with regard to its convenient central position and the irreplaceable large shady trees.
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Centre be not closed nor demolished and that the site be retained in its present form for occasional child care facilities.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Enderby.
Petition received.
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:
That there are many people in Australia who still prefer ‘God Save The Queen’ as the National Anthem rather than any of the alternatives that have been suggested.
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the House of Representatives will urge the Government not to change Australia’s National Anthem without a total vote of the Australian people at a referendum to select an anthem from ‘God Save The Queen’ and the suggested alternatives to it.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr McVeigh.
Petition received.
page 4682
– I ask the Prime Minister whether he has any news for the people of Townsville regarding the Ross River Dam project.
– The Minister for Northern Development and Minister for the Northern Territory will answer this question.
– All I can say to the honourable member for Herbert is that the matter has been thoroughly investigated. It is before the Government at the present time.
page 4682
– My question is directed to the Minister for Transport. Is it a fact that according to very recent reports the Minister has been pressed by major airlines to lift the curfew on flights into and out of Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport with the proposed introduction of wide-bodied jet air bases? Will the Minister give an unequivocal assurance that the curfew will be retained at the unprecedentedly high level that his operated since the Labor Government came to power a year ago?
– Is it true that the airlines have at different times asked me to relax the conditions on the curfew. For example, during the recent stoppage involving Trans-Australia Airlines I was approached by Ansett Transport Industries Ltd to lift the curfew and to permit planes to operate after 11 p.m. This was rejected in conformity with Government policy. So far as wide bodied jets are concerned, during my recent visit to France I inspected a French airbus and in June when I was in the United States of America I looked at 3 airbuses or jumbos which are produced in that country. It is obvious to me that now is the time to introduce this type of aircraft into Australia, rather than allow each of the airlines to purchase 4 727-200 series jets. We must bear in mind that aircraft purchased now will be operating well into the 1980s at which time there will be a serious over-capacity of aircraft operating through Sydney. I believe it is logical that wide bodied jets should be introduced.
I will be writing to the airlines to ask them to reconsider their proposal to purchase 727s. I will ask them also to consider the practicability of ordering one of the 4 jumbos that are available for sale. One of the interesting features is that jumbos are much quieter than the normal run of aircraft. I should add that what was reported in the Australia’ during the week that I was looking to lift the curfew is not true. I can give the honourable member and the public an assurance that the Government has no plans to lift the curfew at peak periods or offpeak periods. In anticipation of someone asking me a question on the difference between noise levels of various aircraft I sought information on that subject. I suggest to the Leader of the Opposition that he might permit me to incorparate in Hansard a table setting out the noise levels of each of the modern type of aircraft. I am sure that this would be of interest to all honourable members.
-Is leave granted? There being no objection, leave is granted. (The document read as follows) -
page 4683
– I ask the Prime Minister the following question: Is it correct as reported that he was refused a vote by the returning officer at a polling booth on Saturday because, apparently unbeknown to the Prime Minister one of his staff had arranged a postal vote for him? As the voter himself must sign the application for a postal vote before a witness and must himself fill in the ballot paper, I ask the Prime Minister: Did he in fact sign the application for a postal vole and did he in fact mi in the postal ballot paper? If he did, why would he have endeavoured to vote at the polling booth?
– This is a matter of mighty moment. I did sign an application for a postal vote just in case I was not able to be in my electorate on polling day. I did not return it.
– Why did you refuse to vote then?
– You did not vote twice did you, Gough?
– Perhaps I may add that in my electorate, owing to the malapportionment imposed by the dilatoriness of our predecessors and the deficiencies of the electoral laws, my vote in any case would be worth only half as much as that of most people in the House. I would represent more people probably than any member of the Parliament. This is because I have a very great number of people in my electorate who are under 18 or who come from overseas or who are soldiers and therefore do not enrol in the electorate. We do not have the equal representation that now applies in other countries under other federal systems. I hope that it will not be too long before the people ensure that every member represents as nearly as practicable an equal number of people. There was one stage when I had a quarter of a million people living in my electorate.
page 4683
– I address my question to the Minister representing the Minister for the Media. What response has the Minister for the Media had to his suggestion in February this year, in an address to representatives of the motion picture industry, that the major distributors of films in Australia should play a part in providing backing for the production of Australian films in Australia? What signs are there that a commercially viable industry can be established in Australia to provide continuity of work for people employed in the film business?
– As the honourable member will be aware, the Government has just brought in an Australian Film Commission. One of the tasks of the Australian Film Commission is to encourage commercial production of films by Australian producers in Australia. Under the terms of reference for the Australian Films Commission is a provision that up to 50 per cent of an agreed budget will be provided through Commonwealth assistance, not only through a financial input but also in the distribution and exhibition of films. Some honourable members recently have seen - unfortunately, I did not see it - a new Australian production called ‘Alvin Purple’ which has been produced by a group called the Village Roadshow which lias formed Hexagon Productions. Although I did not see the film, some of my colleagues on both sides of the
House regard it as a very good and highly entertaining film. This group is producing another film of a story written by David Williamson and has 2 more films on the production line.
I think that this sort of activity by Australian film producers should be encouraged. But it really is only getting Australia back to the position it held very early in this century when Australia was credited with having produced the first full length film in the world - a film entitled ‘Soldiers of the Cross’ which was produced in 1900. During the 1920s and 1930s Australia also maintained a very high position in the world in film making. This position has since declined. I think that all honourable members will realise that because of the initiative taken by the Australian Government in establishing the Australian Film Commission we hope to regain the position of eminence that Australia once occupied.
page 4684
– Is the Minister for the Environment and Conservation aware that more than $2m had been spent on the Pike Creek Dam water conservation project before the Federal Government decided to repudiate the undertaking given by the previous Government to share the cost of constructing the dam with the State governments of Queensland and New South Wales? Is he aware that the Federal Government has agreed to pay its share of this amount, thereby acknowledging its responsibility in regard to sharing the cost of the project? Will the Government now reexamine the project in the light of improved prices for primary products which are capable of being produced by irrigation in that area in place of or in addition to tobacco production, which formed part of the original scheme, and which must make this project more economically sound than when it was investigated previously? Further is the Minister aware of the importance of adequate water supplies for towns along this river system which the Pike Creek Dam would supply?
– When the Government reviewed the question of the Pike Creek Dam it did not repudiate the responsibility accepted by the last Government for the expenses incurred up to that stage. I might add that no definite conclusion had been reached on the final acceptance or otherwise of the proposal; it was still being considered. However, since certain funds had been expended we have informed both of the State Governments concerned that we are prepared to pay our share of the cost - the honourable member cited the figure of about $2m - up to that stage. We have indicated that, subsequent to a number of reviews by both ourselves and the Coombs Task Force, we are of the firm opinion that the Pike Creek Dam is not a financially viable proposition in view of other demands on the nation’s resources in other areas. It is up to the Queensland and New South Wales Governments themselves to decide what they do with it. If they wish to go on and so allocate funds in a fashion which, in our view, is not in the best interests of the whole community, that is their business. I am quite sure that for the people in the local area it is a bonanza. Of course, it is worth while for them, but that does not necessarily mean it is worth while for the rest of the community which, in the main, must foot the bill. For those reasons we will not review the question.
page 4684
– Is the Minister for Transport aware of media reports yesterday which suggested that Ansett Airlines of Australia was well ahead of Trans-Australian Airlines in the business battle between the airlines, based on annual reports tabled by him on Tuesday? Does the Minister interpret the financial results of the airlines’ activities to mean that Trans-Australian Airlines is a less efficient business enterprise than Ansett?
– Be careful, Charlie.
– I will try to be very cautious. In my opinion, the newspaper reports were completely misleading and not factual. I say that for the simple reason that Ansett Transport Industries Ltd conducts intrastate operations in Western Australia, South Australia, Victoria and New South Wales while Trans-Australian Airlines does not operate intrastate in those States. Last year Ansett had an increase in revenue which was about $24m more than was gained by TAA. Notwithstanding that substantial increase in revenue, Ansett made a profit which was only SI 00,000 more than that earned by TAA, and this happened despite quite a difference in their bookkeeping systems. For example, TAA deducted $ 16.5m for depreciation on a fleet of aircraft which is smaller than Ansett’s, while ATI deducted $15m for depreciation. TAA set aside $5m as an allowance for taxation, while Ansett set aside only $3. 5m for taxation. After all of these matters were taken into account, TAA made a profit, in round figures, of $2m and ATI made a profit of $3.5m. When one looks at all these facts and figures, it is very clear that TAA is a much more efficient and better operator than the private airline, and I am satisfied with the results.
page 4685
– I ask a question of the Minister for Health. It concerns the statement he made this week that the States have failed to show specific areas of need that would justify the continuation of the distribution of free milk to all Australian school children. I ask: Who or what committee made that decision? Was the decision weighed against the opinion of world nutritionists who have brought down the decision, based on research, that milk is the best supplier of protein which developed the child best, both mentally and physically? Did the Minister completely disregard this advantage to the nation? Will he agree that, in addition to that fact, it is also of advantage to the nation to encourage the use and production of the health food of the nation?
– There is no disputing the fact that milk is one of the major valuable elements in the Australian diet. As I pointed out in my earlier answers, there has been no demonstration that the consumption of milk rose with the operation of the school milk scheme; on the contrary, Australia’s average consumption per head of population actually fell slightly during the period of the operation of that scheme. The nutritional standards in Australia are among the highest in the world. We are interested in maintaining and extending those standards, and it is in the light of that intention that we have invited the States to make further submissions regarding areas of particular need for milk as milk. But we have decided, on the advice of experts in the National Health and Medical Research Council and in the School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine in Sydney who have actually sponsored surveys in this area using school medical services and other sources, that it would be more productive to use the money which has been dissipated in this area to upgrade the services available to families that are in fact suffering from malnutrition.
Despite the school milk scheme and despite all the other schemes which have been adopted on an across the board basis, we believe that the proper way to assist families that are nutritionally in trouble is through the Australian Assistance Plan which will discriminate in favour of those families that need help and give them the sort of help they need. Very often school miik has been left to get warm, unplatable and unattractive to the pupils, many of whom reject it. Many teachers have complained about the system being ineffective in getting milk to those students who need it most. One of the main disadvantages of milk in this regard is that very often the pupils who most need protein and calcium in their diet, for which milk is the best vehicle, are unable or unwilling to take milk. This is particularly the case-
-Order! Would the Minister answer the second part of the question?
– If the Opposition members keep bowling this question up they will get longer answers each time. (Opposition members interjecting) -
– I can wait for a reasonable silence too, Mr Speaker.
– On a point of order, is the Minister in fact trifling with the House and not answering the question?
– On a point of order, Mr Speaker, could you get the Minister to get his milk down quickly?
– There is no point of order.
– The only identifiable group of children of school age that is of concern to me in needing particularly protein and calcium but in fact all vital elements of nutrition are Aboriginal children. Aboriginal children have by and large been the group which contains the biggest percentage of children who cannot take milk. Unless milk has been a regular item of diet from the time of weaning until school age - and it very often is not in Aboriginal communities - there is a high incidence of intolerance to milk. It is not a natural food after the age of weaning and unless people have continued to take it as a regular item of diet between weaning and school age it can actually be positively harmful. It is not an appropriate item of diet-
– What about the third part of the question?
– Order! Honourable members are only delaying the Minister’s reply by making these interjections. The honourable Minister.
– I am very happy to have any representations from the World Health Organisation, the National Health and Medical Research Council or any other reputable body that says that what we are doing is counter-productive. In fact the experience overseas is that the authorities are doing what we are doing. Britain has phased out the scheme and so has New Zealand.
page 4686
– The Acting Minister for Education will recall that last week he announced that the Australian Government had decided that a new medical school would be established in Newcastle, centred on the Royal Newcastle Hospital, to receive its first students in 1977, and that special grants would be made to the University of Newcastle in 1974 and 1975 subject to the agreement of the New South Wales Government to establish the school. I ask: Has his attention been drawn to a subsequent statement by the New South Wales Minister for Health in the New South Wales Legislative Assembly to the effect that the entire financing of the proposed Newcastle medical school would be the responsibility of the Australian Government and that the New South Wales Government will come into the picture only to the extent that it will become, as desired by Canberra, some sort of administering agency for the Australian Government and that all the finance will come from Canberra? Is this a fact? Further, will the Acting Minister liaise with the New South Wales Minister for Health to see that everything possible is done to ensure that the school will be ready for its first intake of students in 1977?
– My attention has been drawn to a statement made by Mr Willis in the New South Wales Legislative Assembly. It is true that the Government is proposing that a new medical school be established at Newcastle and also in north Queensland. The Australian Government has agreed to bear the whole burden of the cost. All it seeks from the New South Wales Government is its co-operation. I would be very surprised if any government in Australia would not give this co-operation in order to ensure a greater supply of medical graduates. Newcastle is a very important centre. It has a very excellent hospital, and we ought to be able to use those facilities to encourage a greater supply of graduates, which is the intention of the Government.
It is to be deplored that any Minister of a State parliament would think that we would not be seeking his government’s co-operation. I understand that Mr Willis is a bit upset because he is not happy with the way in which the Federal Parliament is running education and health affairs. We want to place it on record that at all times this Government is anxious to co-operate with all State governments. We supply all the funds. All we need is their co-operation. If Mr Willis is reluctant to give his co-operation, that will only be to the detriment of Newcastle.
page 4686
– My question is addressed to the Prime Minister. When asked about statements on foreign policy by his colleagues, the Prime Minister said on 9 January this vear:
All I choose to say is there will be no further statements on foreign policy except by the Minister.
He meant the Minister for Foreign Affairs, who at that time was himself. In this House on 29 November the Prime Minister said with respect to the Provisional Revolutionary Government in South Vienam
It was in fact discussed at the Federal Conference of the Australian Labor Party last July. I expressed my views that in the circumstances then obtaining it would be inappropriate to recognise the PRG. I am not aware of any chance in circumstances* since that time which would persuade me otherwise.
Yesterday in Hanoi the Minister for Overseas Trade, Dr Cairns, declared that Australia would probably recognise the PRG in South Vietnam in one form or another. Will the Prime Minister now state precisely what is Australia’s policy with respect to the Provisional Revolutionary Government? Secondly, if the policy is as he stated a couple of weeks ago, will he take appropriate disciplinary action against the Minister for Overseas Trade because of his interference in and misrepresentation of Australian foreign policy?
– -The right honourable gentleman correctly quotes what I stated a couple of weeks ago on the question of the recognition of the Provisional Revolutionary Government in South Vietnam. That is the Government’s policy. It stands. If it is altered,
I shall announce it. I see no ground for changing it. The right honourable gentleman then asserts that my colleague, the Minister for Overseas Trade, said something or other in Hanoi. I do not know whether he said it. I am not going to worry to cable to see what was said or what veracity there may be in the report.
I think it is one of the most contemptible features of the Opposition’s conduct, including that of its Leader, that whenever a Minister is out of the country it makes allegations about what he is doing and saying out of the country. My colleague, the Minister for Overseas Trade, has been more traduced and vilified over the years on these matters than has any other member of the Parliament, and by and large what he has said and done has been justified. It would be instructive for antiquarians to review what the Opposition has said on Vietnam over the years. An embroilment by the Australian Government for wrong motives and wrong purposes in that country helped set back the peace of this region for a couple of decades. Our connivance in that bloodshed and barbarism there has helped reduce the status in the world of our great and powerful friend, the United States. This was a Syracusan expedition. We should never have been a party to it.
An effort was made on Tuesday in question time to cast aspersions at what my colleague the Minister for Overseas Trade had said in Hanoi about the breaches, apparently by both sides, of the Paris agreements. There was a question on notice at the time. I answered it that night and I presume it will appear in Hansard today, because it was given on Tuesday night too late to appear in Wednesday’s Hansard. No-one can cavil at my answer. It was a considered answer, given on advice, about the situation affecting North and South Vietnam. I invite honourable gentlemen to read that answer. If they believe it is not in accordance with fact, let them state where they think it is wrong, but on the advice available to the Australian Government it is an accurate statement of the situation.
There have been breaches of the Paris agreements by both North and South Vietnam. The Australian Government deplores those breaches by each. I did in fact receive a cable in the ordinary way from our representative in Hanoi about what was said in the interview the Prime Minister of North Viet nam gave my colleague the Minister for Overseas Trade. I see in it that the Minister stated:
The Australian Government is concerned to support the implementation of the Paris agreements. The Government will maintain similar relationships with Saigon and Hanoi and will be critical of ceasefire violations by either.
I believe that is a correct statement; it was stated in the correct place. My colleague the Postmaster-General visited both Hanoi and Saigon earlier this year and said the same thing. The attitude of the Australian Government on the matters in Vietnam at the moment is quite clear. We are not party to the Paris agreements. We believe, however, that they are the best hope of restoring peace and giving some hope to the people of that country which my predecessor and his predecessors for so long did their very best to destroy.
– I rise on a point of order. Today the Prime Minister has said that the Minister for Overseas Trade is the most traduced man in the Parliament. Last week he said he was the most traduced man. Who is the greatest now?
– There is no point of order.
page 4687
– The Minister for Immigration is aware of my repeated representations deploring the action of the Hungarian Government regarding two Australian citizens, Alfred and Anna Gardos, and their son and daughter, who are being held prisoner in Hungary following the confiscation of their Australian passports. Will the Minister take urgent action to see that the Australian citizenship of these people is respected and that they are allowed to return home?
– This case has occasioned a great deal of comment and I know the honourable member has been deeply concerned because these people come from Adelaide and from his particular bailiwick. The situation with the Gardos family - the man, the wife and the son - is that they came to Australia in 1957. The daughter, Sussan ah, was born in Adelaide. They are all Australian citizens. They returned to Hungary and the information I have as a result of investigations made is that their Australian passports were confiscated at the border and they were given a temporary settlement document because, it is reported, but not yet confirmed, they applied for resettlement in Hungary. This is an unconfirmed report which is being followed up at the present time. Certainly, I give the honourable member and the House the assurance that wherever an Australian citizen anywhere in the world is unjustly treated - or appears tq be so - the Australian Government will take ‘it as an insult to Australian citizenship and to Australia itself. No citizen will be left without the concern of the Australian Government. This matter is being followed up by both of the departments concerned. We will probe it to the end with a view to ensuring that justice is done and that Australian citizenship is recognised wherever Australians go. I give the honourable member that assurance.
page 4688
– Does the Prime Minister agree that the establishment of the Institute of Marine Science at Townsville in the vicinity of the Great Barrier Reef offers to Australia the opportunity of being unique and giving the most excellent lead in the world in this field of science? Does the Prime Minister agree that the present proposed site has been arrived at after examination by many expert committees and therefore must be supposed to be the best available site for such an institute? Is it a fact that the Institute, when established, will need to have around it an area designated as a national park so that it can operate properly? If the establishment of this Institute at this place either is threatened or appears to be going to be deferred unduly by such a national park not being established by the State Government of Queensland, will the Commonwealth Government consider acquiring the land necessary for such a national park for Commonwealth purposes in order that this Institute may go ahead rapidly at its proper place?
– I certainly will give consideration to the matter which the right honourable gentleman raises. I acknowledge the part that he played, firstly, in having this Institute established and, secondly, in proposing the proper preservation of the marine environment preferably by way of creating a national park in that area. I appreciate also that it is now likely that as the result of legislation that the Parliament has passed at last, after considering it for 3) years, the Australian Government will be able to establish such a national park. This matter comes within the administrative responsibility of my colleague the Minister for Science, and I would like him to amplify my answer.
– I think that the question asked by the right honourable gentleman should have been asked of the Premier of Queensland. What has happened is that on 4 September we had a meeting with the Queensland authorities. We said that the site at Cape Cleveland, which had been chosen by the committees looking into the matter, was admirable but we wanted to ensure that unbridled commercial development of the area would not jeopardise the scientific purposes of the Marine Institute. That meeting took place on 4 September. Despite constant reminders to the Queensland Government, there has been no response. I would hope that the right honourable gentleman could prevail upon his colleagues in his own Party in Queensland to try to get a decision so that we can get on with the job of building the Institute.
page 4688
– Has the Minister for Defence seen reports in the Press suggesting that Australia is likely to acquire the United States destroyer, the patrol frigate, as a destroyer replacement and claiming that this vessel is quite unsuitable for Australian conditions? Will he inform the House whether there is any substance in these reports?
– I did see a report in which it was suggested that the American frigate, which is now under consideration in the United States, would not be acceptable to the” Royal Australian Navy. Let me answer the honourable gentleman’s question by pointing out that, as I have already announced, the question of a destroyer replacement is under consideration in our own Department of Defence. We will be considering a destroyer between 800 tons and 4,500 tons. No firm decision has been made except that Cabinet and the Government have approved a destroyer program. Coming back to the first part of the honourable gentleman’s question relating to the American frigate, I point out that the advice which was received by the Department of the Navy during the period of office of the previous Government, when a decision was made on the DDL program, stated quite emphatically that if on the ground of cost the DDL program was not considered to be viable the American frigate would be an acceptable alternative. Certainly in view of this statement and a recommendation from the experts of the Department of the Navy it must be considered that the American frigate would be acceptable in terms of naval requirements.
page 4689
– My question is directed to the Postmaster-General. I refer to the undertaking given by the Government concerning the provision of telephone lines up to 15 miles from an exchange to those who had applied prior to the Budget announcement which cut this length to 5 miles. Why is this undertaking not being honoured and why is a heavy charge being imposed for telephone connections on existing lines longer than 5 miles where in fact such lines are not otherwise being used?
– It is true that at the time of the Budget it was announced that there was to be a change in what was known as the country line policy. At the same time it was clearly indicated that where contracts had been entered into prior to that date, which I think was 21 August, all such contracts would be honoured. I am not aware of any details which the honourable member now hints at. If he gives me the information I will do my best to give him an answer.
page 4689
– My question is directed to the Minister for Transport. In its voluminous report on roads in Australia in 1973, the Commonwealth Bureau of Roads has recommended to the Government that it should provide $2,607m to the States for roads. Is it a fact that of this amount $5 13m is earmarked for national highways, $912m for urban arterial roads and $479m for rural arterial development roads? Can the Minister say whether the Australian Government will hand these moneys over to the States to spend in any way they please as is the case under the present Commonwealth Aid Roads Act? Finally, in respect of country roads, to what extent will there be a variation in funds available from the present Commonwealth Aid Roads Agreement for rural roads?
– I first of all acknowledge that the figures quoted by the honourable member for Macquarie are correct, as all honourable members know. I emphasise that the Government as yet has not made a decision on this matter. As he mentioned, it is a voluminous report and we have to give it a lot of consideration. I made it available to honourable members as soon as I received it so it will be subjected to considerable investigation and discussion. One of the points that I propose putting to Cabinet will be on the basis that no longer will we allow the States to determine where Australian Government money is to be spent. Have a look at the Australian national highways system connecting the capital cities and beyond in Queensland, for example. The roads are in a deplorable condition. On the Hume Highway hundreds of lives are lost unnecessarily each year because of its condition. The various motoring organisations have been critical of the States’ actions in not developing these roads. We propose to establish a program of our own wherein we will decide what roads, for example, are to be developed and extended to divided carriageway roads. The same may be said with respect to our national capital. One does not need to look for a sign proclaiming the border between New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory. One need look only at the condition of the road; that will tell one where the border is. The honourable member for EdenMonaro and also the honourable member for Hume have complained on a number of occasions about the condition of the road. These are matters with which we propose to deal.
With respect to urban arterial roads, where State governments have been pursuing a policy of building freeways, we do not propose to go along with indiscriminate construction of freeways. If the construction of such freeways is necessary, yes, we will contribute to the cost. But where we consider that freeways create environmental problems we certainly will not contribute to their construction. The same policy will prevail with respect to rural arterial roads. The Government, I hope, will be pursuing a policy of deciding what roads are essential and what roads require our assistance so as to ensure the development of roads between important centres of population.
page 4689
– Has the attention of the Treasurer been drawn to the latest economic review published by the Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research in which it is claimed that, if the Government’s policies are continued, a recession is likely to begin in 1974, with inflation continuing at an unsatisfactory rate? Has the Treasurer received similar advice from the Treasury and the Reserve Bank? Are the views which he has recently expressed in sharp contrast to those of the Institute, the Treasury and the Reserve Bank?
– My attention has been drawn to the Institute’s prognostications. I may say that I have been a subscriber to the Institute’s publications ever since they were first issued. I think that it has not an unblemished track record by any means. All 1 would suggest is that forecasts are no better than the material upon which they are based. I noticed a reservation that things have changed slightly because no account had been taken of the oil problem. I submit that anybody at the moment ought to be careful about making forecasts as to what is likely to happen in Australia or outside Australia. I simply say that if Western society can no longer conquer recessions, well, Western society has not very far to go. The difficulty at the moment is to regulate booms. But what has happened in the last few months, I think, should make us wary of any sorts of forecasts that are made in the economic area.
– Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the next notice paper, whenever it may appear.
page 4690
-Order! 1 should like to announce with regard to the apportionment of questions without notice between the Liberal Party and the Country Party in this House that in this session Liberal Party members have asked 243 questions, and Country Party members have asked 120 questions. So, I owe members of the Country Party one question. I will pick it up in the next session.
page 4690
– Pursuant to section 10 of the International Monetary Agreements Act 1947, I present the report on the operations of that Act and of the operations, insofar as they relate to Australia, of the International Monetary Fund and of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development for the year ended 30 June 1973.
page 4690
– Pursuant to section 70 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904- 1973, I present the seventeenth annual report of the President of the Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission for the year ended 13 August 1973.
page 4690
– For the information of honourable members, I present the report of the Advisory Committee on Commonwealth Employment Service Statistics.
page 4690
– For the information of honourable members, I present the interim report on Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport by the Australian and New South Wales Governments’ joint committee planning Sydney airports. I bring to honourable members’ attention that there is a 2-volume report to the joint committee on the first stage of the environmental study group’s examination of environmental factors at sites under investigation by the Committee, entitled ‘Report on the Environmental Impact Study Stage 1 Alternative Airport Sites for Sydney’. As the report consists of a summary report volume and a second volume of opinion statements by specialists containing 17 separately bound parts, I am arranging for a copy to be placed in the Parliamentary Library for use by honourable members. I also am arranging for the placement of 2 other reports in the Parliamentary Library. These are the summary report on off-shore airport concept and inland airport concept for Sydney and the report on the engineering feasibility of an off-shore airport in the Sydney region.
page 4690
– Pursuant to section 6 of the National Fitness Act 1941, I present the report, entitled ‘National Fitness in Australia’, upon the work done under that Act during the period January 1972 to June 1973.
page 4691
– For the information of honourable members, I present a report entitled ‘Environmental Protection: The First Year’. This is a summary of my Department’s activities within the Labor Government’s first year of office.
page 4691
– Pursuant to section 19 of the AngloAustralian Telescope Agreement Act 1970-71, I present the report on the Anglo-Australian telescope project for the year ended 30 June 1973.
page 4691
Mr LES JOHNSON (Hughes- Minister for
Housing and Construction) - Pursuant to section 50B of the Defence Service Homes Act 1918-1973, I present the annual report of the Director of Defence Service Homes for the year ended 30 June 1973. An interim report was presented to the House on 26 September 1973.
page 4691
The following Bills were returned from the Senate without amendment:
Albury-Wodonga Development Bill 1973
Albury-Wodonga Development (Financial Assistance) Bill 1973
Growth Centres (Financial Assistance) Bill 1973
Land Commissions (Financial Assistance) Bill 1973
Banking Bill (No. 2) 1973
page 4691
Question proposed:
That grievances be noted.
– Honourable members will have noticed an advertisement which appeared in many metropolitan newspapers yesterday under the heading ‘Ukraine: The Almost Forgotten Battlefield for Human Rights’ and which stated in part:
The Ukrainian community in Australia, and indeed throughout the world, is greatly alarmed at the continuous flagrant breaches of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the regime of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
That regime, generally referred to as Russia, continually makes claims of having solved all problems with the question of nationalities.
Ithas gone so far as to insist on membership in the United Nations for the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic. Careerists in these puppet sovereign’ republics hasten to better one another in new methods of providing proof that they are more ‘Russian’ than the real Russian.
A monthly quota of arrests is carried out. Many thousands of people are being systematically persecuted, jailed in infamous Vladimir Prison, sent to ‘corrective labor camps’ graded on the basis of ‘Severe regime’ or ‘General regime”, no better than Nazi Germany’s concentration camps, simply for daring to express a critical opinion of the regime’s actions in Ukraine or other Soviet republics.
No doubt that advertisement was paid for by subscriptions from little people in Australia who have come from the Ukraine and who know what the socialist system there really is. The advertisement was published, no doubt, because of the anniversary of the Declaration of Human Rights and because this weekend we are to be visited by the President of the Ukrainian National Republic in Exile, Mr Livytskyj who will be holding a public meeting in Canberra on Sunday. The House should take note of this.
The Russian Soviet regime is almost selfconfessed a criminal regime in regard to human freedom. It seals off large areas of its territory so we cannot know at first hand what is happening there. It prevents emigration of Jews and other people from the Soviet Union. It will not let them get out of the prison house. Because it maintains this discipline of a prison regime it is able to terrorise its people into silence.
And we keep silence while this is going on. Apparently we have this kind of double standard. We are falling over ourselves in the name of detente to cover up all these crimes against freedom and against humanity. I noticed only yesterday in the Press that the Prime Minister (Mr Whitlam) was inciting the people of South Africa to violence against their own regime and declaring that such violence would be justified. I am not a defender of the South African regime but I say to the Prime Minister, who is here in the House - I say to the Prime Minister who is now ostentatiously leaving the House - that he exhibits a double standard in this respect. The crimes in South Africa are only a small part of the continous crimes against humanity which are being perpetrated still by the communist regimes, aggressive regimes in Europe and in Asia, which are enslaving their own people and not giving them normal human freedom and human decency.
I say with regret that I speak to some extent about past Governments in Australia. I ask only that the Government of Australia should be even handed in this matter. If it wants to condemn a lack of freedom in South Africa, for example, let it also condemn the far more flagrant and vicious violations of freedom which are still taking place in the Soviet Union and its satellites. If we are worried about some hundreds of people killed at Sharpeville why are we not worried about the millions of victims murdered in the campaign of genocide by the Soviet Union in the Ukrainian Socialist Republic? Why do we make so much fuss about one and do nothing about the other? The world, at its peril, will ignore these attacks on freedom which are being made all the time - this cancerous slavery of the Soviet socialist system. It will ignore these things at its peril, believing that there is safety in surrender, that you can survive by crawling. I do not believe that the lessons of history will confirm that kind of view.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
page 4692
– I move:
The proposal involves alterations and additions within the passenger concourse to provide additional aircraft positions, provision of additional amenities for transit and departing passengers, air-conditioning of the existing concourse and additions, and provision of additional aircraft standing aprons with associated connecting taxiways and vehicular access. The building works, light and power, and fire protection systems will all be extended to match existing facilities.
The estimated cost of the proposed work when referred to the Public Works Committee was $7.3m. The Committee concluded there was a need for the alterations and extensions to the terminal building and the additional aircraft aprons, and that the work should proceed to construction in this instance. Upon the concurrence of the House in this resolution, detailed planning can proceed in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee.
– The Opposition welcomes this indication of further development work in relation to the international terminal and other aspects of the Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport. I should like to urge the Minister for Works and Construction (Mr Les Johnson) and the Government to commence further work at the airport, particularly on the proposed north-south runway which was mentioned in the report tabled by the Minister this morning. I am at some disadvantage in saying this because, as I represent the people of Galston, it will be thought that I am speaking from a biased point of view. But I draw attention to the fact that, as the report tabled by the Minister states, the construction of the additional runway in fact will reduce the level of aircraft noise in the areas surrounding the. Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport. So, it is in the interests of residents in those areas that I would urge the further development of work at Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport, which the present motion moved by the Minister suggests may take place.
-Order! The honourable member for Berowra was allowed a little latitude in making his speech, but I should like to bring to the attention of the House the fact that we are dealing with aircraft aprons and not runways.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
page 4692
Debate resumed from 12 December (vide page 4664), on motion by Dr Patterson:
That the Bill be now read a second time.
– This Bill does 2 things. It extends the fruitgrowing reconstruction scheme for another 12 months and it also lifts the payment for fresh fruit from $200 an acre to a maximum of $250 an acre. Both of these amendments are minor, and they are acceptable to the Opposition. This scheme had a very difficult birth some 12 months ago mainly because of complications arising from a severe means test. The former Minister for Primary Industry, the honourable member for New England (Mr Sinclair), eased the means test on two separate occasions, in August and October last year, and because of this, the reconstruction scheme was considered to be a reasonable proposition if goodwill and flexibility in administration occurred at both Federal and State levels.
I intend to restrict my comments basically to discussing Victoria and to the irrigated areas of northern Victoria - the canned and fresh peach and pear areas - because these are some of the major areas affected, or to be affected by the scheme. The history of the application of the scheme in those areas is less than happy. By the time the second alteration to the means test was made, the fruitgrowing season was at hand and no time was available for growers to make decisions. Also, a great deal of confusion was created by various Labor members of Parliament and Labor candidates for election to Parliament who said that if the Australian Labor Party became the Government, the means test on eligibility would be completely abolished. I should like to quote an article in the Griffith Area News’ of 16 October 1972 in which reference was made to what the honourable member for Riverina (Mr Grassby) had said. The article states:
The tree pull scheme is inadequate and hopeless if a means test is applied and State debts deducted from any compensation money’, Mr Grassby declared.
We will insist that the means test be deleted and that if money is to be made available it should be for the grower to decide what to do with it.
So, one can understand the confusion in growers’ minds at that time last year, when one of the leading spokesmen for the Labor Party said that if Labor became the Government, the means test on the tree pull scheme would be completely removed. However, once Labor came to power as the Government, this undertaking evidently was forgotten because since that time there have been 2 surveys of this scheme and nothing further has been done to ease the means test. The only action along these lines was taken by the previous Minister, the honourable member for New England.
In my opinion, the scheme in Victoria has been marred by lack of commonsense in its application, lack of goodwill - in fact, one gets the impression sometimes that certain people do not want the scheme to succed at all - and lack of flexibility in administration both at the Federal and State levels. I will give honourable members some examples of this. The first example I give relates to the Victorian administration of the scheme, the Victorian Rural Finance and Settlement Commission. In order to decide how much per acre will be paid for canning peach or pear trees, the Victorians have instituted a points system., and in this system are included certain criteria such as the age of the trees, which is fair enough, and also the shareholding of the grower which determines his cannery access. By some strange means, the Commission has arrived at the conclusion that if a grower has few shares or, because of quota arrangements, poor access to a cannery, he should be offered a lower compensation value for the removal of his trees than if he had good cannery access. This situation is completely topsy-turvy.
One would think that the people who should be assisted to leave the industry are those who do not have a ready market for their fruit, namely, those with poor cannery access who are restricted by cannery quotas from selling their fruit. They should be offered the highest possible figure to help them leave the industry because they are the ones without any future in the industry. Yet, in this topsy-turvy situation in Victoria, those people are offered the least. This anomaly has been pointed out on a number of occasions both by me and by members of the Northern Victorian Fruit-growers Association at both Federal and State levels, yet nothing has been done about it. This is a very good example where one could wonder whether or not people really want the scheme to work.
For example, as at 30 November this situation has resulted in an average figure of $259 an acre being paid in compensation for canning fruit in Victoria. According to the original Bill, the average figure to be achieved was $350 an acre. One had hoped that the generous administration of the scheme, which I believe has been one of the features of the general rural reconstruction scheme, would also have been applied in this instance so that, at least in the initial stages of the scheme, the average compensation payable may have been even higher than $350 an acre. If necessary, under pressure it could have been reduced later. But we find that, 12 months after the scheme has begun, the compensation being paid, on an average, is approximately $100, or 30 per cent less, than what it is possible to pay. How can one say that it is an incentive to make the scheme work, when the administrators of the scheme are paying only 60 per cent to 70 per cent of what the grower is entitled to?
Another point relating to the lack of flexibility in administration of the scheme concerns the household area. In many cases, under the clear fell operation, the grower must leave the property. Particularly if they are new Australians and are unsure of themselves in this country or if they are older persons who could possibly retire, the one thing they want to retain is their house in which to live.
It has been suggested both by myself and by the fruit growers in the area that surely when a clear fell operation takes place or when the Rural Finance and Settlement Commission takes over the property a subdivision should be made so that the house and perhaps half an acre around it can be retained by the grower. This would not inhibit the sale of the property because people who would be buying this property would be buying it basically as bare land for an extension of their farming operations - most likely of a grazing nature. But these people, because of their fear of being put out without a house to live in ‘have refused to accept any proposition put forward to them. At least 20 new Australians as well as a number of old Australians have come to me and have said that they want to get out. They have no financial future in the industry at all but where can they go if they are left without a house to live in? In this area of northern Victoria, because of the closer settlement, it is possible that they could still have this house on a property and drive to work at Shepparton, Numurkah or one of the other major towns in the area. This is another example of lack of flexibility in the scheme. It has nothing to do with the original legislation itself, but it is just cussedness in the way it is being administered that is restricting the success of the scheme and restricting social justice to these growers.
Another point arises on the question of what happens to any excess money after the sale of a property when it has been compulsorily acquired by the State administering authority. For example in Victoria we have a case where a grower was bankrupt. His place was compulsorily acquired; it had to be compul sorily acquired - I have no argument with this - so that terms of agreement could be reached with creditors. Because of the proximity of this piece of land to Shepparton it had quite a high real estate value. This property has been sold, the creditors have been paid and one could even pay back the tree pull compensation which the State authority - the Rural Finance and Settlement Commission - claimed from the Federal Government. But approximately Si 0,000 to $12,000 remains undistributed. One fears at the moment that the State authority - the Rural Finance and Settlement Commission - is going to retain this $10,000 to $12,000. That to me would be completely unfair, unjust and unreasonable. Surely this person who saved for years and who paid out on his property for years but fell behind with his payments should be paid the balance after these other commitments have been met and this money should not be kept by the State authority which could make a profit out of money - Federal money - which at no time has been at any cost to itself. That is another area where I believe the Commonwealth should take a far harder line and tell the States: ‘It is not your money; it belongs to the grower once all the debts have been settled’.
One of the ironies of the scheme is that in the Goulburn Valley it was aimed in general at canning pears. But more peaches have been pulled than pears and this is because of the settlement policies in the area, unsuitable soils and climate problems where some peach trees have been planted. This year 3 additional problems have arisen and I want to make 3 points on how the scheme itself as distinct from altering Victoria’s criteria system - the household area etc. - could help from now on. Fifty per cent of the peach trees of Northern Victoria have died because of the wettest year on record. This will mean a shortage of peaches this season and, because of lack of financial incentive and poor outlook for the future, in the past few years not enough peach trees have been planted to maintain peach production, the peach tree having a very short life as distinct from the pear tree.
At the moment in the Goulburn Valley there are orchards where some peach trees are still living and some peach trees have died. I would ask that the administrators of this scheme be flexible enough to allow dead peach trees to be included for tree-pull compensation because it is a terrible situation - and not a workable one - to have some trees living and. some trees dead. I do not think it is good enough to say: ‘Well, if a tree is dead it has to be pulled anyway’. There is also a point made in the second reading speech which I think is completely wrong, and I agree with the member for New England (Mr Sinclair) in this regard. The second reading speech states:
Since the scheme is designed to assist horticulturists who are in financial difficulties the Australian Government has taken the view that no useful purpose would be served by allowing growers after the extension of the scheme was announced to withdraw applications, take one more crop off their trees and reapply for assistance, lt was considered that such a course of action was likely to aggravate a grower’s financial problems.
To me this shows once more the remoteness of the administrators of this scheme from the real life situation facing orchardists. A crop shortage is facing the industry this year because of the season and we have this problem of some trees still living and some dead.
Surely the sensible thing to do would be to allow growers to take this crop off because the season is just about here again and expense has been incurred for spraying etc. and, in conjunction with allowing the dead trees to be included, after this season the growers should pull the trees and claim compensation. It would do 2 things. Firstly, it would improve the financial position of the grower - not make it worse - because he has already incurred the majority of his debts and there is a hope of some income coming in if he is allowed to pick; and secondly, it would help the fruit industry generally this year when there is this critical shortage of canning peaches and even possibly canning pears because of blackspot and other problems.
The third point I wish to make is that because of this problem of peach trees or peach tonnage for the future the scheme should be amended to allow certain types of peach trees - certain varieties which are in demand in the market and which are seasonally the best - to be replanted in certain areas where it is known that the soil and the climate are correct even though the grower himself has claimed compensation for tree pull. Under the scheme basically a person has to sign an agreement that he will not plant fruit trees again for 5 years after he has accepted compensation, yet in a letter dated 15 October the Minister for Primary Industry has told me that in Tasmania, provided 2 types of apples are planted, this requirement that no fruit tree be replanted for 5 years after accepting compen- sation will be waived for apple orchardists in that State. There are certain conditions. I think that should be done for the peach section of the canning fruit industry as well. If it is good enough for the Tasmanian apple grower where there is not the forecast of a crop shortage as there is with canning peaches in the future, it is good enough to be done for the peach canning industry as well. It could be hedged - and should be hedged - with requirements that only certain varieties be planted and that these varieties be planted only in certain soils.
If some of these ways of being more flexible with the scheme both at the State and at the Federal level are carried out - I have enumerated quite a number of them - I believe there is still hope for this scheme to be a far more successful one to help the industry and to help the growers with social justice than it has been up to date.
– The previous Government, to do the best possible, introduced many measures to assist the Australian fruit growing industry - equalisation, sales tax rebate for soft drink manufacture, and reconstruction. At the best of times the fruit industry generally is a finely balanced industry relying on exports, with all the hardships of that. We have skyrocketing freights today and indifferent overseas markets. Also we are relying on home consumption and in the past, as I have just said, we have been, relying on the sales tax exemption for soft drink manufacture. With the loss of this type of government assistance - sales tax exemption for soft drink manufacture - there is all the more reason why the rural reconstruction scheme must be made to work and made to work better than I believe it has worked up to date.
