Senate
7 December 1939

15th Parliament · 1st Session



The President (Senator the Hon. J. B. Hayes) took the chair at 11 a.m., and read prayers.

page 2265

QUESTION

SHORTAGE OF CORNSACKS

Senator ABBOTT:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– Will the Leader of the Senate state whether the Government will take up, preferably with the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, the subject of a substitute material for cornsacks, the shortage of which isnow causing serious difficulty in the wool industry?

Senator McLEAY:
Minister for Commerce · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

-I stall take that matter into consideration,and see what can he done with regard to it. ‘

page 2265

QUESTION

ADVANCE TO WHEAT-GROWERS

Senator UPPILL:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

-Can the Minister for Commerce indicate when the first advance is likely to be available to wheatgrowers in respect of the 1939-40 harvest, and in what form the money will be paid to individual farmers?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– I understand that the preliminary payment will be made at the end of next week. The fanners will receive wheat certificates which they will be able to cash at the banks.

page 2265

QUESTION

WAR ACTIVITIES

Consultation “With Trade Union Leaders.

Senator ARMSTRONG:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– Will the Minister representing the Prime Minister state whether, in view of the practice in Great Britain of consulting trade union leaders, in order to secure their cooperation in prosecuting the war to a successful conclusion, the Government will recast its present policy and consult with trade union leaders to a greater degree than it has up to the present time, in order to obtain their assistance in winning the war?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– In some instances requests have been made by the Government for the assistance of trade union leaders, and their co-operation has been most helpful. The policy of the Government is to avail itself of the assistance of all who are able to offer constructive suggestions at this critical time.

page 2266

QUESTION

CHECK ON WAK EXPENDITURE

Senator BROWN:
QUEENSLAND

– Arising out of statements made by the Acting Minister for Supply and Development relative to profiteering, and the fact that grave fears have arisen in the minds of the people as to the possibility of public moneys being wasted in the Defence Department, and having regard also to the facts that the Public Accounts Committee has not been reconstituted, and that no investigations have been entrusted to the Public Works Committee, will the Leader of the Senate state what methods are being adopted by the Government to guarantee that public moneys will not be wasted during the war period when huge sums are being expended on defence?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– The Government has taken every precaution in that direction by enlisting the services of accountants and experienced business men to assist in checking, and keeping a close watch over all governmental expenditure, particularly in connexion with defence.

page 2266

QUESTION

PROCESSING OF APPLES

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Has the Minister for Commerce received -a reliminary report regarding the possi- ility of processing a portion of the Australian apple crop, a large proportion of which, in ordinary circumstances, is exported to the Old Country and elsewhere, with a view to utilizing it as fruit juice, jellies, &c?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– Yes. The expert officers of the department in conjunction with the State experts have been inquiring into that matter for several months. Further, the department has communicated with the responsible departments in Great Britain whose assistance is being sought, to ascertain what market is available in Britain for processed fruit.

page 2266

PUBLIC WORKS AND UNEMPLOYMENT

Senator KEANE:
VICTORIA

– Will the Minister for the interior inform the Senate what steps have been taken by his department to expedite the disbursement of the sum of £2,000,000 made available by the Government for the purpose of reducing unemployment pending the full benefit of the defence expenditure being realized.

SenatorFOLL. - My department has been closely in touch with the State departments, which have been asked to put machinery in motion to ensure that various public works are put in hand with the least possible delay. Any works that the Commonwealth departments are to undertake have received prior attention in order to ensure as little delay as possible. Already many works are in full swing and next Monday a large number of additional men will be employed in almost all of the States.

page 2266

QUESTION

MILITIA CAMPS

Senator LECKIE:
VICTORIA

– Will the Minister representing the Minister for the Army ascertain the date fixed for the calling into camp of the Militia for a period of three months’ training after Christmas? If the date has not been fixed, will the matter be decided as soon as possible, so that militiamen may make arrangements for their holidays, or for their work in the Now Year ? At the present time they do not know whether they will be summoned into camp early or late in January.

Senator FOLL:
Minister for the Interior · QUEENSLAND · UAP

– I shall bring the honorable senator’s question under the notice of the Minister immediately.

page 2266

QUESTION

GOVERNOR-GENERAL’S RESIDENCE

Senator BROWN:

asked the Minister for the Interior, upon notice -

  1. How many cottages were in “ Yarralumla” grounds during the term of Sir Isaac Isaacs ?
  2. How many were erected to accommodate the extra staff of Lord Gowrie ?
  3. How many were erected or are in course of erection for the increased staff of the Duke of Kent?
  4. What was the cost of the cottages referred to in (2) and (3) above?
  5. Was the cost of the cottages constructed for the Duke of Kent included in the figures given in the Senate on Tuesday, 5th December?
  6. If not, why not.

SenatorFOLL. - The replies to the honorable senator’s questions are -

  1. Five.
  2. None.
  3. None.
  4. Sec (2) and (3).

page 2267

QUESTION

COST OF LIVING

Senator KEANE:

asked the Leader of the Senate, upon notice -

In view of the large increase in the cost of living figures and of the reported statement of Chief Arbitration Judge Beeby that, because of the international position, workers cannot expect Court increases, will the Government consider an increase under its powers conferred by section 18 of the National Security Act?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– The Government has no official knowledge of the large increase of the cost of living, to which the honorable senator refers. As the honorable senator is aware, the Government has,’ under the National Security Act, passed regulations providing for the control of prices, and for that purpose has appointed a Prices Commissioner and staff. Any material increase of the cost of living results in an increase of the wage rate by the application of the formula contained in the awards. The question does not accurately set out the remarks of the Chief Judge. In addition, those remarks did not form part of a judgment, and cannot, in any case, have had relation to the increased cost of living, seeing that, as I have stated, any such increase is met by an increase of the wage rate without any further application to the court.

page 2267

BILLSRETURNED FROM HOUSE OFREPRESENTATIVES

The following bills were returned from the House ofRepresentatives without amendment : -

Sulphur Bounty Bill (No. 2) 1939.

Tractor Bounty Bill (No. 2) 1939.

Wire Netting Bounty Bill (No. 2) 1939.

Newsprinting Paper Bounty Bill 1939.

Trade Agreement (Brazil) Bill 1939.

Trade Agreement(Newfoundland) Bill 1939.

page 2267

RULES PUBLICATION BILL 1939

Bill received from the House ofRepresentatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended.

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

Second Beading.

Senator McLEAY (South Australia -

Minister for Commerce) [11.17]. - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this measure is to authorize the reprinting of statutory rules as amended from time to time. As was pointed out in the second report of the Standing Committee of the Senate onRegulations and Ordinances, “ the frequent amendment ofRegulations makes it extremely difficult for those concerned to lay their fingers upon all the . Regulations that bind them “. The committee suggested, as one of the means by which that disability might be mitigated, that a periodic consolidation of the regulations should be made. While provision is made in the Amendments Incorporation Act, that whenever the Government Printer reprints an act, he is to reprint it with any amendments which have been made thereto, no such provision exists with respect to the reprinting of statutory rules. It is now twelve years since a general revision of statutory rules was made, and many of them have been amended on numerous occasions, thereby causing the difficulty to which the Senate committee referred. This bill therefore proposes to insert in theRules Publication Act, which is the act providing for the printing of statutory rules when they are made, a new section requiring the Government Printer, whenever a statutory rule is reprinted, to reprint it with all amendments thereto. The terms of the proposed new section are clear and follow, with such alterations as are necessary, the corresponding provisions of the Amendments Incorporation Act. The amendment will, I trust, commend itself to the Senate.

Senator COLLINGS:
QueenslandLeader of the Opposition

– The proposed amendment of the principal act is long overdue. In view of a fact contained in a question which I asked this morning, I trust that the Minister (Senator McLeay) does not think it necessary to define “ Government Printer “ in this bill in order to make it clear that the Government Printer referred to in the measure is the Commonwealth Government Printer at Canberra, and not a State government printer operating outside of Canberra.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 2268

PATENTS, TRADE MASKS, DESIGNS AND COPYEIGHT (WAR POWERS) BILL 1939

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator McLeay) reada first rime.

Second Reading

Senator McLEAY (South Australia -

Minister for Commerce) [11.22]. -I move -

That the bill benow read a second time.

The bill makes special provisions with respect to patents, trade marks, designs and copyrights, in consequence of the war. The measure will remain in operation for the period of the war and six months thereafter. It is substantially identical with a similar act passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom a few weeks ago. Trading with enemy subjects is forbidden under the Trading with the Enemy Act, but unless some special provision be made it would not be possible for traders and manufacturers to obtain the benefit of patents, trade marks, designs and copyrights, which have been granted to enemy subjects. Tn the absence of such a measure as this, it would be equally impracticable for persons in Australia to obtain in enemy countries the protection for their inventions and the like which, but for the war, they would have been able to obtain. The bill proposes that, where a person residing or carrying on business in this country has obtained a licence under a patent, design or copyright from an enemy subject, the licence shall continue in force. In Australia there are doubtless many manufacturing industries carrying on under licences obtained from persons who are now enemy subjects. If these licences were not continued in force, the business might be forced to suspend or curtail their operations because they would no longer have authority to manufacture according to the patents held by enemy subjects. The bill also empowers the Attorney-General to revoke such a licence or to vary any condition subject to which it has effect.

Difficulty may arise in the case of a person who wishes to establish some industry in Australia for the purposes of which it is necessary to use a patent held by an enemy subject. The provisions of the Trading with the Enemy Act at present prevent that person from obtaining a licence for such a purpose, and provision is made in the bill empowering the Attorney-General to grant a licence under patents, designs or copyrights held by enemy subjects. Such a licence would normally be granted subject to the payment of royalties, and the bill empowers the Attorney-General to give directionsas to the manner in which the licenseeis to pay or to deal with any such royalties. The bill also contains certain provisions in respect of trade marks. It frequently happens that substances are principally, or solely, known according to some trade mark. If such a case occurs in respect of an enemy trade mark, trade in that article would be hampered by reason of the fact that the trade mark could not be used in connexion therewith. The bill provides that in such cases the AttorneyGeneral may suspend the right to the use of the particular trade mark to the degree necessary to render well known and established some description of the article which does not involve the use of the trade mark.

The bill further provides that, notwithstanding the war, patents may be granted, and trade marks, designs and copyrights registered, on the application of an enemy subject, and any act necessary for that purpose is to be deemed a contravention of the Trading with the Enemy Act. Similarly, the international arrangements with respect to patents, trade marks, designs and copyrights are not to be disturbed by reason of the war.

Owing to the dislocation of communications, a considerable delay takes place in lodging and completing applications for patents and the like received from abroad. It is, therefore, proposed to authorize the extension of any period of time fixed under the relevant acts where circumstances arising from the existence of a state of war render that course desirable.

The bill also permits persons in Australia to pay any fee, or do any act, necessary to obtain the grant or renewal of a patent, trade mark or design in an enemy country, and permits an enemy subject to pay any such fee ot do any such act necessary to obtain such a grant in Australia. This provision is desirable in order that Australian subjects may acquire, in Germany, their rights to industrial property. In many cases Australians hold patents in Germany, and one of the conditions of those patents is that their continuance is subject to the payment of periodical renewal fees. The payment, of fees authorized by the provision just mentioned will keep alive Australian industrial property rights in Germany. This provision also empowers the payment of fees in Australia in respect of Australian industrial property rights belonging to enemy subjects. Unless this right be given Lt seems hardly likely that the similar fights proposed to be conferred on Australian subjects would be effective. The clause contains an important limitation that payments on behalf of enemy subjects are to be made only out. of moneys remitted by or held on account of the enemy subject and not by way of gift, advancement or loan. The provisions which I have just mentioned are din.il ar to the provisions of a licence issued under the Trading with the Enemy Act. It is considered preferable that the necessary provisions should be made by Parliament, and i he licence revoked when this measure becomes law. All the provisions of the bill are in consequence of the war. By reason of a recent amendment of the Imperial Patents and Designs Act, certain Orders made by the King in Council which gave effect, in Australia, to the international arrangements for the protection of patents, trade marks and designs, were repealed as from the 1st August, 193S. In order to continue the operation of the international arrangements in Australia it is necessary to make provisions to take the place of the repealed orders in council, and clause 15 provides accordingly. In order to obviate the necessity for introducing a separate bill, the provisions have been included in this measure.. It is proposed to include similar provisions in the comprehensive bill relating to .patents which will be dealt with later. During the committee stage I shall, if requested, supply more detailed information concerning the measure.

Senator COLLINGS:
QueenslandLeader of the Opposition

.- This measure clearly indicates how war disturbs not only relationship with enemy countries, but our relationships in business here in our own country. It is worth emphasizing that in connexion wih patents and copyrights, as with a number of other matters, such as international postal regulations, which are observed by all members of the Postal Union, nations amicably arrive at decisions at the conference table and honour their undertakings until they are disturbed by war. This fact strengthens the hope that some day we shall realize that even disputes between nations are capable of settlement in the same way. This bill is entirely necessary in the circumstances, and, therefore, the Opposition will support it.

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:
Western Australia

– This is purely a war measure, based on a reciprocal arrangement to protect the rights of holders of German patents, trade marks, designs and copyrights in Australia, ana those of holders of Australian patents, trade marks, designs and copyrights in Germany. I should like to know whether the Government intends to prceed with amending legislation to bring the Patents, Trade Marks and Designs Act up to date.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– That bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives.

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:

– I was not aware of that fact. The Minister for Commerce (Senator McLeay) said that care would be taken to protect the interests of Australian holders of patents, copyrights, trade marks and designs issued in enemy countries. I hope that the Nazi administration in Germany will honour its part of this arrangement. However, knowing its capacity for doing things which no other nation does, I have grave doubts, on that point. Therefore, I can only express the hope that Germany will do the decent thing and observe the rights of, not only Australian subjects, but also all British subjects. Another point is the expropriation of enemy property. Although no information has yet been given to honorable senators in this respect, I assume that the Government has already taken steps to organize this intricate work, as was done during the last war.

Senator LAMP:
Tasmania

.- I remind honorable senators that a “ bushranging” organization in this country known as the Australasian Performing Right Association holds the Australian rights of German music. It will be deplorable if that organization is allowed to continue to bleed the Australian public in respect of German music during this war.

Senator WILSON:
South Australia

– I support the measure, because 1 realize that in a time of war the Government is in possession of facts unknown to us. However, I am not enthusiastic about this decision to protect enemy copyrights and patents during the period of the war. We are at war, and I do not trust the German Government to honour its part of this arrangement. Despite any undertakings which it might give or any legislation which it might enact, I do not believe that it will protect Australian rights in Germany. Neither do I think it proper that German copyrights and patents should be protected in Australia during the war. They should be forfeited to the Australian Government for the duration of the war, at any rate. It will be time to make an arrangement of this kind when a new government, a democratic government, assumes office in Germany. I am also concerned about the payment of these fees to German citizens. Australia must conserve all of its resources at the present time in order to strengthen its defences. If money be paid to German citizens it will no doubt be used to assist Germany in fighting against the Empire. That is a distinct danger.

Senator Collings:

– Would the honorable senator rob German citizens resident here of these rights?

Senator WILSON:

– I am referring, not to German citizens resident here, but to holders, resident in Germany, of rights operative in Australia on which royalties are collected in this country. The Minister said that this arrangement was necessary in order to protect Australian patents registered in Germany. I realize that in matters of this kind we must trust the Government, and, believing that it is in possession of facts which have influenced it to introduce this measure at this stage, I shall support the bill. Were it not for that consideration, however, I should feel inclined to oppose the measure until some further guarantee was given that these fees would not be paid to residents in Germany to be used by them in the fight against our Empire.

Senator McLEAY:
Minister for Commerce · South Australia · UAP

in reply- 1 may inform Senator Allan MacDonald that bills to consolidate and amend the law relating to patents and trade marks have been introduced in the House of Representatives. I give the assurance that the Government has carefully considered the points raised by other honorable senators. I am informed that the German Government has already adopted a reciprocal measure.

Senator Wilson:

– The German Government has made many promises, but has never honoured any of them.

Senator McLEAY:

– I assure honorable senators that the Government would not introduce this measure unless it was essential to do so. As these payments will be made under the direction of the Attorney-General, every reasonable safeguard is provided.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

Clauses 1 to 4 agreed to.

Clause 5 (Existing licences by enemy subjects).

Senator WILSON:
South Australia

– I should like to know how many German patents and licences are in operation in Australia and how many Australian patents and licences are in operation in Germany. What amount is anticipated to be paid to German sub- jects in respect of German patents and copyrights registered in this country, and, conversely, what amount will be paid to Australian subjects in respect of similar rights in Germany?

Senator McLEAY:
Minister for Commerce · South Australia · UAP

– The Government’s technical advisers estimate that from 15 per cent, to 20 per cent, of all patents registered in Australia are held by German subjects. At the moment 1 have not the other information asked for by Senator Wilson, but I shall obtain it immediately.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– We may assume that, in respect of the Australian rights of German patents and copyrights acquired on the basis of a capital payment or by assignment, the money involved has already been remitted to Germany. However, in cases in which licences have been acquired under a royalty arrangement, is it intended that the royalties shall be remitted to Germany during the war? Is it intended that the royalties payable, for instance, to that distinguished gentleman, Hitler, in respect of his book Mein Kampf shall be remitted to Germany during the war? If so, will a contra account be kept in respect of royalties collected in Germany in respect of Australian and British licences operative in that country? Or will this money, in subversion of the Trading with the Enemy Act, be remitted to the German Government? That point has not been cleared up.

Senator McLEAY:
Minister for Commerce · South Australia · UAP

– I am informed that the money will be held here and paid out subject to the direction of the Attorney-General.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 6 agreed to.

Clause 7 - (1.) Where the Attorney-General is satisfied that it is difficult or impracticable to describe or refer to any article or substance without the use of a trade mark registered in respect of that article or substance, and that that mark has been, or is, during the present state of war, in the proprietorship of, or registered in the name of, an enemy subject, whether alone or jointly with another person, the Attorney-General may, on the application nf a person who proposes to deal in the course of trade in Australia with an article or substance which is, or is intended to be. the same as. or equivalent to. or a substitute for, the article or substance in respect of which the trade mark is registered, by order, suspend the right to the use of the trade mark given by the registration thereof so far as regards use thereof by the applicant to such extent and for such period as the Attorney-General thinks necessary for enabling the applicant to render well known and established some description of, or means of reference to, the article or substance with which he proposes to deal in the course of trade, being a description or means of reference which does not involve the use of the trade mark.