Originally $4.6m was allocated to the fruitgrowing reconstruction scheme, and during 1972-73 only $400,000 was actually spent. According to the second reading speech of the Minister for Northern Development (Dr Patterson), setting up the necessary administrative machinery caused a delay in getting the scheme under way. He indicated that most of the growers who could have taken immediate advantage of the scheme had already incurred spraying, pruning and fertilising expenses for the 1972-73 crops before the State authorities were able to accept applications. Certainly the administrative delays would have contributed to a lower number of applications for assistance than originally conceived. However, other factors have contributed to the situation, as pointed out very ably by the honourable member for Murray (Mr Lloyd). Growers might not have been fully aware of the scheme and its possible application to them. The extent of this is difficult to ascertain without a detailed survey. Certainly it appears that there was a great deal of indecision among growers. This is shown by the fact that a large number of applications under the original scheme were not made until the last week before its expiry.
Another possible explanation is that the assessments made by the State authorities of the financial difficulties of the applicants for assistance might have been too harsh. The total number of applications to 30 June 1973 amounted to 1,083, of which 192 or almost 18 per cent were rejected. Overall only 673 offers were made, and only 484 first offers were taken up. In an attempt to decide whether the assessments have been too harsh, information would be required on the financial situation of those growers who applied for assistance and the criteria followed by the authorities. However, it would appear that a greater number of applications would be forthcoming and a greater number would be accepted by the authorities if the means test or the other criteria applying were to be relaxed. It is possible that the Commonwealth Government could come to some agreement with the States on this matter if it is thought that an expanded scheme would be desirable. I suggest that an expanded scheme is desirable, for the reasons I have pointed out.
The honourable member for New England (Mr Sinclair) expressed regret last night that this Bill does not go far enough. He pointed out that he believed that the first year was a trial. He said that the bugs should have been ironed out and that we should be looking forward, in the second year of the scheme, to a varying and expanded scheme. However, the Budget Estimates indicate that only $2m of the remaining $4. 2m will be spent under the scheme during 1973-74. This seems to indicate that the extended scheme will be considerably smaller than the scheme which was envisaged in 1972.
The States Grants (Fruit-growing Reconstruction) Bill will prevent growers who have already applied for assistance under the original scheme from withdrawing their applications, taking one more crop off their trees and re-applying for assistance under the extended scheme. It has been reasoned that the clause which makes this provision has been included to inhibit further indecision on the part of growers who are experiencing financial difficulty and because, if growers were to proscrastinate further, their financial problems would be aggravated. While it might be correct to suggest that further delay by certain growers in removing trees will worsen their financial situation, this clause could prove to be too harsh on those growers who are genuinely indecisive and as a result opt for withdrawing their applications in spite of this clause. More thought should be given to allowing some flexibility in the administration of this scheme, as was well pointed out by the honourable member for Murray. I will not enlarge further on that.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill read a second time.
Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.
Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.
Bill (on motion by Dr Patterson) read a third time.
page 4696
Debate resumed from 20 November (vide page 3509), on motion by Dr Patterson:
That the Bill be now read a second time.
– Mr Deputy Speaker, may I have the indulgence of the House to raise a point of procedure on the legislation? Before the debate is resumed on this Bill I would like to suggest that it may suit the convenience of the House to have a general debate covering this Bill and the Queensland Grant (Dawson River Weirs) Bill as they are associated measures. Separate questions may of course be put on each of the Bills at the conclusion of the debate. I suggest therefore, Mr Deputy Speaker, that you permit the subject matter of both Bills to be discussed in this debate.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Luchetti)Order! Is the wish of the House to have a general debate covering the 2 measures? There being no objection, I will allow that course to be followed.
– The Opposition will not oppose the passage of these 2 Bills, but it draws to the attention of the Government and the public what it believes are major irregularities in the Queensland Grant (Kinchant Dam) Bill. I intend at the appropriate time to move an amendment to the motion that this Bill be read a second time. The situation as I see it is this: The Queensland Government has made a number of requests to the Commonwealth for financial assistance for water conservation. These requests have been made in the order of priorities as allocated by the Queensland Irrigation and Water Supply Commission. First it listed the Fairbairn Dam at Emerald, and this was accepted by the Commonwealth as one of the projects to receive assistance under the first national water resources development program. Next came the Pike Creek Dam. The Queensland and New South Wales Government approached the Commonwealth Government in the late 1960s, and a study carried out in 1970 showed that, at the then ruling prices, the economics of this dam were a bit marginal, but the Commonwealth made an offer of one-third of the cost of the dam, provided the States would also put up one-third each. This offer was accepted and work started on the dam. Next in priority Queensland placed the first and second phases of the Kolan scheme, or the Bundaberg scheme, and behind these the Kinchant Dam, the subject of this legislation. The application for funds for the Kinchant Dam was examined by an inter-departmental committee in 1971, and as a result of the report evaluating this proposal the Commonwealth Government decided not to provide assistance.
This was the situation when the former Government was defeated in December of last year. Early in 1973 - on 10 January, to be explicit - the Minister for Northern Development (Dr Patterson) stated that the Commonwealth Government would carry out an urgent reappraisal of the Eton irrigation proposal, thai is, the proposal which is based on the Kinchant Dam, which we are now considering. There is no prize, of course, for guessing in whose electorate the dam was to be situated. It was in the electorate of the Minister for Northern Development. Within 5 days, officers from the Bureau of Agricultural Economics and State officers were in the area carrying out a reappraisal. The rest, of course, is history. The second BAE report gave the scheme a much better economic assessment than did the first.
– There was no first.
– There was an interdepartmental committee report.
– About 3 lines.
– I have tried to obtain it and I have been unable to do so.
– You were the Minister at the time.
– No, I was not. The Commonwealth Government decided to withdraw its support for the Pike Creek Dam, in the electorates of 2 Country Party members, and to provide an almost identical amount for the Kinchant Dam in the electorate of the honourable member for Dawson. The present Government, when in Opposition, made great play of the need for open government. In government, however, it has shown itself to be completely opposed to giving the Opposition the information it needs to make a proper judgment. I have done my best to obtain all the available reports. All I have been given is a BAE report on the Eton irrigation proposal. It shows that, on the current sugar prices, this project appears to be very soundly based; but we have not been given access to the 1971 interdepartmental committee report, which I mentioned earlier and on the strength of which the previous Government decided not to support the Kinchant Dam proposal. One is entitled to ask: Why did the 2 reports vary so much? Does the Treasury support the figures, in this new report?
Similarly, we have virtually no information about the Commonwealth’s assessment of the Pike Creek Dam. The Minister and his Department will not provide any report on that dam. The only published report on it is in this very short excerpt from the Coombs Task Force report, which quotes the 1970 report:
The economic evaluation in 1970 suggested a low level of economic net benefits; economic analysis indicated a likely return on capital of 1.7 per cent to 3.1 per cent.
What nonsense all this makes of the Prime Minister’s policy speech in which he kept saying that we would have open government. Let me read it:
We want the Australian people to know the facts, to know the needs, to know the choices before them. We want them always to help us as a government to make the decisions and to make the right decisions. Australia has suffered heavily from the demeaning idea that the government always knows best with the unspoken assumption always in the background that only the government knows or should know anything.
Later, of course, he went on to say:
The Australian Labor Party will build into the administration of the affairs of this nation machinery that will prevent any government, Labor or Liberal, from ever again cloaking your affairs under excessive and needless secrecy. Labor will trust the people.
What I am saying is that we should have greater access. We want to know whether the 1970 report has been updated in the light of current prices. If not, why not? Why has the Minister not made these figures available? Obviously a project which was marginal in 1970 could be extremely profitable today because of the improvement in the prices of so many commodities. This whole operation has the appearance of political patronage for the electorate of the honourable member for Dawson. It is a sorry day for this national Parliament when a Commonwealth government abrogates an agreement that was entered into between the previous Government and the State governments of Queensland and New South Wales in order to switch the funds into a Labor member’s electorate and into a project which the State regarded - at the time, anyway - as having a lower priority.
– No. 2.
– It was not No. 2 at the time, and the Pike Creek Dam was not on the list the Minister showed me. The Pike Creek Dam was the State’s No. 1 priority at the time the funds were requested and given. The Minister reminds me of the shire councillor who, on election as shire president, ensures that the road from town to bis front gate is sealed immediately. Now that the Minister has got his dam, there may be an opportunity for other electorates with deserving projects to obtain some money under the national water resources development program. It may be a small point, but one is entitled to ask why water conservation projects are not introduced into this House by the Minister in charge of water conservation. Luckily, for New South Wales and Queensland the Pike Creek project will proceed ‘because the 2 State governments concerned regard it as of such high priority that they would be prepared to share the cost between them in order to ensure its completion.
– More than $2m has been spent.
– Yes. When the Labor Party was seeking to woo the voter at the last Federal election, it made all sorts of rash promises. On water conservation it said:
The conservation of water has always been an integral part of Labor’s development policies as they affect primary industry. Australia’s water needs under line the growing interdependence between city and country. The proper use of the Murray-Darling system is as vital to Adelaide as it is to the Riverina and Sunraysia. The Ross River and Burdekin Projects are as vital to Townsville as to Townsville’s hinterland. They will be prime responsibilities of the Conservation and Construction Authority, which will be financed from the $47 million which Victoria and N.S.W. will pay each year for the next 50 years for the Snowy Mountains Scheme.
One is entitled to ask what has happened to the$47m we were to see every year. We have had 12 months of Labor government and all we have seen so far is that the Government has taken the money from one project that was already under way and diverted it to a project in the electorate of Dawson. We would be very much further down if the proposals of the Prime Minister (Mr Whitlam) for the slowing down or cessation of work on the Dartmouth Dam had been approved. We are entitled to ask what has happened to the $47m, and when we are to see some of the promises implemented or whether this is just another promise that has been forgotten.
I am sure that the Minister for Northern Development, who probably wrote the passage I just quoted, genuinely believed that a Labor government would carry out its pledge because he, like me, is a believer in water conservation. I am afraid that those of us who sit on this side of the House had as much faith in Labor implementing this promise as we had in it implementing its promise to continue to spend 3.5 per cent of the gross national product on defence. We have been proved right. In its first 12 months in office Labor has implemented only one new project - this Kinchant Dam proiect. This has been virtually cancelled out by taking away the money for the Pike Creek Dam. As to the second Bill we are discussing, concerning the Dawson River weirs project, the Opposition supports it. It was the McMahon Government that made the offer to the Queensland Government of the finance for this project. I now move:
That all words after ‘That’ be omitted with a view to inserting the following words in place thereof: whilst not declining to give the Bill a second reading, the House is of the opinion that the assistance provided for the construction of these works has not been allocated in accordance with the highest priorities and greatest needs of the State’.
– Is the amendment seconded?
– I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.
– I shall confine my remarks almost entirely to the Baralaba scheme. It is most gratifying to see that the present Government has continued to develop the approval already given by our Government for this project. It is not a major project, but it is of great benefit to the area involved. Anyone who knows the general area appreciates that, like most other areas in that part of the world or most inland areas of this great country, it is drought prone. For many years the Baralaba area was recognised as being most prolific, from the point of view of beef cattle production and certainly from the point of view of producing fodder crops, such as sorghum, safflower, and so on. However, it was the old story: It lacked the necessary water. A proposition was put to the Federal Government which involved final expenditure amounting to $1.2m. The Federal Government agreed to provide $550,000 of that amount of money. Although the accent in that area is on beef cattle production and most of the grains, particularly fodder crops, there is always the hope that we may see the coal mining activities revived. I suppose that is a rather strange statement in view of the present policy of this Government which has brought to a standstill any projected mineral development in the nation. But just the same, this project will certainly be a contribution to that type of activity because inevitably there is associated with any sort of mineral production the necessity for adequate water supplies. The proposed dam will help tremendously in this field.
There are one or two other comments I would like to make. Under the Queensland Government Farm Water Supplies Assistance Acts of 1958 to 1965 technical assistance is available to land holders throughout the State on all matters relating to water conservation and the utilisation for domestic, stock and irrigation purposes on individual holdings or groups of holdings covering the construction of farm dams, irrigation bores, stock bores and pumping and distribution systems. That is the formal declaration by the Queensland Government. Our Party, with the blessing of our coalition colleagues, promulgated a few years ago and was in the process of formulating policy proposals that there should be much greater accent on assistance to smaller individual projects. I mean projects which arc even smaller than the Baralaba irrigation project.
I think one classic example of the way in which this kind of assistance could be exploited effectively and certainly to the advantage of this nation would be the use of the Keyline irrigation scheme. I am sure that of all people my colleague, who by the way made such a tremendous contribution when he was Minister for National Development and who instilled confidence into all those who were interested in conservation and irrigation - I pay tribute to him - recognises the advantages of the Yeomans-Keyline irrigation system. When I was Minister for the Army I had cause to visit that area. I saw the actual results on the farm. I saw what can be done with this type of irrigation scheme. Even more dramatic was the operation set up by one individual in the Kennedy electorate. I suppose that we speak of those things about which we know most. I refer to an operation near Winton which was put in by a fellow named Charles Phillott. He was laughed to scorn. He was trying to raise sheep on pebbly ridges. Just about the whole of the country looked like pebbly ridges during the drought at the time. Yet he was able to create feed pens. He had no financial assistance. He bought an old worn out grader from the council. He used old tyres and bits of wire. He is typical of the sort of people who live in our part of the world. They stand their ground and they do not wilt under difficulties. He met them as they came along. He was able successfully to turn off fat lambs at a time when the whole of the district was staggering under the most dreadful drought in history.
My purpose in mentioning this is to demonstrate that there should be a realistic non prejudiced appraisal of these individual schemes. I am yet to be influenced by any argument against the application of the Yeomans scheme. I wish I had the time to elaborate further but time is precious this morning. I have undertaken to confine my remarks to one or two points.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Luchetti)Order! The Bills under discussion are very limited. They deal with 2 specific matters.
– I respect your ruling, Mr Deputy Speaker. I am just trying to illustrate the relationship between a scheme such as the Baralaba irrigation scheme and the possibility of applying funds to other schemes. I earnestly ask the Minister for Northern Development (Dr Patterson), who is familiar with the individual difficulties of the people in these areas, to put before his Government a request for further investigation of the ground work which we in government had commenced in order to try to create a major fund which could be used to assist individual drought mitigation operations on the farm or on the grazing properties.
I would just like to conclude my remarks by referring - I hope I am not anticipating something which may be said by the honourable member for Wide Bay (Mr Hansen) - to the unbelievable situation which exists in respect of the Bundaberg irrigation scheme, by which the water is brought up to a certain point and then stopped. I do not have to go into the details of the scheme. I would hope that the Minister for Northern Development will be able to cut out the bottleneck that exists and impress his views on his less qualified colleagues who have to make the decisions. He could put the proposals. I do not want to go into the subject again. I have respect for his ability and his knowledge of this area. I hope that he will be able to overcome the difficulties which exist because of the lack of qualifications and the lack of experience of his colleague who has to make the decision. I ask him to bring into the orbit of his considerations the difficulties of those people who are anxious to see the Bundaberg irrigation scheme concluded. I hope his experience and his status in the Ministry will bear fruit.
– I appreciate the fact that we are limiting our comments this morning in order to try to meet a time-table which has been set for the rising of the House. Therefore I will not reiterate those arguments which have been so ably presented on this legislation by my colleague the honourable member for Farrer (Mr Fairbairn). But I do want at least to stress one or two points. I am particularly concerned about the Pikes Creek Dam because it does happen to be, as the honourable member said, located in the area which I have the privilege to represent. Such a dam would provide water for the border river areas of Queensland and New South Wales and assist irrigation projects in those areas. It would supply water for the towns situated along the rivers in that area. So it is a very important project. The previous Government did not embark upon it lightly. It gave very careful consideration to it. I believe that had it not been for that and also for the very careful consideration given to this project by the respective State governments legislation would have been brought down. Had that been done, then, of course, the project would have gone ahead.
We felt confident that any Government coming into office would honour an undertaking given by the previous Government on a matter of this kind particularly as an amount of about $2m had already been spent. But what happened? This project was discontinued and as the honourable member for Farrer said, another project located in the electorate of the honourable member for Dawson (Dr Patterson) was proceeded with even though it had a lower priority than the Pikes Creek Dam project. There is no reason why both projects should not have gone ahead in the course of time. I believe it is a striking example of the financial irresponsibility of .this Government to allow a project to go ahead, knowing that approval had been given by the previous Government, to the stage where more than $2m out of a total estimate of $14m had been expended and be prepared to let that go down the drain or down Pikes Creek, if one likes to put it that way. If it had not been for the financial responsibility of the governments of Queensland and New South Wales this money would have been wasted. It is to their very great credit that they did continue with the project, and it will be continued, but the construction will be done at a slower rate and with the staggering rate of inflation which has been brought about as a result of the economic irresponsibility of this Government the cost of the project must increase.
Only this morning I asked whether in the light of the improvement in the prices of primary products the Government would be prepared to reconsider this proposal in the same way as it reconsidered the Kinchant Dam proposal. I got a flat no from the Minister for the Environment and Conservation (Dr Cass). It was not even an answer which would give some hope that the Government might be prepared in the new and different circumstances again to have a look at this proposal which, as the honourable member for Farrer said, had been given a No. 1 priority by the Queensland Government. Will anyone suggest that with all the need for water conservation throughout Queensland and New South Wales that those 2 State Governments would have been prepared to embark on a project of that kind without giving it careful consideration? This is the tragedy of this Government. It has a policy not only of jobs for the boys but also dams for the boys. This is adding even more to its financial irresponsibility. I believe, with the honourable member for Farrer, that that is what has happened in this matter.
– I suggest that the honourable member should return to the 2 Bills under discussion.
– Yes, Mr Deputy Speaker. I point out with respect that the Pikes Creek Dam was mentioned earlier in the debate and I am referring to previous remarks that were made in the debate. I welcome - I shall return to the Bills in this way - the introduction of these grants for the purposes of providing water for the areas concerned. As the honourable member for Farrer said, the Opposition agrees with the proposal. But I also want to say that I have seconded and supported the amendment moved by the honourable member for Farrer. It states that the motion should be amended by inserting the following words: whilst not declining to give the Bill a second reading, the House is of the opinion that the assistance provided for the construction of these works has not been allocated in accordance with the highest priorities and greatest needs of the State.
I submit that one of the highest priorities and one of the greatest needs for the State is the Pikes Creek Dam. Therefore in referring to that matter I have been speaking to the amendment which has been moved by the honourable member for Farrer.
I just want to touch for a moment on the Queensland Grant (Dawson River Weirs) Bill, which also is being discussed in this cognate debate. It is an interesting fact that while the Government was prepared to grant $550,000 for this project subsequently, due to unusual geological features - I am referring to the Minister’s second reading speech on this subject - which had been discovered at the weir site on the main stream of the River, the estimated cost of the weirs had risen to $1,220,000. What did the Government do in regard to that? It was prepared to continue with the grant of $550,000 provided that the State government was prepared to carry on with the project and provide the rest of the expenditure, which in the light of Queensland’s great concern for water conservation it has done. So those people in those areas that are concerned with dams on the Dawson River, who were previously represented by the Minister for Northern Development, should know that the project went ahead due to the unswerving determination of the Queensland Government to see that water is provided in as many areas of that State as possible.
The real question in relation to water conservation projects of all kinds is whether there is to be a balanced development of Australia and Australia’s economy. Water is the foundation on which this balanced development must be built. St George in Queensland, in my electorate has been one of the few inland towns in Queensland’s rural production areas which have increased in population. This was the result of water conservation in that area. This shows in bold relief the tragedy of this Government’s repudiation of the Pikes Creek Dam project. If southern inland Queensland is to be deprived of any funds from this Federal Government for water conservation and in addition is to have continuing savage cuts in air services and Postal Department services, an even more rapid drift of rural population to the city must be expected. Water conservation can, as I have stated, increase population in our country towns and so make more economic the provision of essential services. While supporting the grant outlined in this Bill, I again urge the Government to look at the provision of more water for inland areas of Australia and, as the honourable member for Farrer pointed out, to utilise the funds already promised for this purpose. In view of the time factor I shall conclude with those remarks. I have very great pleasure in seconding the amendment moved by the honourable member for Farrer.
– The Government completely opposes the amendment moved by the honourable member for Farrer (Mr Fairbairn) and seconded by the honourable member for Maranoa (Mr Corbett). This amendment states, of course, in unambiguous terms that the honourable member for Farrer and the honourable member for Maranoa are opposed to the Kinchant Dam.
– No we are not.
– Oh, yes, you are. Do not try to pull the wool over my eyes. As far as the people of Queensland, the Queensland Government, and the Queensland farmers are concerned, you oppose the Kinchant Dam by moving this amendment. Let us not have any wool pulled over our eyes. I shall now deal with the honourable member for Farrer. Frankly, I am quite amazed at the cheap politics that he has attempted to introduce. Mr Deputy Speaker, just listen to my case and you will see exactly how true are the words that I utter. The trouble with the honourable member for Farrer is that he still cannot believe that he is in opposition. Firstly, his statements are grossly inaccurate. He says that the project has a low priority. I do not know how low a priority one can get. It has No. 2 priority on the official list given by the Queensland Premier.
– What is No. 1?
– Number One is the Bundaberg irrigation scheme, phase 1 and phase 2. The No. 2 priority given by the Queensland Government, supported by the farmers of Queensland, has been given to the Kinchant Dam. The honourable member for Farrer says that it has no priority. That just shows how inaccurate and how sadly lacking in the facts both honourable members are.
– You are completely wrong.
– If the honourable member wants to have a look at it, I will show him a letter from the Queensland Premier which says that the Bundaberg irrigation scheme has No. 1 priority and the Kinchant Dam scheme has No. 2 priority. But the honourable member for Farrer says that it has no priority. The second point which the honourable member for Farrer made was when he referred to the report of the previous Government. Let me inform the honourable member for Farrer that there was no report of the previous Government - none. There were a lousy 2 pages which I have here, and which wiped the scheme cold. As honourable members will recall, at the end of the last session of the previous Parliament I had to drag it out of the then Prime Minister, Mr McMahon, that the scheme was uneconomic and that he had advised the Queensland Premier accordingly. After 18 months of consideration it took the famous Liberal-Country Party Government 18 months to write 2 pages. There was not one word of evaluation, not one investigation by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics, and not one investigation by the Department of National Development. The previous Government wiped the scheme cold. Is it any wonder that the Queensland Government was savage in its criticism of the Liberal-Country Party Government on that decision.
However, the deception of the LiberalCountry Party Government was exposed after the change of government. I believed, and I would think that most honourable members believed, that there was a report and that an investigation had been made which did prove and back up the previous Government and the previous Prime Minister on this decision. One of the first things that I did after the change of government was to call for the report, because I did not believe what had been said. Blind Freddie would know that the scheme in that area is a highly viable, economic scheme. When I called for the report I found that there were only 2 pages, wiping the scheme cold.
– Why would you not make it available to the House before this debate?
-Order! I ask the honourable member for Farrer to cease interjecting.
– You were a member of the Government.
-Order! I ask the Minister to address the Chair.
– I was not in 1970. You are wrong there.
– This report was given on 2 November 1971. You were a member of the Government then.
– I was a member then.
– Why do you not apologise? You do not know your facts.
-Order! I ask the Minister not to address the honourable member for Farrer.
– You do not like to hear the truth. I shall continue, Mr Deputy Speaker. The Government then asked the BAE, the authority in this field, to evaluate the proposal properly in accordance with the No. 2 priority which it has. The evaluation proved, as the Queensland Government knew and as the organisations representing cane farmers knew, that this project was a highly economic proposition. This was completely contrary to the decision given by the then Prime Minister in November of last year. In fact, this evaluation shows how economic the project is.
Certainly the world price for sugar is high at present. If we take recent prices under the Interational Sugar Agreement of varying from the supply commitment price to about £stg90 a ton, the rate of return on capital varies between 13.8 per cent and 15.9 per cent per annum. Show me any irrigation scheme that can give this rate of return on capital! This evaluation is based on world prices and not on any subsidised prices. This is the result of the evaluation carried out by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics. Certainly world prices can drop, as they have done. If we take an untra-conservative price, say about £stg40 a ton, the rate of return obtained on capital is more than 5 per cent per annum. So, this evaluation justifies our action.
If the honourable member for Maranoa knew this area, which includes Brightly, Mia Mia, Septimus and Eton, he would know that it is one of the most highly susceptible areas to drought in Australia. Let us not have any of this claptrap about how uneconomic this scheme is or how low a priority it has. The facts are not as presented by the honourable member for Farrer and the honourable member for Maranoa. What your remarks show is that both of you are opposed to this irrigation scheme in Queensland. I will make perfectly sure that the people of Queensland are informed of where you stand on this matter.
– Quote my speech, if you want to be fair.
Br PATTERSON - I will quote the amendment that you seconded.
– Quote my speech with it.
– I will quote the amend ment that you seconded.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Luchetti)Orderl
– Let me continue-
– Excellent!
– The honourable member for Wakefield has always been one of those people who insist that there must be economic analyses. The honourable member should rise to support this project completely. But he will vote with the honourable member for Farrer and the honourable member for Maranoa, and that action can only be described as hypocrisy.
– Where is your economic evaluation of the Pike Creek project?
– That is right.
– Ask the Minister for the Environment and Conservation (Dr Cass); do not ask me.
– He refused; I asked him this morning.
– The subject of this debate is the provision of grants for the construction of the Kinchant Dam and the Dawson River Weirs near Baralaba. I am answering questions raised by the honourable member for Farrer and yourself. I have answered every question that you have asked me. As far as I am concerned, I have utterly exposed both of you and your hypocrisy regarding the priority of this project.
– That is your view.
– It is not only my view; it also is the view of the Queensland Government. The Baralaba scheme is to be carried out in the electorate of the honourable member for Kennedy (Mr Katter). He now represents this area which previously I represented. That project is sound. There was some doubt about it when the geological formations proved to involve much higher costs than were estimated at first. The Queensland Government, through its Minister for Conservation, Marine and Aboriginal Affairs, Mr Hewitt, approached me with the proposition that it would go ahead with the scheme and that it would provide the extra money involved.
– The Queensland Government had no option.
– How do you know that it did not? You seem to know more than the Queensland Premier. We evaluated the project further and the project was found to be sound. Mr Hewitt came to Canberra to see me. I later informed him that the Federal Government was perfectly willing to proceed with the scheme as it was sound. That proposal was agreed to by the Queensland Government. I think I have answered all the points made by the honourable member for Farrer and the honourable member for Maranoa. It is possible that when they framed this amendment they were unaware of many of the facts about which I have spoken. But they should not have been unaware-
– We knew them all.
– Why did you not say them? The point that you have made is basically this: This project did not have the priority to warrant support from the Australian Government.
– It did not have a priority higher than that of the Pike Creek scheme.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Luchetti)Order! I ask the honourable member for Farrer to cease interjecting and I ask the Minister to speak through the Chair. This is not a dialogue or conversation.
– The fact of the matter, Mr Deputy Speaker, is that this project had the No. 2 priority in the view of the Queensland Government. It was highly economic. The pathetic aspect of this matter is that the previous Government, without any evaluation whatever by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics and the technical authorities, wiped the project cold as being uneconomic; yet it is one of the most economic water conservation projects that we have in Australia today. 1 think the honourable members for Farrer and Maranoa ought to be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for putting forward this amendment because it is not in character with the ideals for which they stand with respect to water conservation. I can understand the disappointment of the honourable member for Maranoa about the Pike Creek scheme. I have a few views of my own about that project. But we are talking about the Kinchant Dam project. I think that it is quite wrong for the honourable member for Farrer and him respectively to move and to second this amendment when everything that they say about the project is wrong.
It is not for them to say whether the Pike Creek scheme should have a higher priority than the Bundaberg project. I do not believe that it has. The Bundaberg irrigation scheme is vital to the area of Bundaberg. The point is that the Queensland Government ranked the Bundaberg scheme first and then the Eton project second in its list of 9 priorities. Surely honourable members opposite cannot blame this Government for investigating what is proposed as the No. 2 priority by the Queensland Government to determine whether it is economic or uneconomic particularly as their Government sat on this project for 1 8 months and then gave us, as I said before, in my language 2 lousy pages saying that it was uneconomic when it did not undertake any evaluation whatsoever.
– Why did the Queensland Government make it the No. 2 priority then?
– The Queensland Government made it the No. 2 priority because it knew that the project was a sound one. The previous Government wiped it cold. That is the point that I am attempting to make here. An independent analysis by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics has shown this project to be an economic proposition. I have given the House the figures. I cannot have the graph which I hold in my hand incorporated in Hansard. But I am perfectly willing for honourable members opposite to have a look at it and to see the rates of return on capital based on the assumptions made by the BAE which, everybody knows, with respect to these types of economic analyses are conservative. The honourable member for Farrer, who used to be Minister for National Development, ought to know how conservative the estimates of the BAE are with respect to some of these irrigation projects. Still, despite its conservatism, the BAE says that this is a highly economic project. The Government opposes this amendment completely. In view of the explanation that I have made, I believe that the honourable member for Farrer and the honourable member for Maranoa in particular, as he comes from Queensland, ought to seek leave to withdraw their amendment.
Mr CORBETT (Maranoa) - Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Luchetti)Does the honourable member for Maranoa claim to have been misrepresented?
– Yes. I claim to have been misrepresented by the Minister for Northern Development and Minister for- the Northern Territory (Dr Patterson) who said that I opposed the building of the Kinchant Dam. That is quite untrue. I said that both projects - the Pike Creek Dam and the Kinchant Dam - could go ahead. The matter involved is an entirely different one altogether. It is a matter of priorities. What I was promoting was that the Pike Creek Dam should have been built ahead of the Kinchant Dam. That is exactly what I said. My remarks were blatantly misrepresented by the Minister. He has said that he will use the amendment against me without mentioning what I said. So, I believe that he ought to be ashamed of himself for taking that attitude, in the light of the speech that I made. If he heard that speech, he should be more ashamed of himself. If he did not hear it, he should have been listening.
Mr FAIRBAIRN (Farrer) - I wish to make a personal explanation.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Luchetti)Does the honourable member for Farrer claim to have been misrepresented?
– Yes. The Minister for Northern Development and Minister for the Northern Territory (Dr Patterson) has misrepresented me also. I have never on any occasion said that money should not be made available for the construction of the Kinchant Dam. What I have said is that the Pike Creek Dam was regarded as having a higher priority because it was put forward in an earlier request by the Queensland Government. Therefore, I have said that if only a limited amount of funds is available it should go the Pike Creek Dam project. I have never in any circumstances said what the Minister for Northern Development is trying to claim, that is, that I am opposed to this money being provided for the Kinchant Dam project.
Amendment negatived.
Original question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill read a second time.
Message from the Governor-General recom mending appropriation announced.
Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.
Bill (on motion by Dr Patterson) read a third time.
page 4705
Consideration resumed from 22 October (vide page 2415), on motion by Dr Patterson:
That the Bill be now read a second time.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill read a second time.
Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.
Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.
Bill (on motion by Dr Patterson) read a third time.
page 4705
Debate resumed from 12 December (vide page 4636), on motion by Dr Patterson:
That the Bill be now read a second time.
– Is it the wish of the House to have a general debate covering the 2 measures? There being no objection, it is so ordered.
– The purpose of this legislation is to enable the Federal Government to regulate and administer Australia’s fisheries resources to the benefit of the fishing industry and the country as a whole. The Opposition does not oppose the Bill. We commend the Government for accepting the reasonable and sensible amendments which were moved by the Opposition in the Senate. These amendments were directed towards the mandatory forfeiture clauses and retrospectivity. Both these aspects of the legislation were objectionable in principle. Retrospectivity is objectionable for obvious reasons because such legislation involves penalties being imposed for something which at the time it was done would not have attracted those penalties. The mandatory forfeiture provisions, which in the Bill as originally presented provided for the automatic forfeiture of any foreign boat, catch or equipment if a court records a conviction under the Act, are a more complex issue. We do not deny that in certain circumstances forfeiture of catch, equipment or the vessel itself could well be justified. For example, flagrant abuses of our law or persistent offences could lead the court to impose such a penalty. But we say that the court should be allowed to have some degree of flexibility. There could be cases with extenuating circumstances in which the court would not want to order forfeiture. Honourable members should remember that we are talking about vessels which could be worth $500,000. In cases where penalties of such severity were inappropriate mandatory forfeiture could result in gross inequity. We therefore believe that the court should have the discretion to order forfeiture if it thinks fit.
I would like to make it quite clear that we would support forfeiture in cases where the offence is of sufficient gravity to warrant such a penalty. Before the Opposition Parties came to their decision on this issue the Opposition committee which deals with this subject went to great trouble to ascertain the attitude taken by other countries. I seek leave to incorporate in Hansard a table showing the results of our researches compiled from information supplied by the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Department of Primary Industry.
-Is leave granted? There being no objection, leave is granted. (The document read as follows) -
– This Bill has greatly added significance with the passage of the seas and submerged lands legislation which claims sovereignty on behalf of the Federal Government over the seas and the sea bed from low water mark to the 12-mile limit. The sovereignty provisions of the Seas and Submerged Lands Act could well be challenged. However, this legislation does provide for the issue of composite licences for fishing. As I understand the position the Fisheries Bill covers any situation which could arise whether the sovereignty provisions are upheld or whether eventually they are found to be invalid. This brings up the licence issuing procedures and indeed the administration of the Act in general.
I would seek a specific assurance from the Minister for Northern Development and Minister for the Northern Territory (Dr Patterson) that the Federal Government will make maximum use of the accumulated knowledge and expertise of the relevant State government authorities, which have had long experience in this field and are obviously in a better position than the Commonwealth to give sound advice on areas which have always been under their control. Accordingly, I ask the Minister for an assurance that there will be close and continuing consultation with the States to enable the legislation to work smoothly to the advantage of one of Australia’s fastest growing primary industries. The expansion of the fishing industry in recent years has been quite remarkable. I seek leave to incorporate in Hansard a table showing the value of exports over the last 7 years.
-Is leave granted? There being no objection, leave is granted. (The document read as follows) -
– I also draw attention to the levelling off of export earnings in the last year, due no doubt to revaluation of the currency and the fact that much of our fishing exports go to the United States of America in regard to which revaluation decisions have been particularly severe on exporters. We have great fisheries resources off our coasts and we are starting to exploit them to our advantage.
Obviously there are tremendous opportunities for further development. I seek leave to incorporate in Hansard a further table showing imports to Australia of fisheries products over the last 8 years.
-Is leave granted? There being no objection, leave is granted. (The document read as follows) -
– The table shows that we imported over $4Sm worth of fish and fish products of all kinds last year. It would not surprise me to learn that some proportion of this $45m came from fish caught off the Australian coast because there is a strange paradox disclosed by the statistics in the tables that I have just incorporated in Hansard. We earn $74m from exports and at the same time pay $45m for imports. As far as I know, this situation of an industry being substantially involved in both exporting and importing is unique amongst our great primary industries.
On several occasions in the past in this House I have drawn attention to the need for our fishing industry to be able to compete on an international basis. It seems absurd that other countries find it profitable to come thousands of miles to fish in waters which are quite literally at our own front door. One reason is that the Australian fishing industry traditionally has been a small business operation - very often a family business - with limited capital and resources. The result has been that many of our fishing boats are relatively small, built for close off-shore fishing, rather than large ocean-going vessels able to support themselves at sea for lengthy periods at long distances from their home base. If we are to make maximum use of our fisheries resources this must change. Indeed it is already changing. But it is becom ing correspondingly more difficult for the traditional Australian fisherman with his limited resources that I have just described to provide the rapidly growing financial requirements if he is to remain competitive. Our fishermen are second to none in their skill and resourcefulness. In all too many cases it is lack of finance which is preventing them from expanding their operations. This is an area where in my opinion the Government can help through Development Bank loans and similar policies such as loans through the Term Loan Fund. It is some years since I first advocated a more sympathetic and liberal attitude to providing finance to Australian fishermen for buying boats and equipment. I renew my request on this occasion and trust that it will not fall on deaf ears.
There is no doubt about the tremendous interest in what might be called the big league of fishing. At the present time I am informed that there are no fewer than 66 prawn trawlers and a further 8 fishing vessels of various types being built or on order in Australia. The point I make is that these are all substantial vessels, averaging around 90 feet in length. They are ocean-going fishing boats. When in commission these will enable us to take a greater part in such techniques as purse seining and long line tuna fishing. In relation to the latter, it is worth noting that the method of pole fishing so widely used in Australian waters is likely to result in a very large proportion of the fish caught being immature. The mature bigger fish feed at greater depths and they are caught by the long line method. So modern fishing techniques not only increase the catch but also conserve our fishery resources by increasing the proportion of the catch represented by mature fish, with a corresponding reduction in the proportion of immature specimens.
The Opposition is convinced that there are bright prospects for our fishing industry provided Government policies actively encourage maximum local participation in the exploitation of our rich resources. We are pleased to see that the present Government is continuing the research programs instituted by the previous Government. There is a disappointing sparseness of accurate information on many aspects of our fish stocks - their size, distribution and habits. This applies particularly to possible alternative species to replace the school sharks which, until recently, were the mainstay of much of the Victorian fishing industry. The House will be aware that the sale of school shark over a certain size is now prohibited in Victoria owing to the mercury content exceeding that recommended by the National Health and Medical Research Council. This has resulted in sever disruption to the Victorian industry and in many cases of individual difficulty and hardship. It is vital that suitable alternative species be identified and fishermen given access to finance to enable them to equip their boats to fish for other species. This will require a continuing and probably expanded research program. The Opposition will be keeping a close watch on the Government’s performance in this field. The Opposition supports the Bill in the form now presented following the acceptance of its amendments moved in the Senate.
– The Australian Country Party supports this Bill. It shares the view expressed in the other place that some provisions were too harsh and inappropriate at law. The fishing industry is a very important industry. I believe that it is an industry which is not recognised to the extent that it should be recognised. It is not appropriate today to engage in a long debate and I will content myself by saying merely that it is too infrequent that we find in this House an opportunity to refer to the fishing industry. The total concept of the industry must be recognised for an effective consideration of any element of it. I refer to the actual fishing itself; the technology which is increasingly important in this direction; the kind of vessels used; the techniques used; our very great need to intrude a greater participation in fishing to compete with other nations which under international law have the right to come into waters close to Australia and which in fact are drawing heavily upon the resources of these waters; and also our domestic approach. This is largely in the hands of State governments.
Finance for those directly engaged in the fishing industry, for the important work of servicing that industry, for the handling of fish and for its marketing both on the Australian and export market is of great importance. The provision of adequate finance in these various fields cannot be allowed to just drift along. The work done in this direction by some State governments is quite outstanding, but more is required to be done. I believe it is important that the Commonwealth Government not only should step up its support for research but also should look afresh at some aspects of the provision of adequate finance for this industry. There is a need for legislation of the kind with which we are dealing. But I think it is fortunate that in the other place some of the objectionable sections of the Bill were amended, and I want to express my satisfaction in that direction.
I conclude by saying that the fishing industry deserves the support of all governments in Australia. For a number of reasons it is vital that this support be given, firstly, to strengthen the industry and, secondly, to ensure that our status internationally does not wane. I remember some of the words expressed in the last few years by members of the Party which now occupies the treasury bench. I just say to them: Now is their chance to prove their worth in this field. Of course it is very easy to express words; it is another matter to take effective action. I believe that there is a need for a greater degree of close relationship between industry representatives, industry organisations and the Government. A closer relationship could yield a quicker and speedier improvement in the overall status of this very vital industry. I support the Bill.
– in reply - I thank the honourable members who have spoken in this debate for the constructive suggestions contained in the views they expressed.
I assure the honourable member for Corangamite (Mr Street) that there will be close consultation with the States in the development of the fishing industry throughout Australia. It is quite clear that the various State laws relating to the coastline and the Australian Government laws with respect to the fishing zones - the territorial seas - must always be considered as complementary. I certainly give the honourable member the assurance that close consultation will take place.
I do not agree with everything that the honourable member for Cowper (Mr Ian Robinson) said, but I think I am right in reading into his words that he is concerned that there has been some measure of neglect, or that the fishing industry in Australia has not received the support, either financially or in policy areas that it warrants in terms of its importance to Australia’s development. If the honourable member for Cowper means that, I certainly agree with him. I do not believe that the fishing industry has received such support. I believe that the fishing industry throughout Australia has had to develop on a most uncoordinated basis, and in fact it is a wonder that we have any fishing industry in many areas of Australia.
Let rae cite just one example of this. I refer to the town of Karumba in northern Australia. It is located on the shores of the Gulf of Carpentaria and it serves one of the richest prawn areas in the world, and yet the town is a disgrace - through no fault of the people who live there. In fact, they have done a remarkable job in keeping their heads above water, in surviving. Perhaps I should not say that they are keeping their heads ‘above water’ because there is no water; the lack of fresh water is one of the problems facing Karumba. For example, it is incredible to see the seepage of sewage waste matter on the surface of the ground at the State school at Karumba and the pollution of the river by the offal that is being dumped into the river. Karumba is an unsewered area and it lacks a decent road link to Normanton. The water situation in that area is so critical that, for many days, the people are unable even to take a bath and in fact, in some months of the year they are restricted in the amount of water they can drink. Yet this is one of the most important export areas in Australia in the fishing industry. From memory, I think the value of exports from the northern area is something like $6m a year.
– Whose electorate is it in?