  1. Where an order has been made under the last preceding sub-section, an action for passing off shall not lie on the part of any person interested in the trade mark in respect of any use thereof which, by virtue of the order, is not an infringement of the right to the use of the trade mark givenby the registration thereof.

Amendments by Senator McLeay agreed to -

That the words “ the right to the use of the trade mark given by the registration thereof so far as regards use thereof “ subclause ( 1 ) be left out with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “ the rights given by the registration of the trade mark so far as’ regards use of the trade mark “.

That the words “ right to the use of the trade mark given by the registration thereof “ sub-clause (2), bc left out with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “rights given by the registration of the trade mark “.

Clause as amended agreed to.

Clause 8 (Effect of war on grant of patents and registration of trade marks, designs, and copyright).

Senator WILSON:
South Australia

– I should like to know from the Minister, whether if, prior to the war, a German gun had been patented in Australia, the existence of that patent would prevent an Australian manufacturer from making that gun now until permission had been obtained from the German patentee?

Senator McLeay:

– No. Permission could be obtained from the Attorney General to manufacture the gun.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 9 to . 17 agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported with amendments ; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 2271

NATIONAL OIL PROPRIETARY LIMITED AGREEMENT BILL 1939

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standingand Sessional Orders suspended.

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

Second Beading.

Senator FOLL:
Minister for the Interior · Queensland · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this bill is to ratify an agreement between the Governments of the Commonwealth and New South Wales, and National Oil Proprietary Limited, approving of the transfer of assets in the form of approximately 180 acres of land now held by the company to the State of New South Wales for the purpose of establishing a town at Glen Davis, popularly known as Newnes. Honorable senators will be aware that National Oil Proprietary Limited was formed for the purpose of developing the shale oil industry in the NewnesCapertee area, and that the Governments of the Commonwealth and New South Wales undertook to advance to the company by way of loan a sum of £500,000- the Commonwealth Government provided £334,000 and the State Government £166,000 - for this purpose.

Under the National Oil Proprietary Limited Agreement Act 1937, the Commonwealth and the State of New South Wales have a lien over the whole of the assets of the company, pending the repayment of advances. This proposedredisposition of assets, therefore, requires the formal approval of Parliament. The area which is the subject of this bill comprises about 120 acres of freehold land held by the company, and an additional 60 acres held under mining lease. The company has made a gift of this land to the Crown for the purpose of establishing a town. The Government of New South Wales has already taken advantage of this generous gift and has passed the necessary legislation.

This measure is a machinery one. Despite the fact that one of the contracting parties, the State of New South Wales, is to take over the land, it is necessary to remove this land from the operation of the charge which the Commonwealth and the State have over it by virtue of the provisions of the act of 1.937.

Much has been said about this new and important industry; about the security and the employment which it will provide. To this we must add another very important consideration - conservation of foreign exchange.

As local government is the province of the State full details of the plans for the town at Glen Davis are embodied in the State act. In the course of the debate on that legislation the Minister for Local Government assured the Legislative Assembly that the Government of New South Wales realized the need to prevent speculators from swamping out those interested. Every safeguard would, therefore, be taken to prevent speculators from buying and holding for a rise of the unimproved value at the expense of some one else. The Minister said that the bill also gave power to the Government to attach certain covenants to the land, and areas would be sold subject to a provision that the purchaser would erect a certain type of building in a given time, otherwise the land would revert to the Crown to which the money paid for it would be forfeited. Further, the Minister stated that an effort would be made to prevent persons from buying more than one block, except in cases where it was necessary to have additional land to carry stores or other buildings.

Mr. G. F. Davis of National Oil Proprietary Limited is now investigating the possibilities of increasing production from 10,000,000 to 30,000,000 gallons of petrol per annum. There are other large deposits of oil shale in Australia, particularly in New South Wales, the limits of which are not known. Geologists tell us that there is a big saucer of shale lying westward as far as Mudgee, north-easterly to Murrurundi with other undefined limits. It might well be, therefore, that if Mr. Davis can successfully produce 30,000,000 gallons of petrol per annum this production will be largely augmented from other sources. Under present known conditions petrol cannot be produced from shale as cheaply as from flow oil. It is estimated that its cost will be about twice that of the pre-war landed price of imported petrol, but it is conceivable that our technicians will be able to reduce this gap. Shale, however, has one very pronounced advantage over flow oil, that we are able to measure seams, analyse their content, and determine accurately what quantities of petrol we shall be able to obtain over a period of years, whereas supplies from oil wells are likely to diminish or become exhausted at any time.

I might mention that the CommonwealthGovernment has for some time past been devoting considerable attention to the search for flow oil in Australia, and, as honorable senators are aware, the Oil Advisory Committeehas been investigating this problem. One of the reasons whythe search for flow oil has been held up is that there has been no uniform legislation in the States.

Senator Allan MacDonald:

– That would not start the oil running.

SenatorFOLL. - No, but it would start people running to this country to conduct the preliminary exploration which is a necessary prelude to the discovery of oil. As the result of the submission to the States at a recent Premiers Conference of a draft of model legislation in relation to oil search, most of the State governments have now passed measures which will bring about uniformity, and make available additional facilities to those whose business is to search for oil. I mention this fact because the Government of Queensland recently entered into what I regard as one of the most excellent arrangements ever made by a government in connexion with the search for oil. The Government of Queensland and the Shell Oil Company have now finalized an agreement whereby a large area of land has been made available to the company for oil searchpurposes, the land diminishing at the rate of 10 per cent, per annum. The result of the agreement will be that this big company will spend something like £300,000 over a period of years in a search for oil in South-west Queensland. I am sure that I am voicing the opinion of all honorable senators when I say that it is sincerely hoped that the efforts to find flow oil in Queensland will be successful. During the last few months I have been closely associated with the search for oil because the Oil Advisory Committee operates in conjunction with the Department of the Interior, and in spite, of many expressions of a contrary opinion I am firmly convinced that big oil companies such as the one to which I have referred have the best chance of finding flow oil in this country or any other country. Statements have frequently been made to the effect that certain interests have endeavoured to prevent the discovery of flow oil in this country, but whatever may have been the position in the past, according to information in the hands of my department the known supplies of oil in the world are diminishing to such a degree and the demand for petrol is so rapidly increasing that I am convinced that there is now a genuine desire on the part of those whose business is the marketing of oil to find new sources of supply and find them quickly in any part of the world. I have digressed from this bill for the moment in order to deal with the agreement entered into by the Government of Queensland, because I should like to compliment that Government on the far-seeing policy it has adopted.

As I have explained, the purpose of this bill is to provide a town - a welllaidout town with all the amenities of uptodate civilization. Without a background of comfortable homes and environment, we cannot expect this important industry to flourish, and I, therefore,. commend the measure to the Senate, feeling sure that it will be accorded the fullest support of all parties.

Debate (on motion by Senator Ashley ) ad jou rned .

page 2273

REVISED ESTIMATES 1939-40

Debate resumed from the 6th December (vide page 2153), on motion by Senator McBride -

Thatthepapersbeprinted.

Senator CLOTHIER:
Western Australia

. -Yesterday Senator Aylett and Senator Lamp spoke at length on the subject of the fruit-growing industry. In fairness to the Government, I think that, judging by the interest taken by the Minister in a recent deputation on this subject, we have nothing to fear. I am satisfied that the Government will do its utmost on behalf of the fruit-growers. Western Australia has only comparatively recently engaged in fruit-growing for the export market. Unfortunately, this year, through no fault of the fruit-growers, there has been insufficient cargo space in ships calling at Albany and other ports of that State.

Senator Allan MacDonald:

– There will be less cargo space still if no expeditionary force goes away.

Senator CLOTHIER:

– That may be, but I shall not deal, with that point for the moment. Had boats been calling at Albany for wool they could have topped off their cargoes with fruit. Grave concern at the outlook for apple and pear producers as the result of the war has been expressed by the Fruit Growers Association. Commonwealth-wide action to protect the industry is claimed to be necessary as well . as government acquisition of the crops. The position in Western Australia is much worse than it is in any other State. I admit that the Government is experiencing difficulty in” arranging the necessary shipping space for the carriage of fruit to overseas markets, but I suggest that it could relieve the growers by co-operation with the various States in a determined effort to have surplus fruit purchased by Commonwealth and State governments and distributed among school children and the inmates of various institutions throughout Australia. Prac-tical application should be given to the old .adage “An apple a day keeps the doctor away:” I fail to see why an apple a’ day could not be supplied to all school children in the same way as milk is supplied to them. Unfortunately the parents of a great many of the children are not in a sufficiently good economic position to purchase the fruit, but if regular employment at reasonable wages was provided for all in need of it the working man could afford to buy apples for his family, and the troubles of the orchardist would automatically disappear. There is something wrong with our economic system when it forces our producers to export, their fruit, overseas because the people of Australia have no money to buy it. I mention this because the Minister stated that, should the people of Australia each eat an apple a day, that would solve the problem of disposing of our fruit. If our people were all working and earning a good living, they would, I am sure, buy the fruit. Now that the war has deprived the producers of their overseas markets, surely we should put our own home markets on such a basis as could enable all Australians to buy the fruit that they require. This would be a sane and sensible policy, and would provide a market for the producers that would permanently return to them a payable price.

I received a letter from a fruitgrower in Western Australia, and immediately I took it to the Minister for Commerce for his perusal in view of the fact that a deputation was to wait upon him two days later. The letter stated -

My reason for wiring you was that I. saw your name in connexion with a deputation to the Government, re the Apple and Pear Scheme; While far from what might suit the bulk of farmers, especially regards price, the whole idea is an honest attempt to do something.

Unfortunately the people concerned with drafting it (presumably the Department of Commerce) don’t know the pitfalls of a scheme such as they have put out and as the Minister naturally will be guided, apart from policy, by departmental reports the less tinkering with details the better, especially with varieties. For example, we once ran a pool here in Mount Barker, every case of apples put in the cold stores for long storage was in it, each variety being a separate pool.

Trouble then arose because, and rightly so, growers of good- fruit wanted a premium on growers of inferior, so in the case of Yates apples alone the result was a division into 2J”, 2i”, 2i”, 2i” and these were again subdivided into plain, fancy and extra- fancy: therefore 12 pools were run for this variety alone and as money was available immediately on sales., this could be done, but was costly and cumbersome.

Now take the case of the Australian crop. Each State will claim a premium on its fruit and again according to how each variety ranks in each State a premium will be demanded accordingly. Take a case in point - this last year Dunn’s seedling from Western Australia easily beat Cleopatra and Jonathan on the London markets. In Victoria in most cases, especially Gippsland way, the Dunn is a third sale apple and very much the same apples to Tasmania. If we could analyse the results after marketing, well and good, but payment has to be made in advance, on a purely speculative estimate. I think I have said enough to illustrate my point and I think you are interested enough to follow my line of argument, which I hope you will, if necessary, impress on your colleagues from Western Australia.

I was interested to hear some remarks made yesterday by Senator Abbott concerning a young man who had unfortunately lost a leg. It so happens that a similar case in Western Australia had come under my notice. Several members of Parliament in both the State and the Federal spheres have tried to obtain a pension for the young man referred to by Senator Abbott, and I also have been unsuccessful in my efforts to obtain similar assistance for the young person in Western Australia. Most of the jobs as lift attendants have been secured by returned soldiers and the lot of young men who have the misfortune to meet with accidents involving the loss of a limb is particularly hard.

Six or seven months ago, I suggested to the Government that Australia should have its own territorial troops, organized on a permanent basis. The more I have read about the present war the firmer has my opinion become that the time has arrived when permanent troops should be stationed throughout Australia. Many youNg men now unemployed, but who are anxious to marry, would be able to realize their ambition if they could obtain permanent employment in such a force. First, I suggested that the strength of. this force should be about 20,000, but, even if it were only half that number, it would be better than none at all. These troops should be stationed in each of the States, and they would be most useful in assisting in the training of the ordinary Militia.

I do not approve of sending Australian troops overseas, because they are needed for the defence of this country. We have a long coastline to protect, and, if our potential enemies knew that the pick of our men had been sent overseas, our peril would be increased. Any country that intended to attack Australia would be well aware that the flower of the nation’s manhood had been sent overseas with its expeditionary force.

Senator MCBRIDE:
Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Commerce · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– :Not necessarily so.

Senator CLOTHIER:

– At any rate, older men, -like the Assistant Minister and myself j would not be accepted for overseas service. It has been learned since the outbreak of war that attacking aeroplanes are not so dangerous to warships as experts hitherto believed. I base that statement on the following article recently published in a newspaper: -

The experience of the war in Europe goes to show that aeroplanes are not very effective weapons against ships. We could be attacked from the sea. Certainly the existence in Australia of a powerful air force might be a strong deterrent to a power with hungry eyes on Australia, but the knowledge that in addition, a trained standing army was ready to meet a foreign challenge, would greatly increase the margin of security..

It stands to reason, therefore, that any enemy would regard Australia as a fairly easy victim once troops were sent away from our shores.

A few months ago I asked the Government to establish a post office at Inglewood, in Western Australia. I notice that the Estimates contain a provision of £122,000 for additions, new works and buildings. There is a possibility that a further £660,000 may be expended on works, and I again appeal to the Government to use some of that money to provide a po3t office at Inglewood.

Senator Collett:

– The necessary land has been purchased.

Senator CLOTHIER:

– When I made my first application I was informed by the Postmaster-General that £300 had been earmarked for the purchase of the land, and £1,600 for the postal service. The population in the Inglewood district is large enough to justify the erection of a post office, and under the present arrangement, old-age pensioners have to travel many miles to collect their pension payments. I only learned by chance that a site was -.under consideration when- 1 made application to the Bayswater Roads Board in connexion with some land. The board, informed me that it proposed practically to give away a certain area in lieu of a block which it wished to retain. When I mentioned that to the Minister, he told me that had he known of the attitude of the board he would not have earmarked £300 for the purchase of land at Inglewood. However, I do not believe that a class A reserve could be given away by the Roads Board, because such a transaction must be authorized by the State Parliament in the usual way.

I appeal to the Government to provide employment during the Christmas season and afterwards for as many men as possible in order that they may be able to buy fruit for their children, and in that way also assist the growers.

Senator COOPER:
Queensland

.- I take advantage of the licence granted in this debate to bring some important matters to the attention of the Government. That which concerns me chiefly is the provision of broadcasting facilities for residents of remote country areas. For about four years past I have been endeavouring to persuade the Broadcasting Commission to erect an A class regional station in order to provide a service for people living in the central and north-western districts of Queensland, but up to the present my efforts have not met with success. I regard the radio as not merely a, means of providing entertainment for people in distant localities, but also as an essential medium of news, so that in these anxious times they may be kept abreast of current affairs in the outside world. Many of the people living to the west of Longreach have to rely for news upon a mail service which provides deliveries once a week, and in some of the further outback areas, only once a fortnight, or even once a month. During the wet season, which is now approaching, mails, may be delayed for as long as sixteen weeks ; in the district from which I come I have known delays of .fifteen weeks to occur. The Broadcasting Commission has sufficient money to provide a. broadcasting service for those distant areas. Its balance-sheet for the year ended the 30th June, 1939, showed that it had in government securities and other investments, with accrued interest, an amount of £251,748 10s. 6d. .That amount is kept in reserve and does not include a large sum that the commission lias in hand for working expenses; nor does it include plant and buildings, all of which are paid for. Such an accumulation suggests that the commission has the money necessary to provide a daily news service of ten or twelve minutes’ duration for the outback districts.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– It also suggests that the listener’s fee can be reduced.

Senator Gibson:

– No; .that would be n mistake.

Senator COOPER:

– .[ do not suggest that myself, but these men and women outback pay as much towards the revenue of the commission as do city residents, hut they are getting a much less satisfactory service. For some years past a national regional station has been promised for this district but, up to the present, one has not been built. It is realized that, at the present time, all our finance will be needed for defence and the prospect of an A class station being built is remote. For the time being the commission could make use of B class station 4LG Longreach, which gives a very good service to distant country areas. But it is almost impassible in those districts, during the summer months, from about November to the end of March, to obtain clear day-time reception from any A class station in the Commonwealth. In the course of my inquiries I was informed that that difficulty would be overcome with the establishment of the new short-wave station VLR in Victoria. That was not very helpful, because most of the people on whose behalf I am speaking do not possess dual-wave receiving sets. If they wish to listen to station VLR they must scrap their old sets and buy new ones capable of receiving short-wave broadcasts. From my own experience, I can state that station VLR has proved a failure, as far as the- people in central and north-western Queensland are concerned. The seventh annual report of the Australian Broadcasting Commission, referring to station VLR, stated-

The aerial power of Short Wave Station VLR at Lyndhurst, Victoria, was increased from 1,000 to 2,000 watts on 1st October, 1038. In addition to this increase in power, changes in frequency were made from time to time in attempts to improve reception in those remote parts of Australia for which VLR’s service was primarily intended. The alternative frequencies were -(riven the call sign VLB3. “

Listeners in distant parts of the Commonwealth arc relying more and more on the Commission’s short-wave service as their main programme supply. This increasing interest has drawn more attention to the vexations question of interference from overseas transmitters operating on similar frequencies. Arrangements are now being made to raise VLB’s power to 10,000 watts. Short-wave stations in other parts of the world, however, use considerably greater power.

That proves conclusively that the station has failed to give the service expected of it. Because of that, I requested the Postmaster-‘General that B class station 4LG, which is giving excellent service to the people in central and north-western

Queensland, should be permitted to relay at least one of the daily news broadcasts from the national stations. On the 27 th November, the Postmaster-General replied to my representations in the following terms: -

Under the plan recently drawn up for the dissemination of news, following the conference convened by the Minister for Information, tho matter of arrangements for the transmission by commercial stations of news items is entirely the responsibility of the licensees. The plan was adopted after a very careful consideration of all the factors involved, and the post office has no power to concur in any departure from the scheme agreed to by the various parties concerned. It is impracticable, therefore, to permit 4LG to participate in the Australian Broadcasting Commission’s national news relay.