– The Government of which the honourable member for Cowper was a supporter had the carriage of this responsibility. The honourable member should not have introduced politics into this matter because a proposition was put to his Government in 1968, and nothing was done about it. The honourable member might level the same charge against this Government, but at least the investigation into the industry has been given urgent priority by the various Commonwealth departments in association with the State departments. A report has been completed, and the matter is before the Australian Government for urgent consideration, because unless that area obtains drinking water and water for processing, and a decent access road is provided, it will be in a serious situation.
Order! The Minister is getting a little wide of the Bill. He is replying to the debate.
– When I was making my second reading speech on the Continental Shelf (Living Natural Resources) Bill, it crossed my mind that the reference to the Minister of State for External Territories was incorrect. In actual fact, of course, there is no Minister of State for External Territories at the present time. Section 6 of the principal Act also refers to that Minister and to his Department. By way of explanation, at the time when the Bill was introduced into the Parliament there was a Minister for External Territories, and the reference in the Continental Shelf (Living Natural Resources) Bill to the Minister for External Territories has already been adjusted by the necessary order of the Governor-General under section 19b of the Acts Interpretation Act. The present Administrative Arrangements Order provides that the Special Minister of State shall administer the Continental Shelf (Living Natural Resources) Act with respect to the external territories of Cocos (Keeling) Islands and Christmas Island and that the Minister for Foreign Affairs will administer the Act so far as it relates to Papua New Guinea. This point was not made clear in my second reading speech when reference was made to the Minister of State for External Territories.
In regard to the Fisheries Bill 1973, there is no reference in the second reading speech to the Minister for External Territories, but this Bill and the principal Act make reference to the Minister for External Territories exercising powers under that Act in relation to external territories. The Administrative Arrangements Order designates only the Minister for Primary Industry as administering the Fisheries Act. I think that that clarifies that particular point. I am pleased that the Opposition has supported the Bill because I believe it is an important Bill particularly with respect to law and order on the sea in regard to fishing and also with respect to the removal of sedentary species from the Great Barrier Reef area. One important matter which has not yet been finalised relates to the actual ownership of and control over these resources. In my opinion, and in the opinion of this Government, there is only one answer - the Australian Government should have control over these resources. I hope that when the Law of the Sea Convention meets, I think, next year to thrash out many of these matters, including perhaps the setting of a fishing zone of 200 miles from the coast, it will take this matter into consideration so that Australian Government jurisdiction will be asserted in a far more positive way than it is today, particularly over many of our waters, including the Gulf of Carpentaria and the Great Barrier Reef waters which as far as I am concerned are 100 per cent Australian waters.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill read a second time.
Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.
Bill (on motion by Dr Patterson) read a third time.
page 4710
page 4710
Consideration resumed from 12 December (vide page 4637), on motion by Dr Patterson:
That the Bill be now read a second time.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill read a second time.
Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.
Bill (on motion by Dr Patterson) read a third time.
page 4710
Debate resumed from 4 December (vide page 4249), on motion by Mr Enderby:
That the Bill be now read a second time.
– The Bill which we are now considering relates to the remuneration and allowances payable to certain statutory office holders. We in the Opposition have had a close look at the Bill. I remind the House that in 1971, at the request of the Senate, we gave an undertaking that in future we would ensure that the salary and remuneration of officers of the Crown would be fixed by legislation rather than by prescription. This Bill carries out that undertaking which since that time, has been accepted by the present Government. What happens in various cases is that when new offices are created - this Bill relates entirely to the creation of new offices - the Bill creating the office specifies the salary and allowance of the chief officers concerned. But there is a requirement that before the end of the year there will necessarily be introduced a complementary Act of Parliament which, in effect, will carry out the undertaking that was given. Clause 4 of the Bill which contains the Schedule of amendments to the principal Act, refers to the office concerned, the rate per annum of remuneration or salary and the rate per annum of annual allowance. It also sets out the actual designation of the office and the amounts of the remuneration or salary and the allowances to be paid. Unless this Bill is passed into law it will mean that these officers cannot and will not in fact be paid or allowed the remuneration and the allowance which they are properly entitled to receive. For that reason we approve of the Bill. There are certain other provisions in it relating to part-time members of the Grants Commission, members of the Prices Justification Tribunal and deputy members appointed under the Wool Industry Act which has special provisions to which I do not think it is necessary for me to refer. There is also one other valuable amendment relating to an officer who is given an appointment to another department or to another Public Service authority. This is done in order to ensure that there is no loss of pay - it is a no loss clause - and it also provides that until otherwise decided his remuneration shall be fixed by prescription.
But there are 2 matters to which 1 specifically want to refer now. The first one relates to the fact that I believe the time has come when we need a greater degree of rationalisation or co-ordination of the remuneration of office bearers of all kinds. I say that because one can find authority for the payment of salaries and allowances set out in several measures and also one can find that the Public Service Arbitrator has the right in certain circumstances to determine salaries, not of the senior officers or heads of departments but of those closely associated with them. For example, I think it is unfortunate to find that relativities can be changed frequently by a determination of the Public Service arbitrator, and that a determination can have an unfair effect upon office bearers. For instance, because of a Public Service Arbitrator’s determination the Principal Parliamentary Reporter now receives $1,317 per annum less than his deputy receives.
The second point I want to make - I would emphasise it - is that I do believe that the officers of this Parliament have been left behind and have been largely forgotten. For that reason I put to the Minister - I know he will look sympathetically at this - that either we need a new method of approach to this problem or we need to get an assurance that the matter will be considered, say, once every half year. That does not seem to me to be the appropriate method of dealing with it because it is not necessary for this to go through the House in a formal way each 6 months. Nonetheless I would personally like to feel that this matter was receiving the closest attention so that we do not get these changes of relativities and we do not get occasions when salary ranges get out of step and people can be deprived of their just entitlements for a considerable period of time.
I accept the statement made by the Minister for Secondary Industry (Mr Enderby) a few days ago when he mentioned that certain statutory officers as well as members of the judiciary and members of Parliament would have recommendations or determinations made by a tribunal as to their salary code and as to the allowances that would be granted. I understand - I hope it is true - that the Clerks of this House and the Principal Parliamentary Reporter also will be considered by that tribunal. Even though that might be the position, other officers - not permanent heads - will not be included within the ambit or power of this authority. It is for us to ensure that officers of this Parliament are fairly and justly treated. From a fairly long experience I think it is correct to say that one can find that they are apt to be forgotten by the other members of the Public Service and they are apt to be forgotten until the adjustment becomes so obvious that specific decisions have to be made.
I at least had the very great pleasure of ensuring that the salaries of the Clerks of this House and of the Senate were considerably improved, and I would like to see even more done for them in the future. I think we have to recognise that this is the Parliament of the Commonwealth and that those officers are carrying out an important constitutional function. The advice they give is of critical importance to us and the effective operation of this House is largely contributed to by the ability, common sense and industry of the officers of this Parliament. I put those positions to the Minister knowing full well that he will look at them with the greatest degree of sympathy. Having said that I now say that the Opposition approves of the Bill as it is presented with the wish that the matters I have mentioned are properly considered by the Government.
– in reply - Very briefly, the Government is naturally pleased that the Opposition approves and supports this measure. It is a measure extending into the legislation the provisions that require salaries and remunerations to be paid, and the principle that was described by the right honourable member for Lowe (Mr McMahon) is a proper one - that measures of this sort should find expression in an enactment of this Parliament. The only other point I would like to make is that the fragmentation - the division - that exists in the present salary and remuneration system or structure throughout Australia is to be regretted. There is no point laying blame here for what contributed to the situation but the Government is very much aware of it and indeed the Remuneration Tribunal Bill that went through this House the other day is a significant step towards the solving of that particular problem. As to the other remarks made by the right honourable gentleman dealing with parliamentary officers, of course those views are shared by all members of this House.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill read a second time.
Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.
Bill (on motion by Mr Enderby) read a third time.
page 4712
Debate resumed from 12 December (vide page 4596), on motion by Mr Enderby:
That the Bill be now read a second time.
– The Opposition supports this Bill and does so instantly and generously. This Bill is long overdue and the prospect of seeing a consolidation of the statutes is one which I personally welcome very much indeed. I suppose that one of the most significant problems which any practitioner faces is to find out where the law is. Today the Commonwealth statutes are, putting it politely, in something of a mess and the officers who will undertake this work undertake what has been properly described as a massive job. I personally wish them well. As a simple illustration of the difficulty of knowing where the law is, I briefly tell the House the story - a true one - of a citizen of the United States who was charged with a breach of a regulation and convicted of that breach. He took the matter on appeal and he ultimately finished up before the American Supreme Court where it was discovered that the regulation which he had allegedly breached had been repealed before the conviction. This is the absurdity that we face. I am sure that legal practitioners throughout the whole of the Commonwealth will welcome the consolidation of the Commonwealth statutes, and I would like to congratulate the Attorney-General (Senator Murphy) for his enterprise in having ventured upon this task.
– in reply - Briefly in response to the remarks of the honourable member for Moreton (Mr Killen), I can say that the Government is very pleased to be able to introduce this measure because practitioners know that the job involved - or the work involved - in finding the law and wading through those statutes is unnecessarily cumbersome and involved. The last consolidation was completed in 1950 - 23 years ago. Volumes containing all the laws passed since that time have to be perused, studied and gone through if one wants to have any degree of assurance about what the law is. The annual consolidations just do not make up for the defect. I think we are a long way from the ideals that were expressed by thinkers in the 18th century. It was hoped at that time that people would be able to write down their law in some simple, single form so that ordinary laymen not skilled or learned in the law would be able to find where it was and understand it. Society has moved a long way from that innocent view on what could be done. But this measure is a step in that direction.
We all know that if lawyers have to spend hours looking for their law and trying to find out where it is, with the accompanying uncertainty that they might miss something, that is reflected in uncertainty in the judicial process, the decisions of judges and juries, and of course in the cost that ultimately is passed on to the consumer, the client. Anything that can simplify the finding of the law improves the situation. We are very happy to be able to introduce this measure at this time.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill read a second time.
Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.
Bill (on motion by Mr Enderby) read a third time.
page 4712
Consideration resumed from 15 October (vide page 2074), on motion by Mr Stewart:
That the Bill be now read a second time.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill read a second time.
Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.
Bill (on motion by Mr Enderby) read a third time.
page 4712
Debate resumed from 11 December (vide page 4493), on motion by Mr Enderby:
That the Bill be now read a second time.
– The Opposition supports this Bill. Its purpose is a simple one. It is to make provision for another judge or other judges to operate within the Northern Territory. Plainly, the volume of work in the courts in the Northern Territory has increased enormously as the population has increased. As a consequence of the increased population, there has been an increase in the volume of litigation. The singular purpose of this Bill is to enable the courts to proceed, with a greater measure of dispatch and celerity, to deal with litigation. Plainly, justice delayed is justice denied. If 2 individuals are litigating against each other and they want to have the issue resolved, their rights are being impugned to the extent that their issue has not been decided. If a man who has been injured is seeking his remedy by way of damages to compensate him in a simple motor car case, it is a poor consolation to him to know that eventually the courts will get round to deciding the matter. Again, with criminal work, those who practise in the courts realise the sense of distress that is given to judges when they are put in a position of not being able to deal, again with immediate dispatch, with those who are put on trial. The Opposition welcomes this measure.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill read a second time.
Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.
Bill (on motion by Mr Enderby) read a third time.
page 4713
Debate resumed from 11 December (vide page 4495), on motion by Mr Enderby:
That the Bill be now read a second time.
– The Opposition suports this measure, which at first blush appears to be a very simple one; but it is one of the most significant pieces of legislation introduced into this Parliament. It is not, as it stands at the moment, open to controversy. It is what the Bill will produce that will be the flash point of argument and controversy. The Minister for Secondary Industry (Mr Enderby), as Minister representing the Attorney-General (Senator Murphy), in his second reading speech referred to the desideratum of having uniformity of law throughout Australia. One may agree with that, but what one must acknowledge is the fact that very significant restraints and limitations are put upon this Parliament in seeking to secure that uniformity.
My honourable friend, the Minister, in his speech referred, for example, to reform of the laws, relating to commercial transactions, defamation, evidence and crime. The power of this Parliament to legislate with respect to the criminal law is restricted to the 2 Territories. Whilst this Parliament may persuasively seek to bring about reforms between and among the States in this one field of law, it is not open to this Parliament to lead compulsively the States to reach that conclusion. Similarly, there are differences between and among the States in the laws on defamation. For example, in the code States - Queensland, Western Australia and Tasmania - the mere fact that truth is pleaded is not enough; truth must be accompanied by public benefit. My understanding is that in the common law States truth is sufficient and there is not any need for the companion of public benefit. I suppose it is a matter of one’s sense of prejudice or one’s sense of legal environment whether one favours one system or the other.
I wish those who take part in the work of this Commission well. They face a momentous task, one of the most significant tasks ever given to any commission in this country. Whether the Commission will be able to bring about relief in those areas where relief is desperately needed is a matter of speculation, but the members to be appointed to the Commission will have the good wishes, I would suspect, of the great majority of members of the legal profession throughout Australia. Again I say to the Minister that, whilst the end in view is desirable, whether we will be able to reach it as swiftly as he suspects is another question.
– in reply - In the short time left, let me say just a few words. I do not think the Government underestimates the magnitude of the problem. Whereas previous governments may have been deterred by the magnitude of the problem, this Government is not; it is determined to atempt to solve it. I recall the absurdity, in my view, of the different sets of laws that exist throughout Australia. In the Australian Capital Territory for example, we had one set of laws dealing with negligence and contributory negligence as they relate to motor cars, and it is not long ago that in New South Wales there was quite a different test. The measure of whether a man received damages or not depended upon whether the accident took place on this side of the Australian Capital Territory-New South Wales border or on the other side of that border. Even the question of where a person sued - which court was available to him - depended upon artificial lines of distinction of that sort.
The measure in some sense can be put down to an interest by lawyers in lawyers’ law, but it goes far beyond that. Differences exist throughout the country in the laws relating to hire purchase, bills of sale, credit generally, corporations, defamation - as the honourable member for Moreton (Mr Killen) chose to mention - traffic and crime. They are all different or likely to be different throughout Australia. It is a feature of our federal system. I think we pay a terrible price for it. The way in which it can be overcome is not easy; we appreciate that. The whole concept that the States of Australia and the Territories should be regarded as though they were France against Germany or the United States against the Argentine seems to me to be offensive in its absurdity; but we are stuck with it. The lawyers do their best to try to make it work, but it is an expensive and inefficient way of applying the legal solution to man’s social problems. The Law Reform Commission will be at least an attempt, a beginning, to rationalise laws by legislation, where that is possible, or by persuasion, where it can be done only in that way. We commend the Bill to the House.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill read a second time.
Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.
Bill (on motion by Mr Enderby) read a third time.
Sitting suspended from 1.1 to 2.15 p.m.
page 4714
Debate resumed from 27 November (vide page 3885), on motion by Mr Enderby:
That the Bill be now read a second time.
– Is it the wish of the House to have a general debate covering the 2 measures? I will allow that course to be followed.
– The 2 Bills we are dealing with, the Public Service Bill (No. 4) and the Commonwealth Employees’ Furlough Bill, are cognate Bills making various amendments to the provisions of the Public Service Act and providing for a reduced period of service before a member of the Public Service is entitled to long service leave. One of the principal amendments to the Public Service is to remove from the Act any discriminatory terms applying as between males and females so that any inferred discrimination against females by specific reference to them is to be deleted from the Act. The Opposition has no objection to that. It supports the removal from legislation of this kind of any language which might infer that there is discrimination, or which not only might infer discrimnation but also would allow in the administration of the Act discrimination to come about in practice.
Having said that, it is as well to remember that although legislation might not, in its terms, authorise any discrimination, the way in which a service such as the Public Service is administered could well lead in practice to discrimination. I know this is one of the matters about which women in Australia are concerned. Some groups in Australia would like to see not only any language removed which in its terms is discriminatory, but also provisions inserted into an Act of this kind positively preventing discrimination. As long as the Minister in charge of the Bill is prepared to acknowledge to the House that the Government will keep a close watch on all the administrative practices within the Public Service to remove any element of discrimination, it is not necessary - certainly at the moment - to go so far as to put in this positive prohibition against discrimination.
I note that the Minister is agreeing with what I have said, and I am glad to see that. There is no need to take this matter further. The Opposition agrees with what the Government proposes in this Bill. It is in line with its own policy and it hopes that, this having now been achieved in a legislative fashion, it will run right through the Public Service and any element of discrimination will be eliminated. Without moving too far from the subject of discrimination between males and females, it is as well to remind the House that, within the Public Service, discrimination can apply in other directions. I have in mind especially handicapped persons. We do not find any legislative prescription dealing with discrimination against handicapped persons, but people who are so unfortunate as to suffer from conditions such as epilepsy find themselves in a difficult position, not only in private industry but also within the Public Service. I have had representations from people in my own State who suffer in this way. I have in mind one man with whom I played hockey for many years. He passed all the entrance examinations for the Public Service, but had one unfortunate experience within the Service because of his epilepsy and therefore was dismissed. He has gone on to study at night school and has reached a high level of clerical ability through examination and through his own natural ability, yet he is not able to return to the Public Service. I have written to the Minister for Labour (Mr Clyde Cameron) about this, and I hope the matter can be taken further within the Public Service so that in practice discrimination, whether against women or handicapped persons of any kind, can be eliminated altogether.
The Bill removes from the requirements of eligibility for appointment to the Public Service the provision in section 34 of the Act which requires a person first to make and to subscribe to the prescribed oath or affirmation. The Government is proposing to remove that requirement, but the Opposition disagrees with what the Government is doing, and in Committee I will move an amendment seeking to reinstate that requirement in section 34, together with consequential provisions in the Act dealing with the same subject matter, to have public servants take the oath or affirmation of allegiance to the Crown. We do this consistent with the approach of the Opposition to the Government’s desire, in introducing its Citizenship Bill, to remove the requirement that, on becoming naturalised, persons must take an oath or affirmation of allegiance to the Crown. Although in the second reading speech the Minister observed that there is no requirement for an oath of allegiance in State Public Services or in the British Civil Service, the Minister has advanced no real justification in favour of removing this longstanding practice and legislative requirement that an oath or affirmation of allegiance must be taken by members of the Public Service.
It may well be another sign of an apparent move within the Government to break links with the Crown - not in totality, but just to chip away at the edges. The Opposition would not like to see the removal of this provision. Without any undue deference to the Commonwealth Public Service - or the Australian Public Service, as it is now to be known - and without derogation from the job done by the State Public Services, one might say that the Commonwealth Public Service, as the national Public Service, is pre-eminent in Australia. One could well expect that this oath or affirmation of allegiance to the Crown, being at the pinnacle of the Constitution, should be sustained. As I have said, I shall be moving amendments in Committee to re-instate that requirement.
The Commonwealth Employees’ Furlough Bill is introduced to reduce from 15 years to 10 years the period of service which will entitle a public servant to long service leave. The Opposition does not disagree with this proposal. I see from figures available as to the period of eligibility in other States that, broadly speaking, what the Government proposes is in line with eligibility requirements in those other States. Having said that, I make one observation on the promise which the Government, through the Minister for Labour and through a Cabinet decision on 3 April 19 3, made to Commonwealth public servants regarding furlough - that is, long service leave - and the rate of accrual of entitlement to long service leave. On 3 April this year Press statement No. 69 was issued. It announced the decision that the basic qualification period for long service leave would be reduced from 15 years to 10 years. That statement also announced 2 other major improvements proposed for the Public Service - firstly, that the accrual rate for furlough should be 3 months for the first 10 years and half a month for each year thereafter and, secondly, that for the purpose of assessing the increased rates of accrual service would be calculated retrospectively to the date of commencing employment and that those public servants employed as at the date of that statement who had taken furlough would be granted their total furlough entitlement under the new provisions less the period of furlough granted.
That was the decision of the Cabinet. That was the promise made to the Australian public servants. However, subsequently the Minister for Labour repudiated that promise with regard to the accrual rate for furlough and announced that that decision would be deferred. The Minister spoke in these terms: ‘I wish to advise that most of the matters will be included in a separate Bill early next year, if our negotiations for a portable scheme break down.’ He was referring to negotiations with the various State governments. The Minister said:
However, I should make it clear that I could not see my way clear to recommend to the Prime Minister that past service with the Commonwealth be taken into account for the purpose of assisting entitlements under the new rate of accrual. The cost could be astronomical and could not be justified to the Australian public. I can see at once that this represents at its worst a repudiation of the undertaking that I gave to the unions some months ago but I would have no hesitation or difficulty in justifying such a repudiation.
There was no need for the Minister to say that at worst it was a repudiation. In fact, it was a repudiation and the Australian public servants know that only too well. They have not been hesitant at all in condemning the Minister for that repudiation. Not only must we assume but we really know from an answer given by the Prime Minister to a question in this House yesterday that the Cabinet agrees with the repudiation of that promise made by the Minister.
Looking at it in practical terms, the excuse given by the Minister and by the Prime Minister for this repudiation really does not stand up at all. It is said that scheme cannot be introduced now because the Australian Government is negotiating with the State governments to bring in a national long service leave scheme. That is undoubtedly an admirable objective but it certainly is no reason for this Government not to honour a promise that it made to the Australian public servants. The Minister, in announcing that repudiation, sought to justify it in terms of costs which he said could be astronomical. Nowhere as far as I know has the Minister ever sought to ascertain this ‘astronomical cost’ of introducing this scheme. If he can produce those figures we might well agree with him that the cost would be so astronomical that it would add so much to the inflationary trend in Australia that he and the Government would be justified in not honouring the promise.
As the matter stands at the moment, public servants are fully entitled to pass the kind of resolution that the Commonwealth Council of Public Service Organisations and other organisations including the Administrative and Clerical Officers Association carried. That resolution reads:
This meeting of representatives of Australian Federal and State Public Service Organisations representing over 400,000 public servants and their .families throughout Australia rejects any attempt to repudiate the Australian Government’s clear undertaking to introduce a new quantum and conditions of long service leave for Australian Government public servants. We emphatically believe that the Government has an obligation to its own employees to honour the unequivocal promise made in the Cabinet decision of April 3 which resulted from an agreement and negotiations between the unions concerned and the Government.
Further the meeting calls on State Governments to improve their employees’ long service leave entitlements to at least the promised Australian Government standard without delay.
It appears that not only was this a broken promise as announced in the Cabinet decision of 3 April this year but it was a breach of an agreement reached by the Government with the Australian Public Service unions. There can be nothing worse than a breach of an agreement made as a result of negotiations to settle an industrial dispute. Both sides of this House readily condemn unions which reach agreements with employers and then repudiate the agreement. Both sides of this House condemn employers who breach agreements which were voluntarily negotiated and reached. In the same way this House ought to condemn the Government for breaking an agreement which was freely and voluntarily negotiated with the Australian Public Service unions.
In the light of what has happened the Opposition will watch carefully what happens early in the new year in respect of these negotiations with the various State governments to achieve a national long service scheme. I am sure that the Australian Public Service unions will do the same and that they will not let the Government put them off and continually defer the implementation of the promise which was made earlier this year.
– It is a matter of great regret to me that in the course of the debate on a matter as serious as this one the honourable member for Stirling (Mr Viner) should stoop to a pretty low political trick. The honourable member commended the Government on the removal of the discrimination between male and female employees. It would have been rather disappointing had he done anything less than that. However, the honourable gentleman then moved into an area that is of great concern to many people in this House and of course outside it - that is, the terrible disease of epilepsy and the effect that this has on people who are or intend to be employees in the Australian Public Service. That matter has been raised many times. I am quite sure that whilst very little was done about it by previous governments this present Government, which has a more humane attitude than governments which preceded it, will look at this matter and come up with a solution to it.
Having made some contribution to the debate, the honourable gentleman destroyed all of the good impression that he had made when he started to talk about retrospective furlough entitlement. Even on this he was not quite sure what he was talking about. It struck me as rather curious that a gentleman from the other side of this House, a member of one of those Parties that consistently opposes the Government and consistently in this House raises the question of spending in the Public Service and constantly criticises the Government for the way it is alleged to be spending as though money was going out of fashion, by his own admission and by his own words should suggest that a further $180m ought to be spent. He, in his own way I suppose, thought that he was giving the Government a bit of a caning on this issue. He did say that the Government was breaking an agreement. I thought that the honourable gentleman was a lawyer before he came into this place. As a lawyer I thought he would know that an agreement requires 2 parties. If he knows that, he would know that there was never ever an agreement between the Government and the Public Service unions on this matter. It was a matter that was raised in Cabinet and decided in Cabinet. As a matter of fact, the same matter is now a matter of negotiation between the Government and the Public Service unions.
If his concern is really for the Australian Public Service employees, as he tried to lead us to believe it was, I point out that in the time he has been here and since the time that his confreres in another place, both from his own Party and the other coalition Party, refused to pass the Compensation (Commonwealth Employees) Bill that now lies in some sort of cupboard in the musty archives of the Senate. He has never stood up in this place and condemned them for doing so. Does he not know that that Bill on its own would give greater benefit to more Commonwealth Public Service employees than any retrospectivity of furlough back to the date of commencement of duty? Perhaps he would like to speak about it ito his colleagues in the Senate and try to lean on them to bring this matter forward and agree to it so that humane treatment can be given to those workers who, through no fault of their own, are injured while they are in the employ of the Australian Public Service. I suppose that on all matters such as this where something positive can be done the honourable gentleman will remain silent and will raise his voice only when he thinks there is some cheap political trick to be scored off the Government.
One of the 2 Bills which we are debating is entitled the Commonwealth Employees’ Furlough Bill. It is to amend the Act of the same name to reduce the qualifying period for furlough for Commonwealth employees from IS years to 10 years, as a right. As well as doing that it removes all those niggling little phrases that refer to unsatisfactory service and such nebulous matters that could have been used in the past by governments, as the employer, to deny furlough benefits to public servants who have given many years of service. The honourable gentleman did not mention that, but it is a very important part of the Bill - very important indeed. It gives greater security to the employees of the Australian Government.
Public Service Bill (No. 4) with which we are also dealing is to amend the law relating to the Public Service. It changes the Public Service Act in a number of areas. It removes discrimination against women, as has been indicated. Contrary to what the honourable gentleman said, knowing the vagaries of people and their views on things I think it is essential that an anti-discriminatory clause be written in to reduce to words that principle so that it cannot be misunderstood. The Bill also removes the need for the taking of oaths or affirmations. I am not surprised that honourable members who sit opposite are trying to make a hobby horse of this sort of thing. After all, these are only a tradition and those who sit opposite rely on tradition because they are conservatives. But nobody has been able to explain to me why an oath or affirmation is such holy writ and why or how they change the attitude or thinking of the people who make them. Surely a person is not going to obey the oath simply because he has to mouth it. How does it change things? If a person is honest and sincere he will obey a rule anyway. It seems to me that this requirement is just another degradation of people who are employed in the Australian Public Service. It is rather curious that section 55.(1.) of the Public Service Act provides:
An officer (other than an officer of the First or Second Division) who-
The section goes on to provide that other officers must swear an oath. Why is an officer in the First or Second Division different from any other officer in the Public Service? It is the Government’s intention to remove the discriminations which at present lie in that Act. The Bill provides also - I am sure that all people in Australia would agree with this provision - that the title will be changed from the Commonwealth Public Service to the Australian Public Service. The people of Australia more and more are becoming pleased that this Government is giving an identity to the country by constantly using the word ‘Australian’. We are proud of it. We are not ashamed of it and we do not disguise it by using another word that indicates a far broader scope than Australia. ‘Commonwealth’ tends to indicate a very large number of countries and nations throughout the world - a hangover of the British Empire. But we in the Australian Labor Party, in government, are determined to change things in Australia and give a national identity to people, even if it is only by using the word ‘Australia’ and being proud of using it. The words ‘Australia’ and ‘Australian’ are being used proudly and are not being swept under the rug.
The rest of the Bill relates to consequential changes necessary for the reduction of the qualifying period for furlough from 15 years to 10 years. The 2 measures are important in their own ways. The furlough Bill is only one first step. I am surprised, the honourable gentleman opposite and his confreres having always told us that on the question of inflation and all the rest of it we ought to confer with the State Premiers, that today he is berating us for conferring with the various Ministers for Labour in the States in an endeavour to obtain a national long service leave scheme. So again inconsistency shows through.
This Bill takes the first step and reduces the qualifying period. Other Bills will follow to alter the accrual rate for furlough and a number of other things. But they cannot be brought forward yet because there is a risk that they will prejudice negotiations that are taking place between the Australian Government Minister for Labour (Mr Clyde Cameron) and the various State government Ministers for Labour. So the matter rests there. I commend both measures to the House. It has been indicated that amendments will be moved during the Committee stages of the Bill. But, be that as it may, they will have to be faced when they are presented to us. I have read through both Bills carefully and have found nothing at all in them that could possibly be objectionable either to the Opposition or to the Australian people. They certainly satisfy the Government and for that reason I commend them to the House.
– The 2 Bills before the House which refer to matters relating to the Public Service are quite important. In the early stages of the second reading speech the Minister for Secondary Industry (Mr Enderby) indicated what they were all about. Public Service Bill (No. 4) is to remove certain provisions relating to employment for women. A lot has been said in more recent times relating to the numbers of women now employed throughout Australia by various industries. These figures are growing. From the outset I should like to say that statistics do not tell the facts of life in this area or in many other areas. The employment of women has come more to the forefront as far as the public and statistics are concerned in more recent times, but I assure this House and the nation that everyone should know that women have been in the workforce in Australia for a long time - since there have been people in this country. They have not been registered in any statistical form and have not been recognised in many cases. But in fact the very foundation of the nation which was laid in carving out the various farms and production in the country areas of Australia in most cases was a joint operation with husbands and wives. The wife proceeded, without any fear whatsoever, to carry out her part of the development program, and she did so with very little recognition from the nation.
Of course it would not have been unusual to go onto farms in years gone by, and still today, and find women cooking for and looking after many men with no recognition whatsoever by the nation. Women have been in the work force for a long time. Women are now moving into other areas within the Public Service. That is what we are speaking about today.
Australia has a uniform education system. Boys and girls attend the same school and in the majority of cases rub shoulders with each other right through to the university stage although this pattern is not always maintained in the final years of their education. These children are taught in the same forum and, in the main, through the same education system. But apparently at some period beyond formal education the habit is to discriminate between males and females. With that uniform education system running through almost to university level - in some cases it extends to university level - there is no reason at all why that pattern should not continue into employment in the work force. As we have discovered in the operations of this House in more recent times, there is no reason why female reporters cannot carry out the duties which male reporters solely performed for many years.
Different circumstances apply in some areas in which women would like to be accepted as members of the work force. They are capable of working in the Public Service for example but they have other responsibilities in relation to their homes. They are not in a position to carry out a full 8 hours work each day for a S-day week. But they are in a position to do a few hours work each day. I believe that the period worked could vary to a great extent with women working for a few hours each day and also carrying out their responsibilities in their homes. At the same time they are ‘being useful to themselves in an earning capacity and also useful to the nation as a whole by for a few hours each day, applying the skills which so many of them have.
May I have your attention, Mr Speaker, for a moment on this very point? I do not know whether what I propose comes precisely within your area of responsibility. There are 125 members in this House - I should exclude for the purposes of my argument the 27 Ministers, yourself and one or two honourable members - who do not have permanent secretaries here. The work load being faced by members in Parliament House is increasing every year. You have been a member here, Mr Speaker, for a long, long time and you would appreciate the situation which has developed. 1 know that a problem exists because of the shortage of accommodation for members and staff. I am speaking of women being employed for a short period in the Public Service work force. I assure you, and I feel I can speak for a number of honourable members, that many of these ladies could ‘be employed for a few hours only each day to act as secretaries to members who so require secretarial service. I am sure that there are in Canberra many women who would be available to be employed in these positions. The need for additional secretaries is growing in Parliament House. I know that we have secretarial assistance. What I instance is an example of how the availability of stenographers and typists for a few hours each day would take a tremendous weight off the work load of a number of members of this Parliament.
This principle could flow through into a number of areas. The principle could be applied to many areas of employment including the Commonwealth Public Service, where people who have taken the trouble to acquire certain skills but are not able because of other responsibilities to perform a full day’s work, could carry out duties utilising their skills for a few hours each day. I believe that this principle could be applied to the nursing profession in respect of which, for instance, women have been trained and then have worked for a number of years at a hospital somewhere. Many of these women have then married and assumed other responsibilites. At a certain period in life a woman may wish to return to the nursing profession. But she may not be able to return for a full working day for 5 days a week, particularly in view of the shift work that is involved in the nursing profession. But that woman could be available to work a ;number of hours each day. We should be looking at the practical application of methods of utilising the skills of these people.
I do not intend to speak for very long in this debate but another issue which I wish to mention is the reduction from IS years to 10 years of the qualifying period for furlough or long service leave. This proposal represents another improvement in the working conditions of the Australian Public Service. As I have said many times before, nobody objects to improving the conditions of people in this country or, for that matter, people anywhere else in the world. The problem that Australia faces today is inflation. This worries not only the Government and the Treasurer (Mr Crean) but also everybody else in this country. In relation to various aspects of working conditions - I am speaking about the actual work performed in a year and the remuneration received for that work - no country can ignore completely the circumstances of the day when making or taking decisions with respect to working conditions.
In relation to any decisions taken on working conditions, productivity must be considered. Not only honourable members but also employees and employers in Australia, including the Government of the day which is the largest employer in this country, must be aware - and I think that everybody would agree that this is necessary - that in making decisions of this nature an eye must be kept on considerations of productivity which must be involved because variations in Public Service conditions flow through to the whole work force in our community, once a decision to change those conditions is taken.
I repeat that I have no objection whatsoever to improvements in the terms and conditions of employment of the Australian work force. But I do believe that we must view seriously the circumstances that are operating at the moment in our economic system in which the rate of inflation is increasing rapidly. We cannot afford to let inflation run away unchecked. Nobody can deny that Australia enjoys a very high standard of living. There are always pockets of poverty around but, in general terms, we have built up a high standard of living and the Australian people wish to retain that standard. If we in this chamber and in the other place across the King’s Hall take responsibility in these matters right along the line together with employee and employer, we can retain that high standard of living which we have created over the years. I do put emphasis on this point.
Another purpose of this legislation is to modify the current blanket prohibition on officers of the Australian Public Service accepting directorships. I have spoken before on this matter as to whether people who have certain qualifications in the Public Service should be able to make themselves available to the Australian work force and be accommodated in that area. In considering this legislation, we are looking at the acceptance of directorships by public servants in various establishments in Australia. If men and women are capable by reason of their qualifications of carrying out certain duties in certain positions, in my book regardless of where those duties may be carried out the benefit of those qualifications and that expertise should be taken advantage of. That is what this country wants.
A lot of nonsense has been talked - perhaps a lot of sense has been talked also - about overseas capital coming into Australia. No doubt exists that the value of all the capital in the world entering a country will go down the drain if that country does not have the knowhow to use that capital to advantage. We all know this. Over the years, Australia has had to import know-how. This brings to my mind the discussions earlier in this week in this House about the mining industry when we considered the Petroleum and Minerals Authority Bill. I did not speak in that debate but I listened to it with some interest.
I recall to my mind immediately the time when the first oil well was sunk in this country in the search for oil. That oil well was sunk at Exmouth Gulf in Western Australia. At that time, I took the opportunity to visit Exmouth Gulf. I hope, Mr Speaker, that I aim not digressing too far from the provisions of this Bill. I had the opportunity at that time to look at what was going on. We found that a rig had been established at Exmouth Gulf. It was the first in Australia and, incidentally, found a little oil. From memory, each shift of 8 hours involved 5 men - 15 in all were employed - of whom 3 were Australians and 2 were Americans. We had no expertise whatsoever in this field. The Americans were teaching the Australians how to do the work, how to carry out the job, how to drill and how to find oil. Expertise, as well as capital, was coming into the country. Through the provisions of this Bill in relation to directorships, we should seek to use totally the expertise available in Australia and therefore allow public servants to move into these positions. I have no objection whatsoever to that being done. Having said those few words, I indicate that I support the provisions of this legislation to which I have referred.
– I shall not detain the House very long. I wish to draw attention to one matter which I think was raised by a Government member, that is, the implications of clause 6 of the Bill now before us, which were mentioned by the Minister for Secondary Industry (Mr Enderby) in the course of his second reading speech. This is simply a clause which is designed to change the name of the Commonwealth Public Service to the Australian Public Service. On the face of it that seems to be an innocent and insignificant proposal. I agree that none of us wants in any way to be ashamed of being an Australian. In fact just the opposite is the case. I think that all of us in this House should be proud of being Australians and would gladly use the word ‘Aussie’. But the States of Australia are still Australian States and they have their own public services. Why should we arrogate to our Service the monopoly of the word ‘Australian’ We have the Public Service of New South Wales and the Public Service of Victoria, sure. But they are still Australian States and they have just as much right to describe themselves as Australians as have any of us here in this House. Everyone of us here in this House is a citizen not only of Australia but also of one of the Australian States.
I know that this may seem to be a small point, but I believe it has quite important implications. I believe that this is the implication: That this Government is doing a number of underhand things which seem all right on the surface but which when put together in a pattern display an underhand motive. We have spoken in the past about the way in which seemingly well meaning measures can be fitted together into a plan of socialisation. But that is not what I want to speak about now. I am wondering whether this is not part of a plan to abolish the Australian States. We know that this is a centralist Government. We know by looking at the platform of the Australian Labor Party that it not only wants to abolish the Senate and take off all the brakes on its own arbitrary actions in this House but that it has in its platform the proposition to take away all real power from the States and make them simply agents of the Central Government here in Canberra operating in one chamber and with complete dictatorial powers. We know this.
We have to be on our guard lest the present Government, without saying what it is doing, moves gradually towards that objective of abolishing the States, putting all power in Canberra and putting all power in one House of Parliament. I have seen in the year that is behind us many moves which could be interpreted in that way - moves which on the surface seem fair and reasonable and attractive enough but when they are put together into a pattern seem to move towards this funda mental Government objective of destroying the Australian States, destroying every other form of democratic government and centralising everything here in Canberra in one House of Parliament so that the man who obtained the Prime Ministership by some quirk or chance of fate will be able to perpetuate his power, be able to over-ride everything in the Constitution and have complete control of the whole Australian economy, social structure, family life and everything else that one can imagine. I know that this is the plan of the Government.
Maybe clause 6 of the Bill, this innocent seeming little clause, is a small part of that same plan. It is not tremendously significant and it does not add up to very much. But when you take to yourself the adjective ‘Australian’, you deny to the States the power to describe themselves as Australian States. They are Australian States; they are part of the Australian system. Ours is a federal system and our Federal Service is the Commonwealth Service. It is not the only Australian Service. The States of New South Wales and Victoria have their own public services. They are Australian States and as such they are entitled, surely, to have some kind of use of this adjective.
It is not a case of our trying to downgrade the use of the word ‘Australian’. In fact, very much the opposite is the case. For my part, I would like to increase the significance of the word ‘Australian’. But we do not increase that significance by denying the fact that South Australia, Western Australia, Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland or Tasmania is an Australian State. The States are part of the Australian system. The Australian system of government is not as yet a monolithic system of government. It is a federal system. It may be that the change proposed by the Bill does not mean much and that its significance is small. But even in these small things the straws show which way the wind is blowing. A little bit of twig or a leaf floating on the water shows which way the current is running. I believe that there is an underground current running through the Labor Party and the Government - the current of the desire to destroy and break down the whole system of federalism and to centralise everything. It is true that here we are dealing with a small thing - something which has only a symbolic, verbal significance. Yet I just wonder why this should be done. What is the purpose of it? What is the motive behind the things which are being done in this and other legislation?
If this were a single thing I would not worry about it. But it fits into a pattern which is shown in the legislation which this Government has brought into this House in the past year. There are many, many examples of it. We know that we are dealing with a treacherous and underhand Government. We know that we are dealing with a Government which is denying to this House the power to debate Bills of major significance and which has used the guillotine to truncate debate, in a way which is absolutely without precedent, on major matters which go right to the root of the Australian community. We have not been allowed in this House to discuss them. We know, for example, that the Leader of the House (Mr Daly) tried to falsify Hansard. We know that; it is self-confessed. We know that the standard of truthfulness which the Prime Minister (Mr Whitlam) has exhibited in this House is a little bit short of what would be desirable. We know that we are dealing with a Government which confesses that in itself it is the creature of people who are not elected by the Australian people but are responsible only to small groups.
– Order! I think it is about time that the honourable member got back to the Bill.
– I do think that you are right, Mr Speaker. I know that it must be embarrassing for the Government that I should be bringing these things up. I do not want to press them too far. I just want to put them on record because it seems to me that in clause 6 of the Bill we have a small move in that same kind of treacherous and underhand direction. I was simply saying that one must always suspect the motives of this Government because it has shown itself, both in the conduct of individual Ministers and in the conduct of its policy and the way in which its policy is directed from outside this Parliament, to be untrustworthy and unworthy of the trust of the people of Australia.
– In which clause of the Bill is that?
– I am referring to clause 6 which proposes that we should change the name of the Commonwealth Public Service to the Australian Public Service. It is innocent sounding. Maybe it does not amount to very much. But perhaps it is a straw which shows the way the wind is blowing.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill read a second time.
In Committee
The Bill.
– I ask for leave to move together the amendments standing in my name which have already been circulated.
– Is leave granted? There being no objection, leave is granted.
– I move:
page 4722
These amendments are connected with the Statute Law Revision Bill which was introduced and which went through this chamber this morning. The purpose of that Bill is to clear the way for a consolidation of reprints of all Acts of this Parliament as at 31 December 1973. A number of technical non-contentious amendments to the Public Service Act were to be included in the Statute Law Revision Bill, but as Public Service Bill (No. 4) is now before the Parliament these provisions have been removed from the Statute Law Revision Bill and have been included as Table B in the schedule to the Bill which is now before the
Committee and which is referred to in the amendment. The purpose of these amendments is thus to achieve in the present Bill the technical non-contentious amendments which would otherwise have been achieved as part of the statute law revision exercise. Adoption of the amendments would result in a considerable improvement of the Public Service Act and assist in the exercise to produce a consolidated reprint of all Acts. As was commented on by honourable members this morning, there is enormous advantage to the whole country, to lawyers and people Who use legal services, in having this done, and this is an expeditious way of doing it.