During the first week of the war station 4LG was supplied by the commission with a news service three times daily, and letters were received from listeners over a wide area expressing appreciation of the reception, and of the fact that news of current events could be received so promptly. At the end of a week the service was discontinued, and station 4LG was asked to defray the cost of the relays. Those in control of the station said that they were not in any way committed, and declined to meet the cost. If a news service could be made available for the period mentioned listeners naturally want to know why it was discontinued. The Postmaster-General (Mr. Harrison) informed me some months ago that when the national broadcasting station at Dalby was in operation there would be no ground for complaint; but I have received reports from listeners in the far west and the south-west stating that the reception was unsatisfactory and that the station was of no benefit to them. I also requested the Postmaster-General to ask the commission if settlers in an area three times the size of Victoria could not receive some benefit from the national broadcasting system, and I was informed that the station at Longreach should install the necessary equipment to enable’ it to pick up the relay from the Daventry station of the British Broadcasting Corporation. Small stations cannot afford to purchase expensive equipment. On the 1st December, I asked the PostmasterGeneral the following question: -

What would be the cost that the broadcasting commission would have to pay to the Postmaster-General’s Department for tho use of a ground line relaying a twelve-minute news service daily.

The Postmaster-General replied - £1 16s. 8d. between 9 a.m. and ti p.m. £1 lis. 8d. between G p.m. and !) p.m. aif between 7 a.m. and 0 a.m.; and £1 .(is. 46 between 9 p.m. and 7 a.m. The charges specified include the time occupied in preparing the trunk line for broadcast transmission purpose! and the use of a special splitting equipment at Rockhampton.

I also asked whether the cost would be at a lower ratio if three twelveminute news services were given daily, and I was informed that it would not. Station 4LG may be willing to pay the £1 16s. 8d. mentioned by the Minister if it were permitted to take the news from A class stations, but for some reason news transmitted by such stations cannot be broadcast through B class stations. Possibly the Postmaster-General believes that if such a concession were given to one station a precedent would be established. Under the National Security Act, the Government has very extensive powers, and it should not be difficult for it to provide by regulations that for a time at least the Australian Broadcasting Commission should provide a reasonable service to those people on whose behalf I am speaking.

Senator Allan MacDonald:

– Cannot they receive programmes through the national stations?

Senator COOPER:

– Apparently the nearest national stations are not sufficiently powerful or the physical feature? of the country are Such that it is impossible to obtain satisfactory reception, particularly in the summer months. If station 4LG were permitted to transmit the news service broadcast through the national stations, it would benefit not only the residents of the outback portions of Queensland but also settlers in the Northern Territory. About eighteen months ago when I accompanied the then Minister for the Interior (Mr. McEwen) on a tour through the Northern Territory a wireless receiving set was carried on one of the utility trucks. When- we were on the border of Western Australia and the Northern Territory in the vicinity of

Argyle station I asked the operator in charge of the set whether he could pick up 4LG, which he did. Show week festivities in Longreach were in progress, and one of the principal functions was a ball which was attended -by the Governor, Sir Leslie Wilson. The proceedings were being broadcast. During the evening the debutantes were presented to His Excellency, and the transmission was so satisfactory that I could hear, not only the names of the ladies, but also the remarks made to them by the Governor when they were presented. It would appear, therefore, that the Australian Broadcasting Commission could readily provide a satisfactory service to the people in the outback portions of Queensland.

Senator Allan MacDonald:

– Cannot those settlers hear the programmes broadcast from the Queensland national stations?

Senator COOPER:

– The reception from such stations is satisfactory only during winter evenings. Throughout the summer the reception during the day and also at night is very poor. The commission should provide a twelve-minute news broadcast daily between noon and 1 p.m.

Senator Keane:

– Why is not such a service provided ?

Senator COOPER:

– I understand that B class stations are not permitted to relay news transmitted by A class stations. The Postmaster-General also said, in reply to a letter from Mr. McKeon, of Longreach, who has made representations on behalf of 4LG -

I would suggest to Mr. McKeon, however, that he might more fully explore the possibility of utilizing the British Broadcasting Commission short-wave service, keeping in mind that the installation of suitably designed equipment should enable the satisfactory reception of certain of the several Daventry transmissions intended- for listeners in this country, and which are availed of by other broadcasting organizations in the Commonwealth.

B class broadcasting stations cannot be expected to incur the expense of installing equipment to enable them to pick up short-wave stations, and many settlers cannot afford to scrap their present sets and purchase dual-ware equipment. Residents in the capital cities merely have1 to communicate with a trader who will install a radio set for several days on trial without any obligation, but settlers in remote areas of Queensland who have to buy from Townsville or Brisbane for cash have also to incur heavy freight charges. Because of the cost involved, they cannot return a set -which they consider unsatisfactory. I believe that 4LG is the only B class station in Aus-= tralia -providing a service which should be provided by an A class station.

Silting suspended from 12.J/5 to 2.15 p.m.

Senator COOPER:

– I direct attention to the personnel of the board. Mr. W. J. Cleary, the chairman, is a resident of Sydney. So also is Mr. R. B. Orchard, one of the commissioners. Mr. H. R. Brookes, the vice-chairman, and Mrs. E. M. R. Couchman, a commissioner, live in Melbourne. The fifth member, Mr. J. W. Kitto, was formerly an officer in the department of the Postmaster-General. He, too, resides in Sydney. If it is the intention of the Government to make any change in the personnel of the board, it should appoint a representative of country interests - some one who has had actual experience of country life and is conversant with the needs of the people. It is quite easy for residents of our capita] cities and practically all towns throughout Australia to obtain a good national news service merely by switching on their wireless receivers. Many country listeners, particularly those living in. the outback areas of Queensland, Western Australia and South Australia, are in a much less favoured position. Some cannot obtain a satisfactory wireless broadcasting service from existing stations because of unfavourable climatic conditions. In the western part of Queensland there is an area three times the size of Victoria in which the residents have to put up with a very unsatisfactory service from our national stations. It would be possible for them to get a fairly good service through a. B class station, but I understand the Wireless Broadcasting Act prohibits the transmission of a national programme through commercial stations. The commission has in reserve over £250,000. A completely new broadcasting service for the area which I have mentioned could, if permission were granted, be relayed from the nearest national broadcasting station at. Rockhampton to Longreach, whence it could be relayed from 4LG. .1 am informed that a twelve-minute news service three times a day would cost £33 a week, and a twelve-minute service once a clay, between, say, noon and 1 p.m., would cost only £11 a week. Since the outbreak of the war the Government has been given authority to do practically anything by regulation. I suggest that the Minister representing the Postmaster-General should bring before his colleague in Cabinet the desirability oS> using these regulations to give an improved wireless service to outback districts. People living in the western and south-western parts of Queensland are naturally intensely interested in current world events, and they consider that they are entitled to be informed of happenings with the least possible delay. Doubtless many of them will soon have sons serving in the 2nd Australian Imperial Force overseas, and as possibly there will be casualties, it is only right that the speediest medium of news should be available to them. I strongly urge the Government to give them a better service through the stations of the Broadcasting Commission.

Before I deal with the matter of the purchase of the Australian wool clip by the Government of Great Britain, I would like to mention my appreciation of the difficult task with which the Department of Commerce was confronted in bringing this huge deal to a satisfactory conclusion. The matter of appraisement is of vital importance to north Queensland. The decision of the Government to have only one wool appraisement centre for that State, namely, Brisbane, is giving concern to northern growers. Townsville, the largest northern seaport, is approximately 800 miles from Brisbane. Its general export of wool exceeds that of Brisbane itself. It is also the shipping port for a large hinterland. Last year approximately 100,000 bales were shipped from Townsville, even after a ten-year drought. In normal seasons between 150,000 and 175,000 hales are shipped from that port. Under existing arrangements all wool from the central and north-west districts must be transhipped from either Rockhampton or Townsville to Brisbane for appraisement, at considerable cost because of the extra handling involved. New South Wales and Victoria each have three appraisement -centres, Western Australia and Tasmania each have two, and South Australia has one. Hobart and Launceston, the two appraisement centres in’ Tasmania, are approximately 130 miles apart. In the last season Hobart shipped 28,445 bales and Launceston 31,453 bales, making the total for the State 59,798 bales. Compare that with Townsville, which last season shipped approximately 100,000 bales. If there were an appraisement centre at Townsville, the wool could be placed in the store immediately, appraised there and shipped from that port. There would be no double handling, as at present, and the saving to the growers would be approximately 10s. a bale. Small growers would appreciate the saving effected by the establishment of an appraisement centre at Townsville. This arrangement would also release coastal shipping for other essential services, because at present the bulk of the wool is sent to Brisbane by sea, rail transport being too costly. It has ‘ been suggested that it would be difficult to get overseas ships to call at Townsville, but as I shall later explain, there is ample trade at that port to warrant overseas ships calling there. The establishment of an appraisement centre at Townsville would also enable the work to be done more quickly, as well as more economically, because of improved means of communication. Twenty-five years ago Townsville was not linked up with the south by rail; to-day it is. The same objections were advanced to the establishment of Brisbane as a wool-selling centre about 28 years ago. Naturally Sydney interests wished to retain the immense trade done in the selling of Queensland wool in that city, and the objection was raised that if auction sales were held in Brisbane, it would be inconvenient for wool buyers to attend the auctions. But once the sales were established at the northern capital, no difficulty whatever was experienced in securing the attendance of buyers. Conditions of transport are entirely different to-day. A buyer can leave Sydney by air in the morning and arrive in Townsville at night, ready to attend to his business on the following day. Distance is not now a factor in these matters. It would be much more economical for an appraiser to attend at Townsville, where all work could be done, if that town were a wool appraisement centre, than to send the wool south SOO miles to Brisbane for appraisement. “ Townsville is only half a day’s journey from Brisbane. No difficulty should be experienced in shipping wool from Townsville direct to European markets.

Dealing with shipping, I might also mention Mackay, where shipping has increased considerably since a new harbour was completed there a little while ago. However, the three northern ports, Townsville, Cairns and Bowen, handle over 1,000,000 tons of freight, inward and outward, annually. Of this total 650,000 tons of raw materials is shipped direct to Europe. In- addition the value of production in the hinterland served by these three ports is £15,000,000 annually. Honorable senators will realize, therefore, that the proposition I am now making is well worth while. At a conservative estimate, 100,000 bales of wool, weighing 15,000 tons, will be cleared from these ports, chiefly Townsville, within the next twelve months. In addition, the British Government will lift from these ports 20,000 tons of beef and beef products, 400,000 tons of sugar, and some hundreds of thousands of tons of metal consigned from Mount Isa. Most of this cargo will be cleared at Townsville. In view of these figures, any arrangement under -which the 15,000 tons of dumped wool could be shipped direct to overseas markets would be of tremendous advantage. I feel sure that shipowners would be only too pleased to fall in with such an arrangement, because wool can be easily carried with refrigerated cargoes, or with sugar, Wool can be conveniently stacked, and does not shift in the hold.

Senator Gibson:

– Would not extra storage have to be provided at Townsville for this wool?

Senator COOPER:

– Yes; but I feel sure that the wool firms would provide such storage only too readily if a selling centre were established at Townsville. An agitation for this has been proceeding for some time, the main argument advanced in favour of the pro- posal being that if wool sales were held in Townsville, the wool could be shipped direct overseas, thus obviating the necessity for transporting it -800 miles south to Brisbane. The growers would finance a scheme of their own, providing the cost of wool up to £50,000 by a levy of 10s. a bale on their wool. This would represent the 10s. a bale saved on shipping costs to Brisbane. I urge the Government to give to this suggestion very serious consideration. I know, of course, that it will encounter considerable opposition from certain interests. However, it should recognize the enormous development which has taken place in North Queensland during the last quarter of a century. That fact must be recognized sooner or later. The people who urge this proposal do not ask for any assistance from the Government, but simply ask that the facilities which I have mentioned be established at Townsville in order to enable this important volume of trade to be handled more economically and efficiently. In view of the increase of primary production in northern Queensland, surely that request is reasonable. If Townsville be made a selling centre for wool, the wool can be shipped direct overseas by the old British India northern route, and the space previously used in shipping this wool 800 miles south to Brisbane will be made available for the heavy coastal trade in such cargoes as sugar, fruit and other northern products. A definite need exists for this improvement, particularly in view of the accumulations of wool which will take place in the different selling centres under the new appraisement scheme.

Some days ago I asked a question concerning the nationality of persons who have been appointed as wool appraisers. I do not think that any honorable senator has any grave objection to the appointment as appraisers of buyers from foreign countries who previously operated at our wool sales. However, I suggest that in the making of such appointments preference should be given to Australian buyers, whose qualifications for the position cannot be questioned.

I shall now deal briefly with the proposal of the Government to despatch the 2nd Australian Imperial Force overseas.

Front the speeches of honorable senators opposite on this subject I can only conclude that the policy of the Labour party is not to send any troops abroad. Australia’s front line is the Maginot Line. We should realize that if the French and British armies be defeated on that line, Australia also will be beaten. Consequently, we should be prepared to help to defend, that line, not only by supplying wheat, wool and meat for the needs of British and French ([oops, but also by backing up with men our Allies in the field. Wo are certainly making a big contribution in this country towards the allied cause in the manufacture of war material. Honorable senators opposite also contended that the sacrifices arising from the war should be borne by all sections of the community in ‘ proportion to their ability to bear them. From a cablegrain from London published in the Telegraph, Sydney, a week ago I noticed that . Great Britain’s war expenditure amounts to £2,400,000,000 a year, or slightly over £50 par capita of Britain’s population, and half of the total national income. It is pointed out that 10,000 persons in Great Britain have an annual income of .£10,000 or more, the total of these incomes being £180,000,000. Of that amount the Government is -taking by way of income tax and surtax £120,000,000, whilst it is also estimated that, these people will contribute during the next year a further £40,000,000 in death duties. Therefore, of their total annual incomes of £180,000,000. these people will contribute £160,000,000 to the Government during the next twelve months. ‘ This fact should satisfy every one that Great Britain is extracting the last farthing from that section of the people best able to bear the financial burdens arising from war. In addition, the people of Britain individually are making a magnificent contribution to their country’s defences. In view of this fact Australia, which is an integral part of the British Commonwealth of Nations, cannot merely sit back and wait for the outcome of the war. Every man and woman in this country believes that Australia should give some tangible evidence of its recognition of the part it should play in. defence, not only of Great Britain, but also of the Empire as a whole. We can best do that by assisting the British armies in the field.

Senator BROWN:
Queensland

– .Subject to whatever limits are imposed upon the discussion by the President, the debate on this financial statement gives to honorable senators an opportunity to touch upon the subjects and grievances nearest to their hearts. For many years Senator Cooper has been dealing with the subject to which he has just referred* and so also has the honorable member for Kennedy (Mr. Riordan) in the House of Representatives. 1 understand that Mr. Riordan has approached four different PostmastersGeneral on the subject. He has made submissions at great length, written many letters, participated in several deputations to the various PostmastersGeneral, but still the Longreach district is without its national wireless station, and the many thousands of listeners in the vast area of which Longreach is the centre are denied the privileges that are given to people in other parts of Australia. To speak in good Australian language, the Government and the Australian Broadcasting Commission are robbing these people by taking from them £1 a year for radio licences, and giving them only 5s. worth of service in return. If an ordinary trader did the same thing he would be prosecuted. It has been definitely shown that the people to whom I have referred are being denied the same facilities as are offered to wireless listeners in other parts of Australia, and despite the representations made in this Parliament by various honorable senators and honorable members in another place, this state of affairs continues.

Recently I received a letter from the Longreach branch of the Australian Labour party asking for assistance in this matter. The letter points out that, radio reception from the national stations in those outback areas is limited to three months of the year. That bears out the arguments advanced by Senator Cooper. These people ask merely that the Postmaster-General’s Department shall allow one national relay daily from Rockhampton at trunk line rates to the Longreach B class station; alternatively, that permission be given to obtain the news from a Brisbane news agency, an assurance being given that the matter would be published in the Longreach Leader. In view of the fact that Senator Cooper is one,of its staunchest supporters, surely the Government can see its way clear to grant that small concession, and so do the fair thing by those many thousands of men, women and children who are living in isolated areas out west. Those people are suffering great disabilities owing to their remoteness from populated centres, and any one who has lived in the isolated portions of Queensland will know just how serious their disabilities are. Possibly the reason why this long-standing request has not been granted is that there are too few people affected. Apart from Longreach, the settlers are scattered over many hundreds of square miles, and with only one vote to each man and to each woman, little political pressure can be brought to bear. Possibly if a few hundred thousand people were concerned, . the Government would see its way clear to do something; but this Government of city magnates only looks after the cities, especially Melbourne. Just how the vested interests of Sydney and Melbourne are catered for in this Parliament has been demonstrated time and time again. To honorable senators opposite I say, “ You are the Government party, and you are supported by Senator Cooper and his party; why don’t you do the fair thing and grant what he asks?”

Senator Cooper:

– We are right behind the Government.

Senator BROWN:

Senator Cooper does his duty as a good Country party member; he is backing up the Government - perhaps I should say, backing and filling! The Country party is a collection of people who are experts at backing and filling. They are men of promise, but very little performance. Senator Cooper and Mr. Riordan have dealt with the question of radio facilities for the Longreach district time and time again, and the file in the office of the Postmaster-General relating to that subject must be very nearly as big as the file dealing with the Brisbane Post Office.

Senator McBride:

– I hope it has more justification andfoundation.

Senator BROWN:

– I shall not say anything about the foundations for the moment because they have not yet been laid down. Some day, perhaps 50 or 100 years hence, they will be.

I have another grievance to which I should like to refer. This Government, and in fact all of us, are making an appeal on behalf of the defence of this country. We of the Labour party have declared ourselves inflexibly behind the British Government in the prosecution of this war to a. successful conclusion. But once again, as in the last war, we find flamboyant patriotic appeals being made by sentimentalists. In 1914 we were told that this was a war to end war and that this land would be made fit for heroes to live in; nothing would be too good for our soldiers when, they returned. In a popular magazine which is doing splendid work by bringing under the notice of the people just what conditions do exist in Great Britain and other parts of the Empire - I refer to the New Era - I. recently read the following interesting statement by Mr. Churchill : -

My war aim is the breaking down of the barrier which stands between the wage-earners and masses and the more abundant life which science has made possible.

In the same paper appears the following statement by Mr. Anthony Eden: -

Out of the welter of suffering to be endured, we must fashion a new world that will bo something better’ than the stale reflection of the old, bled white.

To those statements is added a similar pronouncement by the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies). They speak of the world that is to be when the war is over ‘and the exploiting lion lies down with the exploited lamb. They would have us believe that there will be peace for all in the days that are to come. As to this, I recall the lines of William Morris -

Come hither lads and harken,

For a tale there is to tell,

Of the good days acoming,

When all will be better than well.