The only other points I would like to make while I am on my feet relate to some of the things mentioned in the second reading speech. With leave I will make these remarks because unfortunately I have to leave shortly. My remarks relate to some of the amendments which I understand the honourable member for Stirling (Mr Viner) proposes to move. They relate to the Government’s proposal to delete the oath of allegiance or affirmation of allegiance where it is to be found in the existing Act. The thinking of the Government here - it has been expressed on many occasions - is that the Australian Public Service and the public servants have largely an employeremployee relationship. Certainly it goes beyond that because it is regulated by a statute - the Commonwealth Public Service Act. We have been told and we know that the British Civil Service does not require an oath of allegiance to be taken. The various State Acts regarding the State Public Services do not have it, and no one can say that they do not work any less well for not having them. They work extremely well.
I think that anyone who has had experience of the Public Service would know that the provisions requiring an oath or an affirmation to be taken are just not used. Indeed, there is general agreement in the Public Service, I suggest, that they get in the way and on occasions they work to a positive disadvantage. I referred to 2 examples in my second reading speech, namely, the case where a person has been naturalised but where he has, for good or bad, dual nationality. To require him to take the oath or affirmation of allegiance in those circumstances could be a positive embarrassment. There is the other consequence, of course, that in this day and age when expertise is so very important and the Government wishes to avail itself of such expertise where it is available, it could deny itself the opportunity of employing, say, an American or a Frenchman - someone who owes nominal allegiance to another country - in the Public Service even though he might be working as an engineer or something of that sort. For a long time most other public services have not worried about the requirement.
I appreciate that the oath or affirmation can be used as a disciplinary measure, but one has to remind oneself that there are regulations already in the Public Service which achieve that effect. Section 34 (b) of the Act springs to mind and so does section 55. If one looks at section 55 one finds the various offences which an officer can commit, such as disobeying or disregarding a lawful order, negligence or carelessness in the discharge of his duties, inefficiency, incompetency, use of intoxicating liquor, disgraceful or improper conduct, breach of any other of the provisions of the Act, and so forth. It surely follows that there is no need to add to those the additional one that the person is in breach of some oath or affirmation of allegiance, which in turn is in extremely wide language. So the Government’s position is that it cannot accept the amendments that I understand the honourable member for Stirling will be moving.
On the positive side may I say that the Bill reduces the furlough period from 15 years to 10 years. It is consistent with the Government’s acting as a model employer for its employees - the employees being the Commonwealth public servants. It is consistent with what the Government has done in relation to 4 weeks annual leave, maternity leave and the recent loading enactment. These amendments merit and warrant the almost unanimous support that they have been given by honourable members.
Amendments agreed to.
– I ask leave to move together the 5 amendments which have been circulated in the name of the honourable member for Wannon (Mr Malcolm Fraser).
– Is leave granted? There being no objection, leave is granted.
– I move:
As I foreshadowed in my speech during the second reading stage, these amendments seek to reinstate into the Public Service Act the provisions requiring the oath or affirmation of allegiance to be taken by members of the Public Service. There is a consequential amendment. There is provision in section 82, subsection (9a), of the Act for dispensation of the requirement of the oath or affirmation of allegiance to be granted by the GovernorGeneral. The Opposition’s amendment here is to substitute the Minister - that is, the Minister in charge of the Act - for the GovernorGeneral. Shortly, the reason for substituting the Minister for the Governor-General is for practical reasons only, to overcome the necessity to go to His Excellency when a dispensation is required.
The Minister for Secondary Industry (Mr Enderby) has said that the Government does not see any need for the oath or affirmation of allegiance because the relationship between the Public Service and the public servants is largely one of employer and employee. I dispute that. The relationship is one of a servant to the Crown, which is something different from the relationship between employer and employee in private industry. The oath of allegiance is regarded as being necessary in the Public Service because the public servant is not a servant of the Parliament but a servant of the Government. The Government members are drawn from members of Parliament but the Government members are appointed by the Queen. And so the public servants are servants of the Government and therefore of the Crown. It is approporiate then that they be required, as a condition of eligibility of appointment), to make this oath or affirmation. It is as well to remind the House of the terms of that oath. It is as follows:
I, John Citizen, do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to the Queen, and will loyally as in duty bound uphold the Constitution of the Com monwealth of Australia established under the Crown of the United Kingdom. So help me, God!
The affirmation is in the same terms except that it affirms rather than swears that allegiance. I do not think there is anything more I need to say on this matter. The position of the Government and of the Opposition is clear.
Question put:
That the amendment (Mr Viner’s) be agreed to.
The Committee divided. (The Chairman- Mr G. G. D. Scholes)
AYES: 41
NOES: 52
Majority . . . .11
AYES
NOES
Question so resolved in the negative.
Bill, as amended, agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments; report - by leave - adopted.
Third Reading
Bill (on motion by Mr Daly)- by leave - read a third time.
page 4726
Consideration resumed from 27 November (vide page 3885), on motion by Mr Enderby:
That the Bill be now read a second time.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill read a second time.
Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.
Bill (on motion by Mr Enderby) read a third time.
page 4726
Bill received from the Senate, and read a first time.
- Mr Speaker, I move:
I ask for leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.
– Is leave granted? There being no objection, leave is granted. (The speech read as follows) -
The purpose of this Bill is to establish in Australia a Legislative Drafting Institute. The problem of ensuring the availability of an adequate number of experienced and capable legislative draftsmen has been one that has troubled this country, along with most other countries, for a long time. The growing complexity of society exacerbates this problem. That this Parliament has been able to enact so many laws has been due in the main to the dedication of a small number of able men. There is no need for me to impress on honourable members that good government requires good laws and that good laws are dependent on the availability of legal draftsmen with sufficient skills and experience to enable the government of the day to express its policies in appropriate legislation.
A step towards meeting the Australian Parliament’s problems was taken in 1970 when the Parliament enacted the Parliamentary Counsel Act 1970. This legislation established a separate Office of Parliamentary Counsel and provided for the top 3 positions in the Office to be statutory offices. A further step was taken by the present Attorney-General (Senator Murphy) earlier this year when he separated the function of drafting Bills for the Parliament from the function of drafting ordinances, regulations and subordinate instruments, and transferred the latter function from the Office of Parliamentary Counsel to the Attorney-General’s Department. The separation has proved in practice a great success and Parliament has had presented to it during 1973 more Bills than in any other year in its history. At the same time, the drafting of the ordinances and regulations has proceeded with great efficiency.
Nevertheless, there are insufficient trained draftsmen available to handle all the demands - indeed, the ever-increasing demands - that are made upon the resources. More needs to be done to ensure that there will be a continuing flow of draftsmen to meet the requirements both of the Parliament and in respect of subordinate legislation. To this end, the Government proposes by this Bill to establish a Legislative Drafting Institute that will be the instrument of meeting this need. The need for providing a flow of draftsmen capable of adequately dealing with the demands is not by any means confined to the Australian Government and Parliament. The States have similar problems. It is proposed that the Legislative Drafting Institute will assist the States, as well as the Australian Government and Parliament, to meet their needs.
There is, however, a further vital purpose that the Institute will serve. This is assistance to other countries - particularly the less developed countries - in meeting the difficulties they have had for many years. During the conference of Commonwealth Law Ministers in New Delhi in January 1971 the urgent need for action in the legislative drafting field was stressed by representatives of a number of countries. But no practical solution was seen to the problem. When the Law Ministers met in London in January of this year, the question was raised again and the Ministers of several countries pointed to the acute situation in their own cases and appealed for help. The difficulty was not whether the more developed countries were prepared to help, but how they could help, in a context where they themselves were experiencing considerable difficulty in keeping pace with the legislative work of their own parliaments and governments.
During the London discussions, Senator Murphy announced that Australia would establish a Legislative Drafting Institute to provide training courses to ensure an adequate supply of legislative draftsmen for Australia and to provide assistance to other countries. There was already in existence one small Institute established for this purpose - that in Ottawa under the leadership of a very distinguished former Parliamentary Counsel of Canada, Dr Elmer Driedger, Q.C., who is in Canberra at present to give the Goverment the benefit of his experience and advice. Dr Driedger’s Institute could accommodate only some 8 persons at a given time and consequently was able to offer only very limited assistance to other countries. The Institute that is to be established by the Bill will provide assistance to other countries, as well as to the States and ourselves. Of course, the number of persons who can be included in the courses at a given time will necessarily be limited because of the need for intense personal training. Legislative drafting is a practical vocation which cannot be developed simply by lecturing or mass production.
From what I have said, honourable members will see that the establishment of the Institute will help ourselves, the States and other countries in need of assistance. The Institute will do this by providing instruction and training in legislative drafting as provided in paragraph (a) of clause 5 of the Bill. It will essentially be a body providing postgraduate instruction. Legislative drafting is a skill which experience has shown is most readily acquired by persons already qualified as legal practitioners, especially those who have had some practical experience in legal work subsequent to attaining their qualifications. In the case of persons from other countries, a good command of the English language will be essential if benefit is to be obtained’ from the available courses.
Another vital function of the Institute will be to foster interest in and encourage suitably qualified persons to enter the profession of legislative drafting. This is vital to ensure a continuous flow of persons to legislative drafting. The profession must be seen to be - as indeed it is - a challenging vocation that offers satisfying rewards in participation in the vital activities of government. An ancillary function that the Institute will engage in is the undertaking of research into methods and techniques used in legislative drafting with a view to the improvement of those methods and techniques and the development of new techniques. I am hopeful that the participation of State lawyers in the Institute will ultimately result in more uniform drafting practices between the States and the Commonwealth. The Institute will be under the control of a Director appointed by the Governor-General. The Director will be a statutory officer whose appointment will be for a term not exceeding 7 years. The Bill makes other usual provisions in Part III in relation to the terms and conditions of office of the Director and of an Acting Director.
It is proposed that the staff required for the purpose of the Institute will be appointed by the Director, with the approval of the AttorneyGeneral. The terms and conditions of employment of members of the staff will be as determined from time to time by the Director with the approval of the Attorney-General, but in determining the conditions of members performing duties comparable with a class of Public Service officers, the Director is to have regard to the conditions applicable to those officers. In addition to the ordinary full-time staff required for the Institute, clause 27 of the Bill confers on the Director, with the approval of the Attorney-General, power to arrange for persons with knowledge or experience in legislative drafting or other relevant matters to assist in the performance of the functions of the Institute. What is in mind, of course, is assistance on a part-time or casual basis from such persons as parliamentary counsel or former parliamentary counsel of the Commonwealth or a State, eminent members of the legal profession, university lecturers and distinguished experts from other countries who may be visiting Australia. The Bill makes provision in Part IV for the finances of the Institute. Moneys for the purposes of the Institute will be appropriated by the Parliament from time to time. The Part includes usual provisions to ensure proper control of expenditure and requires accounts to be kept, and for them to be audited by the Auditor-General.
Mr Speaker, I do not expect ; indeed I do not believe that anyone with knowledge of the intricate skills of legislative drafting would expect- that the Institute will turn out consummate draftsmen at the end of what will be a limited training course - in the case of Australian practitioners, probably of some 9 months duration. It would be a mistake to expect that. But what I believe can be achieved, both for ourselves and at least on a limited scale for our friends overseas, is both a great stimulation of interest in the profession of legislative drafting and valuable training of lawyers in the art of legislative drafting so that they can return to, or embark upon, their careers in legislative drafting with an awareness of the problems they will face, of the means of solving those problems and of the policy and objects to follow in shaping the legislation they are called upon to draft. To this, of course, must be added practical experience ‘in the field’, for it is only by experience that the draftsman can become fully equipped to meet the demands made upon him. But the Institute will play a part, in this significant experiment in Australian legal history, in training Australian and other lawyers in the vital role of legislative draftsmen. I am confident that the description of the proposed Institute used in correspondence by the Assistant Secretary-General of the Commonwealth Secretariat as an ‘imaginative proposal’ will, in the events, prove justified. I am sure that honourable members on both sides of the House will join with me in their approval of this measure. I commend the Bill to the House.
Debate (on motion by Mr Gorton) adjourned.
page 4728
Statement - by leave - taken as a whole.
– This item seeks approval for the expenditure of funds authorised by the Treasurer (Mr Crean) in 1972-73 and payable out of an appropriation entitled ‘Advance to the Treasurer’, which is contained in the annual Appropriation Acts. Out of this advance the Treasurer is authorised to allocate funds to meet recoverable, emergent and unforseen expenditure not specifically provided for in the Acts. The Treasurer is required to account to the Parliament by means of a statement of amounts authorised by him which have not been subject to parliamentary sanction. Over the last 2 years the funds which have been appropriated in this way have doubled, with a total of SI 00m being allocated for this purpose in the 1973-74 Budget.
The Opposition parties believe that it is important that a deliberate effort be made to keep the appropriation of such funds to a minimum. We are particularly concerned that under the present Government, with the proliferation of departments and the rapid increase in the size of the Public Service, the Treasurer will seek increasingly large advances to satisfy the anticipated interim demands of the Government’s administrative expansion. It is clearly desirable that tight control be exercised to ensure that government departments do not seek funds from the Treasurer’s Advance when the correct course is to make provision for such expenditure in the Additional Estimates. Some of the dangers of this system can be obviated by the development of more efficient and accurate estimating procedures. The elimination of clerical errors and delays also can contribute to a more realistic estimate and ensure that less interim finance is required. I am sure the Treasurer appreciates the desirability of keeping these advances at a minimum level. I contain my comments today because of the pressures of time. The Opposition does not oppose the measure.
Statement agreed to.
Motion (by Mr Daly) agreed to:
That the following resolution be reported to .’he House: The Committee agrees with the statement for the year 1972-73 of heads of expenditure and the amounts charged thereto pursuant to section 36a of the Audit Act 1901-1969.
Resolution reported; report adopted.
page 4728
– For the information of honourable gentlemen, I present the texts of the following conventions and protocols in the field of human rights to which Australia has become a party or is about to become a party by accession or acceptance:
page 4729
Ministerial Statement
– by leave - We have come to the end of a momentous and memorable year in the life of the Australian Parliament. Just over 12 months ago the first national Labor Government in 23 years was elected to office. That in itself was an event of historic significance. Whatever the policies or actions of the new Administration, a change of government after such a protracted interval of conservative rule was bound to bring new ideas and fresh directions to our national life, to challenge old assumptions and stale habits of mind and to invigorate the whole climate of political debate in this country. So it has proved. For all of us in this Parliament it has been a uniquely arduous and exacting year. For my colleagues in the Labor Government it has been a year of immense excitement and unremitting activity. For the Australian people - for this country - it has been a year of progress and reform on a scale unmatched in the records of this Federation.
I hope that those words will not be taken as an empty boast. I believe the record of the Government speaks for itself. Anyone who studies that record impartially and factually - as I now invite the House to do - will accept the evidence of a prodigious legislative achievement. Today I want to bring together the main elements of that achievement and identify the consistent philosophy and the fundamental principles that lie behind all we have done and all we have attempted to’ do. I remind the House of this: nothing we have done in these eventful months can be said to have been unexpected or unpredictable. Our policies were formulated over many years. The most important of them were put to the people not once, but twice. We have done nothing that we did not promise to do: we have done what the Australian people charged us to do when they conferred upon us their mandate in December last year. My policy speech for the last elections stands, unqualified and undiminished, as the record of this Government’s activities in the past year and its manifesto for the years to come.
I do not pretend that the year has been plain sailing. Of course it has not. There is much in our program that we have to yet accomplish; many of our plans are still in their formative or embryonic stages. There is much, regrettably, that we have been prevented from doing or bringing to fruition. If the year has revealed clearly the nature and purposes of the Government, it also has revealed - even more nakedly and more unmistakably - the nature and purposes of the Opposition. I shall give the House presently the detailed evidence of the Senate’s obstruction. I doubt whether any of us can recall an Opposition that has behaved with such reckless and irresponsible indifference to the people’s will. We have seen in the Senate a pattern of blatant obstruction and of flagrant defiance of a popular mandate conferred by the people on an elected government. We have too often seen in this House a pattern of rowdiness, of delay, of unruliness and of persistent attempts to bait the Chair and to frustrate the business of the Parliament. We have contended with dinosaurs in one place and schoolboys in the other. Yet by long hours and hard work we have dealt with an unprecedented volume of business in thise Parliament.
Some idea of the scale of our legislative program will be seen from the statistics of Bills passed and introduced. Since this 28th Parliament assembled on 27 February a total of 253 Bills has been introduced. That figure surpasses all records. The nearest approach to it was 169 Bills in 1968. The Parliament has passed 203 of the Bills introduced this year. The size of that accomplishment will be seen more clearly from the total number of pages of legislation dealt with by the Parliament in each of the past 6 years. In 1968, excluding customs tariff schedules, the Parliament passed 775 pages of legislation. There were 481 pages in 1969; 660 pages in 1970; 872 pages in 1971; and 707 pages in 1972. This year the Bills introduced contained more than 2,200 pages - roughly 3 times the total last year. I know what a heavy burden that work has imposed on members and I am grateful for the way they have borne it.
– Do you not know that there is a paper shortage?
– Perhaps the honourable gentleman should have a litmus test. There are other ways that we can measure the volume of parliamentary and Government activity.
Since February this year 39 reports on inquiries instituted by the Government have been presented to the Parliament, not including reports from parliamentary committees or reports of inquiries instituted by the previous Government. There have been 19 statements and communiques tabled on meetings and discussions with State governments. Six Constitution Alteration Bills have been presented to the Parliament. The texts of 39 treaties and agreements with other countries have been presented. Between January and November this year the Cabinet itself made a total of 1,675 decisions. Whatever may be thought of this Government, not even its worst enemies can claim it has been idle. Great as our legislative program has been, the Government has never curtailed or disrupted the smooth proceedings of the House or trespassed on the rights of members.
– Haw-haw!
-Order! If that donkey does not keep quiet, he will go out.
– Indeed, the record will show that there has never been a year when private members have had more opportunity to raise matters in the House and have them debated fully. The House has sat for a total of 908 hours up to lunchtime today - the greatest number of sitting hours in one year for more than half a century. Among the parliaments of the world, only the House of Commons of the United Kingdom and the House of Commons of Canada have sat for longer hours this year. Yet we have only sat once after 11 p.m. The exhausing farce of sitting into the small hours, its intolerable toll on the efficiency and dignity of the Parliament, has been abolished. We have allowed 70 debates on the adjournment - the greatest number on record. We have never once curtailed or suspended debate on general business, and every matter raised by a private member has been debated and voted upon.
The great theme of our legislative program has been one of reform and renovation. We recognised from the beginning that the reforms we were seeking for Australian society - for a more just and humane Australian society - would be possible only through reforms in the structure of government itself. Significant changes in the organisation of the Australian Public Service were essential to provide the administrative resources for the Government’s program. That was our first task. We set about it with vigour and determination. We created new Departments of Urban and Regional Development, Aboriginal Affairs, Environment and Conservation, Tourism and Recreation, Minerals and Energy and the Media to administer whole areas of policy that had been neglected or downgraded in the past. Our program did not mean simply a new emphasis here or a little extra money there. It meant a new and radical assessment of our social priorities and goals. To have worked within the administrative framework of our predecessors would have meant, in large measure, accepting the values and priorities of our predecessors. We were not prepared to do so.
Our administrative changes were made in 2 stages. The first stage was to increase the number of departments from 27 to thirtyseven. Qualified experts from outside the Public Service were brought in at the highest level. I mention a few - Mr James Oswin in the Department of the Media - Dr Don McMichael in the new Department of Environment and Conservation - Mrs Marie Coleman as head of the new Social Welfare Commission - Mr Charles Halton in the amalgamated Department of Transport. At the same time we found it possible to increase efficiency and effect economies by merging some departments and reducing the functions of others. Thus, in the second stage of our administrative reforms, we reduced the number of departments from 37 to thirty-one. We merged the Service Departments with the Department of Defence and Civil Aviation with Transport. We combined the Departments of Housing and Works as a single Department of Housing and Construction. The Department of External Territories was abolished. I commend unreservedly the Australian Public Service for the prompt and efficient way it has adapted to these changes. The Public Service has responded to the Government’s heavy demands with immense professional skill and dedication.
Our changes and reforms, however, did not end with the restructuring of Government departments. We have armed the administrative machine with new functions and organisations to deal with the increasingly complex and difficult problems of planning for the needs of a growing industrial society. Some of the organisations have been given permanent statutory form, such as the Schools Commission, the Social Welfare Commission, the Hospitals and Health Services Commission, the Prices Justification Tribunal and the Pipeline Authority; others have had their statutory charter utterly transformed, such as the Grants Commission, the Cities Commission and the Industries Assistance Commission. In addition special task forces have been set up to deal with specific areas of policy and planning. No fewer than 94 commissions or committees of inquiry were established this year. The best known of them, perhaps, was the Coombs Task Force, which reported to us on the previous Government’ expenditure programs and recommended economies in them. No other Government in Australia has applied such a searching scrutiny to the expenditure of public money. In addition, Ministers have drawn on the services of consultants and outside advisers. We have established a wholly new instrument to provide long-term advice on public priorities - a ‘think tank’ - which we have named the Priorities Review Staff. I believe we can now claim that the Australian Government is equipped with the most modern, expert and comprehensive administrative machinery ever seen in Australia.
I want to summarise for honourable members the main legislation and policy decisions the Government has initiated in the past year. Let me deal with 2 basic principles common to all our programs. The 2 great and guiding themes of this Government have been the promotion of equal opportunity for our people and the promotion of Australian ownership and control of our industries and resources. We alone have proclaimed - and fought for - the right of Australians to participate to the fullest possible extent in their own industries. We alone have proclaimed - and fought for - the right of Australians to own and control the precious resources of this continent. Is there anything strange or unnatural about these rights? How often did we hear them expressed or articulated under our predecessors? How often did our predecessors take firm or decisive action to safeguard them? We seek for the Australian people a greater participation in the destiny of this country. We seek for all Australians the same oportunities to share in that destiny and to live their lives with the highest measure of material security and well-being and with the highest measure of intellectual and spiritual fulfilment.
When I speak of equality of opportunity I am not thinking simply of the removal of poverty or the redress of obvious injustices such as those in education or health. The evidence of unequal opportunity is to be found at all levels, in all areas of society. We are pledged, for example, to give greater equality of opportunity to women, who have long been disadvantaged - often in subtle and hidden ways - in a male-oriented society. No Government has done more for the welfare of women - and I do not mean simply women in need or women in obvious hardship. Similarly, we are pledged to give equality of opportunity to Aboriginals; no Government has done more for the Aboriginals of this country. For the first time they are represented in an elected consultative council which can deal directly with the Australian Government. Again, we are pledged to give equal opportunities to migrants; no government has done more for migrants. These are not idle or pious assertions. The evidence of all we have done is abundant and manifest in the records of this administration. It will stand, proud and unchallenged, in the statutes of this country.
No one disputes that what we have done for education is prodigious in scale and revolutionary in conception. We have increased federal spending on education by well over 90 per cent in our first year. We have established an expert and independent Schools Commission to bring sanity and justice to the whole process of assistance to primary and secondary schools. We have given a new deal to the children of Australia. It is here that the force and sincerity of our commitment to equal opportunity is most clearly seen and readily tested. It is a test also for our opponents, lt is a test that most of them have failed. How striking it is, how revealing, how salutary a lesson for the Australian people, that the two areas of Government policy most fundamental to the people’s needs and aspirations - education and health - are the very areas where our opponents have resisted our reforms with the greatest determination. Nothing reveals more clearly the difference between us - the Government’s forthright commitment to equality; the Opposition’s rearguard defence of inequality and privilege.
I ask the House to examine in detail the record of the Opposition, here and in the Senate. Let us look at the Bills they have blocked and delayed and frustrated and amended. Let us look for the common theme in all their obstructive tactics. The Opposition may lack a common voice, but it is not without a common cause. That cause is the defence of vested interests. Mind you, I confess that I sometimes find it difficult to tell which of their spokesmen, their leaders, should be taken seriously. The Leader of the Opposition would agree that there are more blue-tailed flies in the Senate than here. On one very important measure before this Parliament - the Industries Assistance Bill - the Country Party voted against the legislation while the Liberal Party supported it. On the question of grants to schools, the Liberal Party voted against the measure while the Country Party supported it. We will be forgiven for feeling some confusion.
– Open opposition?
– ‘Open opposition’, says the interjector. In the past year the Senate has rejected 13 Bills, deferred another 10 of which six remain shelved, and amended 21. I list the 13 Bills it has rejected up to today: Commonwealth Electoral - two Bills; Conciliation and Arbitration; Representation - two Bills; Senate (Representation of Territories) - two Bills; Lands Acquisition (Australian Capital Territory); Seas and Submerged Lands (Royalty on Minerals); Constitution Alteration (Democratic Elections); Constitution Alteration (Local Government Bodies); Health Insurance; and Health Insurance Commission. In defence of their wealthy friends and vested interests, they have rejected the democratic principle of equal electorates; they have blocked attempts to democratise and modernise the trade union movement; they have denied representation in the Senate to the people of the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory; they have sought to deny to local government direct access to national revenues and borrowings; they have preserved for foreign mining interests the right to exploit our off-shore resources; they have preserved the inequity, inefficiency and injustice of an antiquated health scheme.
By shelving the Trade Practices Bill they have left the door open to monopolies and big corporations to fix prices, organise cartels and exploit the Australian consumer. By shelving the Australian Industry Development Corporation Bill they have blocked the most effective instrument for ensuring Australian control of our industries and developing new industries. They have left the door open to foreign takeovers and foreign exploitation of the Australian economy. Yet for all the legislation I have mentioned the Government had a clear mandate from the Australian people.
I sometimes hear it said that the Government is doing too much, that we ought to slow down. This is an argument that comes easily and naturally from conservatives. I reject it.
I reject it because the task before us is still a great and formidable task, because much that could have been achieved this year still remains to be achieved, because a nation that has waited 23 years to see essential and overdue social reforms cannot be expected to wait any longer. The Government is proud of its record. We have abolished unemployment and restored a healthy rate of economic growth. Australia has a new strength and confidence at home and a new respect abroad. We are no longer a cipher or a satellite in world affairs. We are no longer stamped with the taint of racism. We are no longer a colonial power. We are no longer out of step with the world’s progressive and enlightened movements towards freedom, disarmament and cooperation. We are no longer in thrall to bogies and obsessions in our relations with China or the great powers. We have strengthened old friendships and established new ones.
In no field in its first year of office has my Government so profoundly, so beneficially, and - let me be quite clear - so successfully established new perspectives as in Australia’s foreign policies. That this has been so was first of all the result of the bitter distortions into which our predecessors had forced Australia’s policies, the injustices they did to the great mass of decent Australians in a shortsighted pursuit of policies as ugly as they were outdated, as narrowly conceived as they were equivocal. If anything came to an end on the anniversary of Austerlitz last year it was the demeaning of Australia in the eyes of the world as the country our predecessors had represented it to be: insignificant, racist, militarist, sycophantic, a timid and unworthy creature of the great powers to whom it had surrendered its identity. Australia is no longer thought of in those ways: if I take pride in that it is because I believe that the ugly Australia of the past did an unforgivable violence to the way in which ordinary Australians thought of themselves, and to the way they hoped their Government would act in its dealings with the rest of the world.
There have been great changes. My Government is unequivocal in its belief in the equality of men of all races: we have proclaimed that belief and have consistently acted in accordance with it. My Government believes the war in Vietnam was a bitter disaster, the end result of the squandering of opportunities for peace presented two decades ago. We shall have no more Vietnams, and we shall do al! in our power to promote the forces for peace in our region and the world. Above all my Government believes in those abiding virtues in Australian society which have given us a distinctive nationhood, the belief in fraternity and independence, the instinct for fair play, justice and freedom that Eureka signifies. It is those virtues which Australia’s foreign policies have sought to embody over the last year; it is that independence which my Government has celebrated and revived.
In spite of many changes certain things abide: Australia’s interests have not changed, only the way in which most Australians perceive them. The Government accepts its basic responsibility to create for the people of Australia a secure environment in which they can maintain and develop their welfare free from fear, threats or artificial constraints whether internally or externally inspired or contrived. That task will be more readily pursued, more easily attainable from now on than was ever possible before. The Government recognises that no society can progress if it rests only on the achievements of the past. I believe we have reached a more sane and equitable balance with the countries of importance to us in the world than at any time in the past, but it is of the nature of our task that it continues with its importance undiminished.
I invite the House and the Australian people to compare this Government with its predecessor, to compare this Government with the tired, resentful, nagging and squabbling rabble who oppose us in this Parliament. Who can doubt the importance and the urgency of all we seek to do, the idealism of our motives, the relevance of our reforms to a better and more secure and prosperous life for all Australians? Who can doubt the triviality, the self-seeking bitterness, the petty methods of obstruction and reaction that motivate our opponents? Who can doubt that Australia is now more respected and admired in the world by its friends and neighbours? Who can doubt that there is a new spirit of activity, of excitement, of adventure in our lives?
We do not regard the government of this country - as our opponents regard it - as a divine right, a privilege that is ours to enjoy in perpetuity. We regard it as a trust from the Australian people. We see no point in accepting that trust if we are unable to discharge it fully and wholeheartedly. I give this assurance to the Parliament and the people: We will carry on with our task, we will not shirk our responsibilities. We will continue to work for a more just and prosperous and enlightened nation. In this first year of the Labor Government we have made great and lasting progress towards our goals. I do not believe that any of the major reforms we have achieved will ever be reversed or abandoned. After all the carping and niggling, backing and filling by the Opposition, the changes we have made will remain - like all great Labor legislation - permanent landmarks in our history. The year ahead will be another year of progress and achievement. I am confident that the Australian people - when next they are asked to choose between the alternatives before them - will endorse our record and renew our mandate.
I ask leave to incorporate in Hansard the following documents, copies of which I have given to the Leader of the Opposition. They include: Legislative Record of the Year; Reports Tabled in Parliament on Inquiries Instituted by the Present Government; Statements Arising from Meetings Between Australian Government and State Government Ministers; Committees; Commissions of Inquiry and Task Forces Reporting to the Government; Reports Tabled by the Present Government on Inquiries Instituted by Previous Governments and the record on Cities, Women, Social Security, Resources, Other Decisions, Migrants, Rural Industries, the Economy, Education, the Environment and a Text of Treaties and so on presented to the Parliament.
– Order! Is leave granted?
– No.
– I read:
Bills Rejected by the Senate
Commonwealth Electoral Bill (No. 2) 1973
Conciliation and Arbitration Bill 1973
Senate (Representation of Territories) Bill
1973
Representation Bill 1973
Commonwealth Electoral Bill (No. 2) 1973
Lands Acquisition (Australian Capital Territory) Bill 1973
Senate (Representation of Territories) Bill 1973 (defeated a second time)
Representation Bill 1973 (defeated a second time)
Seas and Submerged Lands (Royalty on Minerals) Bill 1973
Constitution Alteration (Democratic Elections) Bill 1974
Constitution Alteration (Local Government
Bodies) Bill 1974
Health Insurance Bill 1973
Health Insurance Commission Bill 1973
Bills Stood Aside Following Senate Amendment
Constitution Alteration (Mode of Altering the Constitution) Bill 1974
Bills Deferred by the Senate
Trade Practices Bill 1973
Australian Industry Development Corpora tion 1973
National Investment Fund Bill 1973
Constitution Alteration (Simultaneous Elections) Bill 1974
Trade Practices Bill 1973 (No. 2)
Compensation (Commonwealth Employees) Bill
Bills Amended by the Senate
Australian Capital Territory Evidence (Temporary Provisions) Bill 1973
Bill introduced in the Senate amended on 29 March to delete the proposed limitation on operation. The House of Representatives passed the Bill on 29 March as received from the Senate.
Pipeline Authority Bill 1973
An amendment requiring works costing more than $2m to be referred to the Public Works Committee disagreed to by the House of Representatives on 31 May and not insisted upon by the Senate on 31 May;
An amendment deeming the Authority to be a common carrier disagreed to by the House of Representatives on 31 May and not insisted upon by the Senate on 31 May;
An amendment requiring that a warrant be obtained before entry uponland where it has not been practicable to notify the occupier further amended by the House of Representatives on 31 May to provide that the warrant be issued by a justice of the peace rather than by a magistrate; agreed to by the Senate on 3 1 May;
An amendment requiring 30 days rather than 7 days notice before occupying land agreed to by the House of Representatives on 31 May.
Cities Commission Bill 1973
Amendments made on 30 May to change the title of the Commission to Cities and Regional Development Commission; disagreed to by the House of Representatives on 31 May and not insisted upon by the Senate on 31 May.
Australian National Airlines Bill 1973
Amended on 1 June to require that the Australian National Airlines Commission transfer moneys provided for staff superannuation to the Commonwealth Superannuation Board; agreed to by the House of Representatives on 21 August.
States Grants (Advanced Education) Bill 1973
Amended on 5 June to require that the States report annually to the Australian Universities Commission on the expenditure of money granted to them; agreed to by the House of Representatives on 21 August.
States Grants (Universities Bill) 1973
Amended on 5 June to require that the States report annually to the Australian Universities Commission on the expenditure of money granted to them; agreed to by the House of Representatives on 21 August.
Australian Citizenship Bill 1973
Amended on 5 June to substitute alternative oaths and affirmations including provisions for ‘renouncing all other allegiance’. The House of Representatives on 23 August proposed an alternative amendment providing new oaths and affirmations omitting the requirement of renouncing other allegiance. The Senate insisted upon its amendment on 1 1 September and the House of Representatives agreed to it on 12 September.
Australian Capital Territory Representation (House of Representatives) Bill 1973
Amended on 7 June to permit a margin of allowance of one-fifth in lieu of onetenth; agreed to by the House of Representatives on 1 1 October.
Public Works Committee Bill 1973
Bill introduced in the Senate. Amended on 30 August to require the Public Works Committee to examine all capital works in excess of$2m undertaken by statutory authorities. The House of Representatives amended the Bill on 25 October to restore it to its original text but the Government gave an undertaking that independent examination would be undertaken in an attempt to draw up a more rational method of selecting works to be referred to the Committee. The Senate agreed to the amendment on 13 November.
States Grants (Petroleum Products) Bill 1973 Amended on 10 October to require future amendments of the schedule of subsidy rates to be notified to the Parliament in the form of regulations; agreed to by the House of Representatives on 1 1 October.
Meat Export Charge Bill 1973
Amendment requested on 10 October to reduce the rate of charge on beef and veal from 1.6c to lc; not made by House of Representatives on 6 November; not pressed by the Senate on 7 November.
Meat Export Charge Collection Bill
Amended on 10 October to establish a Meat Export Charge Trust Account; disagreed to by the House of Representatives on 6 November, but similar amendments passed in their place; the Senate did not insist upon the original amendments and agreed to the House of Representatives amendments on 7 November.
Conciliation and Arbitration Bill 1973 (No. 2)
Extensively amended between 10 October and 6 November to reject the proposals to facilitate union amalgamations, to require a Commissioner to ensure that employees bound by agreement have been consulted and to give the Minister for Labour the right to administer all sections of the Act; agreed to by the House of Representatives on 8 November.
Schools Commission Bill 1973
Extensively amended on 20 and 21 November to alter provisions on the structure of the Commission, appointment of members, functions of the Commission, reporting of operations and schools advisory boards. The House of Representatives on 27 Novem ber agreed to one amendment, indicating that any reference to schools refers to both government and non-government schools, but disagreed to the remaining 14 amendments. Insisted upon by the Senate on 5 December; the House on 5 December insisted on disagreeing to the amendments. The Senate did not insist on the amendments on 12 December, but agreed to amendments proposed by the Government and the House agreed to the Government amendments on 12 December.
Seas and Submerged Lands Bill 1973 (No. 2)
Amended on 27 November by deleting Part III, dealing with recovery of off-shore minerals; agreed to by the House of Representatives on 28 November.
Constitution Alteration (Mode of Altering the Constitution) Bill 1974
Amended on 4 December to omit the proposal to require a majority in not less than one half of the States rather than in a majority of the States; and to omit from the title to facilitate alterations to the Constitution; disagreed to by the House of Representatives on 5 December; insisted upon by the Senate on 5 December; the House on 5 December insisted on disagreeing to the amendment and laid the Bill aside.
Industries Assistance Commission Bill 1973
Amendments made between 28 November and 5 December relating to disclosure of interests by commissioners, extension of time from 6 to 10 years after imposition of duties before Commission can initiate review, and the establishment of a separate Temporary Assistance Authority; agreed to by House of Representatives on 5 December.
States Grants (Schools) Bill 1973
Amendment requested to ensure minimum per capita grants to non-government schools. On 12 December the House agreed to the amendments with modifications. The Senate agreed to the modifications on 13 December.
Law Reform Commission Bill 1973
Bill introduced in the Senate. Amended extensively, including deletion of provisions for hearings, requiring the Commission to consider rights and liberties and prohibiting full-time judicial members unless Chairman is judicial office holder.
Fisheries Bill 1973 and Continental Shelf (Living Natural Resources) Bill 1973
Bills introduced in the Senate. Amended to make forfeiture of a foreign ship involved in an office dependent on Court’s direction; on 11 December the Bills were recommitted to Committee and different amendments proposed by the Government but having similar effect were agreed to. The House of Representatives passed the Bills on 13 December as received from the Senate.
Mr Speaker, I seek leave to have the rest of the documents incorporated in Hansard.
-Is leave granted?
– The documents can be tabled. Incorporation in Hansard obviously will take up too much space.
-I am sorry; there can be no debate on the question.
– Mr Speaker, I draw your attention to the size of the documents. It has been the practice of this House not to incorporate documents of this volume in Hansard. It is customary to incorporate tables. If the Prime Minister wishes to continue this farce of reading the documents, that is all right. Under the Standing Orders he has the right to table documents. He has the undoubted right to distribute them to the Press if he wishes. If he chooses to read them into Hansard, that is fine.
– I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker-
-Order! There can be no discussion on the question. Leave is either granted or not granted. Leave is not granted.
– I read:
page 4736
28 February: Report by Mr Justice Moore on the Inquiry into Steel Price Increases proposed by B.H.P. and A.I.S. - Tabled by Mr Whitlam.
– I continue: 15 March: Bilingual Education in Schools in Aboriginal Communities in the Northern Territory. (Requested by Minister for Education on 22.1.73)- Tabled by Mr Beazley. 3 April: Report on Employment Problems in the Port of Portland- Tabled by Mr Cameron. 1 1 April: Components of the growth of Australia’s Major Urban Centres - Tabled by Mr Uren. 2 May: Report of the Health Insurance Planning Committee - Tabled by Mr Hayden. 2 May: Report from the Academy of Science on the Biological Effects of Nuclear Explosion Fall-out. (Request from Prime Minister 12.2.73) - Tabled by Mr Whitlam. 17 May: Biological Effects of Nuclear Explosion Fall-out. (Meeting between Australia/French scientists, Canberra 7-9.5.73)- Tabled by Mr Whitlam. 24 May: Interim Report of the Australian Council for the Arts. (Request from Prime Minister 23.1.73)- Tabled by Mr Whitlam. 25 May: The Role, Scope and Development of Recreation in Australia - prepared by Professor John Bloomfield - Tabled by Mr Stewart. 30 May: Interim Report of the Australian Schools Commission - Tabled by Mr Beazley. 30 May: A Report from the National Hospitals and Health Services Commission Interim Committee - Tabled by Dr Everingham. 31 May: A.C.T. Education Authority - Assessment Panel on - Tabled by Mr Beazley. 21 August: Review of the Continuing Expenditure Policies of the Previous Government - Tabled by Mr Crean. 21 August: Possible Ways of Increasing Imports - Tabled by Mr Crean. 22 August: Aboriginal Land Rights Commission - First Report - Tabled by Mr Bryant. 22 August: Commonwealth Bureau of Roads on effects of stopping freeway construction in State Capital Cities - Tabled by Mr Uren. 23 August: Development of Tourism in Australia - Tabled by Mr Stewart. 29 August: Immigration Task Force (New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland) - Tabled by Mr Grassby. 30 August: A Report from the Social Welfare Commission - Tabled by Mr Hayden. 12 September: Proposal for Australian companies and Securities Legislation - Report by Professor Loss - Tabled by Senator Murphy. 13 September: Lake Pedder Inquiry - Tabled by Dr Cass. 27 September: Protection Commission - Inquiry re formation of - Tabled by Mr Whitlam. 27 September: A review of Public Transport Investment Proposals for the Australian Capital Cities 1973-74 - Bureau of Transport Economics - Tabled by Mr Jones. 10 October: Migrant Task Force Committee - Western Australia - Tabled by Mr Grassby. 8 November: Australian Council for the Arts - Final report on the future workings of the Council and its Boards - Tabled by Mr Whitlam. 13 November: National Estate - Principles and Policies - Submission to the Task Force (by the Department of Urban and Regional Development) - Tabled by Mr Uren. 15 November: Migrant Task Force Committee - South Australian - Tabled by Mr Grassby. 27 November: Power over Prices and Incomes - Report by Mr T. C. WinterTabled by Mr Whitlam. 4 December: A Report from the Social Welfare Commission concerning Aged Person’s Housing - Tabled by Mr Hayden. 4 December: First Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Land Tenures - Tabled by Mr Bowen. 4 December: Re-organisation of the Defence Group of Departments - Tabled by Mr Barnard. 5 December: Education for Recreation Workers- Tabled by Mr Stewart. 5 December: An Inquiry into Ecological Implications of a Turtle Farming Project - Tabled by Mr Bowen. 5 December: An Inquiry in Organisation, Management and Market Prospects of a Turtle Farming Project in Northern Australia - Tabled by Mr Bowen. 1 1 December: Care and Education of Young Children - A Report of the Australian Pre-schools Committee - Tabled by Mr Bowen. 12 December: Interim Report on the River Murray Working Party - September 1973 -Tabled by Dr Cass. 12 December: Report on Roads in Australia Bureau of Roads - Tabled by Mr Jones. 12 December: Medical Rehabilitation Program for Australia - Report of National Hospitals and Health Services Commission Interim Committee - Tabled by Dr Everingham. 13 December: Report of the Advisory Committee on CES Employment Statistics - Tabled by Mr Cameron.