That well expresses the sentiment that was abroad in 1914, as if is again to-day.

Senator McBride:

– Surely the honorable senator does not object to that.

Senator BROWN:

– No. Sentiment plays a big part in the world, and by uttering fine sentiments men have prepared the way to better things;but it is not sufficient merely to be sentimental.

In 1914 I stood on a street corner near the post office in Brisbane, and I listened to a recruiting appeal. The speaker told his audience of the world that was to be, and he quoted the words of the famous American writer, Ingersoll. I wrote the words down subsequently and the other day I came across the old book in which they are written. They are as follows - 1 see a world without a slave. Man at last is free.

Nature’s forces have by science been enslaved.

Lightning and light, wind and wave, frost and flame, and all the secret subtle powers of the earth and air are .the tireless toilers for the human race.

I see a world at peace, adorned with every form of art, with music’s myriad voices thrilled, while lips are rich with words of love and truth; a world in which no exile sighs, no prisoner mourns, a, world on which the gibbet’s shadow does not fall: a world where labour reaps its full reward, where work and worth go hand in hand . . .

I see a world without the beggar’s outstretched palm, the miser’s heartless stony stare, the piteous wail of want, the livid lips of lies, the cruel eyes of scorn.

I see a race without disease of flesh or brain, shapely and fair, married harmony of form and function, and as I look life lengthens, joy deepens, love canopies the earth, and over all in the great dome, shines the eternal star of human hope.

The speaker declaimed those words much more effectively than I am able to do, and, along with other members of the audience, I was deeply affected. But looking back over the years I recall some of the men who went to the front in response to such patriotic appeals. I saw mighty hosts gathered into camps and sent overseas to fight the battle of freedom and the war that was to end war. But let us consider for a moment the fate of those who did their bit in the last war. Many returned with nerves shattered, bones broken, and bodies mutilated; today many are neglected, and the Government has failed to meet its obligations to them. One man in particular whom T know personally has references which speak very highly of his character and his ability. He was injured in the last war and he has asked the Government only for medical facilities. He cannot .continue his work as ‘ a dental mechanic because of the injuries which he suffered. His appeal to the tribunal which deals with such matters was unsuccessful. T approached the gentleman who is in charge of such matters and was informed that the man’s disabilities were not due to his waT injuries or service. The facts, however,, show that his disabilities are definitely due to the war. This man is only asking that, until the tribunal sits again in Brisbane six months hence, he shall be provided with medical attention. But the Government says, “ No ; it is not in the bond “. That case is only one of many. How can the Government make its sentimental appeals to the best in human nature when it treats unfortunate victims of the last war in this manner? The returned soldier to whom I have referred is asking only for medical assistance, but his appeals are being ignored. He has been informed that he will have to face the tribunal again. That is all the Government can do for men who have fought and bled for Australia.

This appeal for unity recalls to my mind another matter which I should like to bring before the notice of honorable senators. Despite differences of opinion with regard to such matters as overseas service, we in this chamber all believe in unity, and it is our hope that Australians will thoroughly unite in order to ensure that the democracy of Australia and of the British Commonwealth of Nations shall not be destroyed by Nazi-ism. But if there is to be unity in our national life during this conflict and after its termination, the workers of this country must be treated .properly. I have received from the Waterside Workers Federation of Australia a letter making representations on behalf of waterside workers in - the Innisfail ‘district. It states -

Dear sir.

At a public protest meeting held in the Regent Theatre. Innisfail, on Friday, the 1st December, which was attended by about 300 residents of the district, the following resolution was passed with a request that it be forwarded to you and others of the Federal Government : -

Resolution moved and seconded by Mr. F. Graham and Mr. L. Proudsley.- We, the citizens of Innisfail and district,, desire to bring before your notice the grave possibility of industrial unrest if the Shipping Companies Association and its allied steamship owners are allowed to introduce contract-sugar loading at Mourilyan Harbour to the detriment of the livelihood of 80 watersiders who hare always! efficiently loaded the sugar of this district into vessels at award wages and conditions.

To honorable senators that may appear to bo only a minor matter, but’ it is the aggregation of such minor matters which causes disturbances amongst the workers of this country. How can the Government expect the workers to be united in their support of Australia in this time of crisis if they are to be thrown out of employment? How can they be expected to wave the flag, cheer and fight enthusiastically for democracy if democracy will not give them a job ? If unity among the workers is desired, then continuity of employment and wages must be guaranteed to them, so that they can adequately provide for themselves, their wives and children. I have previously complained in the Senate that, owing to the closing down of the sewerage works in Brisbane, more than 1,000 men have been thrown out of work and have no prospect of securing employment. Many of them are more than 40 years of age. They were doing useful work on an undertaking that should have been carried out 50 years ago. They have been thrown on to the unemployment market owing to the stupidity of our financial system. No doubt Senator Darcey will back me up in this matter. I asked a question regarding this matter, but it was not permitted to appear on the notice-paper. I asked whether there was any ethical difference between mcn and women being starved in Australia, under a friendly government composed of tories, and being starved in Great Britain or Germany.

Senator McBRIDE:

– Let the honorable senator go to Germany and try it.

Senator BROWN:

– What difference is there between starving men and women in a land of plenty, such as Australia., and starving them in Germany? . I recognize, of course, that the shortage of food in Germany is due to the British blockade, and I am not criticizing the war measures of Great Britain. As a matter of fact, governments in Australia are to be blamed more than those in some countries overseas, because there is no shortage here of the good things of life.

Senator McBride:

– There is no starvation here.

Senator BROWN:

– There is. In all capital cities many men are out of work, and many ‘ women and children are unable to obtain the bodily nourishment they need.

The various public works that should be put in hand to provide employment for the people do not necessitate the importation of materials from abroad since all can be made in Australia. There is no economic reason why these works should not be put in hand. The Water and Sewerage Board in Sydney has recently discharged 4,000 men. Would the Government put off 4,000 soldiers in Sydney, or 1,500 soldiers in Brisbane, because of a shortage of money? Not a single soldier will be discharged on the ground of shortage of funds, and, therefore, the Opposition claims that the industrial soldier, also, should be kept at work. He has just as much right to be looked after as has the military man who goes into the danger zone. Our troops should certainly be paid a higher rate that they are to receive. They should get at least as much as the workers in industry. The Government is backing up the present financial system, which, in all countries, looks after the pockets of the “ money hogs “ in preference to giving attention to the welfare of the people.

Senator Dein:

– According to the honorable senator there is a very poor government in Queensland.

Senator BROWN:

– A report by Mr. Foley, M.L.A., shows that Queensland has the smallest number of unemployed in the Commonwealth, although it enjoys the highest wages, ‘the shortest working week, and the lowest cost of living of all the States. The Government of Queensland, like the governments of the other States, cannot solve the financial and unemployment problems, because it has not the necessary legislative power over financial policy. Honorable senators have just heard tributes by the Minister for the Interior (Senator Foll) and Senator Cooper to the excellent work that has been accomplished in that State under the leadership of the Premier, Mr. Forgan Smith.

I appreciated the effective speech concerning the Government’s financial statement recently made by Senator Cameron. The words quoted by the honorable senators are identical with those underlined by me in reading the statement. I was struck by the changed outlook indicated, compared with that of 25 years ago. Even crusted old tories move ahead, but -the present Government is moving very slowly. The people of Australia fromCape York to the Tasman Sea and from Brisbane to Perth should realize that defence must be paid for now, and that no financial juggling can shift the burden from the present population to posterity. “Wars are won and lost by the men who live and die now, and by munitions that are manufactured now. This war will not be won, and will not be paid for, by posterity. Australia must meet the bill in men, materials, energy, and enthusiasm.

Senator McBride:

– That is what the Government says.

Senator BROWN:

– That is admitted by the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies). All of the work of Australia isbeing done now by the men and women who are organized under the industrial system. As to the financial burden, our friends opposite say that the bill can be met in the future by a system of financial legerdemain; but that would make matters worse after the war than before. I have before me a book by Fairer Smith, entitled War Finance, which shows that the policy being pursued by the present Government in the United Kingdom is the same as that which was adopted in 1914, and led to the depression in the Old Country. The author states -

A nation may defer payment for its imports from abroad as long and as far as it can. obtain sufficient external credit, but not at all for its own productions. The latter may be financed in a way to delude its people into the belief that it is postponing part of the burden, but when the matter is carefully examined it becomes apparent that it is wholly borne by its own industry at the time. If the labour and materials were not then forthcoming no amount of financial legerdemain or accounting would be able to supply them or compensate for their lack.

The advocates of the Douglas Credit system, and other monetary reformers, have been charged with trying to inflict on the community a financial system that would create something out of nothing. I have met Major Douglas and many of the leading speakers in monetary reform circles, but I have never heard one of them say that it is possible to get something out of nothing except that the present financiers get something for nothing. What they do contend is that the economic life of the community should he so organized that all labour and materials would be used to yield the highest production. The present financial system does not permit of the highest point being reached. A pamphlet entitled Prices during the War and After, published in 1919, contained the following statement: -

You can pay for a war either by increased productive activity or by rigid economy in consumption. You can throw a burden of interest on posterity but you cannot make posterity provide the shot and shell, the corn and the cotton that you want. If you cannot increase your production or diminish your civilian consumption sufficiently to meet your war needs posterity cannot see yon through.

That statement appears in a pamphlet published by the British Government. Honorable senators opposite are supporting a Government which is endeavouring to mislead the people by saying that it has adopted a system of financial credit under which it proposes to place the responsibility of the present war on to posterity. The Government through its representatives is not telling the truth, because the present generation has to carry the heavy burden associated with the successful prosecution of the war, and provide everything that is: needed for those who may be at the front or performing essential duties at home. How can posterity be expected to assist in winning this conflict? Instead of continuing the old system of issuing interest-bearing loans, the Government should organize the national credit in such a way that the war can be fought “and all our commitments met without placing the burden upon future generations.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– How can that be done?

Senator BROWN:

– Physically this or any other war cannot be conducted by posterity; but honorable senators opposite say that posterity can bear the financial burden. I deny that. An intelligent Government controlling the affairs of this or any other similar community should utilize its powers to organize the productive forces of the country, so that every man can be provided with employment, thereby assisting to produce the greatest possible volume by the application of labour to material. Honorable senators opposite should cast aside all their preconceived ideas concerning money and credit. They must admit that a war cannot be won by posterity, and if that be true they must also admit that whatever financial juggling they may indulge in, such a system will not produce one gun, one bag of wheat, or one suit of clothes. Such commodities can be produced only by the industrial activity of those engaged in the workshops or on the farms. In the financial statement to. which I have referred, the Acting Treasurer (Mr. Spender) said distinctly that the Government’s financial programme is one of taxing, borrowing from the public, and obtaining credit from the bank. We were informed a few days ago that already £10,000,000 worth of bank credit has been issued on n percentage basis. If this means anything at all, it means that in future there will be claims on the wealth of this country, and if the war proceeds these claims must increase to an alarming degree. If this Government adopts the financial policy adopted during the last war, it will he faced, when the present conflict terminates, with difficulties similar to, but ten times greater than, those which were experienced from 1918 onward. During the last war banks were given the right to draw notes, and on that security they issued credit. Clients were given the bank credit to buy bonds which could be deposited as security to enable them to purchase additional bonds. . That happened also in Great Britain where bonds were used as security for the issue of further loans, and on this paper basis huge claims were created. Finance can be obtained for war purposes, but when it is a matter of rendering assistance to returned soldiers some cannot even receive necessary medical attention. These men are prepared to lay down their lives for their country, but their country will not even provide them with necessary medical benefits. The time is’ not far distant when the people of this country will put on end to such trickery and demand that -the nation shall give to them their rights. Why should the people suffer because those in authority adhere to an obsolete financial system? We are not fools. We should have a properlyorganized financial system under which the whole of the Australian people instead of only the money mongers would benefit. I suppose that this Government will shortly be issuing treasury-bills and war bonds which will form a basis for the issue of further bonds.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– The honorable senator admits that he is advocating only an experiment.

Senator BROWN:

– On almost every occasion on which I speak in this chamber Senator Herbert Hays says that I am suggesting only experiments. During a national crisis the national credit is used for the aggrandizement of wealthy persons and private banking institutions. What does Senator Herbert Hays think happens in wartime?

Senator Herbert Hays:

– Why should not the honorable senator’s system be applied in peacetime?

Senator BROWN:

– I am endeavouring to show the honorable senator that when a nation is at war the danger is recognized, a feeling of national unity is aroused, and the people allow authority to, act in a way which is not permitted in time of peace. National unity is followed by national activity. When we are able to convince the people of the truth of the statement I am making, we ‘shall be able to provide for national action in time of peace so that our people shall not suffer. A similar position obtains when an epidemic occurs. When the health of the community is normal, little notice is taken of the condition of a worker’s child afflicted with a serious complaint, but so soon as an epidemic occurs and the children of the rich are likely to- be affected, there is an immediate demand for national activity. It is the same in wartime. But immediately the danger is over, authority reverts to the old system, and the poor old workers and those dependent upon them have to foot the bill. With the development of Christian charity and the spread o’f intelligence we should be able to promote national action to such a degree that no one will go short of the good things of life. Replying to Mr. Phillip Snowden, Mr. Lloyd George said -

If lie took three-fourths of the income of those receiving £160 per annum he would not have enough to meet the deficit.

If the Government were to’ take every penny of the savings of the people where would the additional necessary finance be obtained ? I ask honorable senators opposite to answer that simple question. I know the system that ls adopted and how the credit machine is manipulated. I know how paper values are inflated at the expense of posterity. This Government proposes to use the credit of the bank and pay a percentage for its use. Under the present system the Government is using, that which is rightly the people’s property in order to bolster up the present obsolete financial system.

I trust that as the war proceeds this Government will see that profiteering does .not become as rampant as it did during the last war; but I ha.ve some doubt in that matter. Lord Samuels, a member of the British Conservative party, said -

Tho Conservative party will not diligently prosecute any measure which encounters the opposition of the employing class.

Therefore I have not much faith in the statement that this Government, which represents the employing class, will prosecute any worth-while measures to put an end entirely to profiteering. I give the Acting Minister for Supply and Development (Sir Frederick Stewart) full credit for what he has done recently in connexion with contracts for the supplyof Army requirements. Many thousands of people in this country are very pleased with what he has done. There is an old saying, “ Set a thief to catch a thief “. I do not wish it to be inferred that I am suggesting that the Minister is a thief. A more apt saying might be, “ Set an exploiter to catch an exploiter “. 1 understand that Sir Frederick Stewart has for many years been a large employer of labour, and although I do not question his sincerity in any way, I have no doubt that -he knows something of the little game that is played by some employers. He knows that if the opportunity presented itself, certain employers in this country - would try to make money out of the people of Australia during this war. In countries under totalitarian rule these people would be lined up against a wall and shot out of hand. But I would not shoot them. I am far too humane for anything like that. I merely remind them of what would happen to them in some other countries if they tried to rob the people. I hope that Sir Frederick Stewart will continue his good work. We shall then see if it is possible to put an end to profiteering..

I have already mentioned one or two things that happened in the last war, and I have directed attention to some remarks by Mr. Bonar Law, who at one time was Chancellor of the Exchequer, and, was for a term Prime Minister of Great Britain. I hope that our friends supporting the Government will note what I am about to read and profit from it, because it is necessary for every government, in times like the present, to have strong backing in order to check the machinations of those who would, if unchecked, bleed this country white while our manhood was fighting in its defence. I take the following extract from the publication, War . Finance, by F. Fairer Smith -

Mr. Bonar Law confirmed from his own experience the difficulty of obtaining concessions from labour as long as gross profiteering was allowed to go on-

I say that the same thing will happen here if the workers are not treated properly. If they realize that profiteering is going on there will be great disturbances. It is the duty of this Government to stop all attempts at profiteering -

He had frequently condemned the latter in strong terms, and returned to the charge during the committee stage of the Finance Bill on the 3rd July, 1917. “It is utterly disgraceful “, he said, “ that in a time of war any class of the community, while others are suffering every kind of privation, should be able to make profits such as I am now going to point out. I do not say it is the fault of the shipowners - I think it was the fault of the Government - but it is absolutely disgraceful that it should have been allowed “

He then told the House that he had himself invested in fifteen different shipping companies a total sum of £8,100, and said, “ Five per cent, on that, which in ordinary times I should have been glad to get, would be £405. For the year 1015, instead of £405, I received £3,024, and for the year 1916, I received £3,847. And that “, he said, “ waa after the payment of excess duty profits”. He continued: “1 agree it is a great advantage to the country that there should be money put into ships if necessary, but prudent managing shipowners do not divide all the profits. There is something to come to me later. One of these steamers has either been sold or sunk, I do not know which. Either way, she has been turned into money for me. In that ship I had £200, and after the very handsome dividend which I received, on liquidation 1 received a cheque for a little over £1,000. That is not my only experience. There was another shipping company in which I invested £350. The other day I received a letter from the managing owners of that company, saying that because the cost of building was so high lim) likely to continue high, it was not probable that they would wish to invest the money in ships for a long ti mo to come; therefore, they were going to make a dividend out of the surplus capital. For that £350 capital, on this division, I received a cheque for £1,050. That is the trade wo are ruining”.

That was a statement made by a responsible statesman of the Old Country in 1917, in denunciation of people who would bleed the people white during war, in order to secure excess profits.

I say in conclusion that a solemn duty devolves upon the Government of this country and. upon the Opposition in this Parliament to check effectively any tendency to profiteer. “We should not forget for one’ moment that we are at war in defence of our democratic system of government, which is in grave danger. There are enemies behind the Siegfried Line in Europe certainly. But there are enemies also in this country - enemies of our own race who would take advantage of the situation to rob the people. It is the duty of this Government to be alive no the danger and see that the unity of the Empire is not dissolved through “ white-anting “ by the money microbes and financial bugs.

Debate (on motion by Senator GIBSON adjourned.

page 2288

NATIONAL OIL PROPRIETARY LIMITED AGREEMENT BILL 1939

Second Reading

Debate resumed from page 2273, on motion by Senator Foi.r, -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Senator ASHLEY:
New South Wales

– It is not the intention of the Opposition to offer serious objection to the hill. Our observations will tend rather to assist the Government not only to develop the oil industry in this country, but also to improve the conditions of thu workers engaged in it. Under the original agreement the Commonwealth Government and the Government of New South Wales provided £500,000 of the required capital for the company, which has been established to exploit what are known as the Newnes deposits. The Commonwealth contributed £334,000 and the Government of New South Wales £166,000. The security for the advance was the land together with other assets of the company. This bill has been intro duced to validate action taken by the company to hand over a certain portion of the land to the Government of New South Wales. Clause 12 of the schedule to the principal act reads -

Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement contained before any advance is made by the Commonwealth or the State to the Company, the Company shall execute and da* liver to each of them the Commonwealth and the State as security for the advances to be made by it and interest thereon a Deed of Covenant and Charge in accordance with the form contained in the Second Schedule hereto with such variations modifications and additions as the Prime Minister of the Commonwealth and the Premier of the State and the Company consider necessary or desirable and so that the said Deeds of Covenant and Charge shall rank pari passu as a first charge on the property and assets of the Company comprised therein or subject thereto without any preference or priority one over the other.

Clause 2 of the schedule of this bill, which amends the original agreement, reads-

Notwithstanding the provisions of clause J 2 of the said agreement made the 23rd day of July One thousand nine hundred and thirty-seven and the terms of the Deed of Covenant and Charge dated the 2Sth day of March, one thousand nine hundred and thirty-nine registered Number 80S Book 1841 made by the company in .favour of the Commonwealth the Prime Minister of the Commonwealth shall have power to release without any consideration the lands described in the schedule hereto from the provisions of clause 12 of the said agreement and of the said Dee’d of Covenant and Charge to the intent that -such lands shall cease to be comprised in or subject to such Deed of Covenant and Charge and thu Prime Minister may deliver up to the company all documents of title to any of the said lands.

The company originally had 180 acres of land which it purchased in the country known now as Glen Davis. Of that 180 acres, an area of 120 acres was reserved for a town site. Recently this area was handed over to the State Government. I do not know whether the Commonwealth Government agreed to the transfer or whether it is now being ratified. When the State Government sells the land in blocks for business sites and the building of homes for workers, it will reimburse itself to the extent of the value of that land, and the security held by the Commonwealth Government will be reduced by a like amount. When this agreement was being considered by Parliament, the Opposition, both in the House of Representatives and in this chamber, urged the Government to make special provision for the supervision of the expenditure of this money at Glen Davis. The Government, how? ever, rejected that suggestion. I understand that up to the present £500,000 has been expended at Glen Davis. However, very little progress has been made in the mining of shale. Most of the expenditure apparently has been incurred on the surface in the construction of culverts, roads, a hostel and homes for officers employed by the company. I point out, by the way, that this is the first scheme of its kind which provides for the construction of workers’ homes. To-day, the workers at Glen Davis live in hessian humpies and huts which are like refrigerators in winter and furnaces in summer. When the Minister for Supply and Development (Mr. Casey) visited Glen Davis recently a deputation representing the workers requested that proper housing be provided for them. The Minister promised to consider the request, and, apparently, this measure is partly the result of action he has taken in that direction. I understand that the State Government proposes to sell this land at auction, although the company donated it. If that be done the workers, who will be obliged to find homes in the locality, will not be protected in any way against exploitation bv land speculators.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– But certain conditions will be imposed in connexion with those sales.

Senator ASHLEY:

– The land will go to the highest bidders. Of course, as should be expected, the purchaser will be obliged to observe certain building covenants. The company proposes to advance to the workers who build houses up to 10 per cent, of the cost of their homes. But the workers will be obliged to approach financial institutions to finance the remainder of the cost. Honorable senators on this side have had experience - a very sad experience - of mining fields. We know only too well the uncertainty of the life of these communities. For instance, at Minmi, in the north of New South Wales, many miners were induced under a similar scheme to erect their homes on that field. When the coal-mine was closed down, because it was no longer profitable, these men were left stranded with their homes. They had to leave the field in order to search for employment elsewhere. To-day most of those homes have reverted to the proprietor of the mine, the estate of J. and H. Brown. We cannot accurately estimate the life of the shale deposits at Glen Davis. I know that they are expected to last for from 30 to 40 years, but that is pure speculation, because the whole of the field has not been surveyed or tested.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– Has it not been bored?

Senator ASHLEY:

– It has been bored in some places, and, in several instances, the results have been disappointing. By providing the deposit the company at Glen Davis will have an equity in workers’ homes. -Thus the danger arises that at any time in the future an employee who becomes prominent in a fight for improved working conditions will be told by the company, which is hi3 boss, “ Well, get out of your home if you are not satisfied “. I suggest that it would be f ar preferable for the State Government to let the land to the workers on perpetual lease at a nominal rental. If that were done, the men would be given far greater security, and would enjoy almost complete equity in their homes.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– Why not let the company build the homes?

Senator ASHLEY:

– I should not mind if the company did so. But in view of the fact that the Government is prepared to bear the capital cost of constructing annexes and machinery for the use of private enterprise for the manufacture of war materials, it should be prepared to provide homes for these workers, who will be engaged in an industry of great importance to not only the defence, but also the normal development, of this country. I point out that the major portion of the construction work at Glen Davis is being carried out by Concrete Constructions Limited. I understand that this company is to be paid costs plus 10 per cent. This arrangement appears to be extraordinarily generous in view of the fact that a margin of only 5 per cent, is allowed by the Department of Supply and Development in letting similar contracts. As Concrete Constructions Limited has its own brickworks and is interested in cementworks, a margin of 10 per cent. profit is highly generous. The taxpayers’ money should not be expended in this way.

Senator FOLL:
UAP

– Why does the honorable senator say that it is the taxpayers’ money? This is a contract as between one company and another company.

Senator ASHLEY:

– It is a contract between the Glen Davis company and this Government, which loaned a certain amount to the company. I know that honorable senators opposite will say that the company is to be charged interest at the rate of 4£ per cent. Apart from the fact that the company has very little security to offer, we have no guarantee that it will be able to repay this money. Of course, if the venture proves a success, as all of us hope -it will, the Commonwealth can expect to recover this loan. In view of the facts which I have given, however, the Government should handle this matter in a business-like way. Having provided so large a sum of money without security or any guarantee that it will be repaid, it should at least exercise some supervision over this expenditure at Glen Davis. Whilst I have every confidence in the ability of the company to undertake this venture, I fail to understand why so much money is being wasted on the surface.

Senator Wilson:

– It is being paid to the workers of Lithgow.

Senator ASHLEY:

– No ; most of these workers come from Captain’s Flat. I understand that Concrete Constructions Limited is prone to drive its employees so hard that it has not a very creditable record of being able to retain their services. I have already referred to the large amount which is being spent at Newnes, and I also wish to direct attention to the fact that eighteen months ago I brought to the notice of honorable senators the condition of the road from Capertee to Glen Davis.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– Where is Glen Davis to be situated?

Senator ASHLEY:

– In the Capertee Valley.

Senator Wilson:

– How far from Lithgow ?

Senator ASHLEY:

– About 60 miles. Yesterday, I asked the Minister representing the Minister for Supply and Development a question with regard to the con dition of the road from Capertee to Glen Davis but, in framing my question, I made a slight error. I asked whether it was a fact that machinery necessary to ensure the early production of oil at Glen Davis had been returned to Sydney because the roads were not capable of carrying it. The reply given by the Minister representing the Minister foi* Supply and Development was as follows: - lt has been ascertained that the machinery required for the production of oil at Glen Davis has, as a result of the Council’s decision, been returned from Rylstone to Sydney. Two heavy vessels are at Rylstone and one is in transit between Rylstone and Glen Davis.

Actually the plant which was removing the machinery from Rylstone railway station returned to Sydney and the machinery has not been sent to Glen Davis owing to the state of the road. Eighteen months ago I drew the attention of honorable senators to the condition of that road, and the circumstances under which men were required to work on it. Young men, ill-clad and ill-fed, were sent from Sydney onto that job. They were picked up from various depots, and transported to the country by lorry. Some of them had never previously worked on the roads. They received two weeks’ work in eight, for which they were paid approximately £9. They then returned to the city and had to live for the remaining six weeks on that £9, which represented £1 2s. 6d. a week. With that princely sum they were supposed to keep themselves in food and clothing, and, in some instances, to assist to maintain homes. The tragedy was that those young men arrived on the job soft and completely unused to hard pick-and-shovel work. At the end of a fortnight, just when they were becoming seasoned to the work, they were sent back to Sydney to spend six weeks in idleness. I protested in this chamber against that state of affairs, and suggested that the Main Roads Board should take over the construction of the road, and make a good job of it by giving full-time employment. I assure honorable senators that at the rate of progress now being made, the road will not be ready two years hence. The Government has requested the Davis Company to speed up the production of oil from shale but what is the position tq-day? The company has carted over the old road from

Newnes three huge retorts, two of which weigh 40 tons each, and the third 35 tons. Two of these retorts are stranded at Rylstone railway station and one is lying half-way between Glen Davis and Rylstone. These are the vessels referred to in the answer to my question.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– By which route were those vessels carried?

Senator ASHLEY:

– They were taken through Rylstone.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– How were they lifted from Newnes?

Senator ASHLEY:

– They were taken on lorries, but the lorries were not able to get through. One retort is now lying between Rylstone and Glen Davis, and 3 understand that further transport is being held up by a culvert which is not strong enough to take the weight. So much damage was done to the culverts on the road that a protest was made by the Shire Council, which has now limited the weight of any vehicle to 10 tons. When Senator A. J. McLachlan was Minister for Development, I asked that something be done to improve the condition of this road, and had my representations been heeded and the work commenced, this company would not have been subjected to the hindrance which it is suffering to-day. No doubt, the company is anxious, to commence production as quickly as possible, but what assistance has been given by this Government or the Government of New South Wales? Two valuable retorts are at the Rylstone railway station and the other is half-way down the track to Glen Davis. The road should have been reconstructed many months ago by the Main Roads Board, which would have made a sound job of it, and 50 tons could have been carried over it, if necessary. It should have been built by full-time employees and that would have been much better than the relief work system adopted by the Government of New South Wales.

Another matter to which I take exception is not specifically mentioned in this bill, but has relation to it. I refer to the hotel that is to be built at Glen Davis. Clause 29 of the bill passed by the New South Wales Parliament states -

Notwithstanding anything contained in the New South Wales Liquor Act 1912, or any other act, an application for the removal of a publican’s licence or an order conditionally granting the removal of a publican’s licence to premises within the area described in the second schedule to this act or within a distance of one mile within any boundary thereof shall not be granted except with the consent in writing of the Minister.

The Minister referred to is the Minister of Justice. My objection to that provision is that although uniform liquor laws operate in New South Wales and, for that matter, in all other States of the Commonwealth, this new township is to be singled out for special attention. One licence has already been provided by transfer, but, if it is found desirable to have a second licence, the consent of the Minister of Justice must be obtained. In my opinion that is a position which should not be tolerated by this Government or by the State Government. I am not levelling my complaint against the holder of the present licence. As a matter of fact he is a friend of mine.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– Is the licence at Newnes or Capertee?

Senator ASHLEY:

– It has been transf erred from Mount Victoria. The liquor laws throughout the State are administered by licensing boards, and I do not think that one place should be singled out for unusual treatment of this kind.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– But it is State-owned property.

Senator Amour:

– The land will be sold eventually.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– That may be, but it has not yet been sold.

Senator ASHLEY:

– I shall not pursue this matter any further. I hope that the observations I have made will be given due consideration, particularly in view of the fact that many hundreds of workers will shortly establish their homes in the new township. Everybody knows that in remote mining fields amenities of life are scarce, and for that reason everything should be done to improve the living conditions of the workers and their families at Glen Davis. Up to date, these workers have been very tolerant, and if honorable senators saw the conditions under which they are living no doubt strong support would be forthcoming for my representations. The workers recognize the big job which has been undertaken by the company in developing the shale oil industry. There has been no industrial trouble on the field and none is expected, because Davis Brothers are recognized as good employers, but the workers should be given every consideration and assistance in the establishment of their homes at Glen Davis.

In conclusion, I reiterate my appeal to the Government to take action in collaboration with the State Government of New South Wales in an endeavour to place the Rylstone - Glen Davis-road in reasonably good condition, and to improve the conditions of labourers on that road. If necessary the workers should be permanently employed. Only by doing that job properly will the Government remove the hindrance to which the industry has been subjected during the last eighteen months.

Senator DEIN:
New South Wales

– I welcome this bill, and at the outset I congratulate the company undertaking the development of the shale oil industry on its magnificent achievements’ already. The company has transferred to the New South Wales Government 180 acres of land upon which a model town is to be built for the employees in the industry. That transfer necessitates Commonwealth approval, because the Commonwealth holds a lien over all the assets of the company, and therefore the area cannot be transferred -without the consent of the Commonwealth Parliament.

As a result of the bill a town will spring into existence at Glen Davis. It will be a model town, containing all the amenities of civilization. The Government of New South Wales is committed to an additional heavy expenditure, estimated at £40,000, for the provision of streets and footpaths. The State Government intends to take every precaution, in the interests of the porkers, against land speculation in that area. It will restrict the ownership of land, as far as possible, to one block for each person, and the land will revert to the Government if the conditions of the covenants are not observed. Over 600 men are engaged on the field, and it is estimated that early next year the population will reach 2,000. After about fifteen months, it is expected to increase to about 4,000.

I was somewhat surprised at the almost luke-warm attitude of the Opposition to the measure. When the bill, granting ll>” leases to Mr. Davis to undertake this work was dnder discussion in this Parliament, the proposal was vigorously objected to by the Opposition, and that may account for its present indifference. Senator Ashley, on behalf of the Opposition, damned the bill with faint praise. He complained that the Commonwealth Government is forfeiting some of its’ assets to the New South Wales Government, but I claim that he has no grievance on that score. The people of Glen Davis are citizens of, not only New South Wales, but also the Commonwealth. If the Government of New South Wales incurs considerable expenditure in providing housing accommodation, what does it matter if the asset created passes to the State? Senator Ashley also complained of lack of supervision of the expenditure by the Commonwealth Government. This company undertook an expenditure of £166,000, and we can be sure that it would guard against a waste of money.

Senator Foll:

– Those responsible for the venture have had great business experience.

Senator DEIN:

– Yes ; they are doing a good job, and it ill-becomes anybody to throw cold water on the scheme.

Senator Ashley condemned the principle upon which the housing scheme is to be undertaken. He pointed out that the company is prepared to advance a deposit of 10 per cent, of the cost. In addition, the Rural Bank of New South Wales has offered to finance homebuilders to the amount of £300,000. These are heavy contributions which may be sufficient to meet the whole of the cost of the homes. If the town prospers as is expected, there is no reason to believe that the Rural Bank or some other financial institution will not finance the homebuilding operations on the field, even to a greater degree than I have indicated. Another complaint by the honorable senator was that Concrete Constructions Limited is operating in the building of homes on this field. I take it that that firm- has been given the work on a competitive basis. Unfortunately, whenever a big company undertakes a job, Senator Ashley assumes that it will obtain excessive profits. Similar complaint is heard concerning the operations of the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited.

Senator Cameron:

– The companies get the profits.

Senator DEIN:

– Yes, otherwise they would not undertake contracts. The honorable senator and his friends prefer to stand off and throw bricks at these large companies. Concrete Constructions Limited employs Australian workmen at Australian rates of pay. Senator Ashley, who knows more about this area than I do, would not be prepared to go to Glen Davis and condemn Concrete Constructions Limited and its management as he does in this chamber.

Senator Ashley:

– I shall be there next week, but the honorable senator is not game to go with me.

Senator DEIN:

– I should welcome an opportunity to do so. The workmen employed at Glen Davis have nobody but the present Government and its supporters to thank in connexion with this enterprise.

Senator Ashley complained, again, because of the large surface expenditure on the field. Whether that criticism is justified or not I do not know, but surely he does not object to expenditure for the provision of housing accommodation.

Senator Ashley:

– I have never complained about that.

Senator DEIN:

– Before a single gallon of petrol is produced, preparations are necessary for the building of this town, and, no doubt, the proposed surface expenditure is essential. The honorable senator was critical, quite justifiably, of the conditions under which the relief workers were operating. He said that the Main Eoads Board should have constructed the road, but that board cannot undertake construction work on whichever road it desires.

Senator Ashley:

– But the Main Roads Board is doing the work to-day.

Senator DEIN:

– Because it has been instructed to proceed with the work. When Senator Ashley mentioned this subject on a previous occasion the whole of his criticism was levelled against the New South Wales Government because he said the road was being constructed by relief workers. He did not say one word about the 400 or 500 men who were employed there on full-time and at award rates and conditions. In complaining of the conditions under which the relief workers were employed he told only a portion of the story. The honorable senator is entitled, I suppose, to deal with whatever section he desires ; but it is grossly unfair to select only one section and disregard others who are receiving totally different treatment. Possibly it is true that a number of the relief workers were getting only two weeks work in eight; but these men would be better working there, if only for a short period, than on the dole. The honorable senator also referred to the granting of an hotel licence, a subject which I do not know very much about. I understand that two acres of land was provided by Mr. Davis as a site on which an hotel is to be erected at a cost of about £15,000. Arrangements have been made for a licence; but Senator Ashley complains because no provision has yet been made for- a second licence. One hotel should be sufficient at present, but should another be needed the State Minister can grant another licence. Why should we worry about a second licence for a town the construction of which has not yet been commenced ?

Senator E B Johnston:

– Is not the granting of a licence a matter for the State Licensing Court?

Senator DEIN:

– Yes. The State Minister will see that sufficient hotel accommodation is provided in” the interests of the people of Glen Davis. I commend the bill to the Senate, and I trust that it will have the support of the majority of honorable senators.

Senator ARTHUR:
New South Wales

– I did not hear Senator Dein’s observations concerning the area of land to be made available for workers’ dwellings and the covenant mentioned by the Minister for the Interior (Senator Foll) ; but I understand that an area of approximately 180 acres is to be subdivided for the erection of dwellings. I have just learned that two acres is to be set aside for the erection of an hotel, and I understand from the Minister’s statement that the population is likely to range from 4,000 to 8,000 persons. As one of the original miners in Newnes Valley, I know more of the locality than any other man in Australia, including the Geological Adviser to the Commonwealth. I know a good deal concerning the shafts sunk and the value of the seams at depth. References have been made by the Minister and by others to Newnes, but the locality they are discussing is not Newnes; there is a range of mountains between Glen Davis and the township of Newnes. I am very much concerned with the size of the building blocks which are to be surveyed and sold, and I am particularly anxious that the Government shall not allow a slum area to develop. If 178 acres is subdivided on a plan of nine blocks to an acre, a slum area which would not be permitted in any city or municipality will develop. The miners will not take just what the Government decides unless it suits them. This may mean a cessation of operations. Some of us can recall the conditions under which the Wallerangong collieries were developed and how an exploiter purchased an area which was divided into very small blocks. If a certain area is necessary in other centres to enable families to live under healthy conditions why should not a reasonable area be provided at Glen Davis? Apparently the authorities have overlooked the fact that in the 178 acres to be subdivided for building purposes provision will have to be made for business areas, streets, footpaths, recreation halls and parks. I know that the Commonwealth Government is not directly responsible and that the subdivision of the land is a State matter.