Note: A number of other reports have been presented but as they are pursuant to legislation they are not included in this list. Nor have reports from Parliamentary Committees been listed.
page 4737
1 March: Communique of meetings between Prime Minister and Premiers of New South Wales and Victoria at AlburyWodonga on 25 January 1973 - Tabled by Prime Minister. 6 March: Statement made on 2 March 1973 following meeting between Prime Minister and Premiers of New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia concerning River Murray and River Murray Commission - Tabled by Prime Minister. 13 March: Communique and Points of Agreement of the Ministerial Council Meeting concerning Albury-Wodonga (Aspects of Development and Decentralisation) - Tabled by Mr Uren. 15 March: Statement regarding meeting on 24 February 1973 between Minister for Housing and Victorian counterpart on proposed Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement - Tabled by Mr Johnson. 27 March: Statements made with regard to the Australian Transport Advisory Council meeting in Hobart on 16 February 1973 - Tabled by Mr Jones. 3 April; Meetings of Australian and State Labour Ministers on 23 February 1973 in Melbourne - Tabled by Mr Cameron. 11 April: Components of the Growth of Australia’s Major Urban Centres - Tabled by Mr Uren. 17 May: Proceedings of Conferences between Australian and State Ministers for Housing (Canberra, 23 March 1973 and Adelaide, 5 April 1973)- Tabled by Mr Johnson. 31 May: Conference of Australian Government and State Ministers with Responsibilities for Wildlife Conservation (Melbourne, 9 March 1973)- Tabled by Dr Cass. 22 August: Transcript of conference of Australian Government and State Ministers held at Canberra on 10 May 1973 - Tabled by Prime Minister. 22 August: Communiques relating to meetings of Ministerial Council established to oversight the growth of the AlburyWodonga areas held on 9 March, 23 May and 4 July 1973- Tabled by Mr Uren. 22 August: Summary of discussions at meeting of Ministers responsible for recreation held on 7 June 1973- Tabled by Mr Stewart. 29 August: Transcript of conference of Ministers responsible for immigration held at Brisbane on 11 May 1973- Tabled by Mr Grassby.
– Order! Ring the bells. (The bells having been rung) -
– Mr Speaker, there is not a single member of the Country Party at his desk and the Leader of the Opposition is falling down on his duty too, I notice.
– That is not so. He has been present all the time. It is quite contrary to the Standing Orders that the Prime Minister should be making a farce of the Parliament in this way.
– You have made a farce of it.
You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
– Order!
– The Minister is out of order.
– Order! The Minister for Immigration will come to order.
– Obey the Chair.
– Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will come to order. The Minister for Immigration.
– Yes, Sir.
– Remain quiet.
– I will try, under great provocation. (Quorum formed)
– I continue: 11 October: Transcript of minutes of meeting of Australian Water Resources Council held on 27 July 1973- Tabled by Dr Cass. 16 October: Record of decisions of Tourist Ministers Council held on 9 and 10 July 1973- Tabled by Mr Stewart. 24 October: Report of conference of Australian Education Council held on 14 and 15 June 1973- Tabled by Mr Beazley. 24 October: Summary of resolutions and recommendations of Australian Forestry Council meeting held on 8 June 1973 - Tabled by Dr Patterson. 20 November: Statement regarding meeting of Australian Government and State Government Ministers concerning export of kangaroo products held on 9 March 1973- Tabled by Dr Cass. 29 November: River Murray Waters - Problems asociated with use - Summary record of discussions at meeting between the Prime Minister and the Premiers of New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia on 2 March 1973 - Tabled by Prime Minister.
I turn next to a table entitled ‘Committees, Commissions of Inquiry and Task Forces Reporting to the Government’. I ask for leave to incorporate the table in Hansard.
– Order! Is leave granted? Leave is not granted.
– The table reads as follows:
page 4738
That is, before the House rose for the winter recess.
Aboriginal Land Rights Commission (First
Report tabled 22.8.73)
Aboriginal Bilingual Education in Schools -
Advisory Group (Report tabled 15.3.73)
Adelaide Airport Advisory Committee
A.C.T. Education Authority - Assessment
Panel (Report tabled 31.5.73)
A.C.T. and New South Wales - Impact of growth of Canberra
Aircraft Industry Working Group
Australian Council for the Arts (Report tabled 8.11.73)
Australian Post Office Commission of Inquiry
Australian Pre-schools Committee
Australian Schools Commission - Interim Committee (Report tabled 30.5.73)
Biological Effects of Nuclear Explosion Fallout - Academy of Science (Report tabled 2.5.73)
Biological Effects of Nuclear Explosion Fallout - Meeting between Australian and French Scientists (Report tabled 17.5.73)
Citizen Military Forces - Committee of Inquiry
Child Care Standards Committee
Child Care Research Advisory Committee
Computerisation of Criminal Data Committee
Computerisation of Legal Data Committee
Education for Community Recreation Workers
Employment Problems in the Port of Portland (Report tabled 3.4.73)
Employment Statistics - Committee of Inquiry
Health Insurance Planning Committee (Report tabled 2.5.73)
Homeless Men and Women - Working Party
Immigration Advisory Council - Committee on Community Relations
Immigration Task Force (All States) (Reports tabled 29.8.73, 10.10.73, 15.11.73)
Institutions of Tertiary Education in Sydney, Melbourne, Albury-Wodonga - Location, Nature and Development (Report tabled 3.5.73)
– Order!
– Make him withdraw that remark.
– Order! The honourable member for Angas knows that what he has put is not a point of order. The Prime Minister is speaking by leave of the House. I call the Prime Minister.
– The document continues: Institutions of Tertiary Education in Sydney, Melbourne, Albury-Wodonga - Location, Nature and Development (Report tabled 3.5.73)
Lake Pedder Inquiry (Interim Report tabled 13.9.73)
Land Tenure - Commission of Inquiry into (First report tabled 4.12.73)
National Estate - Committte of Inquiry
National Hospitals and Health Services Commission - Interim Committee (Report tabled 30.5.73)
National Population Inquiry (as extended on 4 March 1973)
National Rehabilitation and Compensation Scheme - Committee of Inquiry
National Superannuation - Committee of Inquiry
Nursing Homes Fees Review - Committees of Inquiry (All States)
Open University Inquiry
Pilbara Study
Poverty Inquiry
Protection Commission - Inquiry reformation (now named Industries Assistance Commission (Crawford Report)) (Report tabled 27.9.73)
Recreation in Australia - the Role, Scope and Development (Report tabled 25.5.73)
Review of the Continuing Expenditure Policies of the Previous Government (Report tabled 21.8.73)
River Murray Commission - Working Party (Report received September 1973)
Social Security-Welfare - Advisory Council Social Welfare Commission (Reports tabled on 30.8.73 and 4.12.73)
Steel Prices - Inquiry into proposed increases (Report tabled 28.2.73)
Study Group on Aboriginal Health
Superannuation pensions - Commonwealth Inquiry into adjustments after retirement (extended terms of reference) (Report tabled 10.4.73)
Technical and Further Education - Australian Committee
Urban Centre - Components of the growth (Report tabled 11.4.73)
A.C.T. Schools Interim Authority
Australian Ionising Radiation Advisory Council
Burdekin Project Committee
Commission of Inquiry into the Maritime Industry
Committee on Development of Outdoor Recreation
Committee of Inquiry into Government Procurement Policy
Committee of Inquiry into the Protection of Privacy
Committee of Inquiry into workloads in Defence and Research Establishments
Committee of Reference for Defence Forces Pay
Committee on National Uniform Safety Code for Australian Government Employment
Committee on Possible ways of increasing imports (Report tabled 21.8.73)
Consultation with Young People
Consumer Affairs Council (Related to A.C.T.)
Emergency Housing Committee (Related to A.C.T.)
Evaluation Study of Operation and Effectiveness of the Aboriginal Secondary Grants Scheme
Financial Needs for training teachers for special education in tertiary institutions
Financial support for approved private teachers college
Government Industry Panel on Cherries
Housing Standards Committee (Related to A.C.T.)
Inquiry into Certain aspects of Stevedoring Industry
Inquiry into Aboriginal/Police Relations
Inquiry into Employment in the Building Industry
Inquiry into Impact of Freight Rates on the Tasmanian Economy
Inquiry into Technical Education in the A.C.T.
Inquiry into the Implications of Establishing Frequency Modulation Radio Broadcasting in Australia
Inquiry into the prices of certain commodities and services in the A.C.T. and Northern Territory
Interim Commission on Consumer Standards
Interim Committee on the Production of Pharmaceutical Products
Interim Council for the Curriculum Development Centre
Interim Executive of the Australian Health Insurance Commission
Interim Primary Schools Libraries Committee
Legal Aid Review Committee
Medical Fees Tribunal (Some determinations have been handed down)
Molonglo Parkway Inquiry
National Committee on Discrimination in Employment and Occupations National Forensic Institute Committee of Inquiry
Possible development in Australian universities of studies in linguistics, including Aboriginal linguistics
Possible steps to encourage studies in Australian universities of the languages and cultures of people who represent a significant component of Australia’s migrant intake
Review Panel on Land Allocations to Builders- A.C.T.
Royal Commission into Petroleum and Petroleum Products
Second Interim Committee for the Schools Commission
The Interim Board for the Proposed Belconnen Mail Authority
Turtle and Crocodile Farming Project in Northern Australia - Inquiry into Ecological Basis Organisation and Market Prospects (Reports tabled 5.12.73)
West Australian Airport Advisory Committee
Working Party on Nursing Homes Fees
Working Party on the Environmental Implications of the Woodchip Industry and the Softwood Forestry Program
Workshop on Aboriginal Health Services and Aboriginal Health Workers
Workshop on Aboriginal Health Research.
The next table is entitled ‘Reports Tabled by Present Government on Inquiries Instituted by Previous Government’. I ask for leave to incorporate this document in Hansard.
– Order! Is leave granted? Leave is not granted.
- Mr Speaker-
– Mr Speaker, may I direct your attention to the state of the House.
– Order! A quorum is present. I name the honourable member for Mackellar.
– I move:
– Order! The question is: That the motion be agreed to. Those of that opinion say Aye.
Government members - Aye!
– I think the Ayes have it.
– Mr Speaker–
– Order! There is no debate. The question is therefore resolved in the affirmative. This being the honourable member’s second suspension during the year, the suspension is for the remainder of this day and next 7 consecutive days.
– Merry Christmas, Bill.
– Mr Speaker, the honourable member for Mackellar wishes to offer his apology.
– In this particular case no apology will be accepted by the Chair.
– On a point of order.
– Order! There is no point of order involved. The honourable member will resume his seat. Anybody could follow this practice all day and then apologise. In this way anybody could make a farce of the House. The apology is not accepted.
– Mr Speaker, there was no quorum.
– Order! I have not given the honourable gentleman the call.
– You have not put the question, Mr Speaker.
– I did put the question.
– Are you so ruling?
– I put the question. (The honourable member for Mackellar thereupon withdrew from the chamber.)
– I read:
page 4741
Tabled by Mr Barnard: Financial Terms and Conditions of Service for Male and Female Members of the Regular Armed Forces - Final Reports of the Committee of Inquiry -1 March 1973.
– Order! The point of order is not valid unless I give the honourable member the call. He made a facetious point of order a moment ago and I do not intend to give him the opportunity to make another one.
– I continue:
Tabled by Mr Hayden: Nursing Home Insurance Proposals Report of subCommittee of the Commonwealth Health Insurance Council (1 August 1972) - 11 April 1973.
Tabled by Mr Barnard: Re-organisation of the Defence Group of Departments. Report by the Morshead Committee (December 1957 and February 1958) - 30 May 1973.
Tabled by Mr Beazley: Teacher Education 1973-75 - Report of Special Committee on Teacher Education - 8 May 1973.
Tabled by Mr Beazley: Report of the Inquiry into Academic Salaries 1973 - 17 May 1973.
Tabled by Mr Grassby: Immigration Advisory Council - Progress Report of Inquiry into the Departure of Settlers from Australia - 14 March 1973.
– Order! The honourable member for Angas will resume his seat. I do not want him arguing with the Clerks.
– I certainly was not.
– The honourable member was arguing with the Clerks about how many members were in the House. He will resume his seat.
– I continue:
Tabled by Mr Jones: Department of Civil Aviation - Costs and Revenues - Second Report by Working Group to Minister for Civil Aviation (May 1971) - 11 September 1973.
Tabled by Mr Barnard: Defence Legal Services - Report of the Committee of Review (November 1971) - 7 November 1973.
page 4742
The Labor Government is the first Australian Government committed to a program for restoring our great cities and building new ones. The Government recognises that the quality of life for most Australians depends on the quality of our cities. It has embarked on a long-range program to make Australian cities and their suburbs more efficient, more orderly and more beautiful.
The Department of Urban and Regional Development was created on 19 December 1972, as the major policy arm of the Australian Government in urban affairs.
The Cities Commission was set up to provide town planning and other practical skills for developing existing cities and planning new growth centres.
Five-year Report on Growth Centres
The Cities Commission presented a 5-year report in June on investigations of 12 locations for possible centres to be selected for accelerated growth. The Budget allocated $33m to selected growth centres this financial year.
Referendum on Local Government
In order to help local government meet its growing responsibilities, the Government has decided to hold a referendum to alter the Constitution to give local government authorities access to national revenues and borrowings.
The Prime Minister met the Premiers of New South Wales and Victoria in AlburyWodonga on 25 January to launch the centre for accelerated growth. An agreement was signed on 23 October to set up a Development Corporation to plan and construct the new city. The Government’s first Budget allocated S9m for the first year’s expenditure.
The National Capital Development Commission is planning the new towns of Tuggeranong and Gungahlin to take the rapid expansion of Australia’s major growth centre. The need for more public transport and medium density housing has been emphasised.
The Department is preparing a national urban and development strategy.
The Australian Government is negotiating with the States to establish land commissions or similar bodies to acquire and develop land at new centres or on the fringes of existing cities. The commissions, by selling building blocks at a reasonable price, should dampen spiralling land prices. They also offer a means of comprehensive town planning. The Budget allocated $60m to be spent over 2 years by the land commissions.
Inquiry into Land Tenures
A Commission of Inquiry into Land Tenures, under Mr Justice Else Mitchell, has issued its first report. It recommends changes in property laws to reduce profiteering in land. The report recommended that Crown should hold ‘development rights’ to land, giving it the increase in value in the land when it is rezoned from, say, rural to urban residential.
Catching up the Sewerage Backlog
The Budget allocated an extra S30m to help catch up on the backlog of sewerage. Studies are underway for a long-term program to overcome the backlog and abate serious pollution.
The Grants Commission has been reconstituted to make funds available to local as well as State governments. The Department has recommended regional groupings of local councils, which should combine to apply for assistance from the Grants Commission.
Two pilot area improvement programs, coordinated by the Department, have been launched in the western regions of Sydney and Melbourne. The allocation this financial year is $5m for Sydney’s west and S3m for Melbourne’s west. The States and local governments may use the money to upgrade roads, parks and welfare services.
Inquiry into ‘National Estate
The Australian Government has set up an Inquiry into the National Estate under Mr
Justice Hope to report on ways of preserving the environmental heritage, both man-made and natural. The Budget set aside $2. 5m this financial year to begin the program.
The Australian Government is negotiating the purchase of the Church of England lands in the Glebe, Sydney, to preserve an historic townscape and help retain low income housing in the inner city.
page 4743
The Australian Government is determined to remove or reduce all legal, social, educational and economic discrimination against women. It has already done much to achieve this objective. It recognises that many women are the victims of subtle forms of prejudice and hostility.
ILO Conventions
In June the Government ratified a basic International Labour Organisation Convention on discrimination in employoment and occupation which will benefit women. It is committed to ratify the ILO Convention on equal pay for women. The Government’s Human Rights Bill, introduced in the Senate, is a further step in reducing discrimination.
Review of Public Service Employment The Government has made a review of employment conditions in the Australian Public Service. As a result, all positions in the Service are to be open equally to men and women applicants. Advertisements of vacancies and the placement of staff have been changed to avoid the possibility of selection on the basis of sex. Age limits for permanent appointment have been lifted from all but a very few designations, thus providing more opportunities £or married women who have already brought up families.
The Budget allocated further funds for training and retraining schemes for women. The Government is studying the possibility of creating permanent part-time employment and trial schemes of flexible working hours are being introduced.
Maternity leave provisions for Government employees have been extended to 12 weeks on full pay and a further 40 weeks unpaid without risk to continuity of service or status.
A completely new benefit, the supporting mother’s benefit, has been introduced. This benefit is payable to unmarried mothers including deserted de facto wives and de facto wives of prisoners, to married women not living with their husbands, and to wives who have been separated for other reasons, provided they have the care of their children. Any woman receiving this support is eligible to participate in the training scheme for widow pensioners.
Sales Tax on the Pill Abolished
One of the first decisions of the Government was to remove the sales tax on oral contraceptives and place them on the pharmaceutical benefits list. Prompt action has also been taken in the allocation of grants for family planning.
Child Care and Pre-schools
Extensive grants have been made for research into child care and for the construction and operation of child care centres. The Government’s Pre-schools Committee has recommended measures to ensure that child care and pre-school centres are provided for children below school age. The Government has tabled the report of the Australian Preschools Committee and invited public discussion of its recommendations on child care and pre-school centres.
Women’s Adviser to the Prime Minister
The Prime Minister in April appointed Ms Elizabeth Reid as his full-time adviser on issues relating to the welfare of women. Many other talented and qualified women have been appointed to official positions and committees of inquiry set up by the Government.
page 4743
The Government believes that social security is the right of all Australians. It is neither a form of charity nor a form of privilege. The Government has substantially raised the level of social security payments, but it does not believe that social security is provided by cash benefits alone. Its legislative program in its first year of office has brought new benefits and opportunities to a wide range of Australians in need. The Government is determined that Australia will once again lead the world in the provision of advanced and enlightened social security programs.
Increases in Pensions and Benefits
On the second day of the first session of Parliament a Bill was introduced providing for increases in all pensions and unemployment and sickness benefits ranging from $1.50 a week to $14 a week. Payment of pension increases was made retrospectively from the first pay day after the election. The Budget provided for a further increase of $1.50 a week in all pensions and unemployment, sickness and special benefits. The standard pension rate is now $23 a week.
Abolition of the Means Test
The first step towards the abolition of the means test was made in the Budget with the abolition on age pensions for all people aged 75 or more. The means test will be abolished during the life of this Parliament.
Common Benefit Rate
All pensions and unemployment and sickness benefits are now paid at a common benefit rate - $23 a week standard rate and $40.50 a week married rate. In this way the Government has removed several serious penalising anomalies; there is now the same rate of unemployment benefit for young persons as for adults.
Linking Pensions to Average Earnings
The Government has provided for pension and benefit rates to be automatically adjusted twice a year until they reach 25 per cent of average weekly earnings. Thereafter there will be regular automatic increases to retain this relationship to ensure adequacy of pension and benefit rates in relation to changing standards of living in the community.
Benefits for Student Children Over 16 Years
The denial of benefit for full time students over 16 years was an injustice practised by the previous Government. The new Government moved quickly to abolish this anomaly. Payment is now made to all student dependents of unemployment and sickness beneficiaries similar to those for dependent children of pensioners.
Additional Pension for Students
Payment of additional pension for full time students, together with mother’s or guardian’s allowance if applicable, will now continue without regard to the child’s age until either eligibility for pension ceases or until the child’s studies cease.
Discrimination Against Widows Removed
The Government has removed the longstanding discrimination against class B and C widows who were deemed eligible for widow’s pension but paid less than a class A widow. All widow pensioners now receive a common rate of $23 (with additional amounts for mothers).
Supporting Mother’s Benefit
The Government has introduced a completely new benefit, the supporting mother’s benefit, to be paid to unmarried mothers, including deserted de facto wives and de facto wives of prisoners, married women not living with their husbands, and wives who have been separated for other reasons, provided they have the custody, care and control of their children. A woman receiving supporting mother’s benefit may continue to receive the benefit outside Australia and is eligible to participate in the national rehabilitation service and the training scheme for widow pensioners.
Investigation of a Family Allowance
The Department of Social Security is investigating the possibility of paying a family allowance to all mothers. The Minister’s view is that a woman must be given a free choice to work or to stay at home with her family. This must be a freely available right, not a situation forced on her through economic necessity.
Portable Pensions Legislation
Age, invalid, wives’ and widows’ pensions are now available to Australian pensioners who wish to live in any other country. Portability of pensions is now provided without any requirement for reciprocal arrangements with other countries. This ended the previous Government’s cumbersome, slow-moving and inadequate process for providing pension portability. While this will benefit mainly aged, invalid and widowed migrants who wish to return to their former homelands, either permanently or temporarily, it will apply equally to all pensioners. It will thus in future be possible for pensioners to visit, or live with, their children or relatives who have settled or are working overseas.
Australian Social Welfare Commission
The Social Welfare Commission was announced in April and formally established by legislation. It will make recommendations to the Government on the development of social welfare in Australia. It is headed by Mrs Marie Coleman, who was formerly Director of the Victorian Council of Social Service. Through the establishment of this Commission, the community will know the Government’s goals and will participate in determining those goals.
The Australian Assistance Plan
The Social Welfare Commission is examining an Australian Assistance Plan to provide for cost-sharing with local authorities and voluntary agencies over a wider range of welfare services in each locality. The Commission has been allocated S 1.75m for a program of careful evaluation of the Assistance Plan concept before recommending on the final legislative form of the Plan. The Commission will establish and control the experimental phase of the Plan and consult with the community so that the concepts of the Plan are understood. The Commission has indicated that the final program could cost in the order of $30m a year. The range of services which may be covered by the proposed expenditure is wide, and the anticipated preventive value will be great if viewed in the light of the cost of providing such services as children’s homes and deserted wives pensions.
Widening of Terms of Reference of the Poverty Inquiry
The Poverty Inquiry established last year under Professor Henderson has had its terms of reference widened to give greater scope for a comprehensive and far-reaching report into poverty in Australia. Four more experts have been added to the Inquiry.
Working Party on Homeless Men
A working party has made recommendations to the Government on the care of the homeless. The report deals with employment, social security benefits, assessment centres, health services, laws and ordinances, capital assistance, maintenance subsidies and Aborigines.
The Health Plan
The Health Insurance Planning Committee was formed soon after the December election and released its report in April. The report gave detailed recommendations on the timing and method of implementing the Government’s proposed new universal health plan. The plan will be operated by an Australian Health Insurance Commission. The establishment of this Commission has been approved by the
Government and, to help achieve the target date of 1 July 1974 for the commencement of the plan, an interim Health Insurance Commission has been established.
National Superannuation
In March, a National Superannuation Committee of Inquiry was established under the chairmanship of Professor Hancock, to recommend a national superannuation scheme for people who retire on grounds of age. It will look at questions such as voluntary early or deferred retirement and payments for invalidity, unemployment and sickness.
National Compensation Inquiry
The Government has appointed a committee of inquiry into rehabilitation and compensation consisting of Mr Justice Woodhouse and Mr Justice Meares. The secretariat for this Inquiry has been formed by the Attorney-General’s Department.
Revision of Subsidised Health Benefits Limits
Eligibility limits for low income families receiving subsidised health benefits were revised after the national wage case decision. The basic eligibility limit was lifted by S9 to $60.60 and the graduations between the basic figure and the 2 other eligibility categories have been widened.
This means that families with gross weekly incomes of $60.50 or less will not have to pay health insurance fund contributions. Families with weekly gross incomes of $65 or less will pay one-third of the normal contributions and families with gross weekly incomes of $69.50 or less will pay two-thirds of the normal contributions. This complicated system of assisting low income families with health insurance will be replaced by simpler and more effective arrangements under the new universal Health Insurance Plan next year.
Rehabilitation Allowance
The Budget increased the full-time training allowance by $4 to $8 for people receiving the rehabilitation allowance and those taking part in the training scheme for widow pensioners. The allowance remains at $4 for those undertaking part-time courses. The living away from home allowance under both schemes was also increased to $16 a week for a married trainee or one with dependent children or students; and to $10 a week for an unmarried trainee.
Orphan’s Pension
The Budget provided for an orphan’s pension of $10 a week. This pension is paid to the guardian of a child both of whose parents are dead or one of whose parents is dead and the whereabouts of the other unknown. This removes an area of human neglect that should not have been allowed to continue.
Disability Requirement Abolished
The Government has removed a requirement that persons suffering from physical or mental disability must have reasonable prospects of engaging in a suitable vocation within 3 years after commencing rehabilitation treatment or training. This action was intended to meet the needs of a small number of disabled people who, because of the severity of their disabilities, or their need for specialised training, are unable to return to suitable employment within 3 years and consequently, do not qualify for acceptance at present.
Greater use ‘is now being made of tertiary training at universities and colleges of advanced education as a means of giving handicapped people vocational or professional skill that will ensure for them a suitable and satisfying career. Some of these courses are of 3 or more years’ duration and it is not unusual for training to be preceded by a period of treatment in a rehabilitation centre.
Sheltered Employment
Government legislation has enabled local governing bodies to use borrowed money to attract subsidy for sheltered workshops and residential accommodation for handicapped people working in sheltered workshops or elsewhere. The Handicapped Children’s Bill is designed to serve the same purpose in relation to training centres, training equipment and residential units for handicapped children.
Hostel Care for the Aged
The Government has increased from $10 to $12 a week the rate of subsidy paid to eligible organisations which provide personal care services for the aged in hostel accommodation. The subsidy can now be paid in respect of residents under 80 years of age who require personal care services, in addition to all residents aged 80 years or more.
Meals on Wheels Subsidy
The Government has increased the basic rate of subsidy paid to ‘meals-on-wheels’ ser vices from 15c to 20c a meal, lt has also increased the subsidy from 20c to 25c for all meals served with an approved Vitamin C supplement. This increased subsidy will become payable from 1 January 1974 and apply to meals delivered since 1 January 1973.
Home Care Program
The Government has made more money available for the present home care program for elderly people. It has increased the Government’s grants to the States from $l:lm to $2:lm of State expenditure on housekeeper and home help services and senior citizens centres, and raised the subsidy for welfare officers employed in senior citizens centres from onehalf to two-thirds of their salary.
Agreements with Other Countries
The Australian Government has invited 13 countries to begin negotiations on reciprocal agreements to cover a comprehensive range of social security payments.
-Order! The point of order is valid. The Prime Minister must address the Chair.
– This initiative is designed to help some former Australian residents not now entitled to receive Australian pensions overseas - for example, people who left before the portability of pensions legislation received royal assent. It would also help some people now residents in Australia to receive entitlements from their country of origin.
Rehabilitation Centre
The Government approved the establishment of a rehabilitation centre at Townsville, Queensland, costing approximately $1.7m This is the first centre to be established outside a capital city and is consistent with the Government’s policy of regionalisation.
Handicapped Children’s Benefit Doubled
The Budget provided for the handicapped children’s benefit to be doubled to $3 a day. This benefit is to become payable in January 1974.
Sir, I seek leave to incorporate in Hansard the amount of social services of various kinds provided in the Snedden Budget of August 1972 and those provided in the Crean Budget of August 1973.
-Is leave granted?
– I should like to identify in this mass of papers what the Prime Minister seeks to incorporate. Yes, leave is granted.
– There being no objection, leave is granted. (The document read as follows) -
page 4747
page 4747
Unemeptoyment Short-term, Sickness and Special Benefit
Single adult 17.00 23.00*
Married person with dependent spouse . . 25.00
Each dependent child . . 4.50
Long-term Sickness Benefit
Single adult .. 20.00 23.00* Married person with dependent spouse 28.00
Each dependent child . . 4.50
Pension as for Class A Widow Each dependent child Mother’s allowance
40.50* 5.00
40.50* 5.00
23.00* 5.00 4.00
To guardian of a child both of whose parents are deceased, or where one deceased and whereabouts of other parent unknown . . Nil 10.00
page 4747
The Australian Government is committed to the highest possible measure of Australian ownership and control of our mineral and energy resources. Our overriding concern in minerals and energy policy is the national interest. The Government, on behalf of the Australian people, will be actively involved in the search for minerals and their sale, distribution and exploitation.
Ten-point Policy on Minerals and Energy
In Tokyo in October, the Minister for Minerals and Energy (Mr Connor) outlined a tenpoint policy on minerals and energy:
Export Controls
The Government imposed export controls on minerals on 31 January this year. They apply to all minerals exported from Australia in a raw or semi-processed form. The controls are designed to ensure that export prices for Australian minerals are at a reasonable level in relation to export prices from other countries; to ensure that the Australian Government has full knowledge of all details of export contracts, particularly the currency denomination and protection clauses, if any; and to see a balanced development of Australian mineral resources so that production for export is consistent with the best interests of Australia.
Pipeline Authority
On 20 February the Government approved the creation of a Pipeline Authority. The policy of the Labor Party provides for the transmission of natural gas by an interstate pipeline system to ensure continuity of supplies and uniformity of wholesale price. The first stage of the national pipeline system will link Sydney to the Gidgealpa fields. It is ultimately proposed that the pipeline will continue to Palm Valley. In view of the critical energy shortage in Western Australia a joint Commonwealth-State study is now under way to evaluate the feasibility of a pipeline link between Palm Valley, Kalgoorlie, Perth and the natural gas fields on the North-west Shelf.
Closing of Income Tax Loopholes
In May the Government announced the end of income tax concessions for capital subscribed to companies for expenditure on mining or prospecting for oil and other minerals in Australia and New Guinea. The concessions were provided by sections 77c, 77d and 78 of the Income Tax Assessment Act. These provisions of the Act had been used extensively for tax avoidance. The tax concessions were an expensive and inefficient form of Government assistance to the mining industry, costing the taxpayer over $250m a year.
Petroleum and Minerals Authority
The Government has introduced a Bill for a Petroleum and Minerals Authority. The aims of the Authority will be to explore, develop, transport, process and sell Australian petroleum and minerals. It will employ its own personnel and equipment in search, let out contracts for search, act in partnership with companies, and accept farm-ins to attractive areas.
Iron Ore Negotiations
Early last year massive international currency realignments, particularly in relation to the United States dollar, put pressure on Australian mineral contracts, specifically those for iron ore. After negotiations with the Japanese Government and steel industry, the Minister for Minerals and Energy was able to announce that the Australian iron ore industry had been granted price increases of up to 17 per cent.
Coal Negotiations with Japan
The Government has backed initiatives by the Australian Coal Association to carry out industry-to-industry talks with the Japanese on guidelines for future negotiations between the 2 industries.
Offshore Sovereignty
The Government introduced a Bill to assert Australian sovereignty over off-shore territory from the low water mark. The Liberal Government, because of opposition by the State governments, had backed down on this issue. The Bill included a section outlining a mining code. This section was rejected by the Senate.
Royal Commission into Petroleum
The Government has set up a royal commission under Mr Justice Collins to inquire into ali aspects of petroleum products, refining and pricing.
-Order! The Prime Minister should address the Chair.
– I continue:
page 4749
The Government has introduced a Human Rights Bill to guarantee the rights and freedoms of the Australian people. It has brought in similar legislation on racial discrimination.
Ombudsman to be Appointed
The Government has announced its intention to appoint an ombudsman to protect citizens from bureaucratic abuses or miscarriage of justice. It has already appointed an ombudsman for the armed Services.
The Government has abolished the death penalty in Australian Territories and Services.
New Policies for the Arts
The Government has brought new vitality to the creative arts. It has established a new Australian Council for the Arts, with numerous autonomous boards, which will become an independent statutory body under legislation to be introduced in 1974. The Budget provided $14m for the arts in 1973-74 - roughly double the provision made in the last Liberal Budget. The Council has approved 1508 applications for assistance from artists, writers and performers.
The Government, as part of its policy against racial discrimination, has banned racially selected sporting teams from entering Australia or travelling through Australia to other countries.
Change in Royal Title
With the full understanding and approval of the Queen, the Government has changed the Royal Style and Titles so that Her Majesty will in future in Australia have the official title of Queen of Australia.
Votes for 18-year-old Citizens
The Government has legislated to give the vote to all citizens in Australia aged 18 and over.
The Government has undertaken to give Australia a new and distinctive national anthem truly reflecting our character and traditions. It has authorised an official survey of public opinion to determine the most popular anthem for Australia.
page 4749
The Australian Government from the start has recognised that migrants are one of the great disadvantaged groups in Australian society. The Labor Government’s policies on immigration are designed, not merely to bring new migrants to Australia, but to ensure that migrants already here enjoy full and equal opportunities as Australian citizens.
Under legislation passed by the Labor Government, people in Australia receiving age and invalid pensions, including wives’ or widow’s pensions, will be able to receive those pensions in any country where they choose to live. This right will not depend on negotiating reciprocal agreements with other countries. Previously, a pensioner had to live in Australia for 20 years after reaching the age of 16 and had portability rights in only four countries - Italy, Greece, Turkey and Malta. Now, a person drawing an Australian pension can receive that pension anywhere in the world. The new legislation will benefit aged, invalid and widowed migrants who wish to return to their former homelands. It will apply equally to all recipients of pensions, including those born in Australia, who wish to live abroad.
The Australian Government is arranging negotiations with 13 countries on reciprocal agreements to cover a comprehensive range of social security payments. These countries include West Germany, Malta, Italy, Greece, Turkey, the Netherlands, Israel, France, Yugoslavia, Austria, Sweden, Belgium and Denmark. The Government’s action will help migrants who feel that the lack of reciprocal agreements on social security with their homelands has deterred them from taking out Australian citizenship.
For humanitarian reasons, priority in the selection of migrants is now given to the reunion of families. No tests of acceptability beyond those of sound health and good character are applied to sponsored spouses, dependent children or aged or dependent parents of Australian residents.
Under the Labor Government, everyone seeking Australian citizenship can do so irrespective of national origins and under conditions applying equally to all. The period of residence will be three years for all.
Under amendments to the Crimes Act, it will no longer be possible for Australian citizens to be deported. Naturalised Australians are to be treated as Australians, and will not be liable to deportation or cancellation of citizenship. An amendment to the Aliens Act has eliminated the need for annual notification by migrants of address, occupation and marital status. The Government is also moving to prevent the abduction of children from Australia.
Task forces have ben established in all State capitals to identify the most urgent settlement problems confronting migrants. Each is chaired by a member of Parliament and includes people in day-to-day contact with migrants and their needs.
A health benefit certificate providing an initial free two months insurance for migrants is now issued to all migrants, generally at overseas posts.
The Government has set up a Community Relations Committee of the Immigration Advisory Council to inquire into discrimination against migrants, exploitation of migrants and their use of community services. It is meeting in all States and holding consultations with ethnic representatives.
The Government is proceeding with an inquiry under the direction of Professor W. D. Borrie of the Australian National University, to determine the best possible size, composition and distribution of Australia’s population at various stages up to the year 2000. Nearly 140 organisations throughout Australia have been invited to make submissions.
The Government has abolished discrimination against non-Europeans. Previously, persons of non-European descent were ineligible for citizenship until they had been resident in Australia for five years, although many people of European descent could qualify for citizenship after one year’s residence. This provision has been abolished. Non-Europeans qualify for citizenship under the same terms as other migrants - after three years residence.
Australia’s first telephone service in 20 languages was established in Sydney and Melbourne to answer emergency please for help from migrants. The service will be extended to other States.
Migrant education centres have been opened in Perth, Brisbane, Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide. Classroom accommodation, language laboratories, libraries and child-minding facilities are provided. In addition, 48 multilingual officers are being appointed in all States to work in the community and in schools with migrant children.
page 4750
Rural industries are currently enjoying record prosperity and the Government is determined to preserve that prosperity. Its policies are designed to strengthen rural industry, place farming on a more businesslike basis independent of ad hoc grants and taxpayers’ subsidies, and tackle the big issues of rural poverty, undersized farms and inefficient marketing. The futile ‘patch-up’ approach of the Country Party is a thing of the past.
The Government has established an Industries Assistance Commission which will give aid to rural industries after open inquiry and independent scrutiny of assistance proposals. Despite support for the Commission from farm organisations and the Liberal Party, the Country Party resisted this important reform. The Commission will be a more powerful and wider-ranging body than the Tariff Board. It will look critically at levels of unused protection available to secondary industry where tariff rates on imports are far above prices charged for comparable goods in Australia. The Commission will not be the Government’s only source of advice. There remain Government departments, other expert groups and industry associations including farmers themselves.
Early in the year the new Government took positive steps to revive the drought-hit Australian wheat industry and face up to its duty to provide as much wheat as possible for a grain-hungry world. It accepted the wheat industry’s recommendation for a record 514m bushel delivery quota for 1973-74 and established an additional floating pool of 20m bushels in case any individual State exceeded ils own State quota. The Government also provided a special 10c a bushel incentive payment on top of the $1.10 first advance. This was the only increase in the first advance for 15 years. In May the Government approved a second payment to growers who delivered wheat to the 1969-70 pool. The payment had been delayed because of large sales from that pool on long-term credit. The Government recognised that there were many growers urgently in need of money to finance the planting of the 1973-74 crop.
In June the Government announced that the existing 5-year Wheat Stabilisation Plan, due to terminate in November, would be extended for an additional year to give the new Government time to develop a new and improved stabilisation scheme. This proposal was endorsed unanimously by the Australian Wheatgrowers’ Federation. A new wheat scheme was presented to the industry this month.
The Government has increased the rate of tax paid to wheatgrowers for research into better wheat growing methods and has increased matching grants by the Government to support the research program. The wheat industry welcomed this move as essential to offset increasing research costs and to investigate new problems confronting the industry.
The initiative of the new Labor Government in establishing diplomatic relations with China led to the signing in late 1973 of a long-term wheat contract between Australia and China and an important contract for the sale of sugar to China.
The Government announced a 3-year scheme beginning in 1974-75 for financing and programming wool research and promotion. The Government will contribute $6 1.4m over the 3 years. The scheme will entail greater financial responsibility by the Government for research and less financial support for promotion. On the other hand, growers’ funds collected through the wool tax will be directed more into the promotion.
A referendum on the export of merino rams and merino semen was held between 22 October and 22 November. This was in line with Labor’s promise to hold a ballot of woolgrowers before allowing any rams to be exported from Australia. A majority of those who voted were in favour of a total prohibition on exports of merino rams and merino semen. The Government has accepted that decision.
Wool Selling Long-term Arrangements
In Osaka on 28 October the Minister for Primary Industry (Senator Wriedt) obtained agreement from Japanese wool spinners and importers that they would investigate the feasibility of long-term arrangements for the supply of Australian wool to Japan. It was the first time the Japanese have indicated that they are prepared to consider wool-buying arrangements outside normal methods.
The Government is providing $1,051,000 in 1973-74 to compensate owners for stock condemned as T.B. reactors. Funds are being made available to the mainland States on condition that those States match at least half the Australian Government contribution from their own resources or from their existing compensation funds. The Australian Government will contribute the full compensation paid in the Northern Territory.
The Government has approved the allocation from various research trust funds of $4.1m for beef, lamb and mutton research, $486,325 for pig research and $252,354 for chicken meat research this year. In all cases, research costs are jointly met by producers and the Australian Government.
It is significant that there is not a single member of the Country Party in the chamber listening to the Australian Government’s record in respect of primary industry, and there are 4 members of the Liberal Party, two from Brisbane, one from Sydney and one from Melbourne.
In July the Government announced a significant change in the pattern of assistance to the dairy industry. It was decided to phase out the annual bounty on butter and cheese production over two years and place greater emphasis on providing finance to assist readjustment within the industry.
Additional funds will be provided beyond June 1974 for re-adjustment measures, including improvements flowing from liberalisation of the marginal dairy farm reconstruction scheme. The Government approved the allocation of $937,383 from the Dairy Research Trust Account for a program of research.
The Australian and South Australian Governments have jointly applied for the patent for the manufacturing rights for a vegetable oil-butterfat spread known as butterine. The patent will be passed on to the Australian Dairy Produce Board which will issue manufacturing licences to dairy factories. Money paid for licences will be directed into dairy research projects. Butterine contains about 80 per cent butterfat and 20 per cent vegetable oil.
The Government has decided to establish an Australian Apple and Pear Corporation to replace the existing Australian Apple and Pear
Board. The new Corporation will have a smaller and more workable membership than the Board with much greater emphasis on marketing skills and other expertise.
Emergency adjustment assistance payments to canning fruit growers and growers of export apples and pears were announced in May. Payment to canning fruit growers is being made on the basis of their deliveries of peaches, pears and apricots to canneries in the 1972-73 season. Payments are at a rate of $12 a ton on up to 125 tons. Adjustment assistance to export apple and pear growers are being made on the basis of their average annual exports in the 2 calendar years 1971 and 1972. Payments to these growers are at a rate of 30c a bushel on exports up to 5,000 bushels. In November the Government announced additional assistance of $1.5m to the canned fruit industry. This will be allocated between export canneries according to their exports of canned peaches, apricots and pears.
The fruitgrowing reconstruction scheme which expired on 30 June 1973 is being continued for a further 12 months. The scheme was introduced in July 1972 and was to operate for one year only.
Development of the Nation’s Fisheries
The Government has approved expenditure of nearly $lm on fisheries research and development projects. The Government is also considering ways of increasing the rational exploitation of other undeveloped and underharvested resources in waters around Australia for the present and future benefit of its people.