Senator Dein:

– Is not additional land available ?

Senator ARTHUR:

– Yes, but not for building purposes. The Commonwealth Government should see that the subdivision is made in such a way that slum areas will not develop, particularly in a locality where the men have to work under .trying conditions. I understand that Mr. Davis has stated that he hopes that the production of liquid fuel will increase from 10,000,000 gallons to 30,000,000 gallons a year, and if that hope is likely to be realized, a much larger area than that to be provided will have to be set aside for housing the people. I am afraid that men such as Hudson, who created such a disturbance at the Ingleburn camp, may be induced to operate. We do not want men who employ free labour and who will not observe the- laws of the land to be associated with the undertaking. If that should happen the miners will not deal with the Commonweatlh Government or with Mr. Davis, but will take the matter into their own hands. We do not want any more “scab” timber-getters. The conditions under which the hotel licence was transferred will be dealt with during the next election campaign, because I believe that those conditions will create a smell in the nostrils of the people and that even Senator Dein and others will find it difficult to answer some of the questions which will be asked.

Senator CAMERON:
Victoria

– When I first perused this measure I thought it was quite innocuous, but on closer examination I find that something should be said concerning it and its origin. The Senate should not be asked to pass a bill such as this in one day, and even if that should be the desire of the Government the Minister (Senator Foll) should provide honorable senators with a copy of bis second-reading speech in order to prevent misunderstanding. If mistakes are made as the result of the hurried scrutiny of measures presented to this chamber, the fault lies with the Ministry because it does not give members a reasonable opportunity to study the bills or weigh the arguments submitted by Ministers in support of them. As I see it, the purpose of the bill is to authorize the use of public money in order to stabilize private enterprise a,nd to strengthen the position of those who consistently exploit the workers for profit. I agree that in some circumstances the Government is justified in assisting private enterprise, but I believe that there is a special reason why we should examine this measure closely. Senator Ashley has told us that Commonwealth money to the amount of £334,000 has been invested in the National. Oil Proprietary Limited on the security of property held by the company.. If is now proposed to establish a town site on land previously owned by the company, and something has happened which suggests there is more in this proposal than appears on the surface. Mr. Davis, I understand, in the fullness of his heart, is presenting the Government of New South Wales with a large area of land free of cost. These things do happen I know ; and they should be examined in the light of all the circumstances before we pass judgment upon them. This land, I gather, has been given to the New South Wales Government for the purpose of a town site on which will be erected business premises, including an hotel and homes for workers. The blocks of land will be sold at auction on Boxing Day to the highest bidder. I am informed ‘that the company has undertaken to assist workers to erect homes on their blocks by advancing 10 per cent, of the cost. I see some connexion between these two transactions. I cannot imagine a company which is conducted for profit, advancing 10 per cent, merely for the sake of doing it. It must have some profit motive. It seems to me also that most of the blocks of land will be bought by speculators.

Senator Dein:

– The conditions of sale will restrict such purchases to one block.

Senator CAMERON:

– I have yet to learn that that condition will be enforced, and I am not prepared to accept assurances on that point unless they are backed up by something more substantial than we have yet had from the Minister. I believe that what has happened in the past will happen in the future. This land, I fear, will be purchased mainly by speculators who will expect to re-sell it at a profit. Also, in the event of an employee being discharged from his employment because he objects to the conditions under which he is working, or for some other reason, the company in all likelihood will foreclose.

Senator Dein:

– It is not fair to say that.

Senator CAMERON:

– Well that usually happens in such circumstances, and if it happens to workers employed by this company they will risk losing their equity in properties which they have contracted to purchase. There is nothing in the bill, or, so far as I can recall, in the Minister’s statement, to indicate that the position of the workers, in circumstances such as I have outlined, would be safeguarded. Senator Arthur said, and I agree with him, that the blocks for dwellings will be so small as to constitute slum areas, as has happened in other parts of this country in connexion with schemes for the erection of homes for workers in proximity to the industry employing them.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– One-fifth of an acre is not a small block.

Senator CAMERON:

– It cannot be said to be a large block. Senator Ashley mentioned that arrangements had been made for the erection of buildings by a. construction company on the basis of cost plus 10 per cent.

Senator Foll:

– He did not say anything of the kind.

Senator CAMERON:

– He did. I am pointing to these aspects because I consider that the bill should be closely examined. The Government should not expect us to buy a “ pig in a poke “. So far, the whole of the facts have not been given to us, and, having regard to what has happened in the past, we are fully justified in pointing to what is likely to happen again. If our criticism of this measure will have a restraining effect in the right quarters, it will be all to the good. I am quite certain that if a Labour government submitted to this chamber bills as they are presented to us by this Government, it would be subjected to the fiercest criticism by its opponents, and it would deserve everything said about it.

Senator Dein:

– The honorable senator would have opposed the original bill if he had been a member of this chamber.

Senator CAMERON:

– That is mere assumption. My attitude to every measure brought before this chamber is determined by the arguments submitted for or against it. More than that I cannot do. My opponents, and certainly my supporters, would not expect me to do less. My mission as a member of this Senate is to protect the interests of the people who sent- me here. If the Commonwealth and New South Wales Governments are satisfied, as apparently they are, that it is necessary to establish a town site - I note that the Minister for Public Works in New South Wales believes that the State project is likely to last from 50 to 150 years - what is wrong with the Government itself providing residences for the workers? If, as Senator Dein has suggested, the Government wishes to protect from speculators the workers who may desire to build homes at Glen Davis, why does it not accept the responsibility for building those homes? It may be said that the Government has not the available finance.

Senator Dein:

– The Rural Bank as the agent of the New South Wales Government is doing that class of work.

Senator CAMERON:

– I am not concerned at the moment with what the Rural Bank is doing in New South Wales. The Government might say that it has not the money available. In reply to that I would say that as the Government can provide money for the erection of annexes to private factories - and each is the equivalent of another factory - it could erect workers’ homes on the Glen Davis town site. It could also keep out building speculators, and other exploiters. But the Government does not propose to do anything of that kind. Consequently it is reasonable to assume that it is making things easier for the speculator. From all of the facts placed before us we must conclude that the Government- is spending public money unnecessarily in an effort to stabilize private enterprise by giving it the right to appropriate a profit to which, in the circumstances, it is not entitled. The production of oil in this country is just as urgent in the present crisis as is the manufacture of armaments and munitions. In introducing the bill the Minister paid a tribute to the oil companies. He said that whatever might have been suggested concerning their operations in the past - and that is a partial admission that these companies have not been above suspicion - we could now pay a tribute to them for the good work which they are doing to-day. I remind the Minister that the oil companies are merely making a virtue of necessity. If there were no war, and oil could be procured more cheaply elsewhere than in Australia, these companies would see to it that our oil resources remained undeveloped. In view of the potentialities of this industry and the urgency of producing oil in this country the Government could have achieved considerably more for the nation by itself undertaking the responsibility of establishing this industry. If that were done the rights of the workers would be more fully protected.

Senator COOPER:
Queensland

– I congratulate the Government on having introduced this measure. I sincerely hope that the venture now being undertaken at Glen Davis will prove so successful that this company will be enabled to turn its attention to shale deposits in other States. Large shale deposits exist, for instance, in central Queensland. Some time ago I brought under the notice of the Minister for the Interior samples of oil extracted from that shale, the estimated production from which was highly satisfactory. The Minister kindly arranged for me an interview with a Dr. Wade, with whom I discussed this proposition. Should the Glen Davis company be enabled to turn its attention to other propositions of this kind I hope that the very favorable results of tests of the shale in central Queensland will be borne in mind.

Senator AMOUR:
New South Wales

– A feature of the agreement embodied in this measure is a proposal to apply the principles of town planning* in the development of the residential area at Glen Davis. The State Government is to expend £40,000 on the construction of streets and footpaths. I should like to know whether these will be macadamized, and whether kerbing and guttering will be constructed. Perhaps, also, it is proposed to beautify the place by the planting of ornamental trees. However, when all of this work has been completed the idea, apparently, will be to open the door to the speculator. I can come to no other conclusion, because no provision is made in the bill to keep out the speculator. In these circumstances we shall probably find such companies as T. M. Burke Proprietary Limited or Arthur Rickard and Company cornering the building sites. The company at Glen Davis proposes to advance to builders of homes 10 per cent, of the estimated cost. The remaining 90 per cent, of the cost will have to be found somewhere. We have been told that the Rural Bank of New South Wales will advance it. I should like to know whether the covenant mentioned by Senator Dein is to be in respect of the land or the buildings. Under the Local Government Act of New South Wales buildings of this k; nd must be constructed of brick, stone or like material. If a covenant along those lines is to apply in this case the workers at Glen Davis will be penalized. Senator Dein said that this land will revert to the State Government. If the lots are to be sold at auction will a caveat be lodged against the deeds in order to prevent purchasers from disposing of th« land, other than to the State Government ? Did Senator Dein have in mind a building covenant?

Senator Dein:

– Yes.

Senator AMOUR:

– That system is not always effective in practice.

Senator Dein:

– The State Government imposes the covenant.

Senator Foll:

– The covenant is to prevent any person from holding this land for speculative purposes.

Senator AMOUR:

– Speculation will not be prevented in that way, because the purchaser will be obliged to buy from the speculator in the first instance. We on this side contend that this land should be disposed of on perpetual lease. In that way the speculator will be kept out of the picture altogether. Otherwise he will be able to grab this land, and inflate prices, with the result that many workers will not be able to meet their commitments. Instances of that kind have occurred throughout New South Wales. I am afraid that in establishing this town of Glen Davis the company concerned will ask the workers to contribute to a housing scheme. I have seen that done before. I remember going round certain parts of Sydney with an insurance inspector who was valuing houses which had been vacated by the tenants. In all these homes was pitiful evidence of the conditions under which the occupants had lived when their breadwinners had lost their jobs, and the same thing will happen again at Glen Davis if the greatest care is not taken. The workers will build homes and put their savings into them. While they are employed, they will continue to pay their instalments, but who knows how long the shale deposits will last? Various estimates of their extent have been given. One report submitted to the Commonwealth Government expressed the opinion that the deposits were very limited, but now it is claimed that there is a much bigger area of shale than was at first thought.

Senator Dein:

– Is the honorable senator going to oppose the bill?

Senator AMOUR:

– No. We on this side of the chamber are merely endeavouring to have something done in the interests of the people, instead of in the interests of wealthy organizations. It is now estimated that the shale deposits at Glen Davis will be sufficient to keep the company in continuous operation for twenty years, and no doubt, should that estimate be inaccurate, compensation will be paid. I am very much, concerned with what might happen to the workers who are engaged on this venture. Who knows what influence might be brought to bear to destroy the enterprise? I am fearful of what might be done by the major oil companies.

Senator Cameron:

– They have done considerable damage in America.

Senator AMOUR:

– They have done much damage here. What happened in the Wolgan Valley when an endeavour to produce oil from shale was being made by Treganowan and Chambers? Those people were told by the major oil companies that unless operations at Wolgan Valley were discontinued, oil supplies would ‘be cut off from the firm’s enterprises in Victoria. The Minister in charge of Development at that time then told Messrs. Treganowan and Chambers that the Commonwealth Government could do nothing to. assist them. I fear that similar pressure might be applied in the future in connexion with this venture. It is a fact that when Mr. Fell was working at Newnes, he paid men to cut timber and stack it in the tunnels. He then set fire to it and claimed to be waiting for the oil to flow out. Just imagine that! The real reason was that he wanted to destroy the shale, but did not succeed in doing that. To cover up his real activities, he claimed that he was waiting for the oil to flow out.

Senator Foll:

– That is a very serious slander of a dead man. Actually, he was trying to turn the tunnel into a huge retort. It may have been a foolish experiment, but he was certainly not endeavouring to destroy the shale.

Senator AMOUR:

– I cannot be concerned about that. I am dealing with facts. My opinion is that he was trying to destroy the shale. I regret that the rn:.n of whom I speak is dead, but when we are dealing with national problems I r.m not going to keep quiet’ just because the individual concerned has passed away.

Senator Foll:

– The honorable senator should tell the truth about a man, whether alive or dead.

Senator AMOUR:

– It cannot be denied that timber was placed in the tunnels and burned.

Senator Foll:

– - Yes, but I know for what reason that was done.

Senator AMOUR:

– I think that I know too. I. fear that before the twenty years has elapsed something may happen. I submit that if a township is to be built, whether it be in connexion with shale oil, oil from coal, or flow oil, it should be under the control of the Government. Then there could be no shady transactions or scandalous treatment of the workers. At Glen Davis a housing scheme similar to those operated by the “Water Board when it is building dams, should be inaugurated. The “Water Board builds houses which can be easily removed when a job is finished. That could be done in this case, and the houses could be removed to other shale deposits, should the Newnes deposits cut out. I remind honorable senators of the variation in the estimates given with regard to our iron ore. deposits. At one time Australia’s iron ore deposits were regarded as practically inexhaustible, but now it is known that they are definitely limited. The same thing might happen in connexion with the shale deposits. It would be quite a simple matter to construct homes which, could readily be removed should the necessity arise. . These homes could be established at about five to the acre, thus affording plenty of room for gardens and live stock, and for children’s playing areas.

Senator Foll:

– No doubt that will be done under the present proposal.

Senator AMOUR:

– That may be so, but why impose a building covenant necessitating the construction of homes valued at £500 or £600? These houses will be practically a dead loss should the deposits peter out earlier than is expected. Perl] ap? even the National Oil Proprie tary Limited might at some future date feel inclined to put some wood into the tunnels and set fire to it, and the unfortunate workers would then be left miles away from their next place of employment with unpaid-for homes on their hands. I urge the Government not to confine its attention to the Newnes shale deposits, but to tap other known fields of shale. If towns are to be established, why not establish one adjacent to the coal-fields at Maitland and embark upon the extraction of oil from coal ?

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

.–L have only one criticism of this measure. I understand it is proposed that the new township should be called Glen Davis. I suggest that in view of my efforts on behalf of the industry while Minister in charge of development, the township might be called Strathlachlan.

The production of oil in this country, whether it be flow oil, shale oil or oil from coal, is absolutely essential for defence, because, should our communications with the outside world be severed, there would be no fuel with which to drive our cruisers and aeroplanes. I am strongly of the belief that we should make ourselves independent of overseas sources of supply in that respect at least. For 25 years governments of New South Wales, many of them formed by the party which the honorable senator who has just resumed his seat is a member, have allowed Newnes to languish, and it ill becomes a representative of that State to gibe at the Commonwealth Government which for a long time has endeavoured to establish the shale oil industry. Honorable senators have been discussing the future of the industry at Newnes, and the outlook and prospects of the men engaged in it. Those of us who visited Newnes years ago, and saw the pitiful plight of those who were hanging on in the slender hope that some day the industry would re-open there, know just how much the enterprise of Mr. Davis means. The whole of the Newnes valley and the adjacent country has once more been brought to life. Having been to Newnes in recent years and seen the desolation and the spirit of hopelessness that, prevailed, I know just how much all this means to the people there. Even although flow oil may be found in Australia some day - I have no doubt that it will - the establishment of this industry now is a worth-while achievement, because of the security it will give to this nation from a defence point of view. Instead of criticizing those who have made the establishment of the industry possible, and have come to the rescue of the nation at this time by devoting their capital, energy, and tremendous organizing ability to the enterprise, we should generously laud their efforts. They have asked for this agreement under which the land is to be made available to the State government. Why should that be a matter for discussion in this chamber? The construction of a township is a matter entirely within the province of the State government. I do not know anything about the position with regard to the granting of hotel licences, and I do not care. That is a matter for the Government of New South Wales to deal with. By means of this measure the Commonwealth Government is merely making available that area which, under the original agreement, was set aside for the establishment of a town.

Senator Amour cast a serious slur upon the name of the late Mr. Fell, and I regard his statement a3 a deplorable one. It has frequently been” alleged that Mr. Fell desired to destroy Newnes. I have read many reports concerning his activities at Newnes; I have studied the matter on the spot, and talked with men who were associated with him, and I have heard of the difficulties under which he laboured, not only with regard to retorts, but also owing to the enmity of people in the neighbourhood. In desperation he sought a method of retorting on a large scale, and tried an experiment which, as the Minister for the Interior (Senator Foll) said, may have been foolish, but was certainly not an effort to’ destroy the deposits. He was merely endeavouring to retort shale in a wholesale way by burning it. His difficulties were great, and the difficulties of the present company will be great, but I am convinced, from what I have heard, that the company will succeed. The old retorts which were worked in a small way in the earlier years of Newnes have been modernized, and I understand that the difficulty caused by the presence of wax in the shale will be overcome. I believe that there is a vast deposit of shale there, but I urge the Government and the National Oil Proprietary Limited to heed the warning given by Senator Amour. All surface examinations made since I was associated with this matter have shown that there are even vaster deposits of shale in this area than were originally estimated. If the war continues for a considerable period, and trouble is experienced ki importing supplies of petrol, it may be necessary to conduct operations on a much more extensive scale in order “ to develop the ‘Other seams, in the neighbourhood of Capertee, Newnes and Glen Davis. In any case it would be wise for the New South Wales Government, in association with the National Oil Proprietary Limited to see that the buildings at Glen Davis are of such a character that they will be capable of being transferred to a new site.

Instead of the Commonwealth Government being charged with having done nothing to help in the development of this field, it is to be congratulated upon having, in conjunction with the last New South Wales Government, found men of intelligence and capacity, who have searched the world for the best methodsof dealing with the shale and thus helping to make Australia safe in respect of oil supplies. Therefore, it would ill become us to indulge in carping criticism. Continuous work and study have been necessary in order to bring this scheme to fruition. One would think, from, some of the remarks made by honorable senators, that the retorting of the shale is a simple matter. Many failures have occurred throughout the world. We know the difficulties experienced in the Scottish shale-fields, and also in Estonia where most up-to-date methods have been employed. When two good Australians offer to do the job, gibes are thrown at, them, and we are told that there is a rake-off somewhere. I hope that they will make a substantial profit out of Newnes, in view of the criticism that has been levelled at them. They deserve all the credit that this enterprise should receive at the hands of tine Australians.

Senator ARMSTRONG:
New South “Wales

– I deprecate the remarks of Senator A. J. McLachlan who declared that gibes had been hurled at the men who have undertaken this work. I have a high regard for Mr. Davis, and I can only describe him as a big Australian. The Labour party opposed the scheme at the outset, on the ground that it was fundamentally unsound. It recognized that the development of this field would meet a national need, but it contended that the undertaking should be in -the hands of the nation. That is still the Opposition’s > attitude to the proposal. If the Government considers that the work is better in the hands of Mr. Davis, the Opposition differs from it. I admit that Mr. Davis has now developed Glen Davis to a stage beyond my expectations. “When I had an opportunity to meet him. I came to the conclusion that the work undertaken by him is not too great for him to accomplish. I have admiration _ for what he has done in all his business ventures. In New Zealand he has in operation the biggest dredge in the southern hemisphere. His gelatine business is unequalled in this part of the world, and we must admire the organization that he has created.

Despite what has been said in this debate, I still believe that an opportunity will be given to land speculators to buy blocks at auction. The Government of New South “Wales is expending £40,000 to prepare this area for the building of houses, but the men who will live in them will not be on the field when the land ie offered at auction, even if they have the necessary money to purchase it. In my opinion, they will be unable to finance the purchase of the houses to be erected. The only safeguard to be provided i« that only one block is to be sold to. each bidder, but we know that precautions of that kind do not prevent operations by “ dummies “. I have no doubt that the speculators will reap their harvest, as they invariably do. The land should be leased rather than sold, and I think that the Government of New South “Wales should even erect the houses. Common halls are to be provided -for the residents, and I suggest that it would be wise to expend £150,000 in the erection of homes for the miners.

Senator FOLL:
Minister for the Interior · Queensland · UAP

in reply - I am glad that certain remarks made earlier in the debate have been contradicted by the last two speakers. I appreciate the tribute paid by Senator Armstrong to Mr. Davis for his enterprise, and I endorse the remarks of Senator A. J. McLachlan, who was Minister for Development at the time when the first effort was made to develop this shale-field. The ex-Minister is to bc congratulated on the successful result of his work. I. saw this field in the early days. I well remember the late Mr. John Fell and the difficulties that confronted him. Like- others, he had his faults, but he made a sterling effort to develop the Newnes field. No man ever had more formidable hurdles to jump than he. The suggestion that he tried to set fire to the shale deposits in order to destroy them is one of the basest and dirtiest insinuations ever voiced in this chamber. The experiment made by him may have been a foolish one, but his action was due to the fact that he had reached almost a state of desperation in trying to discover the best means of retorting the shale. He was of the opinion that., by setting fire to the shale, mining would be saved, and the gases could be collected. Probably it was not a wise experiment, and was doomed to failure, but the charges made against him do no credit to Senator Amour. Before defaming the name of a dead man who did valuable pioneering work at Newnes, he should have made sure of his facts.

I suppose that no bill discussed in this chamber has had such a remarkable reception ‘ as the original measure had. If this bill had been submitted to Parliament by a Labour government, it would have been claimed by the Opposition that it provided for one of the most desirable schemes ever propounded. “What is annoying honorable senators opposite is that they cannot claim credit for what is being .done on this field. Their criticisms of the .Government’s policy in regard to the Newnes deposits is not shared by anybody outside this Parliament. Honorable senators opposite have predicted that speculators will make profits out of the sale of the land, that the employees on the fields will be huddled together in small allotments, and that they may eventually be driven from their homes. Is there any possible disaster that has not been predicted as likely to overtake them? Mr. Davis is a model employer, and, in order that the employees might be assisted to build homes for themselves in the area, he has made 178 acres available for that purpose.

Honorable senators opposite have suggested that the Commonweatlh Government should construct ‘the workers’ dwellings at Glen Davis, but it would be just as reasonable to suggest that it should undertake the construction of dwellings on the wheat belt in Western Australia, on the cane-fields in northern Queensland, or in any other part of the Commonwealth.

Senator Cameron:

– Cannot the New South Wales Government build the houses ?

Senator FOLL:

– That Government has the power to do so if it desires. When this subject was under consideration in the New South Wa.les Parliament, Mr. Martin, the Minister for Public Works and Local Government, was asked if the workers would be allowed to buy the land, and he said that they would be. He also said -

The Government realizes the need to prevent speculators from swamping out those interested, and every safeguard is to be taken to prevent speculators from buying and holding for a rise in the unimproved value at the expense of some one else. . . . An effort will be made to prevent persons from buying more than one block except in cases in which it is necessary to have additional land to carry stores or other buildings….. Every precaution will be taken to ensure that the wish of the Government is carried out.

It is the responsibility of the State department controlling local government matters in New South Wales to determine what should be done in this respect. I am sure that every precaution will be exercised concerning the size of the blocks and the type of houses to be constructed. Honorable senators opposite, instead of indulging in wholesale criticism of the company conducting operations at Glen Davis, should commend Mr. Davis and those associated with him for the vision and enterprise they have shown, and for making land available to the employees.

Senator Keane:

– Could not the Government direct the State Government to see that blocks are allotted only to the workers engaged in the industry?

Senator FOLL:

– I presume that the State Government will adopt such a policy should it be necessary. The State Minister said that the workers will have an opportunity to buy the land. In connexion with the transfer of the hotel licence, Mr. Martin said -

A gentleman at Mount Victoria holds licences for two hotels there and as apparently one hotel is sufficient for Mount Victoria, he applied to transfer one of the licences to Glen Davis, and the land on which the hotel will bc built, which comprises 2 acres, is shown on the plan. Mr. Davis promised the holder of the licence that if he put up a hotel he would give 2 acres of land free.

It is understood that the licensee is to construct a hotel costing not less than £15,000. There is nothing wrong in transferring a licence; but that is a matter over which the Commonwealth Government has no control. As was stated by Senator A. J. McLachlan, we are deeply indebted to Mr. Davis for investing his own money and displaying so much enterprise in this venture. Of course, the Commonwealth Government has made certain moneys available and the State Government, too, has taken an active interest in the venture. It is difficult to understand why honorable senators opposite, particularly “those representing New South Wales, should use every opportunity to belittle this important undertaking. Apparently they are annoyed to find that this Government has achieved so much success in connexion with the development of the oil-shale deposits at Newnes.

Senator Ashley:

– Why is r.ot something done to expedite the conviction of the road?

Senator FOLL:

– The Commonwealth Government cannot undertake the construction of roads on land which it does not control.

Senator Ashley:

– Over £70,000 of Commonwealth money is being expended.

Senator FOLL:

– Money is made available to the States under the Federal Aid Roads Scheme, and the honorable senator knows that the ‘Commonwealth Government does not now stipulate the roads on which that money shall be expended. Some time ago, schedules of proposed road works were submitted to the Commonwealth for approval; but the State authorities are now free to spend the money on whichever roads they choose. The Main Roads Board has been pressed by the Prime Minister, through the Premier of New South Wales, to expedite the construction of the road referred to by Senator Ashley, and further strong representations will be made in that regard. I understand that 220 men are at present working on the road, and that the number will soon be increased to 300.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clauses 1 to 4 agreed to.

Schedule.

Senator AMOUR:
New South Wales

.- The Minister (Senator Foll) denied that certain events had occurred.

Senator Foll:

– The honorable senator said that Mr. Fell tried to destroy the shale by fire.

Senator AMOUR:

– The Minister said he did not. He should produce the proof.

The CHAIRMAN:

– Order ! The honorable senator is not discussing the schedule.

Schedule agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment; report adopted. Bill read a third time.

page 2302

THE LATE DR. F. LIDDELL

The PRESIDENT:

– I have to inform the Senate that I have received from Miss B. B. Liddell, of Stanmore, a letter of thanks and appreciation for the resolution of sympathy and condolence passed by the Senate on the occasion of the death of Dr. F. Liddell.

page 2302

CUSTOMS TARIFF (No. 4) 1939

Bill received from House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended.

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

Second Reading

Senator McBRIDE:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · South Australia · UAP

. -I move -

That the bill bo now read a second time.

This measure deals principally with subjects covered by 27 reports of the Tariff Board. Increases of duty are provided on cotton condenser yarns for towels, manufactured towels and towelling and bath mats, industrial sewing threads of flax or hemp, process engravers’ plates, water bore casings, tractor wheels and centres, tractor tyres and tubes and a number of other commodities. Amongst the goods on which duties are reduced are wool tops, woollen yarns and piece goods, glucose, cornflour, internal combustion engines of over 50 horse-power, and industrial belting. There is therefore a blend of increases and reductions of duties according to the protective requirements of individual industry. As each tariff item comes before the committee, I shall, if it is so desired, explain the reason for the variation of duty.

Senator COLLINGS:
Leader of the Opposition · Queensland

– We have debated many tariff measures since I ha ve been a member of this chamber, and frequently I have told the story which I desire briefly to tell to-night. This bill, like all other tariff measures, is one for consideration in committee rather than debate at the second-reading stage. During more recent years the policy of this Government and its predecessors has been to reduce progressively the degree of protection granted to Australian industries. Whilst that policy may be wise enough when applied to wellestablished industries which, it might be claimed, no longer need protection, I cannot help thinking that the reduction of the duties on thousands of tariff items by succeeding Commonwealth Governments during the last few years must be reflected in the condition of our national economy. If ever there was a time in the history of the Commonwealth when imports from overseas should be restricted, it surely isinthis national emergency. Unless the Minister can advance good reasons why import duties should be reduced to enable goods to come into the Commonwealth in greater volume than hitherto, we on this side must register our most emphatic objection.

The growth of industries in this country, primary and secondary, is the real history of Australian development - a development which, I venture to say, is without parallel. In no other country have any similar number of people achieved so much in their first 150 years as has been achieved by the people of Australia. In this National Parliament the influence of three contending forces is always felt in the discussion of tariff proposals. First, we have the Country party. Although, in this chamber, its numerical strength is small, its intellectual strength is considerable. It should not be necessary for me to say that I entirely disagree with its tariff policy.

Senator Cameron:

– Country party members were a bit weak on wheat last week.

Senator COLLINGS:

– I do not altogether agree with my colleague.. They wore so strong that they astounded some of us. But I am digressing. In this Parliament we have, as I have said, three contending parties on tariff matters - the Country party; the United Australia party ; and the Australian Labour party, represented in this chamber by myself and my fifteen colleagues. Members of the Country party believe in securing the highest possible price for all commodities which they produce, and insist on paying the lowest possible price for the goods which they require. In other words, they believe in low import duties, to which we of the Opposition are resolutely opposed. We believe that, the brand of tariff legislation which they favour is inimical to the interests of the nation. The United Australia party, members of which constitute the present Government, may be described as a hybrid in fiscal matters. It believes in a revenue-producing tariff.

Senator McBride:

– That is not correct.

Senator COLLINGS:
QUEENSLAND · FLP; ALP from 1937

– Well, we have had ample evidence of that tendency of the United Australia party in recent years. Its members favour revenueproducing duties. A tariff which primarily is intended for revenue purposes does not protect Australian industries. It does not check imports to the degree which -we think they should be checked in the interests of Australian industries, especially in a time of national emergency like the present. In recent years all tariff measures brought down by Governments of the United Australia party have been designed on those lines.

Since the inauguration of the Commonwealth, Labour has had a very definite tariff policy. My colleague, Senator Keane, will, to-night, have something to say about the heroic efforts made by the Scullin Labour Government in this connexion.

Senator McBride:

– Will he say anything about the disastrous results of that policy ?

Senator COLLINGS:

– There will be no need to do that, because the Scullin Government’s tariff policy wrought almost a miracle in Australia’s salvation. Our tariff policy is definitely protective, but as a party, unfortunately for Australia, we have not yet had an opportunity completely to implement it. Our fiscal declaration is described in our platform as “ The New Protection “. But there is one important new thing about it. With that exception our policy is protection as it is understood in the ordinary sense of the fiscal term. When we get an opportunity to put it into effect, when we are able to give full and complete protection to primary and secondary industries, there will be adequate protection for the primary producer, protection for the manufacturer, protection for the consumer and, finally, protection for the workers engaged in protected industries. We believe in safeguarding our primary, secondary, and tertiary industries.

Having stated our policy in general terms, I add that I am an enthusiastic protectionist, because, unlike so many members of this chamber - I notice one or two who, judging by their grey hairs, are approaching my capacity for remembrances - I knew this country when it was dependent on other countries for everything that it needed. The history of Australia’s development is a most remarkable one. I am impelled to say this becauseI remember so well how strongly we had to combat the influence of people who, many years ago, declared that Australia would never be able to do anything worth while.

Senator McBride:

– Surely they were very few in number.

Senator COLLINGS:

– On the contrary, in the days to which I refer, they comprised practically all of the people who counted for anything in the affairs of this country. They were the people who controlled governments, municipal councils and all other semi-public bodies. How well do I remember their “ What, produce marmalade equal to Kieller’s of Dundee? Produce jam equal to Crosse and Blackwell’s of London? Produce sauce equal to Lea and Perrin’s from Worcestershire? Produce cheese equal to that from Edam in Holland? Of course not. You will never be able to produce butter equal to that which comes from Cork, because you have not the right kind of water to wash it in”.

Senator McBride:

– Science has helped us a great deal since then.

Senator COLLINGS:

– Yes. But let me talk of the butter which we did produce in Australia before the days of cream separators and butter factories, and when farmers employed the most primitive methods. The butter was sour when it was brought into the store and it was no good three days later, because, remember, there was no refrigeration then. I went to work in 1883, behind a grocer’s counter in South Brisbane. Thehighest price which the local farmers could get for their butter which they brought into town for sale every Saturday was 3d. per lb. If it was extra good, they got 4d. per lb. Before the week was over, if it was unsold, it would be sent to the local biscuit factory to be used for the making of biscuits. Almost before it was a week old it was rancid and full of worms. As my colleague, Senator Brown, would say, “ I know whereof I speak “ I am talking of something of which I have had personal experience.

Senator McLeay:

– The honorable senator’s health apparently was not affected.

Senator COLLINGS:

– As a matter of fact, in those days we could scarcely afford butter even at the price then ruling. However, I do not want to continue in humorous vein because to me protection for Australian industry is a subject of intense seriousness.

I have told the Senate that in those early days, practically everything which we required was imported from some other country. Queensland even imported beer from somewhere down south, but since I have never tasted the beverage, that did not concern me much, though my friends tell me that I do not know what I have missed. Sugar was imported in those days, until there arrived in a country town a man named Hope, who said, “ I believe that we can start a little refinery in this village “. From that beginning has sprung the great sugar industry which now means so much to Queensland.

I mention these things because I know that, given the opportunity, we can produce everything we require and do it better than the people of any other country, not excepting even the manufacture of agricultural machinery. As every one knows, we are now manufacturing various machines, including agricultural reapers and binders and selling them abroad in competition with manufacturers in other countries. A week or two ago I had an opportunity to visit the steel works of the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited at Newcastle, about which we hear so much at different times, and I am bound to say that that great company is doing wonderful work there.

It is inspiring to think that so many of our great secondary industries have sprung from small beginnings. The moral of my story is that these things could not have been accomplished without adequate protection. Therefore, we should examine meticulously every proposal to reduce the rates of duty in favour of manufacturers of other countries so that we may be quite sure that we are not doing harm to some Australian industry. I have no sympathy with those people who would refuse fiscal aid to those small concerns which, so often, are described as backyard industries. Nearly every industry, at the outset, was a backyard concern, and to the degree that they meet the Australian demand and comply with Australian conditions, they merit support.

Given adequate protection these “backyard industries “ in time extend their operations and become prosperous concerns. When they have established themselves, it is not a wise policy for the Government to say to those in control of them, “ Now that you are prosperous, we find that we have done the wrong thing; we must now withdraw the protection hitherto given to you Legislative wisdom suggest that there must be reasonable limits in both directions.

Sitting suspended from 6.16 to 8 p.m.

Senator KEANE:
Victoria

.- I am amazed that the Government cannot arrange its business for the session in such a way as would enable Parliament to give proper consideration to so important a matter as the tariff. Why could not this schedule have been brought on earlier? My leader has emphasized the general attitude of the various parties towards the tariff. I do not suggest that all of the tariff wall of this country has been constructed by the Labour party. Right from federation, a strong feeling has existed in this country that we should establish secondary industries on a sound basis. The greatest impetus to this policy, however, was given during the regime of the Scullin Government. In the emergency confronting it, that Government introduced a high tariff. Because of the appalling conditions existing at that time, it had no alternative. Coincidentally, it imposed drastic prohibitions of imports. That action met with thunderous protest from importing interests right throughout Australia. To-day, however, we find that even this Government, in a time of emergency, is forced to reintroduce practically the identical prohibitions which were imposed by the Scullin Government. I agree with that action. The Scullin Government set out to wipe out an unfavorable trade balance, and also to provide employment for many thousands of our people who were then workless. As the result of its tariff, prosperity returned to the secondary industries of this country, although, I admit, that improvement did not become evident until some months after the Scullin Government went out of office. The woollen industry alone was enabled toemploy 8,000 extra hands, whilst the prohibition against the importation of wireless cabinets established an industry which gave work to 3,000 people. There can be no doubt that that poiicy saved this country. However, the Scullin Government was not very long out of office before its successor interfered with the duties on 2,000 items.

Senator McBride:

– Hear, hear!

Senator KEANE:

– I remind the Assistant Minister that the Lyons Government, which interfered with those duties, was a composite body. My leader has explained Labour’s tariff policy. We know where the United Australia party stands on this matter ; and no one can entertain any doubt that the Country party stands for freetrade for every one except when that policy hurts its own interests. When he was a member of the Parliament of South Australia, the honorable member for Barker (Mr. Archie Cameron) said -

Frectrade is my slogan, and I do not care who knows it. I. am not concerned where goods come from or whether they are made by black, brown or brindle.