A 5-year tobacco leaf stabilisation plan will operate from the beginning of 1974 along similar lines to existing arrangements. This will assure the tobacco industry of a further period of orderly marketing under which an agreed quantity of tobacco leaf will be sold each season under an auction system backed by reserve prices. The quota for 1974 has been set at 15,422,000 kilograms of flue-cured leaf.
The Government has decided to extend the existing rural reconstruction scheme to cover 1973-74 and has authorised the States to make new commitments totalling S3 6m. The Australian Government is providing funds to the States for rural reconstruction on the basis of 25 per cent as a grant with the remainder as a loan payable over 20 years. The Government is examining ways of improving the rural reconstruction scheme, especially its rehabilitation provisions, to help farmers who wish to leave the land.
The Government has extended the rural lending activities of the Commonwealth Development Bank. Previously, lending had been confined to funds for development and farm build-up purposes. Long term lending will now include financing of farm purchases, assisting in financing difficulties associated with the death of a farm proprietor, and restructuring unsuitable short-term debts. The Budget provided $20m to facilitate this additional lending by the Bank.
The Australian Government will provide up to $500,000 on a dollar for dollar basis to New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and South Australia to control the plague locust threat.
The Government has a total expenditure of $7,210,000 for 1973-74 under the Commonwealth extension services grant. The purpose of the grant is to help develop the agricultural extension services of the States. In 1972-73 the grant approved by the previous Government was just over $6.5m. The funds are used by the State Departments of Agriculture to extend and improve the effectiveness of the information and advice being provided to primary producers.
page 4753
Throughout the first year of the Labor Government the Australian economy was booming. The Government restored full employment in Australia after the recession in 1972. It is determined to maintain full employment and a healthy rate of growth while continuing its battle against inflation. Australia’s overseas reserves remain immensely strong. Gross domestic product, farm incomes, consumer spending, retail sales and capital expenditure all showed healthy rises in the September quarter.
Upturn in the Economy
The year 1972, before Labor came to power, was a year of unemployment, underuse of capacity and poor growth. By contrast, 1973 has been a year of buoyant activity and full use of resources. The ambitious economic and social objectives of the new Government helped dispel the uncertainty and hesitancy which had characterised private spending during the previous 2 years.
The new Government quickly recognised the danger of domestic demand outstripping supplies and introduced a wide range of measures to counter the inflationary threat - some with an immediate anti-inflationary impact, others aimed at increasing competition and the more efficient use of resources in the longer term.
To facilitate the Government’s plans for improving education, welfare services and other social programs without placing too much strain on the economy, the Government set up a task force, headed by Dr H. C. Coombs, to make a critical view of expenditure programs inherited from the previous Government. The work of the Coombs Task Force led to many savings in expenditure in the 1973-74 Budget.
In 1973, real gross domestic product is estimated to have increased by 6i per cent - compared with the 2 per cent growth rate in 1972. Domestic production is now running at $2,000m a year more than it would have been if the under-employment of 1972 had been allowed to persist.
The Government established a Prices Justification Tribunal and a Joint Parliamentary Committee on Prices to subject proposed price rises in many areas of economic activity to objective scrutiny. The Tribunal has made public reports on its findings.
The Government introduced price controls in the Australian Capital Territory and sought powers in a referendum to regulate prices and incomes in Australia as a whole. The Australian people refuse these powers, but the Government will continue to seek State cooperation in this field.
The Government inherited a grossly excessive level of liquidity in the economy because of the failure of the previous Government to correct the undervaluation of the Australian dollar or to act against a huge and unwanted inflow of funds from abroad. The Government recognised its responsibility to restore sound and responsible economic management by twice upvaluing the currency - by 7.05 per cent in February and a further 5 per cent in September. The Government also imposed a deposit requirement on foreign borrowings. The monetary authorities raised the statutory reserve deposits ratio and stepped up the sale of Government bonds in order to reduce liquidity in the private sector.
The Government is establishing an Industries Assistance Commission as recommended in a report by Sir John Crawford. The Commission will recommend assistance to all industry - including rural industry - on the basis of open public inquiries.
The Government brought in new laws - similar to those in most overseas countries - to check restrictive trade practices and safeguard consumers. These laws were held up by the Senate.
An Interim Commission for Consumer Standards was set up to ensure that people buying goods get full value for their money.
Check on Foreign Takeovers
The Government has closely scrutinised take-over activity for foreign interests among Australian companies. Nearly 500 proposed take-overs have been brought to notice. The Government refused 19 takeovers which it considered to be against the national interest; 49 were deferred; 51 are under consideration and 29 have lapsed; 322 cases were allowed to proceed.
The Government announced action to check foreign investment in Australian real estate. It made it clear that the Reserve Bank would not normally grant exchange control approvals that might be needed for proposed foreign investment in real estate.
page 4754
The Government’s initiatives in education, despite the obstruction of the Senate, have raised the educational horizons of the vast majority of Australian children. The Government’s objective is to bring higher standards of education and equal opportunities in education to every child at every level from preschool to tertiary. This objective is well on the way to fulfilment.
In its first Budget the Government committed $843m to education for 1973-74 - almost double that given by its predecessors in 1972-73.
The Government has established a permanent Schools Commission to implement its program. An interim committee for the Commission was set up under Professor P. H. Karmel’s chairmanship only 10 days after the election. The Commission will be an independent statutory body which will give aid to all schools, without distinction, on a ‘needs’ basis. In its first Budget the Government provided $97m for capital and recurrent grants for primary and secondary schools in accordance with the first part of the Karmel Committee’s recommendations.
From January 1974 the Australian Government will take over full financial responsibility for tertiary education. Fees will be abolished.
From 1974 non-competitive living allowances will be offered to all full-time unbonded Australian students admitted to approved courses in tertiary and approved post secondary institutions. The Budget provided S32m for this purpose. The Budget also provided means-tested educational allowances of up to $304 a year for children in the final 2 years of secondary school.
The Government has provided an unmatched grant of $5m for library materials in colleges of advanced education in the 1973-75 triennium. About 500,000 more books will be made available to college students in the next 3 years following agreement on a distribution formula for the library grant.
Commonwealth teaching scholarships were more than trebled in 1973 and new book and equipment allowances provided from the start of the academic year. The number of Commonwealth teaching service scholars increased from 120 in 1972 to 400 in 1973.
Children defined as isolated because they do not have reasonable daily access to a government school will receive a boarding allowance of $350 a year without means test and an additional $350 subject to means test. Additional allowances of up to $304 for clothing, books and other items will also be available.
Scholarships for Pre-school Teachers
Special scholarships for trainee pre-school teachers and grants to training colleges were introduced at the start of the 1973 academic year as emergency measures. The grants cost more than $1.5m in 1973-74 and were paid to more than 1700 pre-school teachers.
The Government reached an agreement with the New Zealand Government to train 100 Australian dental therapy students in New Zealand. It granted an additional 55 training college places for dental therapists in 1973.
The Government estabished in April a Technical Education Commission to make recommendations to the Government and to give financial help to institutions to develop technical, trade and further education courses in conjunction with the States. The Government decided in February to give $10m in additional unmatched grants to the States for capital expenditure on technical education. Grants to these institutions will be covered in future by recommendations of the Technical Education Commission, which will examine the needs of technical education as from July 1974.
The Government gave $3m to help destitute tertiary students in 1973. The needy student scheme will be administered by universities and colleges of advanced education which will allocate funds.
Australian Pre-school Committee
The Government has established an Australian Pre-schools Committee which will become an independent statutory commission. The committee has made recommendations to the Australian Government on setting up and operating pre-schools and child-care centres throughout Australia.
The Government has established a Child Care Standards Committee to advise on the payment of grants for child care and to establish appropriate standards for child care facilities which will be financially assisted by the Government. The Committee will work closely with the proposed Pre-Schools Commission in developing and integrating the Child Care Act into a new program of assistance in the preschool and child care field beginning in 1974. The Budget provided $8m for the construction and operation of child care centres in 1973-74.
The Government has appointed a committee of the Universities Commission to advise on an open university. The committee will conduct a major inquiry into open tertiary education.
Committee on Technical and Further Education
The Government has established an Australian Committee on Technical and Further Education, to become a commission after legislation. It will advise the Government on the development of technical and further education and make recommendations for financial assistance to State institutions from 1974.
Salary increases of between 21 and 24 per cent for academic staffs were authorised on the basis of a report by Mr Justice Campbell. Total cost to the Australian Government will be more than $48m in 1974.
Education in the Australian Capital Territory
The Government has set up an Australian Capital Territory Schools Authority and an inquiry into technical education in the Australian Capital Territory.
page 4755
The Australian Government recognises the community’s growing demand for national and global attention to environmental problems.
The interrelated questions of population, good production, energy generation and pollution of the biosphere are a challenge to the capacities of all the earth’s peoples. The Australian Government is now tackling these pressing problems for the first time. The Environment Platform of the Australian Labor Party adopted at Surfer’s Paradise this year was an historic recognition by an Australian political party of the priority areas for early action.
New Departments
Early in its life the Government created several new departments which are involved in environmental issues. A Department of the Environment and Conservation was set up. The new Departments of Urban and Regional Development, Tourism and Recreation, and Minerals and Energy all have key roles to play.
Australian Environment Council
Australian Government initiatives have brought a new and positive spirit to the Australian Environment Council. The Australian Government and the States are donating to a new fund on a dollar-for-dollar basis. This fund has enabled the Australian Environment Council to attack some key research problems including air pollution monitoring, heavy metals in sea food, motor vehicle emissions and the impact of human settlements on the ecology of shallow bays and tidal estuaries.
International Action by Australia
The Australian Government is active in the United Nations Governing Council on Environmental Programs where it is the only representative of the Australasian and Oceanic region. Australia has joined the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. It has offered to provide an air quality monitoring station as part of the United Nations ‘Earthwatch’ program. It has signed an International Convention on Ocean Dumping and is involved in the development of an international treaty to control trading in endangered species of wildlife. It has supported a 10-year moratorium on whaling in the International Whaling Commission
National Parks and Wildlife Commission
In Australia the Government has created a National Parks and Wildlife Commission and Service to manage national parks in the territories and to develop a ‘national’ service with the right expertise in these areas. Has that gone through yet?
– The Senate is holding it up. I continue: The Government, together with the States, has created a new Council of Nature Conservation Ministers to enable the Australian Government to develop a truly ‘national’ system of national parks.
Kangaroos Exports Banned
The Government has banned the export of products of kangaroos and related species. It has done this to convince the international community that Australia stresses the importance of wildlife conservation and to indicate to the States that it is not satisfied with the lack of uniformity in their approach to conservation programs for kangaroos.
Environmental Impact Statements
The Government has decided that environmental impact statements must accompany any proposal to spend public funds provided by the Australian Government or to exercise powers held by the Australian Government. This policy will receive legislative backing next year.
Inquiry Into National Estate
The Government has set up an Inquiry into the National Estate under the chairmanship of Mr Justice Hope. It will recommend to the Government ways and means of protecting and enhancing the National Estate. As on interim measure the Government allocated $3m to be used for the protection of the National Estate in 1973-74.
Standing Committee of Parliament
A Standing Committee of the House of Representatives on Environment and Conservation has been set up. Already it has held inquiries into Ayers Rock, urban freeways, limestone mining, compulsory deposits on beverage containers and environmental legislation. The Government will look at all their reports with a view to their implementation where they are in accord with overall policy. The Government also created a Bureau of Environmental Studies to co-ordinate and direct the Government’s research efforts into environmental problems.
National Water Policy
The Government has developed and released a national water policy. This policy provides a basic framework to ensure that water-related projects - for power, for irrigation, for sewerage, or any other purpose - will be financed in a rational and environmentally sensible way. For too long Australia has suffered the ‘ad hoc’ or ‘pork barrel’ approach of gearing economically dubious water projects to electoral politics.
New Northern Territory National Park
The Government has approved the creation of a large national park in the Northern Territory to be known as Kakadu National Park.
I have next a list of the texts of treaties, etc, presented to the Parliament. Perhaps I might have leave to incorporate it in Hansard.
– Is leave granted? There being no objection, leave is granted. (The document read as follows) -
page 4757
3 April - United Kingdom/ Australian Trade Agreement - letters exchanged during the process of termination of the Agreement. 4 April - International Cocoa Agreement 1972. 15 May - Convention 131 concerning minimum wage fixing adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 54th session. 22 May - Convention 111 concerning the abolishment of discrimination in employment and occupation adopted by the International Labour Conference in 1958. 29 May - Treaties to which Australia has become a party by signature:
Agreement which has been signed by Australia and which will enter into force after Notes have been exchanged by the signatories:
Treaties in relation to which Australia has deposited instruments of ratification:
Statute to which Australia has become a party by accession:
Convention and Treaties) to which Australia is considering becoming a party by ratification:
Agreement and Conventions to which Australia has become a party by accession:
Convention and Covenants to which Australia is considering becoming a party by ratification:
– To finish my speech, I mention another record. The length of this speech is probably a ‘first’ for a Prime Minister.
– I ask for leave to make a statement on the same subject.
-Is leave granted?
– No.
– Leave is not granted.
page 4758
Message received from the Senate intimating that it had agreed to the modifications made to the requested amendments of the Senate and had agreed to the consequential amendments made by the House of Representatives to this Bill.
page 4758
The following Bills were returned from the Senate without amendment:
Australian Apple and Pear Corporation Bill 1973.
Apple and Pear Stabilization Bill 1973.
Apple and Pear Export Charges Bill 1973.
Apple and Pear Stabilization Export Duty Collection Bill 1973.
National Health Bill (No. 2) 1973.
page 4758
Bill returned from the Senate with an amendment.
Motion (by Mr Daly) agreed to:
That the -amendment be taken into consideration in Committee of the Whole forthwith.
In Committee
Consideration of Senate amendment -
In clause 4, leave out paragraph (b), insert the following paragraph: “ (b) by omitting sub-sections (2), (3) and (4) and substituting the following sub-sections: -
The land acquired under this section may be an easement, right, power, privilege or other interest that did not previously exist as such, in, over or in connexion with land.
Where the acquisition of land is authorized by the Minister under sub-section (1), the Minister shall cause to be laid before each House of the Parliament, within 30 sitting days of that House after the giving of the authorization, a statement describing the land and stating that the acquisition of the land has been authorized under that sub-section for the public purpose specified in the statement.’.”.
Motion (by Mr Daly) proposed:
That the amendment be agreed to.
– The amendment is the one which was suggested by the honourable member for Gippsland (Mr Nixon) when the Bill was before this chamber. The amendment was inserted in another place. The Bill has been returned in the form in which it was agreed upon in the other place. If the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr Lynch) requires more information, perhaps he could refer to the speech made by the honourable member for Gippsland a few days ago.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Resolution reported; report adopted.
page 4759
Bill returned from the Senate with amendments.
Motion (by Dr Everingham) agreed to:
That the amendments be taken into consideration in Committee of the Whole forthwith.
In Committee
Consideration of Senate amendments -
In clause 5, after sub-clause 4, add the following new sub-clause: “(5) The Minister before giving his approval to the Commission to make grants under paragraph (1) (c) to a State organisation or to an organisation or persons in a State, other than an Authority or instrumentality of Australia, shall request the appropriate Minister of that State to consult with him concerning the matter and, if that Minister does so consult with him, have regard to the view expressed by that Minister.”.
After clause 6, add the following new clause: “6a. Notwithstanding any directions given by the
Minister, the Commission may recommend to the Minister that a report furnished by it to him should be drawn to the attention of the Parliament and, where the Commission so recommends, the Minister shall, as soon as practicable, cause that report to be laid before each House of the Parliament.”.
– I move:
That the amendments be agreed to.
16761/73 - R - [169]
One of the amendments recommended by the Senate refers to the tabling of reports when the tabling is recommended to the Minister by the Hospitals and Health Services Commission. The other amendment states that before giving his approval to the Commission to make grants to an organisation or persons in a State, other than an authority or instrumentality of Australia, the Minister shall request the appropriate Minister of that State to consult with him concerning the matter and, if that Minister does so consult with him, have regard to the view expressed by that Minister.
– The Opposition is pleased that the Minister for Health (Dr Everingham) has seen fit to accept these amendments. All that the Opposition wishes to say is that we trust that the Minister will live up to the indications in these amendments and undertake genuine consultation with the States and genuinely regard their views as expressed in the amendment to clause 5. As to the second amendment, which relates to new clause 6a, what is sought to be established is the role of Parliament in regularly overseeing all the work of government. I simply repeat that we are pleased that these amendments have been accepted. We thank the Minister for agreeing to these amendments and we accord support to them.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Resolution reported; report adopted.
page 4759
– I present the ninth report of the Publications Committee sitting in conference with the Publications Committee of the Senate.
Report - by leave - adopted.
page 4759
Bill returned from the Senate without amendment.
page 4759
Motion (by Mr Daly) agreed to:
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.
page 4760
Motion (by Mr Daly) 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 4760
– I move:
That the House do now adjourn.
Earlier this afternoon I was given the opportunity to point out to honourable members how hard they had worked this year. We have sat for a greater number of hours than any other legislature in the world this year, except only the Houses of Commons at Westminster and Ottawa. We have sat for more days than has been the case for more than half a century. We have dealt with a record number of Bills. That legislation has been of very great complexity. Everybody in this chamber has had to work very hard indeed. I know that Ministers have had to do so. I know that Government supporters have had to do so. I know, too, that members of the Opposition, particularly office bearers in the Opposition parties, have had to work very hard as well.
The business of the House depends immensely on those who preside over it. I pay a tribute to you, Mr Speaker, at the conclusion of your first year in the Chair. I acknowledge, as I believe all honourable members will acknowledge, your skill, good humour and infinite patience in conducting our affairs. You have been a singularly tolerant Speaker. If I may say so without disrespect, I sometimes thought you were a little too tolerant. Nevertheless, I believe that this characteristic flows from the fact that you are the first Speaker for very many years who ever served in opposition. Before that there were Speakers who might have appeared soured by their years in Opposition. Sir, you have over the years experienced what it is like to be in Opposition. The experience has kept your good humour undiminished. You have been ably assisted by the Chairman of Committees, the honourable member for Corio, (Mr Scholes) and by those from both sides of the House who take your place as Deputy Speakers. You have been admirably supported by the Clerk, the Clerk’s assistant and the officers of the House. Their professional skills, their devotion to their duties and their willing co-operation have done much to speed and effectuate the work of the chamber. I know how much during the long years I was in Opposition I depended on the professional skills of the officers of the Parliament. I am certain that those who have succeeded me have the same debt to acknowledge to them.
I now must pass to an aspect of the affairs of the House which is in the hands of the Government and particularly the Leader of the House (Mr Daly), the father of the House, the father of the Parliament, the daddy of them all. Private members would acknowledge that questions without notice have always taken more than three-quarters of an hour every sitting day. The House has, on over 70 occasions, had the opportunity to debate the adjournment at night. On only one occasion has the House sat after 11 o’clock at night. Every Thursday morning private members have been able to express their grievances or raise matters of general business. Every motion which a private member has put on general business has been debated and it has come to a vote. For the first time that I can remember the notice paper has no unresolved general business. I believe we must all acknowledge that this is the achievement of the Leader of the House. His is an arduous job by any standard and the Leader of the House often gets as much trouble from those whom he is supposed to lead on his side as from those he is supposed to inspire in the Opposition, hut he has kept to proper standards.
The statistics certainly show that private members have never had such a fair share of the business of the House. But above all, in a way that nobody in this chamber can emulate, he has brought a singular zest and wit and humour to the proceedings of the House. Of all the appointments that it has fallen to me to make as the Leader of the Government, there is none in which I take such great satisfaction in the House and outside as the appointment of its Leader. He has been assisted by the Whips, the honourable member for Wide Bay (Mr Hansen) and the honourable member for Bonython (Mr Nicholls) on the Government side and the honourable member for Henty (Mr Fox) and the honourable member for Calare (Mr England) on the Opposition side. They are all experienced and firm but decent men. I think we can all acknowledge that whatever we may think and sometimes say about each other in the chamber during testy periods or even excessively relaxed periods, we would all acknowledge that the
Whips have acted like gentlemen and they have been the friends of us all to an extent which is very hard for people in that position of discipline to attain or retain.
Not all of us can express, because time would not permit, but I must express my own pleasure in the work - heavier I suppose than I have ever had to undertake - with my eoi-; leagues in the Cabinet and in the Government. It has been an extraordinarily strenuous but fulfilling time. Like all of us who have staff - Ministers and Opposition office bearers - we are immensely assisted by the men and women who are prepared to work for us on our staffs. Something was said about overtime. Nobody who works on a ministerial or Opposition staff can avoid overtime. It seems to me that the relations between our staffs on each side of the House are cordial and civilised and have helped in the work which we have had to perform in the House and in our various duties around the country, although the business of the House has prevented all of us going around the country as much as probably we would have liked to have done.
The Government owes very much to the Australian Public Service. I have already expressed this view earlier this afternoon and on various occasions outside the House. The Public Service has had to work extraordinarily hard. Parliament has to deal with legislation but administration takes more time even than legislation. The Government could not have done the job it did without the great assistance of the Public Service. About the people concerned with the Parliament itself, I must pay particular tribute to the First Parliamentary Counsel and to the parliamentary draftsmen. This is Mr Comans’ first year as First Parliamentary Counsel. It is the heaviest year that any parliamentary draftsman in the Australian Parliament has ever had to superintend. If anyone deserved a holiday over Christmas it would be he, and his staff. I would believe, as far as I can tell - I certainly would assert and certify - that their work has been of the highest standard. It would have been impossible to specify, to articulate and to record the aspirations or the decisions of the Government without an extraordinarily skilful and diligent set of parliamentary draftsmen.
Needless to say, the Government Printer and his staff have been kept busy this year. The only thing in our favour must be that we have knocked off earlier at night than had been the case. All these people I thank for a job well done. I also commend to the House the work of the Hansard and Parliamentary Library staffs, the secretaries and stenographers and the hundreds of men and women who work in this building. They are the people who make the wheels go round and we appreciate their efforts. There is also a class of men who wait outside the building - the drivers. However, here again, due to the humanity of the Leader of the House in his capacity as Minister for Services and Property it can no longer be said of the drivers: They also serve who only stand and wait. They now no longer have to wait for more than 15 minutes. We are all in their debt. Their safety record as drivers in a country plagued by road accidents is second to none.
One final word, Sir, for the members of the Press, those who sit in the gallery up there as though in some judgment seat, and all their colleagues around the continent. They serve Australia well for they are a free Press - sometimes too free for some of us when we are in their sights - but free they are and free they will remain while I remain Prime Minister. I thank them for all the nice things they have said; with my accustomed generosity I forget the nasty things they have said, or whether in fact they did say nasty things.
All of us here- members, public servants and the Press - combine to make the institution of parliamentary government a living’ vital thing, an experience in democracy which has matchless qualities. There is a common bond which unites us no matter how bitter the debate, no matter how wide the gulf between us, and no matter what the disagreements are. We are essential parts of the whole process. Without all the parts, none of us is anything. With that awareness, I extend the season’s greetings to all members of this great institution, the Australian Parliament, and to those who serve it and to their families. I believe that we deserve a recess. 1 hope that we all come back in excellent health and spirits.
– It is customary at the end of the parliamentary session to speak on the adjournment motion in terms of appreciation to those who have assisted in the Parliament and also to wish greetings. For reasons that were not within my control, I must take 2 minutes before I do that. It is the custom of the Parliament that if 2 hours notice is given of the intention of a Minister to make a statement, leave is given for that statement to be made. We were given notice by the Prime Minister (Mr Whitlam) that he intended to make a statement and we agreed to grant leave.
I was then provided with a statement of 62 pages and asked whether I would agree to it being incorporated in Hansard. As you will know, Mr Speaker, the Parliament has been most anxious that Hansard not be misused by wrong incorporation in that publication. The way in which Hansard is usually used in this purpose is for the incorporation of a table when that table illustrates a point in argument. For instance, this morning the Minister for Transport (Mr Jones) wanted to table a chart which showed the noise levels of different types of aircraft. He was readily given leave to do so. No doubt that table will appear in the Hansard report of today’s proceedings as an incorporation. That is the way in which the incorporation of material in Hansard occurs.
We have been most anxious that that right not be abused. There has been a constant determination to ensure that. On occasions the normal procedures have been departed from. I believe, for instance, that last year the then Minister for National Development, Sir Reginald Swartz, incorporated in Hansard towards the end of the parliamentary session a quite long statement. I think it could have been more than 20 pages of the printed Hansard. That is what happened on that occasion. I was unaware of it at the time. That matter was not part of my duties at that stage.
This year, as Leader of the Opposition, I have been determined to do all that I can to make this Parliament what a Parliament ought to be. If rules did not govern incorporations in Hansard, a member could be asked by one of his constituents to incorporate in Hansard the text of a novel that he had written. If it were incorporated, the Government Printer would print it and that constituent could distribute his novel wherever he wishes. Somebody could come along with a copy of ‘The Three Musketeers’, a trilogy of Frank Hardy’s works or whatever and seek leave to have it incorporated. Quite clearly, that would be an absurdity.
– Whitlam came along with ‘Gullible’s Travels’.
– Yes, he came along with ‘Gullible’s Travels’. We have been anxious to play our part. I found because of the petulance exhibited from the Government that leave was refused for me to make a statement on the same subject as the statement delivered by the Prime Minister. What an awful way for this Parliament to conclude the business of this year. The Prime Minister was so devoid of confidence in his own performance that he had to stand here and recite for 2 hours what his Government had done so that he can sit at night and read it, no doubt to remind himself that he is, in his own words, ‘the greatest’. I have made the point. I will not pursue it. What happened this afternoon on the part of the Government and of the Prime Minister was as gross an abuse of the forms of this House as I have ever seen. That unfortunate episode having passed, I now come to the principal purpose for which I rose.
This Parliament has serving within it office bearers and outside it other office bearers. I want to pay a particular tribute to the Clerks of the Parliament, the Serjeant-at-Homes and the officers of the Bills and Papers Office, all of whom are essential in the running of this Parliament. They all perform their jobs extremely efficiently. They have the respect and honour of every member of the Parliament. I congratulate them for yet another year’s service well performed.
Also within the House we are served by Hansard. It is a wonder to most of us how Hansard manages to get everything down in the stresses that sometimes occur in the House. I think that there are many members of the Parliament who, after they have spoken and then read the Hansard proofs of their speeches, feel that the Hansard report certainly reads more cleanly and more directly than the words that were used. I also draw attention to the way in which, in that tidying up process for which I thank them, the Hansard reporters perform this task without in any way destroying the full intent of the words, whether what was said was in error, malicious or complimentary. I pay a tribute also to the Hansard typists who hammer out on their typewriters the words dictated to them by the Hansard shorthand reporters. I have heard the clacking of their typewriters; I pay thanks to them.
Another group within the House are the attendants, silent but always on hand to attend to our needs. They do an excellent job. I would like those attendants in the House and the attendants outside the House, in the corridors, etc, to receive the thanks of the Opposition.
Serving us also within the chamber is yourself, Mr Speaker. May 1 say in the warmest of personal terms that we have known each other for a number of years. I congratulate you on the year passed. I have not always agreed with you but, so far, I have managed to obey you. I intend to do so in the future. If we have disagreements, the Opposition will take the appropriate parliamentary course. In personal terms, I thank you for your service this year. I thank also Mr Scholes, the Chairman of Committees, and his Deputy Chairman not only on the Government side but also on the Opposition side. The conduct of the House that they have ensured and the knowledge of the Standing Orders that they have displayed has been first class.
Outside the chamber there are the parliamentary dining rooms. The people in the dining rooms have a very difficult task to perform looking after 185 members of the Parliament who many times are not in the easiest of moods when they go into the dining rooms. I thank those who prepare the meals and those who serve them.
Very important also to the work of the Parliament are the cleaners. They do a particularly good job. I think that a special tribute ought to be paid to the cleaners. Sometimes when we leave our offices at night, we do not leave them in a particularly tidy fashion. When we return in the morning, they are always clean. I am particularly thankful to the cleaner on the area of the building where I have my office.
The Parliamentary Library serves us extremely well. On behalf of the Opposition I wish to pay a special tribute to those people in the Parliamentary Library who do our legislative researching for us. This research work is so important to us in formulating policies and speeches for this chamber.
The Parliamentary Counsel likewise is an old friend of most of us in this place. I pay tribute to him and to his staff. The Government Printer is under continual stress to get the daily Hansard out. He always achieves that task. The hours that we have been sitting in this session must have put an added strain on him, but he has been able to achieve the production of the daily Hansard.
I thank also the members of the Press who sit above us and observe our every action and hear every word that we utter. Sometimes the reports that we read of our speeches are not what we would have written if we had been writing them, but I think all of us would say that the job done by the Press is absolutely essential to the democratic process so that what happens here can, through the judgment and interpretative pen of the Press, reach all the Australian people.
I pay a tribute to the Whips, particularly the Opposition Whips. I think Mr Max Fox, the honourable member for Henty, and his assistant Whip, Mr Geoffrey O’Halloran Giles, and Mr John England from the Australian Country Party. The Whips have done an excellent job. I think they have co-operated very well with the Government side of the House. I pay a particular tribute to the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party, Mr Lynch, who, on behalf of the Opposition is responsible for the conduct and management of the House. A great deal of the credit for this year’s sittings must go to him and also to another colleague, Mr Sinclair, who on behalf of the Country Party has co-operated with Mr Lynch. I also thank their staffs for the work they have performed this year.
I particularly thank my own staff who have borne a great deal of the burden of my work. The job of Leader of the Opposition is a difficult one. The Prime Minister had that job for quite a number of years. I now know that the job of a party leader, especially the job of a party leader on the Opposition side of the House, is a significantly different one. I thank my own staff for making this job easier. I also thank the staffs of Ministers whom I have found to be very helpful. I convey to all the ministerial staffs through the ministers, my appreciation for the work which they have done. I have not always agreed with what they are bound to write; but I certainly have appreciated greatly their courtesy and the way in which they have attended to their duties.
Finally, I pay a tribute to the wives of members of Parliament. I do not think the public understands just what burdens the wives of members carry. I am particularly grateful for the way in which our wives have represented us when we have been here, for the way in which they have spoken when called upon to do so and for the way in which they have stood up to the pressure which has been put on them and which no ordinary women would bear. I am sure that all of us are proud of the way in which they have been able to withstand this pressure and help us in our tasks.
I take the opportunity to extend to every member of the House and every person to whom I have referred best wishes for Christmas and the new year. May the new year be a year of change.
– This is one adjournment debate in which a member of this House may speak for unlimited time. I do not know whether it would be appreciated if I used that privilege which is given to me. This is a time for one to express appreciation of the work that people have done in enabling this Parliament to keep going. I had hoped to speak this afternoon, during the debate on the ministerial statement made by the Prime Minister (Mr Whitlam), about some of the things which he has not done. I had listed 25 points in regard to Government actions which are harming primary industry. But I guess that will have to wait for a speech that I will make at some later date.
I support the remarks of the Prime Minister (Mr Whitlam) and the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Snedden) in expressing thanks to the many people who help to make the Parliament function. I express my personal appreciation to you, Mr Speaker, for the work that you have done, for the trials and tribulations which you have suffered and for the patience and tolerance which you have shown. I have not helped. I can remember one occasion on which you were a little trigger-happy and you threw me out of the chamber. Sir, I accept that I deserved that treatment and I have no recriminations at all in regard to the incident. I probably deserved to be treated in that way on many more occasions. However, I will not say that all of my colleagues who have been thrown out deserved to be treated in that way to the extent that I did. Mr Speaker you have done your job to the best of your ability and you have shown impartiality. I thank you for the way in which you have conducted this House, under great pressure and trials. My appreciation also goes to Mr Scholes, who has shown great ability in the management of the chamber from the Chair during the Committee stage of Bills. He has enabled work to proceed quickly and promptly.
In conclusion, I wish everybody in this House a happy Christmas and, most impor tantly, a healthy 1974. I know the enormous pressure under which Ministers have to live. I notice that their faces are becoming a little more lined and a little more pale. I have lived through this experience. However, I want to say how very sorry I am that Mr Beazley is not here today. Mr Beazley, who has had a tremendous job to do in bringing forward a new education program, is sick at the moment. I just hope that ill-health does not befall any more of us.
– I would like to join briefly with the Prime Minister (Mr Whitlam), the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Snedden) and Leader of the Australian Country Party (Mr Anthony) in paying tribute to the many people who have assisted in making this House function during the past 12 months. I do not intend to cover the ground covered by the earlier speakers. But I certainly pay tribute to you, Mr Speaker, for the work that you have done as the occupant of the high office of Speaker of this House.
I recognise also the unfailing courtesies and sense of humour of the Leader of the House (Mr Daly). If the Leader of the House has not made himself a statesman in the Parliament this year, it is only because he has been subject to very severe pressures by his leader, the Prime Minister. Even if this has been a record year in terms of guillotines, gags, and all of the things that have made the Opposition parties somewhat frustrated, I certainly want him to know that not for one moment, or in any shape, sense or form, do I hold him responsible for those matters, because I know that he has been subject to very ruthless determinations by the masters he is forced to serve.
– You will break his heart.
– Well, it might break his heart, but I do not think so. Perhaps 1974 will be a different year and perhaps we can look to the Leader of the House for that real sense of statesmanship which I am sure he can display in all of these matters which we on this side hope will make this a better functioning Parliament in 1974.
I would just like to single out two of three people who I believe deserve special comment. First of all, I recognise GifT Jones who, for as long as I can recall - I think for all of this year - has been the Parliamentary Liaison Officer. He is being promoted in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. I say without any qualification whatsoever that, from the Opposition’s point of view, I have never found a better Parliamentary Liaison Officer. He has been most helpful at all times. I pay a public tribute to the work that he has contributed in assisting the Leader of the House in the functioning of this Parliament.
I also recognise, on behalf of the Liberal Party in particular, the efforts of Miss Chris Newall, the secretary to the Opposition Whips, who has displayed tremendous zeal and determination in her job and who at all times has been forthcoming with the high standard which we expect from the occupant of that office. She could not have rendered better service than she has during the past 12 months. I know that the Leader of the Opposition joins with me in paying the warmest tribute to her for the way in which she has carried out her task.
Finally, I thank the people who have assisted me in the running of the House from our side. I recognise Tony Street who has been an assistant Leader of the House on the Opposition side. I thank Max Fox and Geoff Giles for their assistance as Opposition Whip and Assistant Opposition Whip. I thank the Deputy Leader of the Country Party, Ian Sinclair, with whom I have worked very closely indeed. I think it is fair to say to him that I have had fewer problems with members of the Country Party than I have had at times with some of the ‘mavericks’ in the Liberal Party.
– You are right there.
– I always speak frankly in these matters. That is a frank comment. Maybe 1974 will be a different year - not in a sense of problems with the Country Party but perhaps with the one or two members of our Party who at times have made this House a rather lively place. I recognise the efforts of my own personal staff. I will not put their names into the record but they know that I am referring to them. I can see one of them in the gallery at the present time who graces the scene very much indeed. I thank them and I extend to honourable members on both sides of the House the compliments of the season.
– Before I enter into the festive spirit of Christmas may I just for once make a few political comments. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Snedden) mentioned that he had been refused leave to speak and that he did not want to clutter up
Hansard. I think he said he did not want to see it misused. He should know that leave can be granted by the House for an honourable member to incorporate matter in Hansard but if the House refuses leave the honourable member is entitled to read it to the House. That was done today. This was caused by the petty, frightened approach of the Leader of the Opposition. He did not want to hear the truth. He stated that this was unusual. Today I had occasion to see his Party and him indirectly to ask whether the Prime Minister (Mr Whitlam) could incorporate his speech in Hansard. Firstly I sent him a copy of Hansard dated 28 September 1972 when Sir Reginald Swartz, then the Minister for National Development, asked leave to make a ministerial statement on Australia’s natural resources of minerals, forest, water and energy. The Labor Party agreed to his incorporating it in Hansard. His speech takes up 23 printed pages, much more than the 62 pages of typing that the Prime Minister asked to incorporate today.
Again, on 15 October 1967, at page 1941 of Hansard the Australian Labor Party when in Opposition gave the then Minister for National Development the opportunity to incorporate 15 pages in Hansard. Today because of his petty, frightened approach to the great record of the Labor Party the petulant, prospective Prime Minister, as he calls himself, did not want to clutter up Hansard. By heavens, it is full of fiction from the last Government. A lot of it was read, and badly read to us. I would prefer members of the Liberal Party to incorporate everything for the simple reason that today they have indicated how frightened they are of the truth. The Prime Minister took 2J hours to read Labor’s record, and we have only started. I would have been prepared to give the Leader of the Opposition 2 minutes to state what they had done. Why should he not have that time? There would be one page full and one blank, and anybody could read it in that time, even the Leader of the Opposition.
So today he was petty, frightened and afraid. He thought he was smart making the leading citizen of this Parliament read a speech for 2 hours. The only thing the Leader of the Opposition did was to cause this Parliament to lose valuable time. That time could have been saved by a commonsense approach. I suggest to him that he exercise the same judgment in Opposition as we did when we realised these things could be done. If a member of this Parliament wants to put something in Hansard there is no way he can be stopped, provided he has the patience and the time to do so. We did not mind taking that time because this was important. I am sorry that the Leader of the Australian Country Party (Mr Anthony), who is not here at the moment, did not ask for leave to speak on that statement today because he has a much higher degree of political integrity than the Leader of the Opposition and - I will tell honourable members something else - a lot more common sense. I will admit that he has not much to beat, but he is still in front.
I thank the Prime Minister for his generous comments about me and about my conduct of the House and parliamentary affairs, because evidently the Opposition forgot. It is nice to know that at least I was remembered by my friends on this side of the Parliament. In any case, I think we can say that we have destroyed the petty approach of the Leader of the Opposition today. The reason why honourable members opposite did not fight it was not that they were not upset about the thing. I doubt whether there are more than a dozen Liberal members anywhere in Canberra at this very moment, and the Leader of the Opposition was not game to call for a division because he knew very well that he would be sitting up there with a few like Brown’s cows and nothing else in sight. That is the reason. That is the great fighting Liberal Leader of the Opposition. The fact is that his members will not support him on the last night of the session. They wanted special planes to be on and off like yo-yos so they could get home. The Leader of the Opposition did not protest too greatly tonight, except in that mild way, because if he called a division now there would hardly be a dozen Liberals in the chamber. I exclude the Country Party members because they generally attend to their duties, but most of the Liberals have gone back to their directorates, the multinationals and all those sorts of things. They are out celebrating the great funds they have received this year.
-Order! I think the Minister is becoming a little provocative.
– Mr Speaker, I am sorry you took that approach because I am just animated by the spirit of Christmas. I feel friendly towards everybody at this time, even the Country Party. I now wish to touch upon the spirit of Christmas in a real way. I would like to thank the officers of the House and the officials for their co-operation and particularly you, Mr Speaker, for your wise judgment and your wise and unswerving approach to the high responsibilities that you have, in the fact of great provocation from people who should know better. I would also like to thank the Clerks of the House and my opposite number, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr Lynch). He said that things were out of my control. I would hate to say what has happened on that side because I have had a look at a few votes lately. But within the limits imposed on him by the restrictions of the so-called unity opposite I think that he has done a commendable job. In fact I hope that he is that position for a long time to come.
Whilst the Leader of the Opposition did not wish me a happy Christmas, I congratulate him on the way he is performing over there. I think he will be very successful on that side of the Parliament over the next twenty or thirty years. I would like to extend my thanks to the Whips and the others who have co-operated with me, and also to the Library staff, the attendants, Hansard, the Parliamentary Counsel, Mr Coman and his staff, who have worked behind the scenes and have made possible all the legislation that we have enacted in this Parliament. I would like to thank Mr Giff Jones, the Parliamentary Liaison Officer. I have never held it against him, but he was trained by Sir Reginald Swartz. He has been very effectively part and parcel of the parliamentary machinery and in every way, as the Deputy Leader of the Opposition has stated, has rendered commendable service to all members of the Parliament in a courteous and efficient way. His promotion to higher honours is, I think, well earned. I thank him personally for his assistance. I think he has learned a few things this year from our side of the Parliament that he probably did not learn from the other.
– The guillotine - that is what he has learned about.
– We have still a long way to go. This has been a record year for legislation but one could not beat the Liberal guillotine in four or five years if the Parliament sat every day of the year. Do not forget that the previous Government put through 19 Bills in 17 hours. I have not approached that figure, even in a year. The people who say these things now are the record holders.
In any case, I repeat something that I have wanted to say for a long time. I sincerely thank members of the Parliament, from both sides of the House for that matter. From time to time in the heat of battle in the Parliament tempers become frayed and all kinds of things happen. But from both sides I have had many kindnesses, and much assistance and support from time to time. In my time in this Parliament no Party has ever presented such good attendances and such a solid front as has the Parliamentary Labor Party. I have no doubt why that is so. It is led by a superb Prime Minister who is giving inspiring leadership to the people of Australia. The great record he has produced tonight certainly justifies the high regard in which he is held both at home and abroad. His policies have changed the face of the nation. Australia is respected wherever one might go. We have thrown away the policies of the past. In every way the Prime Minister gives leadership of a kind which undoubtedly will receive the endorsement of the people of this country for many years to come.
My thanks go to the army of people around the Parliament particularly at this time of Christmas. In the real spirit of Christmas may I extend to everyone here my good wishes for a very merry festive season and a happy New Year. I say to the Opposition that, whilst they are all good fellows, I hope they stay in Opposition in the new year and the new year after that. We on this side of the House look forward to next year with great pleasure, knowing full well that the foundations we have laid will let us have many more merry Christmases on this side of the House; and the people accordingly will benefit in that way.
– Honourable members, I should like to take this opportunity to thank the Prime Minister (Mr Whitlam), the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Snedden) the Leader of the Australian Country Party (Mr Anthony), the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr Lynch) and the Leader of the House (Mr Daly) for the words of praise which they uttered about me. I should like to respond on behalf of the officers of the Parliamentary staff. I can assure honourable members that I fully endorse every word which has been spoken about these officers in regard to their ability, dedication and sincerity. I do not want to go over the ground again because it would take too much time, but I endorse every laudatory remark that has been made about the attendants and every person who makes Parliament a place in which it is possible for us to serve.
I should also like to take this opportunity to say how lucky we are to have a transport officer like Gordon Pike. I think that everyone would agree that when one talks about patience and tolerance, the first person who comes to mind as possessing those great attributes is Gordon Pike. After all, he has a tremendous duty to perform in arranging, and sometimes cancelling, plane bookings. But not once has it ever come to my notice that he has complained, nor have I ever heard him complain, about the duties that he is expected to perform.
Ir addition, I should like to endorse the remarks of the Leader of the Opposition relating to the staff of the kitchen and the dining room. They do an excellent job for us. Sometimes we are a little handicapped in this regard. Quite a lot of the work in the kitchen and the dining room is sessional work, and sometimes the staff members whom we recruit are inexperienced, but they pick up the work very quickly and, all things considered, they do an excellent job in serving us in the dining room.
Honourable members, I say once again that I am very thankful to have such splendid people at my side as Norman Parkes and Jack Pettifer, and of course those people to whom reference has already been made who work in the Parliamentary Library and the Joint House Department, as well as Bill Bridgman of the Hansard Staff. I endorse the remarks which have been made about these people. I am very pleased to see that the House is unanimous in relation to the thoughts which have been expressed about the officers of the House. T take this opportunity to wish everyone, including wives and families, the very best for Christmas and a happy new year.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Mouse adjourned at 6.18 p.m. to a date and hour to be fixed by Mr Speaker as determined by the resolution of the House.
page 4768
The following answers to questions upon notice were circulated:
asked the Minister for Trans port, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
I cannot put a precise figure on the proportion of the community that would be disadvantaged. However, I believe that it is a significant proportion. 1 am aware that there is a strong body of opinion in Perth that a curfew should not be imposed.
May I continue by indicating some of the disadvantages that would flow from a curfew on domestic flights.
There would be delays in the delivery of mail and urgent freight, because scheduled times on which these articles could be consigned would be compressed into a shorter time period. This is particularly relevant on long haul routes that do not have a very high frequency of flights. Perth is on such a route.
A curfew would make it difficult for the airlines to continue to offer the existing level of discount fares. These lower fares are possible because aircraft are utilised as much as possible throughout the 24 hour day. The lower fares have a popular appeal. The problem for the airlines is indeed greater than merely losing the utilisation of their existing fleets. They would be faced with the need to purchase additional aircraft, in order to maintain present frequencies to Perth, if flights to that city were to become more concentrated as to the time of the day. The end result would be increased costs to the airlines which would have to be passed on to the air travellers, freight forwarders, and so on throughout the community.
As you know the domestic airlines have scheduled their Perth flights with the view to keeping noise nuisance as low as possible.
I might add that, at the present time, the difference in the daylight saving situation between East and West Australia has resulted in westbound flights arriving earlier in Perth thereby being more acceptable from a noise point of view.
With particular reference to international flights through Perth, I should like to say that on present schedules, the majority of arrivals and departures of international aircraft take place between the hours of midnight and 3 a.m. The introduction of a curfew at Perth Airport could have a serious impact on international airline scheduling as some operators might be obliged for operational reasons to overfly or by-pass Perth, with consequent effects on tourism and trade in Western Australia. In the main, international operations to Perth are conducted over longhaul sectors of world-wide routes which involve the meeting of curfews and other restrictions at other international airports en route. The keen competition between international airlines demands that aircraft leave European capitals at convenient hours for travellers.
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
These services provide some 5,000 seats a week between Canberra and Perth, and some 4,200 seats a week between Perth and Canberra. The number of passengers actually carried between these centres is, of course, considerably less. In 1972-73, TAA, for example, carried 3,150 passengers between Perth and Canberra, and 3,049 in the reverse direction. A similar number would have been carried by Ansett Airlines of Australia, so that, in total, about 12,400 passengers would have been carried in both directions during the year.
This is some 34 passengers a day, or little more than 17 a day in each direction. Certainly, this number is insufficient to sustain a direct service between the two points and, having regard to the number of connecting services provided, does not suggest that the airlines are failing to service the route adequately.
In addition to the services shown in their published timetables, the airlines do, of course, provide additional services as traffic demands.
Air Services Between Western Australia and the Eastern States (Question No. 1239)
asked the Minister for Trans port, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The present pattern of air services between Western Australia and the Eastern States is as follows:
Forty-four flights a week leaving Perth between the hours of 11.30 a.m. and 12.25 p.m., and 10.45 p.m. and 1.00 a.m.
Forty-four flights a week leaving Melbourne between the hours of 9.15 a.m. and 11.00 a.m., and 7.40 p.m. and 8.45 p.m.
These services have been arranged to cater for the requirements of travellers, most of whom commence their journeys in the Eastern States and later return. A comparatively small proportion of the total traffic originates in Western Australia. For example, in the last 3 years, less than 39 per cent of the passengers carried on these services by Ansett Airlines of Australia originated their journeys in Perth.
The airlines have also arranged their services in this way in order to offer convenient connections with their other services and those of the international airlines.
Only 6 of the 44 eastbound flights a week, the two services to Adelaide leaving Perth at 1.00 a.m. on both Mondays and Fridays, and the services to Sydney, leaving Perth at 11.10 p.m. and 11.15 p.m. on Fridays, could be said to be scheduled at times arranged to enable them to conform with jet curfew requirements. These flights arrive at Adelaide and Sydney respectively shortly after the lifting of the curfew on jet aircraft at 6.00 a.m.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice:
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:
I have informed the Pallotine Mission that I have not approved its application for a grant to enable it to extend its existing youth hostel. I have also informed the Mission of the reasons for ihis decision which are, basically, that
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The reasons for the delay for these passengers are as follows:
–
Ships on the Australian Coast: Single Voyage Permits (Question No. 1259)
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice: <1) Have any single voyage permits been granted to ships on the Australian coast since 1 January 19737
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Trans port, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Trans port upon notice:
Will he investigate the possibility of installing flight arrival and departure and now boarding boards at Perth Airport similar to those used at other centres.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Action is already in hand by Ansett Airlines in association with TAA and Qantas to install a Visual Flight Information Display System at Perth Airport. (Closed Circuit T.V.)
The proposed installation has been approved in principle by this Department and we are at this time awaiting (final) details from Ansett before giving our final approval for the installation.
Companies in Australia Holding Airline and Charter Licences (Question No. 1332)
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Ansett Transport Industries (Operations) Pty Ltd - Melbourne, Vic.
Connair Pty Ltd - Alice Springs, N.T.
East-West Airlines Ltd- Tamworth, N.S.W.
Qantas Airways Ltd - Sydney, N.S.W.
In addition, a Statutory Corporation, the Australian National Airlines Commission, trading as TransAustralia Airlines, holds airline licences.
The companies in Australia holding charter licences are:
Aerial Agriculture Pty Ltd - Bankstown, N.S.W.
Agricultural Aviation Pty Ltd - Brisbane, Qld.
Air Charter Albury Pty Ltd- Albury, N.S.W.
Air Charter Services Pty Ltd - Devonport, Tas.
Air Express Ltd - Brisbane, Qld.
Air Gold Coast (Flying) Pty Ltd - Burleigh Heads, Qld.
Air Link Pty Ltd- Dubbo, N.S.W.
Air Planters Pty Ltd- Bundaberg, Qld.
Air Tasmania Pty Ltd- Hobart, Tas.
Air Taxis Australia Pty Ltd- Caulfield, Vic.
Airchart Flying Services Pty Ltd - Brunswick, Vic.
Airfarm Associates Pty Ltd- Tamworth, N.S.W.
Airfast Charter Pty Ltd- Mascot, N.S.W.
Airfast Helicopter Utilities Pty Ltd- Mascot, N.S.W.
Airland Pty Ltd- Cootamundra, N.S.W.
Airserve Albury Pty Ltd, trading as Arcas Airways -Albury, N.S.W.
Airspeed Services Pty Ltd- Albury, N.S.W.
Airwork Australia Pty Ltd - Jandakot, W.A.
Alpine Aviation Pty Ltd - Melbourne, Vic.
Altair Pty Ltd- Perth, W.A.
Amber Air Charter Pty Ltd, trading at Amberair - Ceduna, S.A.
Ansett Transport Industries (Operations) Pty Ltd - Melbourne, Vic.
Arnhem Air Charter Pty Ltd- Darwin, N.T.
Australian Air Charterers Pty Ltd - Brighton, Vic.
Avia Guard (Victoria) Pty Ltd- Ballarat, Vic.
Aviation Centre Pty Ltd- Bankstown, N.S.W.
Aviation Services Pty Ltd - Melbourne, Vic.
Aviation Services Pty Ltd - Perth, W.A.
Avis Rent-a-Car System Pty Ltd- Sydney, N.S.W.
Bandy, T.. A., & Co. Pty, Ltd- Epping, N.S.W.
Barrier Air Taxi Service Pty Ltd- Broken Hill, N.S.W.
Bell Bros. Air Charter Pty Ltd- Guildford, W.A.
Bigger, Don, Automotive Centre Pty Ltd - Frankston, Vic.
Bonanza Air Charter Pty Ltd - Dingely Village, Vic.
Boomerang Air Services Pty Ltd - Mount Lawley, W.A.
Border Aviation (Agricultural) Pty Ltd - Albury, N.S.W.
Boxall Air Charter Pty Ltd- Bunbury, W.A.
Brabham, Jack, Aviation Pty Ltd - Hurstville, N.S.W.
Brain & Brown Air Freighters Pty Ltd - Essendon, Vic.
Bristow Helicopters Pty Ltd - Melbourne, Vic.
Burnett Airways Pty Ltd - Bundaberg, Qld.
Bush Pilots Airways Ltd - Cairns, Qld.
Business Jets (Australia) Pty Ltd - Melbourne, Vic.
Camden Aviation Sales & Service Pty Ltd - Camden, N.S.W.
Campbell-Hicks Airways Pty, Ltd, trading at S.A.S.
Southern Air Services - Cheltenham, Vic.
Campbell’s Aviation Pty Ltd- Lambton, N.S.W.
Carpentaria Exploration Co. Pty Ltd - Brisbane, Qld.
Central Australian Airways Pty Ltd - Mile End, S.A.
Central Highlands Air Taxis Pty Ltd- Emerald, Qld.
Charter Flights (Horsham) Pty Ltd- Horsham, Vic.
Chartwell Pty Ltd- Gordon, N.S.W.
Cheynes Beach Holdings Ltd - Albany, W.A.
Chieftain Aviation Pty Ltd- Bankstown, N.S.W.
Civil Aerial Surveys Pty Ltd - Melbourne, Vic.
Civil Flying School Pty Ltd- Cheltenham, Vic.
Civil Flying School (Lilydale) Pty Ltd- Kew, Vic.
Civil Flying School (W.A.) Pty Ltd- Jandakot, W.A.
Civil Flying Services (W.A.) Pty Ltd- Jandakot, W.A.
Clubair Pty Ltd- Warners Bay, N.S.W.
Cobar Aero Club Ltd- Cobar, N.S.W.
Commercial Aviation Pty Ltd - Bankstown, N.S.W.
Commodore Aviation Pty Ltd - Port Lincoln, S.A.
Condobolin Aero Club Ltd- Condoblin, N.S.W.
Connair Pty Ltd - Alice Springs, N.T.
Coral Avion Pty Ltd- ThursdayIsland, Qld.
Country Air Services Pty Ltd - Rockhampton, Qld.
Coveair Pty Ltd- Adelaide, S.A.
Crone, Donald & Associates Pty Ltd, trading as Coral Ayer Executive Flight Services - Sydney, N.S.W.
Cropair Pty Ltd- Griffith, N.S.W.
Davey Air Services Pty Ltd- ‘Dubbo, N.S.W.
Delta Air Services Pty Ltd- Sydney, N.S.W.
Des’s Aviation Pty Ltd- Whyalla S.A.
East-West Airlines Ltd- Tamworth, N.S.W.
Eastern Air Transport Pty Ltd - Brisbane, Qld.
Emu Travel Pty Ltd - South Melbourne, Vic.
Esair Pty Ltd - Esperance, W.A.
Executive Air Services Pty Ltd - Essendon, Vic.
Executive Air West Pty Ltd- Perth, W.A.
Executive Airlines Pty Ltd - Essendon, Vic.
Farmair Pty Ltd- Tinamba, Vic.
Field Air (Ballarat) Pty Ltd, trading as Air Charter Ballarat- Ballarat, Vic.
Flemington Truck Sales Pty Ltd, trading as Robby’s
Aerial Services - Melbourne, Vic.
Flinders Island Airlines Pty Ltd - Cheltenham, Vic.
Flinders Ranges Tourist Services Ltd- Wilpena, S.A.
Flying Associates Pty Ltd- Townsville, Qld.
Forrester Stephen Pty Ltd- Melbourne, Vic. (G.A.A.F.) General Aviation Air Freighters Pty Ltd
Jannali, W.A.
Galaxy Flying Safari Pty Ltd- Essendon, Vic.
General Flying Services Pty Ltd- North Balwyn, Vic.
George, Ken Pty Ltd- Victoria Park, W.A.
Geraldton Air Charter Pty Ltd- Geraldton, W.A.
Geraldton Fishermen’s Co-operative Ltd- Geraldton, W.A.
Glenair Pty Ltd- Broadmeadow, N.S.W.
Godfrey Industries Pty Ltd- Glynde, S.A.
Grampian Aviation Service Pty Ltd- Stawell, Vic.
Great Barrier Reef Hotel Pty Ltd- Sydney, N.S.W.
Greenacres Air Agriculture Pty Ltd - Inverell, N.S.W.
Groote Eylandt Air Charter Pty Ltd- Whyalla, S.A.
Groupair Pty Ltd- Berwick, Vic.
Hawker de Havilland Australia Pty Ltd - Bankstown, N.S.W.
Hawker de Havilland Australia Pty Ltd, trading as Hoxton Park Flying School, Bankstown, N.S.W.
Hazair Agricultural Services (Albury) Pty LtdAlbury, N.S.W.
Hazelton Air Services Pty Ltd- Cudal, N.S.W.
Helicopter Charter Pty Ltd - Brisbane, Qld.
Helicopter Operator Pty Ltd - Brisbane, Qld.
Helitrans (Australia) Pty Ltd- Cairns, Qld.
Hill27 Pty Ltd, trading as Westwayair, North Perth, W.A.
Hooker Pastoral Co. Pty Ltd- Sydney, N.S.W.
Illawarra Flying School Pty Ltd - Bankstown, N.S.W.
International Aircraft Co. Pty Ltd - Parafield, S.A.
Ipec-Air Pty Ltd- Sydney, N.S.W.
Islander Aircraft Sales Pty Ltd- Lakemba, N.S.W.
Jamaduru Investments Pty Ltd and L. A. Tilly Investments Pty Ltd, trading as Jan Beers Aviation, Beckenham, W.A.
James Air Charter Pty Ltd - Bankstown, N.S.W.
Jayrow Helicopters Pty Ltd - Mentone, Vic.
Katoomba Air Services Pty Ltd, Katoomba N.S.W.
Kelly’s Airways Pty Ltd - Coonabarabran, N.S.W.
Kempsey Flying Club Ltd- Kempsey, N.S.W.
Keys, Les, Aviation Pty Ltd- Dalby, Qld.
Lake Eildon Airways Pty Ltd, Alexandra, Vic.
Lanham’s Air Charter Pty Ltd - Mount Isa, Qld.
Leasair Holdings Pty Ltd - Bankstown, N.S.W.
Leonora Air Charter Pty Ltd - Leonora, W.A.
Lindeman Aerial Services Pty Ltd - Mackay, Qld.
Lindgren Motors Pty Ltd, trading as Aviatours - Belmont, N.S.W.
Lloydair Pty Ltd- Waramanga, A.C.T.
Mactaggarts Primary Producers’ Co-operative Association Ltd - Brisbane, Qld.
Manning River Aero Club Ltd- Taree, N.S.W.
Marian Aviation Pty Ltd- Perth, W.A.
Masling Commuter Services Pty Ltd- Cootamundra, N.S.W.
Mathews Transport Pty Ltd - Bendigo East, Vic.
Merimbula Flying School Pty Ltd- Sydney, N.S.W.
Mersey Valley Aerial Services Pty Ltd - Devonport, Tas.
Mitchell Coots (Australia) Pty Ltd- Melbourne, Vic.
Mooney Aircraft (Australia) Pty Ltd - Church Point, N.S.W.
Moore, R. R. & Co. Ptd Ltd- Tamworth, N.S.W.
Mount Gambier Aviation Pty Ltd - Mount Gambier, S.A.
Mount Isa Copying & Air Charter Service Pty Ltd, trading as Carpentaria Air Charter Service - Mount Isa, Qld.
Murray Border Flying Club Ltd- Tocumwal, N.S.W
Narrabri Aero Club Ltd, trading as Namoi Aero Club- Narrabri, N.S.W.
National Homes Pty Ltd, trading as Executive Air - Chermside, Qld.
Nationwide Air Services Pty Ltd- Mascot, N.S.W.
Navair Flying School and Charter Services Pty Ltd- Bankstown, N.S.W.
New England Aviation Pty Ltd - Armidale, N.S.W.
Nicholas Skyways Pty Ltd- Bentleigh, Vic.
Nicholson’s Air Services Pty Ltd- Toowong, Qld.
Northern Air Pty Ltd-Cairns, Qld.
Northern Aviation Pty Ltd - Orroroo, S.A.
N.Q. Aerial Charter and Training Pty LtdiMareeba, Qld.
O’Brien, W. B., Enterprises Pty Ltd- Brewarrina, N.S.W.
Oilfields Aviation Pty Ltd- Caulfield, Vic.
Opal Air Pty Ltd-Coober Pedy, S.A.
Ord Air Charter Pty Ltd- Wyndham, W.A.
Overland Airways Pty Ltd - Rockhampton, Qld.
Parsons, C. H. Pty Ltd- St George, Qld.
Pastoral Aviation Pty Ltd - Carlton, Vic.
Pays Air Service Pty Ltd- Scone, N.S.W.
Penrith Air Charter Pty Ltd - Kingswood, N.S.W.
Pentair Pty Ltd- Albury, N.S.W.
Perth Air Charters Pty Ltd- Perth, W.A.
Photographic and General Air Charter Pty LtdGeorges Hall, N.S.W.
Pilotmakers E.F.T.S. Pty Ltd, The- Dromana, Vic.
Pioneer Flight Centre Pty Ltd - Mackay, Qld.
Pipeair Flying School Pty Ltd - Cheltenham, Vic.
Plant-Fab Construction and Installations Pty Ltd, trading as P-F Aviation Services - Morwell, Vic.
Port Augusta Air Services Pty Ltd - Adelaide, S.A.
Port Macquarie Air Services Pty Ltd - Port Macquarie, N.S.W.
Premier Aviation Pty Ltd- Wagga, N.S.W.
Proposch Timber Pty Ltd, trading as Tarago Valley Flying Services - Drouin, Vic.
Qantas Airways Ltd - Sydney, N.S.W.
Queensland Pastoral Supplies Pty Ltd - Brisbane Qld.
Queensland Primary Producers Co-operative Association Ltd - Longreach, Qld.
Rannair Pty Ltd- Sawtell, N.S.W.
Reiss Chartering and Agencies Pty Ltd - Sydney, N.S.W.
Rex Aviation Ltd - Bankstown, N.S.W.
Rex Aviation (Queensland) Pty Ltd, trading as Queensland Flying Services - Archerfield, Qld.
Riverland Flying Group Pty Ltd - Adelaide, S.A.
Rossair Pty Ltd- Parafield, S.A.
Rotor-Services Pty Ltd- Darwin, N.T.
Rotor Work Pty Ltd- Sydney, N.S.W.
Rural Helicopters (Australia) Pty Ltd- Coffs Harbour, N.S.W.
SAATAS Pty Ltd- Adelaide, S.A.
S.B.C. Transport Pty Ltd- Perth, W.A.
Scale and Engineering Pty Ltd, trading as Scale and Engineering Executive Air Charter - Bayswater, S.A.
Schutt Aircraft Pty Ltd- Cheltenham, Vic.
Schutt Aircraft Flying Academy Pty Ltd- Cheltenham, Vic.
Science Aids Australia Pty Ltd - Woodville West, S.A.
Silver City Air Taxis Ltd- Broken Hill, N.S.W.
Skyway Pty Ltd- Wee Waa, N.S.W.
Skyways of Benalla Pty Ltd - Wangaratta, Vic.
Skyways (Queensland) Pty Ltd- Archerfield, Qld.
Southbank Pty Ltd- Wollongong, N.S.W.
Southern Cross Air Services Pty Ltd - Rozelle, N.S.W.
Spraycott Aviation Pty Ltd- Wee Waa, N.S.W.
Stillwell, B. S.- C.F.S. Pty Ltd, trading as Civil Flying Services - Melbourne, Vic.
Stradbroke Gardens Air Charter Pty Ltd- Brisbane, Qld.
Summerland Aero Services Pty Ltd - Casino, N.S.W.
Sunland Aviation Service Pty Ltd - Archerfield, Qld.
Sunraysia Air Taxis Pty Ltd-Mildura, Vic.
Super Spread Aviation Australia Pty Ltd - Cheltenham, Vic.
Swiftair Aviation Service Pty Ltd- Casino, N.S.W.
Tamair Pty Ltd- Tamworth, N.S.W.
Tangalooma Pty Ltd, trading as Tangalooma Air Taxis - Broadway, Qld.
Tasair Pty Ltd- Cambridge, Tas.
Tasman Air Services Pty Ltd- East St Kilda, Vic.
Tasmanian Aviation Services Pty Ltd - Hobart, Tas.
T.B.N. Airlines Pty Ltd- Launceston, Tas.
Thiess Bros Pty Ltd- Yeerongpilly, Qld.
Thomas, R. H. R. & A. M. Thomas Pty Ltdtrading as Thomasair Services - Roma, Qld.
Tom the Cheap (W.A.) Pty Ltd- South Perth, W.A.
Touring Aircraft Hire Pty Ltd - Ringwood, Vic.
Trans Air Pty Ltd- Adelaide, S.A.
Trans-West Air Charter (W.A.) Pty Ltd- Jandakot, W.A.
Travel-World Blacktown Pty Ltd - Blacktown, N.S.W.
Trevair Flying School Pty Ltd- Inverell, N.S.W.
Triflo Engineering Industries Pty Ltd - Sandgate, N.S.W.
Tropic Air Services Pty Ltd - Carnarvon, W.A.
Tropic Airways Pty Ltd - Gladstone, Qld.
Tumut Aero Club Ltd- Tumut, N.S.W.
Tumut Air Services Pty Ltd- Tumut, N.S.W.
Unionair Pty Ltd - Toowoomba, Qld.
United Air Services Pty Ltd- South Perth, W.A.
Vee-H Aviation Pty Ltd - Canberra, A.C.T.
Vowell Air Services Pty Ltd - Mount Eliza, Vic.
Westair Air Charter Pty Ltd - Coonabarabran, N.S.W.
Westralian Aviation (Services) Pty Ltd - Jandakot, W.A.
Westway Air Services Pty Ltd - Victoria Park, W.A.
Whittaker Pty Ltd- Maryborough, Qld.
Whittlesea Flying School Pty Ltd- Whittlesea, Vic.
Whyalla Air Taxis Pty Ltd- Adelaide, S.A.
Williams General Aviation Pty Ltd- Parafield, S.A.
Wilston Aviation Pty Ltd- Hughenden, Qld.
Woodfall Aviation Pty Ltd- Archerfield, Qld.
Wrights Airways Pty Ltd - Mount Isa, Qld.
In addition there are 178 charter licence holders who are not companies.
Holders of charter licences do not operate over fixed routes.
The Department does not have records of contributions made to consolidated revenue by the many smaller operators in the industry nor of contributions made by way of customs duties and sales taxes paid by all aviation enterprises.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice:
Does the legal Aid Service have any role in connection with Aboriginal tribal law; if so, in what manner.
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs hasprovided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:
No, but matters of Aboriginal customary law may be relevant in particular cases in which the Aboriginal Legal Services provide assistance.
Book Prices in Australia (Question No. 1343)
asked the Minister for Secondary Industry, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
(2)
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice:
Further to question No. 1058, will be indicate:
How many handicapped people sought assistance for admittance to rehabilitation centres or regional rehabilitation clinics during 1972-73 and were refused.
What were the main reasons for their rejection.
What is the average waiting time experienced by people before receiving attention at the centres/ clinics; and
What is the average length of treatment.
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
The average length of centre treatment during 1972-73 was-
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
(2)
It was also asked to give special attention to the question of subsidy assistance for the modification of vessels to be used as drilling rigs.
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
What is proposed throughout Australia is the progressive transfer of most of the remaining Australian Government aerodromes to local government authorities. There are 90 Government and 12 military/civil joint user aerodromes in Australia as compared with 190 aerodromes licensed to local governments and 192 aerodromes licensed to private individuals and organisations.
The comparable figures in Western Australia are 24 Australian plus one military/civil joint user aerodrome (Learmonth),15 local government and 26 private.
We expect this change to occur in natural reaction to the Government’s 80 per cent Civil Aviation Cost Recovery Programme which was announced at the time of presenting the 1973 Budget.
It can be shown that local governments in looking after the basic aerodromes - runways, taxiways, apron, terminal, car park and roads - from within their normal council workforces, can do so much more cheaply than when the aerodromes remain under departmental control. This is primarily because it is necessary for departmental aerodrome staff to be provided throughout the year to look after emergencies additional to normal day to day maintenance; as against this, the larger council workforces can be deployed on the aerodromes or on some other council project as the current circumstances demand.
Another point in favour of local ownership is that since development costs are shared by the local government and the Australian Government, it is possible for the Australian Government to more readily economically justify its half of the investment within its total financial commitments. This also means that when an aerodrome is under the control of the local government it is in effect under the control of the local community and the local community may therefore develop its aviation facilities as and when it thinks fit; it has the major say in the priority which is given to these developments.
Finally is the point of possible aerodrome closures. For some years now the number of aerodromes in Australia has remained fairly stable, a limited number of new aerodromes are being created and an approximately equal number of aerodromes are being abandoned. In considering whether or not an aerodrome is acceptable to the local council, within the local aerodrome scheme, the best possible check is made on whether or not that aerodrome is justified today; no aerodrome is abandoned for which the local community feels there is a real need.
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Holden SS Motor Car (Question No. 1416)
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The claim mentioned refers to a particular motoring writer’s subjective opinion and it is relevant to note that other motoring writers have expressed contrary opinions. The newsletter of the Car Consumers’ Association also reports that GM-H refute the claim.
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
The right honourable member will know of my interest in the compiling of a catalogue of all works of art in the National Collection (see Hansard, page 623 of 24 February 1971). I have recently had this matter examined and I am advised that the intention is that provision should be made as soon as possible for professional personnel to undertake the preparation of a definitive catalogue with detailed histories of all works in the Collection; the task is expected to take two to three years.
Works of art intended for exhibition in the National Gallery have been acquired over a very long time beginning soon after Federation. Many works were acquired for sums which bear no comparison to present day art values, and others have been donated. In the circumstances and bearing in mind that values of works of art may change frequently and quite considerably it is not possible to put any meaningful value on the collection.
Works not presently on exhibition, or display in official establishments or Australian missions abroad, are housed under controlled conditions in a specially equipped repository in Canberra.
Works of art acquired by the Government for the periods 2 December 1972 to 30 June 1973, and 1 July 1973 to 31 October 1973 are listed below.
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice:
What is the mean cost per day of a patient in (a) supervised hostel accommodation and (b) day hospitals in each of the States.
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
The information requested by the honourable member is unavailable to my Department.
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
The provisions in the legislation to which the right honourable gentleman refers were framed by the last Government of which he was a member. I am sure when he considers my answers to the points he raised he will recollect the details from previous discussions which would have taken place within that Government and in which he no doubt would have participated. The only variation made by the present Government is to the nursing home admission formalities. To ensure that a bona fide patient seeking admission to a nursing home is not disadvantaged by requiring strict adherence to admission procedures, the requirements have been relaxed to the extent that where a medical practitioner refuses to complete the formal application for admission (form N.H.S), my Department is accepting certification in writing by the medical practitioner, usually on the doctor’s notepaper.
Yes. This provision is contained in Section 40AB (4) of the National Health Act.
The National Health Act does not contain a definition of ‘institution other than an approved nursing home’. This is determined in the light of the particular needs and circumstances of individual applicants.
No. The word ‘institution’ is interpreted as applying to alternative accommodation such as hostel units, aged persons homes, residential units, etc.
Applications are only rejected under Section 40AB (4) of the National Health Act where some alternative more suitable accommodation is available. The availability of such alternative accommodation is normally determined by personal discussion between the applicant’s own medical practitioner and the Departmental medical officer assessing the application with particular regard to the individual patient’s circumstances and requirements. Also, Departmental knowledge of institutions such as aged persons’ homes and hostels, etc., in a particular area would be used in these circumstances.
One of the conditions applying to the eligibility criteria for the domiciliary nursing care benefit, under the provisions of the National Health Act, is that the Director-General must be satisfied that the infirmity or illness, disease, incapacity or disability of the patient is such that if he applied for approval of admission to a nursing home his application would be approved. It follows, therefore, that a patient, in respect of whom the domiciliary nursing care benefit has been approved, needs care equivalent to that provided in a nursing home.
and (7) I am informed that this is not done routinely at the present time. However, my Department has reviewed the pro-forma letters advising nonapproval of the benefit to give more specific reasons for rejection and this will also include advice as to the applicant’s right of appeal. This information will be included in future pro-forma letters.
The scheme commenced on 1 March 1973 and during the period 1 March 1973 to 31 October 1973 some 4,500 applications for the benefit were rejected and appeals were lodged in approximately 6 per cent of these cases.
Of the appeals lodged, the benefit has been granted to approximately 14 per cent of the appellants.
Working Party on Hearing Conservation (Question No. 1208)
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
With reference to his answer to question No. 550 (Hansard, 22 October 1973, page 2469), (a) what was the actual date in 1973 that the working party on hearing conservation was set up, (b) will the recommendations of this working party be made available and (c) if recommendations are already available, what are they.
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
Further to Question No. 1076 and in light of the answer provided by him and that provided by the Prime Minister in the House of Representatives on 7 November 1973, has the Prime Minister instructed him to provide a list of inter-departmental committees of which officers of the former Department of Civil Aviation were members, if so, will he now provide me with such a list.
– The answer to the right honourable gentleman’s question is as follows:
I refer the right honourable gentleman to the answer I gave on 8 November (Hansard, page 3086) and to the Prime Minister’s answer to his Question Without Notice on 15 November 1973 (Hansard, pages 3373-4).
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice:
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice:
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s questions:
The Yirrkala community is being given advice and assistance in working out plans for its future. Several grants have recently been approved to assist groups at Yirrkala in establishing satellite communities in their traditional lands where they wish to do so.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice:
What were the Commonwealth valuations at the time of purchase at Glenairy/Sunnyside, New South Wales, and the Baptist Theological College, Brisbane, which were financed with grants from the Aboriginal Advancement Trust Account.
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:
The Glenairy and Sunnyside project was supported by way of grant from the Aboriginal Advancement Trust Account to a community enterprise, Cummeragunga Pty Ltd which then purchased the property. The level of the grant was determined on the basis of a feasibility study and valuation carried out by a leading private firm of management consultants. The consultants’ valuation was $125,000. No Australian Government valuation was obtained.
As the Queensland Valuer General had already carried out a valuation of the Baptist Theological College, Hill End, Brisbane before the property was purchased by Aboriginal Hostels Ltd, it was not considered necessary to obtain an Australian Government valuation. The Queensland Valuer General’s valuation was $217,000.
Grants Review Committee (Question No. 1341)
asked the Minister representing the
Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice:
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:
The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Senator Cavanagh, announced today that the Permanent Head of his Department, Mr Barrie Dexter, had established within the Department a Grants Review Committee. The Committee was composed of all Second Division Officers in the Head Office in Canberra and had the task of examining all proposals for grants from the Aboriginal Advancement Trust Account before draft recommendations to the Minister were placed before the Secretary of the Department.
Senator Cavanagh said that it was expected that through this Committee it would be possible to ensure that the interests of all Head Office Divisions and Branches were taken into account and consistency maintained in relation to recommendations for grants from the Trust Account. Senator Cavanagh added that he was still considering the establishment of an all-party Parliamentary Committee to assist him in considering recommendations for grants from the Trust Account, but it was unlikely that any such Committee could be established before the next Session of Parliament.
asked the Minister for Trans port, upon notice:
Following his answer to Question No. 1076 and in the light of the Prime Minister’s guarantee in the House on 7 November that the information will be made available, will he provide a list of the interdepartmental committees established since 2 December 1972 of which officers of the former Department of Civil Aviation were members.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
I refer the right honourable gentleman to the answer I gave on 8 November (Hansard, page 3086) and to the Prime Minister’s answer to his Question Without Notice on 15 November 1973 (Hansard, pages 3373-4).
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Darwin and the Northern Territory do not suffer from these peculiar difficulties in that the area is served by sea from both Eastern and Western Australia and in addition by rail and road from South Australia and Queensland.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice:
In relation to the purchase by the government of Desert Farms at Wiluna in Western Australia and the intention to use 73 acres of the land for melon planting,
what markets is it envisaged will be used to sell the fruit,
who is the project manager assisting the Aboriginal community and who are the agricultural consultants involved,
what is the background experience and qualifi cations of each of these people,
how many members of the Aboriginal com munity hold shares in the operating company, and
on what basis have the shares been allocated.
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the right honourable member’s question:
Consultants employed by these two groups have been operating in South Australia and Western Australia as general agricultural, pastoral and farm management consultants for the past 12 to 13 years. The project is the specific responsibility of Mr G. M. Giles of A.A.C.M. - B.R.M. Mr Giles has a degree in Agricultural Science and a Post Graduate Diploma in Farm Management.
Specific technical assistance as required is provided by the staff of the Horticultural Division of the Western Australian Department of Agriculture.
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
Australian/New South Wales Governments Joint Committee Planning Sydney Airports.
Australian/State Advisory Committee to study Adelaide’s regular public transport (airline) airport requirements.
Interdepartmental Steering Committee - Darwin Airport Relocation.
Australian/State Advisory Committee to study
Western Australia airport requirements.
Brisbane Airport Advisory Committee.
In addition the State Planning Advisory Committee in Victoria is investigating a second major airport site for Melbourne. The Air Transport Group of the Department of Transport is assisting with the investigation.
asked the Postmaster-General, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
GATT Anti-Dumping Code (Question No. 1495)
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Customs and Excise, upon notice:
– The Minister for Customs and Excise has provided the following answer to the right honourable member’s question:
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice:
Will the Government give favourable consideration to making it possible for pension cheques to be paid directly into pensioners’ bank accounts.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
I have recently approved in principle that pension payments be made to the credit of bank accounts twelve weekly, as for child endowment. However, I am unable to forecast when this facility is likely to become available, as examination of a number of relevant administrative and legislative aspects by the Treasury, the Reserve Bank and my Department has not yet been completed. When arrangements are completed, all Social Security pensioners will be advised and invited to take advantage of the new payment method.
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
In view of the industrial dispute with TAA pilots, what steps are being taken to facilitate the movement of passengers and goods over routes flown solely by TAA in Papua New Guinea.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
As from 1 November 1973 responsibility for the operation of internal air services in PapuaNew Guinea was assumed by Niugini, the national airline of Papua New Guinea. Neither TAA nor ATI now operate any air services in Papua New Guinea in their own right.
TAA pilots seconded to Air Niugini were not involved in the week long pilot dispute which disrupted TAA’s mainland services and which was settled on 30 November, 1973.
Accordingly, there was no interruption to the movement of passengers and goods on air routes in Papua New Guinea.
asked the Minister for Supply, upon notice:
Further to his answer to question No. 1026 (Hansard, 22 November 1973, page 3789) concerning the 50 to 100 Nomad aircraft which the Government has refused to supply to the Portuguese Air Force, what firm orders has the Government received for this aircraft, and from whom.
– The answer to the honourable members question is as follows:
The Government Aircraft Factories have received thirteen firm orders for Nomad aircraft. The Australian Army has ordered eleven aircraft and J. Brabham Aviation Pty Ltd and Nationwide Air Services Pty Ltd have each ordered one aircraft. In addition the Minister for Defence made public during his visit to Indonesia in April this year that Australia would supply four aircraft to Indonesia as part of the Defence Aid Program. Worldwide marketing efforts are continuing and distributorships are progressively being awarded.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice:
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the right honourable member’s question:
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister, representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
What is the (a) membership, (b) time-table and (c) charter of each of the following interdepartmental committees : (i) Arrangements for provisions of advice on ionising radiation, (ii) Assistance to Industries, (iii) Australian Government Office Space, (iv) Australian Investment Overseas, (v) Australian Participation in NASA Post-Apollo Program, (vi) Australian Trade with Developing Countries, (vii) Brussels Definition of Value for Duty and GATT Anti-Dumping Code, (viii) Consideration of First Report of the Aboriginal Land Rights Commission, (ix) Environmental Impact Studies, (x) Freedom of Information Legislation, (xi) GATT Trade Negotiations, (xii) Human Rights, (xiii) Metric Conversion Co-ordination, (xiv) Motor Vehicle Industry, (xv) National Archives Legislation (xvi) National Housing Policy, (xvii) Revaluation Adjustment Assistance for Rural Industries, (xviii) Shipbuilding Industry, (xix) Social Indicators - (Social Welfare), (xx) Soil Conservation, (xxi) Structural Adjustment - (Tariff), (xxii) The Production of Educational Publications, (xxiii) Unified Aid Administration, (xxiv) Urban and Regional Development, (xxv) Urban Transport and (xxvi) Purari River Project.
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is set out in the following table:
Australian Capital Territory: Protection of
asked the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice:
In view of the high rate of livestock loss and damage to property in rural areas of the Australian Capital Territory, caused by thieves and vandals as well as by workmen on the Tuggeranong development, will he (a) provide rangers and police patrols to protect the property and livestock of rural residents of the A.C.T. from thieves and vandals and (b) ensure that the rights of rural lessees are respected by surveyors, planners and other workmen employed on the Tuggeranong development.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The Department of the Capital Territory is aware of reports of loss of livestock being experienced by rural landholders in the A.C.T. Over the years the Department’s) rangers have co-operated with landholders and reported such losses and incidents to the A.C.T. Police who are responsible for taking action against thieves and vandals.
The Attorney-General has advised that the A.C.T. Police have patrolled the rural areas regularly for many years. The Police so engaged have been selected for their interest in stock and rural problems and their capacity to investigate offences in rural areas. The patrols carried out by day and night as necessity indicates are supplemented by experienced detectives from the Criminal Investigation Division. There is liaison between the A.C.T. Police and the New South Wales Police stationed in areas immediately outside the Australian Capital Territory. There is a continuing exchange of information in respect to thefts of stock, indiscriminate shooting and kindred offences.
These arrangements will continue.
So far as the damage alleged to be caused by workmen on the Tuggeranong project is concerned, the Minister for Services and Property advises that the rights of rural landholders are respected. The Survey Branch of the Department of Services and Property, in co-operation with the Department of the Capital Territory, follows long standing procedures for entry by survey parties upon freehold or leasehold properties. Arrangements for access are made through the Department of the Capital Territory after the landholder has been informed of the impending survey. Personal contact is normally made with the lessee or owner at the commencement of the survey to give further details of proposed movements, type of marks being placed and other relevant matters.
Survey parties are asked to ensure that minimum inconvenience is caused to landholders and at all times to respect the property - stock, fences, crops, gates, pastures etc. The rule on gates is to leave them as found.
In addition my colleague, the Minister of Urban and Regional Development has assured me that when the National Capital Development Commission, or its agents wishes to inspect any land, which is either occupied on agistment or is held under lease, prior request for permission to enter is made to the Land Administration Branch, Department of the Capital Territory. Such requests clearly identify the land to be entered, and the date, duration and reason for the required entry is stated. An officer of the Department of the Capital Territory accompanies the inspection party to make the initial introduction to the landholder.
When the National Capital Development Commission, or its agents, wishes to carry out trial holes, soil tests or backhoe trenching on reserves, or land which is) either occupied on agistment or which may still be held under lease, prior request to enter and carry out such work is made in writing and permission obtained. These requests, as for site inspections, identify the land to be entered and state the date and duration for the required entry.
Australian Council for the Arts: Literature Board (Question No. 1436)
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice:
What groups in the community as defined in the Australian Health Insurance Program, are not covered by the present health scheme, and how many people are in each group.
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
At present well over one million Australians are not insured against the cost of sickness or injury. The available evidence suggests that the uninsured population includes many poor people, migrants and Aboriginals. Although it is not possible to provide precise estimates of the numbers involved in each category, surveys by the Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics do provide an indication of those community, groups where the proportion of people not covered is greater than the Australian average. The following table shows details of these groups.
This table has mainly been compiled from information contained in the Bureau of Census and Statistics publication: ‘Persons covered by Hospital and Medical Expenditure Assistance Schemes, August 1972’.
Aboriginals are disproportionately represented in the category ‘Males engaged in occupation groups with below median incomes’ and consequently it can be expected that the proportion of the Aboriginal population not protected against health costs would be greater than the Australian average. Information from organisations and persons intimately involved with Aboriginals also supports this view.
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice: (1)Is it a fact that the charge to patients for the cheapest beds in public hospitals in South Australia, such as the Royal Adelaide, is currently $20 per day.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (!) Yes.
A payment at the rate of $16 per day will also be made in respect of all patients in private hospitals.
Organisations conducting religious, charitable or community private hospitals may also elect to offer free treatment and accommodation for ‘hospital’ patients. If they do so, the Australian Government will make a supplementary payment, which will have regard to the loss of revenue of, and increased cost to, the hospital in respect of these patients. Such arrangements will only be entered into where they are acceptable to the hospital concerned.
asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice:
– The answer the the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice:
What are the details of research programs funded by and for the Poverty Inquiry, the body or bodies conducting such programs, the cost of each such program, and the total cost.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Hereunder is a list of the research projects being undertaken by the Poverty Inquiry and for which funds have been approved, the person or body conducting the project and the cost of each project. The total cost of these projects is $424,018 but it is emphasised that the costs are subject to revision in the light of any changes in salaries that may occur since the projects were approved.
asked the Minister for Supply, upon notice:
What was the value of petroleum products purchased by the Government from (a) Australian-owned and controlled companies and (b) other companies for 6 months ended 31 December 1972.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
No central records are kept of the value of these purchases. Period contracts arranged for the various types of petroleum products are used by ordering officers in Australian Government departments and most Australian Government instrumentalities throughout Australia. It would be an extremely lengthy process to obtain and consolidate details from all purchasing sources in order to produce a total of actual purchases.
An assessment of the value of usage has, however, been derived from the estimated quantities adopted in letting period contracts, together with the recorded costs of purchases under separate contracts.
The concept of ‘Australian-owned and controlled’ companies is one of some complexity.
The following figures, in response to parts (a) and (b) of the question are based on simple majority ownership of the firms concerned:
Part (a) - Australian-owned companies - $5. 3m.
Part (b) - Other companies- $23.2m.
asked the Minister for Supply, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Australian Council for the Arts (Question No. 991)
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The following grant was paid for a project in the Northern Territory during the 1971-1972 financial year:
The following organisations and individuals in the Northern Territory received grants from the Council during the 1972-1973 financial year:
Mr Raphael Apuatimi Mrs Vai Stanton Mr Albert Lennon Mr Wandjuk Marika Mr Tim Leura Jabaljari
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
Will he also indicate for each Department
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows: The Public Service Board has advised as follows:
Information on the number of (a) (i) divisions, and (ii) branches prior to 2 December 1972 and
As for Part (1) the information only covers central office units of Departments with the formal title of ‘Division’ or ‘Branch’.
asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Yes. My attention has been drawn to the use in Australia of vibrator machines similar to those which are imported. It should be noted, however, that the importation of machines which use electric impulses to cause muscular contractions and claim to reduce the user’s weight is not automatically prohibited. On the advice of my Department, the Department of Customs and Excise permits importation under the following conditions:
asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice:
– The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice:
– The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:
asked the Minister for Secondary Industry, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
That was a long-term planning proposal and it is stressed that the Australian Government has not yet considered the re-location or the possible timing of such a move. Because of the issues involved, including the development of the Albury-Wodonga area, it may be some time yet before a decision is given. However, I can say that if the decision were that the school should be re-located it is> unlikely that such re-location would be commenced until at least towards the end of the 1970’s, having regard to the priority of other major capital works projects and the time involved in planning such a new major establishment.
asked the Minister for Labour, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
1970-71 1971-72 1972-73
$47,944 $39,090 $48,623
asked the Minister for Secondary Industry, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Labour, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
(a) and (b) Had these evictions been enforced and the employees and their families been required to move elsewhere the education of the children, and the family life of the people involved, would obviously have been affected.
asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice:
– The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:
(a) The area is part of the State of Western Australia.
asked the Minister for Minerals and Energy, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (1), (2) and (3) The following table shows the proportions of Australia’s energy requirements met from various fuels, including those nominated by the honourable member, in the decade ended 1971-72 together with estimates for the years 1972-73 and 1973-74:
asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice:
How many Service personnel will be transferred from the Weapons Research Establishment at Woomera as a result of his statement of 20 November 1973 on the reshaping of defence activities.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Twenty-three (23).
asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Natural Gas and Petroleum Products (QuestionNo.1424)
asked the Minister for Minerals and Energy, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Alice Springs: Museum and Art Gallery Complex (Question No. 1428)
MrCalder asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
With reference to my question without notice on 6 November 1973 (Hansard, pages 2787-8), will he give serious consideration to the question of establishing or assisting to establish in Alice Springs an art centre of the significance which is warranted by the importance of the town as a leading centre in Australia for both European and Aboriginal art.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
I am advised that a site in excess of eight acres has been set aside on the bank of the Charles River for the erection of a museum and art gallery complex in Alice Springs. Included in a five year development plan, submitted to the Department of the Northern Territory by the Museums and Art Galleries Board of the Northern Territory, is a proposal for the erection of a complex for a museum and art gallery on that site. An amount of $1,000,000 has been suggested by the Board for development in the five year period. The Board has proposed the briefing of an architect to prepare preliminary plans. The provision of funds for this purpose is being considered as an interim measure, and pending the erection of the future art centre, the previous residency at Alice Springs has been transferred to the Museums and Art Galleries Board for the display of works of art and Aboriginal artifacts. The residency is a substantial building of some forty squares situated in the heart of Alice Springs. The Museums and Art Galleries Board plans soon to open a permanent art display in this building.
Lake Phillip son Area: Coal Deposits (Question No. 1435)
MrWallis asked the Minister for Minerals and Energy, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Interest has recently been revised in a coal deposit near Lake Phillipson (about 340 miles northwest of Port Augusta) because the proposed new railway from Tarcoola to Alice Springs will intersect the area. An exploration licence has been issued to Utah Development Company which has carried out some exploratory drilling. The Trust is obtaining information on this deposit to see whether it could be of value for future power generation.’ The Annual Report also indicates that proven reserves of Leigh Creek coal suitable for open-cut production will be appreciably higher than previous estimates and that ample coal is therefore available for the Playford Power Station at Port Augusta.
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable members’ question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Overseas Trade, upon notice:
– The Minister for Overseas Trade has provided the following answer to the right honourable member’s question:
asked the Minister for Secondary Industry, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
Is the Auditor-General carrying out a full inquiry into the specific recommendations by the Standing Committee on the Environment and Conservation arising from its investigations into the Turtle farming project in the Torres Strait; if not, why, not.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The Auditor-General has not been asked to carry out a full inquiry into the specific recommendations by the House of Representatives Committee on Environment and Conservation as the recommendations - set out on page 1 of the Committee’s Report on Turtle Farming in the Torres Strait Islands - are outside the ambit of the duties of the Auditor-General as laid down by the Audit Act 1901-1969. I also refer the honourable member to the answer he was given on 26 November 1973 (Hansard page 3867). The turtle farming project was mentioned in the AuditorGeneral’s Supplementary Report for the year ended 30 June 1973 tabled on 29 November 1973 as one of the matters on which Audit representations had been recently made to the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and comments sought from the Australian National University. The Auditor-General and the Secretary of the Department are in correspondence on all the representations, including particular queries put to the Department. The report which the AuditorGeneral will make after considering the Department’s replies will be presented to the Parliament in due course pursuant to the procedures laid down in the Audit Act. The Public Service Board has, after consultation with the Secretary, decided to institute an examination of the administrative procedures of the Department.
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
Is there an inter-departmental committee dealing with the shipbuilding industry in Australia; if so, what is the committee’s (a) membership, (b) timetable and (c) charter.
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
The appointment of an inter-departmental committee to review the Australian shipbuilding industry was announced by my colleague the then Minister for Secondary Industry (Dr J. F. Cairns) and myself in our joint press statement of 8 March 1973. In reply to the right honourable gentleman’s specific queries: <a) The Departments represented on the committee are those of Secondary Industry, Transport, the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Overseas Trade, Defence and the Treasury.
It was required to present its report as soon as possible. The report is presently under consideration by the Government and an announcement will shortly be made.
The Committee was asked to review the level and modes of assistance accorded the Australian shipbuilding industry with a view to providing assistance which would ensure the continuing development of a rationalised and efficient shipbuilding industry in Australia.
It was also asked to give special attention to the question of subsidy assistance for the modification of vessels to be used as drilling rigs.
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice:
Will he provide a list of the interdepartmental committees which have been established since 2 December 1972 of which officers of the former Department of Housing were members).
– The answer to the right hoourable member’s question is as follows:
No. On 20 September 1973 my colleague, the Prime Minister, informed the right honourable gentleman in reply to a Question Without Notice about interdepartmental committees that, if he wished to know the composition and function of any particular Interdepartmental Committee, and for what period of time it had been active, the Prime Minister would be happy to provide him with that information (Hansard, page 1317). I also refer the right honourable gentleman to the Prime Minister’s answer to his further Question Without Notice on this subject on IS November 1973 (Hansard, pages 3373-4). If the right honourable gentleman wishes to have information about a particular committee on which my Department is represented, I will assist him as far as possible having regard to the Prime Minister’s answers to Question Nos 964 and 10S7 (Hansard 27 September 1973, page 1714 and 24 October 1973, page 2665).
asked the Minister for Supply, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Urban and Regional Development, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Set out in the table hereunder are particulars of staff appointed to the Department and to my personal staff who are in receipt of salaries in excess of $10,000 per annum.
In circumstances where such, staff were officers of the Public Service prior to their appointments their previous designation and classification is also shown.
Where the appointee was not a member of the Public Service prior to appointment, details of remuneration are not furnished because such information is personal and confidential to the individual.
Postal Voting In The Coogee Electorate
– On 6 December 1973, the honourable member for Phillip (Mr Riordan) asked me a question on postal voting in the Coogee Electorate in the New South Wales State elections. I have had this matter investigated by staff of my Department and this is the reply by my New South Wales Director of Posts and Telegraphs:
Mr Hastings, Returning Officer, said he had kept envelopes showing that ballot papers posted on November IS had reached him on November 26 - nine days after polling day’. In discussing this allegation with Mr Hastings it was learnt that any applications for -a postal vote received after 6 p.m. on the day before the election, i.e. 16.11.73, were deemed to be received too late’ and were placed in a folder. There is provision on the application form, in a space reserved for office use only, for the date of receipt of the application to be shown. There is also provision on the form for the applicant to show details of the date the application was completed. Of 70 late applications, only 33 had envelopes attached and it is assumed the remainder were received by means other than post. The envelopes of concern to this Department were examined and in each case the date of receipt was shown as 26.11.73. Mr Hastings admitted that these applications could have been received any time after 6 p.m. on 16.11.73 but due to pressure of work were not processed until 26.11.73, when they were dated as having been received on that date. Of the 33 applications accompanied by envelopes 21 bore legible date stamp impressions. Of these, 16 were posted between 9.11.73 and IS. 11.73 and in the normal course, with the exception of one which was posted at Paraburdoo in Western Australia on 14.11.73 should have been received by the Electoral Officer before 6 p.m. on .16.11.73. No explanation can be found to explain any delay in delivery and the possibility that they were misplaced in the electoral office cannot be discounted. Five applications were posted too late for delivery by 6 p.m. on 16.11.73. Of the remaining 12 applications it is not possible to determine the date of posting. Further, in relation to specific complaints by residents in the electorate who applied for postal votes and didn’t receive ballot papers, I quote the following example:
Mr Norman and Mrs Stella Disney, 11/12 Wauchope Crescent, South Coogee. The applications were received by the Returning Officer on 16.11.73 and the postal vote ballot papers are claimed to have been posted to the applicants on the same day. Mr and Mrs Disney reside in a large block of Housing Commission flats. They deny receiving the ballot papers and it was noticed that a lock is fitted to their letter-box. No explanation can be furnished for the non-delivery of the ballot papers.
Mr H. Evans, 10/34 Bream Street, Coogee. Mr Evans’ application was received at the electoral office on 12.11.73 together with an application from his wife. The ballot papers were alleged to have been posted to Mr and Mrs Evans at Flat 4, South Seas Esplanade, Burleigh Heads, Queensland, on 13.11.73. Mrs Evans received her ballot paper but Mr Evans did not. No explanation can be furnished for this apparent failure of service.
Australian Security Intelligence Organization
asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice:
– The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:
Health Insurance Scheme: Computer Equipment
– The following information is supplied in response to a Question without Notice asked of me by the Honourable Deputy Leader of the Opposition on 12 December 1973:
The Department of Social Security is currently acquiring computing facilities for 3 different purposes: They are:
The upgrading of the equipment currently installed in the Department’s state capital cities for the conventional work of the Department.
A mini computer network to provide an uptodate data entry system, and
A central computing facility in Canberra.
In relation to the equipment mentioned under (b) and (c) in the preceding paragraph, I should point out that this equipment is designed for use both by the Department of Social Security in connection with its current responsibilities and for the proposed ‘Health Insurance Program. If the Health Insurance legislation is deferred, then it is proposed to give priority to the development of departmental applications. Answers to the questions are related to the 3 separate categories 1 have set out.
Category (a) - The computer centres in Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth have been up-graded during the last 3 months and up-grading of the Sydney and Melbourne installations will take place during December 1973 and January 1974. The total cost of this up-grading is $3.4m.
Category (b) - The Department, through the Stores Supply and Tender Board has negotiated contracts with the National Cash Register Company and Honeywell Pty Ltd for the supply of mini computers and data entry devices at a cost of $5. 7m, $4. 5m of which is to be expended in 1973-74.
Category (c) - In relation to the central computing facility a Letter of Intent was sent to LB.’M. Australia Limited by the Stores Supply and Tender Board on 11.12.73. This Letter of Intent covered the purchase of one machine at a cost of $5 .4m. To support adequately the proposed Health Insurance Program, a second machine of the same size would be required in Canberra but no arrangements have been made with I.B.M. for its acquisition.
It will be seen that steps have been taken which will lead to the expenditure of a sum of $13. 3m for the purchase of computing equipment by the Department of Social Security and this is the sum that was appropriated by Parliament in Appropriation Act No. 2 1973-74 Division 945 item 2-01. I confirm my statement in the House this morning that I have not had any recent discussions with the management of International Business Machines concerning any of these matters.
asked the Minister for Education, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Programs of special purpose grants to the States for education are normally for periods longer than one year and are commonly on a triennial basis. The question of extension of time for any program would not, therefore, arise at the end of each year within a program period.
The Government recognises that due to planning and contractual problems, the rate of expenditure is likely to be slower in the early part of a program and accelerates towards the end. This difference is more marked in some States than in others because of variations in local procedures.
It should also be noted that in all legislation pertaining to special purpose grants to the States there are restrictive clauses which preclude the Minister from authorising funds to States which would exceed their yearly entitlement under a particular program.
Because States commit funds to projects under approved programs, which may not be completed by the time the program ends, the special purpose legislation also generally provides that the Minister may authorise payments to a State after the period to which the legislation applies. This procedure enables States to complete approved programs.
Under the States Grants (Pre-School Teachers Colleges) Act 1968-1972 the Government made available $2.5m to assist independent pre-school teachers’ colleges in the States. The period of the application of the Act has had to be extended on several occasions because of problems with local government authorities and in the purchase of additional land. This is explained in the annual Report of the Department of Education and Science for 1971-72 tabled on 30 August 1972.
Under the States Grants (Secondary Schools Libraries) Act 1972, Victoria, in the first year of the second triennium of the Secondary Schools Libraries Program, only expended $500,000 of the $2,315,862 available to it. There was no extension of time involved as 1972 was the first year of a three-year program which will conclude on 31 December 1974.
In respect of the States Grants (Advanced Education) Act 1965-1972 all States have been unable to expend within the periods covered by the legislation some of the Federal funds provided by that legislation. The composite table which appears at the end of this reply shows (a) the periods, (b) the categories, and <c) the sums involved. This table should be read in conjuction with the subsidiary tables numbered 1 to 6 which show the distribution between the States of the sums mentioned.
Under this Act extensions of time have been granted in some cases. These are:
Capital Expenditure:
Acts Covering the Triennia 1967-1969 and 1970-1972
Section 5 (4) of this Act provides for the Minister to approve expenditure after the period to which the Act relates, as applying to the prescribed period.
Approval under this Section was given to the four States requiring it, i.e. Victoria, Queensland, South Australia and Western Australia.
Acts Covering the Triennia 1967-1969 and 1970-1972
These Acts provided that State contributions made during the triennium would be matched by a Federal contribution, subject to other conditions in the Act.
In the 1967-69 triennium, Victoria, and in 1970-72 triennium all States except New South Wales, took advantage of this provision and contributed the State share of the funds scheduled. The Australian Government is continuing to match these contributions as the projects progress and actual capital expenditure incurred.
Recurrent Expenditure:
Acts Covering the Triennia 1967-1969 and 1970-1972
There is provision in these Acts for the Minister to approve a State contribution, made after the year to which it relates, to be treated as if it were contributed during the former year.
The Minister has exercised his discretion in such cases on only a few occasions and it is not expected that any further requests will be received from the States with regard to the past triennia
asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice:
What was the number of discharges of Army personnel from 7 December 1972 to 31 August 1973 in each of the following categories:
What was the number of accepted enlistments for the Army during the same period.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (l)
In addition, 834 members were discharged for reasons other than those listed above. Note: Figures exclude National Servicemen. (2) 4299.
Note: Include National Servicemen who enlisted in the Regular Army.
Australian Access to Ocean Surveillance Information Obtained by United States Satellites and Aircraft (Question No. 1099)
asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Educa tion, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
With regard to consumer protection in the ACT, my colleague, the Minister for the Capital Territory, administers the Consumer Affairs Ordinance which gives the Consumer Affairs Bureau the power vices and to conduct research into matters affecting consumers. The Australian Government does not at this stage have powers in the area of consumer protection applicable to the operations of commercial organisations in the States. However, the AttorneyGeneral has introduced a Trade Practices Bill which provides for a Trade Practices Commission.
I will bring the matter raised by the honourable member to the attention of the Attorney-General and the Minister for the Capital Territory.
asked the Minister for Hous- ing and Construction, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: <1) The desirability of residential development on the land at Belmont is still under examination. <2) An announcement will be made when a decision has been reached.
asked the Minister for Education, upon notice:
In relation to the working party established by the Australian Education Council on 13 June 1973 to study relationships between Commonwealth tertiary scholarships and State teaching studentships:
who are its members;
on what dates has it met;
when is it expected to complete its work;
will it be consulting with interested bodies such as the Australian Union of Students, and
will he table its report when completed.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Education, upon notice:
Will he table the discussion paper on student loans prepared by his Department in 1972.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The discussion paper to which the honourable member refers was prepared as an internal working document by the Department of Education and Science and is not the kind of document made available for release.
asked the Minister for Education, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
New student assistance arrangements for 1974 and following years will mean that offers of competitive scholarships, which must be accepted or rejected, will no longer be made. Students will have the opportunity to apply for non-competitive living allowances if they believe they have an entitlement under the means test. Space is provided on papers to be submitted after the application for the student to notify the Department that he has withdrawn his application, and to give his reasons for doing so, in the some way as in earlier years.
asked the Minister for Education, upon notice:
Will he table the 1972 report compiled within his Department on desirable changes to the Commonwealth tertiary scholarships schemes.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The report to which the honourable member refers1 was prepared by the Department of Education and Science and is not the kind of document made available for release.
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows: (1), (2) and (3) The increase in employment under the Public Service Act from 1 July 1973 to 30 June 19T4 is to be kept below S per cent.
Accordingly, the Government has not attempted to set some standard limit on the growth of statutory authorities. In at least some instances, as the right honourable member will appreciate, it would not have authority to do so.
Overall, growth can of course be expected in employment by statutory authorities. This may arise from normal growth in their activities or, in some cases, as I said in the recent Garran Oration, from transfers from other places where, one way or another, the taxpayer pays.
The Government expects, however, that in the matter of employment, statutory authorities will have due regard to economy and the Government’s approach to employment levels under the Public Service Act.
University Students (Question No. 12S4)
asked the Minister for Education, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Although my Department is currently collecting data on sales of houses from State Valuation Authorities this is not yet available for all Capital Cities nor for a sufficient length of time to answer the question. The best information available at present is that published in ‘Building Statistics’, by the Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics. The series on average commencement value of private contract-built houses has only recently been introduced and is backdated to the year ended June 1971.
asked the Minister for Education, upon notice:
What was the amount per capita spent for students at (a) universities and (b) colleges of advanced education in (i) each State and Territory and (ii) the Commonwealth in 1971-72 (Hansard, 26 October 1972, page 3490).
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (a), (i) and (ii). In the case of universities, full information is more readily available for the calendar year 1972. General recurrent grants per equivalent full-time student at universities for the year 1972 are set out in the following table:
E.F.T.S. - Equivalent full-time students calculated in the manner set down in paragraph 6.7 of the Fourth Report of the Australian Universities Commission.
asked the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice:
In view of his stated determination to take over the responsibilities of the States for welfare and advancement of Aboriginal people, what plans has the Government approved to improve housing, recreation and living conditions in Wreck Bay over which it has direct responsibility and control.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The project for redeveloping Wreck Bay is currently being discussed by the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and the Department of the Capital Territory.
I will advise the honourable member as soon as the plans for the project are finalised.
asked the Minister for Education, upon notice:
Further to question No. 1077 and in light of the answer provided by him and that provided by the Prime Minister in the House of Representatives on 7 November 1973, has the Prime Minister instructed him to provide a list of interdepartmental committees of which officers of his Department are members; if so, will he now provide me with such a list.
– ‘The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
I refer the right honourable gentleman to the answer the Minister for Education gave on 7 November (Hansard, page 2960) and to the Prime Minister’s answer to his Question Without Notice on 15 November 1973 (Hansard, pages 3373-4).
asked the Minister for Education, upon notice:
Following his answer to question No. 1077 and in the light of the Prime Minister’s guarantee in the House on 7 November 1973 that the information will be made available, will he provide a list of the interdepartmental committees established since 2 December 1972 of which officers of his Department are members.
– The answer to the right honourable gentleman’s question is as follows:
I refer the right honourable gentleman to the answer the Minister for Education gave on 7 November (Hansard, page 2960) and to the Prime Minister’s answer to his Question Without Notice on15 November 1973 (Hansard, pages 3373-4).
HMAS Coonawarra (Question No. 1413)
asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice: (0 When will the Government’s stated policy of establishing a Statutory Development Assistance Agency to administer our foreign aid program be implemented.
– The Minister for Foreign Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Education, upon notice:
How many (a) primary school and(b) secondary school pupils are there in the Roman Catholic systemic school system in 1973.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Primary .. 279,776
Secondary . . . . 10,559
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
What approaches have been made by (a) State authorities and (b) other persons for a curfew at Perth Airport during thelast 6 calendar years.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The only State Authority to have requested the imposition of curfew restrictions at Perth Airport is the Belmont Shire Council which has suggested the move on five occasions since September 1970. The actual dates of the approaches made by this Council are 11 September 1970, 11 December 1970, 27 August 1971, 13 April 1972 and 5 April 1973.
Requests for the imposition of curfew restrictions have been submitted by private persons on four occasions namely, 2 May 1970, 23 Feburary 1972, 19 April 1973 and 28 November 1973.
In addition to the approaches mentioned above, questions were asked in the House on the same matter on 24 September 1968 (Mr Cleaver) and 3 September 1970 (Mr Bennett).
asked the Minister for Education, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable gentleman’s question is as follows:
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
The table also includes the estimated cost for each department of providing these activities during the financial year 1973-74. The table has been compiled on the basis of information supplied by all Government departments. The right honourable member will note that the information is based on the departmental structure as it existed at 30 June 1973.
asked the Minister for Urban and Regional Development, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Department of the Capital Territory: Interdepartmental Committees (Question No. 1081)
asked the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice:
Will he provide a list of the interdepartmental committees, which have been established since 2 December 1972, of which officers of his Department are members.
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
No. On 20 September 1973, my colleague, the Prime Minister, informed the right honourable gentleman in reply to a Question Without Notice about interdepartmental committees that, if he wishes to know the composition and function of any particular
Interdepartmental Committee, and for what period of time it had been active, the Prime Minister would be happy to provide him with that information.
I also refer the right honourable gentleman to the Prime Minister’s answer to his further Question Without Notice on this subject on 15 November 1973 (Hansard, pages 3373-4).
If the right honourable gentleman wishes to have information about a particular committee on which my Department is represented, I will assist him as far as possible having regard to the Prime Minister’s answers to Question Nos. 964 and 1057 (Hansard 27 September 1973, page 1714 and 24 October 1973, page 2665).
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
The Public Service Board has advised me that the following table indicates -
The number of social worker positions on the establishment of each Department.
The dates of creation of social worker positions - precise dates are not available in all cases.
Details of the functions, duties and responsibilities of the social worker positions.
Details of the number of positions currently filled - this information includes permanent and temporary occupants. Figures for earlier years were given in answers to me on 7 November 1968 (Hansard page 2678), 17 September 1969 (page 1549) and 16 August 1972 (page 287).
asked the Treasurer, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice:
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:
asked the Treasurer, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The Government’s attitudes and policies towards foreign ownership were explained in a statement delivered by the Prime Minister at the recent Ministerial Conference in Tokyo and subsequently tabled in full by him in the House on 7 November 1973.
With regard to statistical information, detailed statistics are available from the Bureau of Census and Statistics in respect of foreign ownership and control of the mining industry in Australia for the years 1963 to 1968, and of manufacturing industry in Australia for the years 1962-63 and 1966-67. At present the Commonwealth Statistician is undertaking statistical studies of the extent and characteristics of foreign ownership and control in key sectors of the Australian economy. It is expected that the results of these studies will become available progressively from about the middle of 1974.
Taiwanese Vessel ‘Yung Yuan’ (Question No. 1261)
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice:
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question: (l)-(5) The vessel Yung Yuan is at Maryborough awaiting a decision as to her future use.
asked the Minister for Trans port, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The honourable member may be assured than the Government is very conscious of the need to maintain the existing high standards of operational efficiency and safety in Australian aviation and that the amalgamation of the two Departments will not lower in any way the present high standards of air safety.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice:
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:
Qantas Airways Ltd: Operations in Fiji (Question No. 1327)
asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
An examination of the total services between Australia and Fiji by all carriers indicates that Qantas has a minimum of flights arriving and departing Nadi at times which some people might consider unreasonable. Qantas provides five B707 daylight flights per week between Australia and Fiji which cater mainly for tourist traffic and Fijian travellers. Four B747s per week depart Australia for Fiji in the evening and whilst these are long haul services transitting Fiji they do cater for businessmen who wish to spend a full working day in Australia prior to departure.
Qantas maintains at Nadi a modern fully equipped flight kitchen where thirty-seven of the thirty-nine staff employed are Fiji nationals. In the financial year ended March 1973 fifty-four per cent of the food processed by the Nadi flight kitchen was purchased locally.
Qantas has made a boarding music tape which includes selections of South Pacific music including the traditional Fijian farewell song Isa Lei played by Fijian musicians.
Qantas inflight cabin staff are almost exclusively Australian citizens and although it is true that Fijians are not employed in this category, neither are Indonesians, Hawaiians, etc. Qantas is Australia’s international flag carrier and it is appropriate that the cabin staff should reflect this role.
Qantas has not been involved in a large number of industrial disputes in Fiji but those that have occurred have attracted a great deal of attention, owing to the critical impact of Qantas’ operations on the Fiji economy. These operations are not only to service Qantas flights but Qantas also provides food and ground handling for most interntional carriers serving Nadi.
As Qantas is a prominent foreign company operating in an important industry (i.e. tourism), the union representing most of the employees has tended to endeavour to force Qantas into the position of pacesetter in wages and terms and conditions of employment in Fiji.
Qantas has in fact been a good employer, its rates being traditionally somewhat higher than rates for similar work in other industries in Fiji. In its dealings with the unions, however, Qantas has to pay regard to the anti-inflationary policies of the Fiji Government, which take account of the need for local wages and conditions to be set at levels that can be sustained by the Fiji economy. Accordingly, in the settlement of industrial disputes Qantas has been concerned to comply with proper industrial procedures according to Fiji law.
asked the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice:
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:
and (2) The answer to part (1) of Question 1000 indicated that the Aboriginal Legal Aid Services were established to provide legal advice and representation for Aboriginals. The detailed arrangements under which the individual Aboriginal Legal Aid Services in the States and the Northern Territory operate were discussed and agreed upon at a conference in Canberra on 9 April 1973. These are as follows:
assistance in non-contentious matters where there is likely to be of direct benefit to the Aboriginal.
actions to be taken on behalf of an Aboriginal community or a substantial Aboriginal group will be considered on an individual basis by the Australian Government following an approach by a Service.
the other costs of administration of the Service;
asked the Minister for the Capita] Territory, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Treasurer, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
See my answer to Question No. 230 recorded in Hansard of 11 April 1973.
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
Has his attention been drawn to statements by Western Australian secessionist leaders that the question of secession should be settled within Australian jurisdiction and not British, and drawing attention to the Australian Government’s statements that the British Parliament has no right to decide Australian issues; if so, will he clarify the situation.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The Government’s attention has not been drawn to any statements of the kind referred to by the honourable member.
By-law Policy: Interdepartmental Committee (Question No. 1459)
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
(1)-
The following Departments are represented on the committee -
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet
Department of Customs and Excise
Department of the Treasury
Department of Secondary Industry
Department of Overseas Trade
The committee is to examine the implications of by-law policy.
asked the Minister for Urban and Regional Development, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
–
asked the Minister for Urban and Regional Development, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
The Government established a task force to enquire into the National Estate on 16 April 1973. Its report is awaited.
My Department has made submissions to the enquiry and in thecourse of preparing its submissions has drawn advice from a number of areas. No formal committee was, however, established.
asked the Minister for Urban and Regional Development, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Educa tion, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
On 14 March 1973, my colleague, the Minister for the Media, announced the appointment of an inter-departmental committee under the chairmanship of a senior officer of his own Department andwith members drawn from the Department of Education, Prime Minister and Cabinet and the Treasury. The Committee’s terms of reference are:
asked the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice:
What are the current areas and values of acquisitions of land in the A.C.T., still unoccupied and unleased, including forests.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The major unleased areas of Government land (excluding roads, hill reserves, playing fields and suburban parks in the City area) are:
asked the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice:
Will he provide a detailed dissection of the figures of salaries and administrative expenses in the Minicipal and Territorial Accounts for the A.C.T. for 1971-72 and, in doing so, will he indicate the number of employees involved, their salary levels, the office space utilised by them, maintenance and similar costs, printing and stationery costs , and provisions made for long service leave.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The information required is set out below:
There has been no reason to value these lands and a value is not available.
asked the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice:
Is it a fact that in the 1971-72 Territorial Accounts for the Australian Capital Territory the income from payroll tax was understated by more than$1 million.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The Tentative Territorial Account for the Australian Capital Territory for the financial year 1971- 72 included payroll tax for the first time.
As the power to levy payroll tax was transferred from the Commonwealth to the States on 1 October 1971 the amount included in the Tentative Territorial Account was intended to disclose the revenue collections for the period 1 October 1971 to 30 June 1972.
The amount was, in fact, understated by $455,569 being payroll tax for this period paid in New South Wales on behalf of Australian Capital Territory taxpayers.
asked the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice:
In relation to loan repayments, principal and interest, on water supply headworks in the 1971-72 Municipal Accounts, how was the value of assets of water supply headworks calculated.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The sources of cost details and the procedure followed in determining the value of assets, were as follows:
sources of cost details:
the valuation of assets and capital works in existence at 30/6/64 by Mr L. M. Graham,*
annual and monthly returns of completed works submitted to this Department by N.C.D.C.,
annual statements of expenditure in the Australian Capital Territory prepared by Department of Works,
appropriation records of expenditure on new works by Department of the Interior;
procedure followed:
projects completed before 1/7/64 - costs were extracted from the report prepared by the consultant and further depreciated over the period 1/7/64 to 30/6/69 in accordance with the rates of depreciation suggested by the consultant,
projects completed after 1/7/64 - the. cost of the projects was made up of the basic contract cost, administrative oncosts, fees and interest on work-in-progress up to the date of completion of the project and then depreciated over the depreciation periods suggested by the consultant
- Consultant engineer engaged for specific purpose of valuing municipal assets.
asked the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice:
Will he make a comprehensive statement detailing all the conditions related to granting of leases of blocks of land for residential purposes in the Australian Capital Territory,
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
I draw his attention to a comprehensive statement made by my predecessor on 27 September 1973 on land and housing in the Australian Capital Territory. The conditions detailed in that statement relating to the granting of residential leases still apply and can be summarised as follows:
Land for First Home Buyers
Two waiting lists have been established, one for first time home buyers and a second for persons who voluntarily transferred from the waiting list for Government housing. Priority is presently being given to those on the latter list.
Leases are made available at predetermined prices averaging about $5,500. Eligible persons are offered a choice of sites in locations and at prices which generally reflect their preferences. If not satisfied with the blocks offered, they may elect to participate in a limited access’ auction in which the number of blocks offered will exceed the number of eligible buyers. To date such an auction has not proved necessary.
Land for Freelance Builders
Each builder seeking land has been allocated a quota based on his building performance over the past three years.
Prices are fixed as for land offered to first time home buyers and there are controls over the package price of house and land to prevent profiteering.
asked the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice:
What are the full details of the conditions which must be met prior to the granting of a Commissioner for Housing loan in the A.C.T., including price of dwelling, previous home ownership, and family income of the applicant.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Commissioner for Housing loans are available to applicants who are able to pass a needs test subject to the following qualifications:
Applicants must be married, engaged to be married or in the case of single individuals obliged to provide accommodation for dependants.
Loans are not available to applicants who are not employed in the A.C.T.
Generally applicants have been required to contribute at least 10 per cent of the cost of the project from their own funds and demonstrate their ability to repay the loan. The required contribution is under review.
A person who owns a house or whose spouse owns a house is ineligible.
Persons who have received previous financial assistance or whose spouses have received previous financial . assistance from Government funds for housing in the A.C.T. are ineligible. This would include persons who had received in the - A.C.T. a Commissioner for Housing loan, a loan from Government funds advanced to co-operative building societies, a War Service (now Defence Services) Homes loan or who had purchased a Government house on terms.
Under the needs test applied up to December 1973 loans would not generally be approved in cases where:
Applicants are eligible for Defence Services Homes loans,
The proposed purchase price of the property or of the cost of the land plus the proposed cost of erecting a dwelling exceeds $30,000; or
Assets held by applicants are substantial.
However factors such as income, size of family and financial commitments are taken into account.
The availability of loans is in all cases subject to funds being available.
asked the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice:
What was the last date on which a Commissioner for Housing loan was granted on a house with a sale price of more than $30,000.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
A loan was approved for purchase of a secondhand house costing $31,500 on 12 October 1973.
asked the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice:
In view of (a) the complaints from residents of the A.C.T. about having their rates increased on the basis of unaudited Municipal Accounts and (b) the undertakings in the preceding two annual reports that the 1971-72 Municipal Accounts would be audited, will he consider having audited (i) the 1971-72 Municipal Accounts and Territorial Accounts and (ii) subsequent annual accounts of A.C.T. Municipal and Territorial revenues and expenditures.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
The form of the Municipal Accounts for Canberra and the question of their audit is the subject of current correspondence with the Treasurer.
I have proposed that the form of the accounts should be formally approved by the Treasurer and that the accounts be subject to audit. It is not intended that the audit will cover past years’ accounts.
Regarding the Territorial Account the published documents explain that the account was prepared principally to assist the current inquiry by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the A.C.T. and to allow informed public debate on the question of state-type costs and revenues. It is not intended that the Territorial Account be audited.
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Persons may also elect to be accommodated in private hospitals. All hospital charges will be tax deductible and the choice rests with the individual person as to whether he insures against these costs. If he does elect to insure, the insurance contributions also are tax deductible.
Under the Australian Health Insurance Program a man earning $70.00 a week will pay about $33.00 per annum by way of levy. For this amount he will be entitled to rebates of at least 85 -per cent of the doctors bills and free accommodation and medical treatment in a standard ward of a public hospital. A man earning $400 a week will pay the maximum levy of $150 per annum.
The likely contribution rates for persons who wish to insure for intermediate or private ward hospital accommodation charges are presently being compiled in conjunction with the Government Actuary. However, charges in respect of such accommodation will be reduced by an Australian Government payment of $16.00 per day, in lieu of the present payment of $2.00 a day. Hospital bills accordingly will be $14.00 a day cheaper under the Program than if the present scheme were to continue.
asked the Minister for ‘Urban and Regional Development, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable minister’s question is as follows:
Department of Urban and Regional Development and Department of Transport: Intel-departmental Committees (Question No. 1556)
asked the Minister for Urban and Regional Development, upon notice: <1) Have there been any inter-departmental committees established since 2 December 1972 in which his Department and the Department of Transport have examined problems of common concern or matters in which they, are jointly involved.
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
The purposes of these committees are:
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
During the experimental period of the Australian Assistance Plan local bodies are being given the responsibility of deciding upon the structure of the Regional Councils for Social Development. In accordance with the guidelines laid down in the discussion paper it is required that the composition of the Council be as pluralistic as possible thus widening the cross-section of the community which takes decisions on local social welfare problems. Section 2.3 of the Australian Assistance Plan advises* that: ‘Each Regional Council should involve representatives of the Australian, State and Local Governments, trade unions and employer groups, welfare consumer groups and non government bodies concerned with social welfare.’ In the implementation of this principle Regional Councils for Social Development are required to set out the details of their structure in formal constitutions which are then approved by the Commission.
So far within the pilot phase of the Plan the Social Welfare Commission has selected a total of 20 regions to be funded to establish and operate Regional Councils for Social Development in New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia. Of these, 4 will receive in addition block grants paid on a basis of $2 per capita for the support of welfare programs proposed by the Regional Councils. The other 16 regions will receive specific grants of up to $20,000.
Projects in South Australia, Tasmania and the Northern Territory are under consideration.
Details of the regions selected to date, of the bodies to be supported and of the costs to be incurred in each case, are as follows:
New South Wales -
The South-West Sydney Regional Social and Development Council based in Marrickville will receive $20,000 for its general operations and $850,000 to fund social welfare programs. In addition, there may also be grants of $10,000 for the employment of community development workers in the region. Proposals are being examined for a Regional Information and Research Centre, a Village Activities program, a project for working mothers, a pilot project in Hurstville in which the social and intellectual needs of old persons will be catered for, a regional geriatric service, a Youth Forum and other programs.
The Community Council in Fairfield /Liverpool will receive $20,000 as will the Newcastle Community Development Group, the Tamworth and District Social Service Council and the Wagga Wagga Community Action Group. $5,000 will be provided for the Central Coast Social and Welfare Co-ordination Council in the Gosford/Wyong region and a similar amount for the Manly-Warringah Social Welfare Co-ordinating Committee.
New South Wales/Victoria -
The Albury/Wodonga Regional Interim Working Committee for Welfare Education and Welfare Co-ordination will receive a grant of $20,000.
Victoria -
The Western Region Commission Welfare Committee is sponsoring the establishment of a Regional Council for Social Development in the western region of Melbourne. A grant of $20,000 will be provided for this purpose together with $704,992 for the support of welfare services. Proposals for welfare programs are still under consideration. The Ballarat Council of Social Service will be provided with $20,000 as will the Geelong and District Community Chest Association which is establishing a Regional Council for Social Development in the Barwon region. The Outer Eastern Regional Council in Melbourne will receive $10,000 and the Broadmeadows Welfare Advisory Committee $1,000.
Queensland -
In Queensland the Social Development Board for Gladstone will receive $64,000 to establish a Regional
Council for Social Development and to support sc:a.> welfare programs. Proposals have been received for a Citizens Advisory Service and for a supplement to an existing project by the National Fitness Council to establish a Youth Centre.
The Mackay Council of Social Welfare and the Townsville Welfare Council will each receive $20,000. The Bundaberg Regional Council for Social Services and the Rockhampton Social Welfare Development Planning Council will each receive $5,000.
Western Australia -
A proposal for a Community Service Program was prepared by the Western Australian Department for Community Welfare. In accordance with this proposal $284,000 will be provided to establish a Regional Council for Social Development in the South-West and Southern Agricultural Region and for social welfare programs in the area. Proposals have been received for a program to disseminate social welfare information for research projects and for training programs.
On the basis of the same Community Service Program $20,000 will be provided for a Regional Council in the southern goldfields region.
Due to delays in the appointment of the Commissioner’s research staff, most research and special projects to date have been undertaken by consultants engaged by the Commission and by institutions and organisations which have been commissioned for specific projects. In addition, officers of the Department of Social Security have assisted with research, particularly that arising from the requirements of short term project work. However, even when its own research staff is available, the Commission will continue to call upon the services of the Department of Social Security, individual consultants and outside institutions and organisations.
In the following summary it is not possible to give exact details of the cost of ali projects initiated by the Commission as a number of projects have not been completed and some expenses, including travel and administrative costs, are not known at this stage. In such instances, the amount approved for the project is indicated (e.g. up to $3,000), although the final cost may not reach that figure.
asked the Minister for Urban and Regional Development, upon notice: <1) Have there been any interdepartmental committees established since 2 December 1972 in which his Department and the Department of Housing and Construction have examined problems of common concern or matters in which they are jointly involved.
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:
– The answer to the right honourable member’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice: _ (1) Is the Australian Government subsidy for pensioners hospitalised in Western Australia approximately, $5 per day.
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: <1) Yes. The Australian Government currently pays a hospital benefit of $5 a day on behalf of pensioners enrolled in the Pensioner Medical Service who are accommodated and treated without charge in public wards of public hospitals. The rate of this benefit was increased to SS a day by the National Health Bill 1966.
asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:
– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:
Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 13 December 1973, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1973/19731213_reps_28_hor87/>.