To-day that gentleman is Leader of the Country party in this Parliament. Although it had only fifteen members in both Houses, so strong was its hold over the Lyons Government that its members held nine ministerial jobs. That was surely a case of the tail wagging the dog. Fortunately, so far as the tariff policy of this country is concerned, circumstances are different tb-day. Nevertheless, this United Australia party Government is dominated by a freetrade bias. Its policy is not to alter the duty on any item without reference to the Tariff Board. It is compelled to take that course, because a government of the same political complexion agreed to the insertion of that condition in the Ottawa Agreement. I do not subscribe to that principle. I have no doubt that the members of the Tariff Board are quite neutral and unbiased on the matters referred to them. It is obvious, however, that the average commercial organization, more particularly the smaller concerns, are not aware of the activities of that board, despite the fact that its sittings are advertised and evidence is invited from all parties interested in matters referred to it for inquiry. Small manufacturers are no more acquainted with those facts than they are with the fact that to-night we arc discussing new tariff schedules. They will know nothing about these alterations of duties until they experience the effects of them.Despite references to the Tariff Board, however, duties are gradually being whittled down. That is a regrettable tendency. Honorable senators on this side and many honorable senators opposite were inundated to-day with letters from organizations which will suffer loss as the result of the proposed alterations which we are now considering. If anything causes instability in business, it is the conviction in the minds of traders that the Government is continually meddling with the tariff.

Senator McBride:

– All interested parties are given an opportunity to submit evidence to the Tariff Board.

Senator KEANE:

– Quite a number of organizations are not prepared to give evidence before the board because they fear that in doing so inside knowledge concerning their undertakings will be divulged.

Senator McBride:

– Those who do not wish to submit evidence publicly can do so confidentially.

Senator KEANE:

– I am aware of that fact. The point I emphasize now, asI did in 1929, when I was a member of the House of Representatives, is that no board has a right to have the final word on any matter which it is the duty of the elected representatives of the people to decide.

Senator McBride:

– The honorable senator knows that Parliament has the last say in these matters.

Senator KEANE:

-This Government acts on the policy of refusing to alter duties without reference to the Tariff Board. Its invariable practice is to frame schedules on the board’s recommendations. In these circumstances, it is impossible to secure any amendment of a tariff schedule in Parliament. I repeat that this Government, faced with the present crisis, is compelled to do practically the same as the Scullin Government did in prohibiting certain imports. I applaud it for following that course. I fail to understand, however, why this Parliament is not prepared to lay down, as a tariff policy to be followed for all time, that we shall not allow goods to be imported which can be manufactured or grown here. The folly of importing such commodities as beer, rum, wine, potatoes, ordinary biscuits, bacon, butter, cheese and eggs! This Government should say straight out that the importation of goods which can be manufactured or produced here will be prohibited for all time.

Senator McBride:

– The honorable member is drawing on his imagination.

Senator KEANE:

– I was hopeful of submitting to the Senate to-night a list of the goods the importation of which was prohibited by the Scullin Government in April, 1930. I assure the Assistant Minister that the classes of goods including the articles which I have mentioned, would amaze him. Those goods had been- imported in considerable volume under tariff imposed by preceding governments. Surely it is the A BC of protection to say, “ If we can manufacture or grow things in this country we shall not allow them to be imported “. 1 say to the primary producers that their best customers are the 500,000 employees engaged in Australian secondary industries. I realize that in respect of its tariff policy the present Government is handicapped by the provision of the Ottawa Agreement to which I have referred.

Senator McBride:

– That agreement is no handicap.

Senator KEANE:

– That agreement achieved very little for Australia. I propose to deal merely with a few of the individual items in the schedules. As a consequence of the Ship Bounty Bill, machinery, boilers and auxiliaries for use in the construction of vessels are to be admitted free, whereas the duty on these items previously was 33 per cent. British, and 65 per cent, general. When the engineering interests of this country realize the effect of wiping out the duty on these items, they will be staggered. In mentioning the steps taken by the Scullin Government to remedy our adverse trade balance by introducing a high tariff and drastic import prohibitions, I overlooked another emergency measure introduced by that Government, namely, the Sales Tax. The rate of tax imposed by that Government was 31/3 per cent. Members of the then Opposition raised a great outcry when the Scullin Government introduced the sales tax, which, was described as an infamous imposition. However, we find to-day that instead of the tax being repealed altogether, it has been raised to 6 per cent. ‘The sales tax will now yield £9,000,000 per annum, although it was originally introduced as an inescapable emergency measure. This Government apparently intends to make it an all-time feature of its financial policy. Honorable members opposite should bear in mind ‘some of the important reforms achieved by the Labour party in its very short term of office - two-and-a-half years of power in one only chamber in 24 years.

I can assure the Government that some aspects of the schedule to this bill will be the subject of discussion when the measure is in committee. My object in rising was primarily to express regret that tariff legislation is almost invariably brought down in the last few days of a session, when it is impossible for honorable senators to get a. grip of its implications and probable repercussions. The time allowed is quite inadequate for a close study of the schedule, and honorable senators can only make a few general remarks on the bill.

I suggest that the Government should not meddle too much with the tariff and so risk upsetting the financial stability of the country. The Scullin Government’s tariff policy was inescapable owing to the adverse trade balance and the condition of Australian industries, but this Government has no such difficulty to contend with. It has had experience of the operation of the tariff during the past ten years, during which this Government and its predecessors have done considerable whittling down of duties. The morn the whittling, the more our secondary industries are endangered.

Senator McBRIDE (South AustraliaAssistant Minister for Commerce) fS. 19]. - in reply - I was interested this afternoon to hear the apologies made, bv the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Collings) when dealing with the tariff policy of this Government. Thu honorable senator indicated quite clearly that the Labour party’s tariff policy amount’s to prohibition, and he went to a great deal of trouble to outline the policies of the two parties sitting on this side of the chamber. The honorable senator said that the United Australia party has an indeterminate policy. In regard to that, I can only say that we have a very efficient protective policy. We believe that the way to encourage efficient secondary industries is not to impose high duties indiscriminately and so allow the establishment and continuance of industries on an uneconomic basis.

The Leader of the Opposition also referred to tariff duties introduced during the Scullin regime. In them we had a very good illustration of what the real tariff policy of the Labour party is. Under the guise of emergency legislation the Scullin Government raised many duties to an absolutely prohibitive level and actually, as Senator Keane pointed out, imposed about 78 prohibitions. It is unfortunate for honorable senators opposite that when they talk of the benefits of the Scullin tariff they know that all the facts are against them. They claim that while the Labour party was in office it was not able to enjoy the full benefits of the tariff which it introduced, but, in almost the same breath, they accused the succeeding Government of whittling down the duties. They cannot have ‘ it both ways. If the Labour party’s tariff policy was so good and the policy that this Government pursues is so bad, why is it that during the Labour party’s term of office, when those prohibitive duties obtained, industry languished and, as soon as the Lyons Government assumed office and began to implement its own tariff policy, employment in secondary industries immediately increased ? While the figures which I propose to cite have no doubt ‘ been given on numerous occasions, I cannot allow this opportunity to pass without showing just what the actual effect, of the Scullin Government’s tariff policy was. In order to give a fair indication, I propose just to mention a few factory employment figures during the relevant, period. Taking as a basis an index figure of 100 in 1928-29 we find that by 1931-32 factory employment had dropped to 74.1. It was not until t.he Lyons Government came into power find removed many of the prohibitions and high duties imposed by the Scullin Government that a real expansion of secondary industry was brought about.

The benefit became apparent as early as 1932-33, when the index figure rose to 81.8. The figures for the succeeding years were: -

Senator Gibson:

– The greater the reduction of duties the greater the prosperity.

Senator McBRIDE:

– Yes, and the greater the expansion of the secondary industries. The burden of Senator Keane’s address to-night was that it is unfair to bring down tariff schedules in the dying hours of a session. If the honorable senator is so keen a student of tariff matters, he should know very well that these schedules were introduced into the House of Representatives on the 14th September, As an ardent champion of secondary industries and manufacturers, he has had ample opportunity since that date to examine thoroughly these schedules and be prepared to discuss them.

Senator Keane also referred to the licensing system introduced by the present Government to meet the exigencies of the time, and he suggested that that system was on all fours with the prohibitions imposed by the Scullin Government. But he knows very well that the licensing system does not involve prohibition, and in any case the licences apply only to non-sterling countries.

The honorable senator also contended that the Tariff Board should not be permitted to decide the fiscal policy of the Government He excused the manufacturers who refrained from attending the open inquiries by the board by saying that they were afraid to give evidence lest they disclosed trade secrets or practices. Senator Keane must be aware that any manufacturer has the right to submit confidential evidence to the Tariff Board and, consequently, the suggested danger of revealing trade secrets does not exist. Any manufacturer who has a good case is usually perfectly willing to submit evidence to the board, and I suggest that those manufacturers who did not avail themselves of this opportunity to give evidence, but immediately started writing letters to honorable senators, had not a good case. The proper course is for those manufacturers to tender their evidence to the Tariff Board, and not to write to members of Parliament, who have not the time or the qualifications to examine such representations.

Senator Keane said, very unfairly, that the Ottawa Agreement, while being a definite handicap to manufacturers, was of no benefit to any other section of the Australian community. Once again, the honorable senator knows perfectly well that that is not the position. The primary industries of this country have benefited to an extraordinary degree under the preferences conferred by that agreement. Also, in consequence of the extra prosperity brought about in our primary industries, the secondary industries also have benefited to a substantial degree.

I am sure that Senator Keane will admit that he misrepresented the position when he claims that the sales tax had been introduced by the Scullin Government and retained at 31/3 per cent. The truth is that the Scullin Government actually raised the tax to 6’ per cent.

Senator Collings:

– As an emergency measure only. It was intended to remove the tax as soon as possible.

Senator McBRIDE:

– I am merely correcting the statement by Senator Keane that the sales tax was introduced and maintained by the Scullin Government at 3 per cent., whereas, as a matter of fact, it was raised to 6 per cent. One of the first remissions of taxes made by the Lyons Government was a reductionof the sales tax to 5 per cent; later it was reduced to 4 per cent. I admit that this Government found it necessary to increase the tax to 6 per cent., and it seems most unlikely that in the near or distant future the impost will be abandoned. I have nothing more to add at the present stage, but I shall be prepared to give full information on the items in committee.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee :

Clauses 1 to 5 agreedto.

The schedule.

Senator Keane:

– Will the Assistant Minister for Commerce (Senator McBride) inform the committee why the duties on item 27, division 3, glucose, have been increased ?

Senator McBRIDE (South AustraliaAssistant Minister for Commerce) [8. 31 J. - The importations into Australia of glucose were mainly from the United Kingdom, and the English manufacturers’ price at the time of the Tariff Board’s inquiry ranged from £15 to £16 sterling a ton, as compared with the local manufacturers’ price of £36 10s. a ton. The duties have been reduced owing to that fact. It was considered that the local price was too high, taking into consideration the cost as ascertained by the board after a full inquiry.

Senator KEANE:
Victoria

.- In company with the honorable member for Maribyrnong (Mr. Drakeford) I have been in touch with Maize Products Proprietary Limited, a large organization in Melbourne, representatives of which were witnesses at the inquiry before the Tariff Board in opposition to the reduction of the duties. I have received the following letter from that company: -

Dear Sir,

We wish to refer to the debate on Tariff Board recommendations, which we understand conies before Parliament at an early date.

Wo particularly wish to stress item 27 (Glucose), and item 58c (Cornflour), and to place before you some relative facts.

The Tariff’ Board’s report that our costs and selling prices are unjustifiably high is entirely against the facts.

Our selling prices are governed by costs of manufacture, which are considerably higher in Australia than overseas: All raw materials - fuel, cases, tins, casks, &.c. - are much higher in Australia. Labour costs are also on a much higher level owing to the living standard.

Maize - an Australian primary product, used exclusively by this company - costs approximately 100 per cent, more in Australia than Great Britain.

This company consumes 050.000 bushels of Australian maize annually, and is largely responsible for the high price obtained by the maize-growers. -

We believe that the Tariff Board must be quite convinced as to the justification of our higher costs on the purely manufacturing side of our industry; but we are doubtful whether it has made due allowance for the correspondingly higher overhead costs. We need only point out that distribution and selling costs are more than proportionately higher in Australia than in Great Britain.

During the last war this company was instrumental in saving the confectionery industry when, for a considerable period, it was impossible to obtain glucose from overseas - at times the cost of overseas glucose landed in Australia was as much as £30 a ton above tha local’ price. This company did not take any advantage of the position at that time, nor has it done so since.

With conditions again approaching the position where overseas supplies may be difficult or impossible to obtain, we are in a position to supply the whole of the requirements of Australia, and thereby once again enable the confectionery industry to carry on in the normal manner.

We give you hereunder figures from which you may judge the magnitude of this industry -

Capital invested- £717,958.

Maize used per annum (approximately), 650,000 bushels, which represents an expenditure of £170,000 at price ruling, i.e., 5s. 3d., and all maize used is Australian grown.

Numbers of employees - 300.

Amount paid in salaries and wages (approximately) - £72,000 per annum.

Coal and coke consumed - 15,000 tons.

Casks, containers and other supplies, all of Australian origin - £100,000.

Amount paid for inward and outward transport on materials used in the course of manufacture, and manufactured goods - £32.300.’

From the above figures, it will be seen that the materials purchased by this company amount to approximately £302,000, and that the amount paid for salaries and wages is £72,000.

Decreasing the duty on glucose and cornflour in such a drastic manner jeopardizes the very existence of the industry, and with it the market for the large consumption of maize.

We definitely state that at no time have we taken advantage of tariff protection to ask an exorbitant price for our products.

Maize is grown chiefly in New South Wales- and Queensland. In those two States is to be found 94 per cent, of the total area under maize in Australia. In 1936-37, New South Wales produced 3,302,520 bushels, Queensland 3,148,814 bushels, and Victoria 794,506 bushels. In the other States the quantity of maize produced is almost negligible. The greatest production in Australia was recorded in 1910-11, when it amounted to over 13,000,000 bushels. A bountiful harvest in Queensland increased the Australian total in 1924 to 12,400j000 bushels. The production in 1936-37 amounted to 7,246,383 bushels, and the average for the decennium ended 1936-37 was 7,812,540 bushels. The gro3s value of the Australian maize crop for 1936-37 was £1,326,000. I urge the Minister to reconsider the proposed reduction.

Senator McBRIDE:
South AustraliaAssistant Minister for Commerce · UAP

.- The Tariff Board made a full investigation of this matter and has offered some pertinent remarks regarding the way in which the industry is being conducted. Its report on glucose, dated the 30th June last, states -

After full allowance has been made for the much higher costs of maize in Australia, the disparity in selling prices of glucose in Australia and the United Kingdom is only partly explained. A reasonable approach to the problem may be made by excluding the costs of maize from the costs of production in both countries. In Australia the selling price of one ton of glucose exceeds the cost of maize into the factory by about£19 (Australian) while in the United Kingdom the margin between costs of maize and selling price of glucose is approximately £7 (sterling). The board is satisfied that the selling pricein the United Kingdom used in this calculation is reasonable . . .

The board’s review of the evidence submitted by the Australian and United Kingdom manufacturers has failed to show any justification for the wide disparity (two and a half Australian to one United Kingdom) in the margins between maize costs and selling prices in the two countries. - Two possible explanations appear: -

The Australian industry is not efficiently or economically conducted.

The Australian manufacturer is using the shelter of the tariff to make excessive profits.

. There is no doubt that the business is highly profitable and the high measure of protection has supported a local selling price that has permitted unjustifiably high levels of both costs and profits.

In view of those very definite statements by the board, the Government considers that the reduction of duties is justified.

Senator Cameron:

– Could not the Australian price of glucose be controlled by the Commonwealth Prices Commissioner ?

Senator McBRIDE:

– The matter could be dealt with under the National Security Act, hut the Prices Commissioner was appointed to keep prices from rising above those ruling prior to the war; and it would be an entire departure from that principle to require him to police all prices charged by manufacturers throughout Australia. Such wide duties were not envisaged when he was appointed. I suggest that the proper. way in which to control the local price of glucose isto impose duties that will force manufacturers to sell their product at a reasonable figure.

Senator CAMERON:
Victoria

– I claim that action on the lines that I have suggested is preferable to allowing Australian industries to suffer as the result of competition from overseas.

Senator McBride:

– The Government does not admit that they will suffer at all.

Senator CAMERON:

– If glucose is imported from the United Kingdom, instead of being manufactured in Australia, the local industry will suffer.

Senator McBride:

– Importations will be unnecessary, if the industry takes proper steps in the direction that I have indicated.

Senator CAMERON:

– Then the Minister admits that, the industry is a law unto itself?

Senator McBride:

– It has been up to the present time.

Senator CAMERON:

– It is essential to build up the secondary industries of Australia to the maximum degree. If certain manufacturers are charging excessive prices for their products, the Government should intervene. They should not be permitted to prevent the development of Australian industries. If this country becomes self-contained we shall be in a better position to defend ourselves than if we remain dependent on overseas manufacturers.

Senator COLLINGS:
QueenslandLeader of the Opposition

. -Will the Assistant Minister explain why catalogues and price lists printed in the United Kingdom and relating exclusively to products of that country as described in Item No. 338 of Division 13, Paper and Stationery, are admitted duty free under the British preferential tariff?

Senator McBRIDE:
South AustraliaAssistant Minister for Commerce · UAP

– The Tariff Board recommendedthat admission free of duty under the British preferential tariff be allowed of catalogues and price lists printed in the United Kingdom and relating exclusively to products of that country, but not relaing to Australian products. The importations are not recorded separately. Trade catalogues and price lists not designed to advertise the sale of goods by Australian interests, when imported in single copies, are admitted duty free under the existing tariff, but bulk supplies are subject to duty. The proposed item extends the duty free concession now accorded in respect of single copies of these catalogues and price lists to bulk supplies, provided they are of United Kingdom origin and relate exclusively to products of that country. The duty reduction in this case is 9d. per lb. or 30 per cent, ad valorem. Tor many years United Kingdom interests have complained of the high duties imposed on printed matter advertising their products, in comparison with the duties charged elsewhere in the Empire.

The Canadian tariff provides for free admission of advertising matter relating exclusively to products of Empire countries. Whilst British interests sought exemption from duty on all advertising matter printed in the United Kingdom, the Tariff Board was not prepared to recommend that course, but suggested a partial concession which has been adopted in the proposals now before the committee. Some catalogues contain information of interest to those desirous of improving their manufacturing methods, and duties which prevent their importation, close a source of valuable knowledge to Australian industrialists. Subsequent to the receipt of the Tariff Board’s report the opinion of that body was sought regarding the effect which the concession recommended would have on the Australian printing industry. The board replied that it had reviewed the business of thirteen of the largest printing houses, and this survey disclosed that the bulk of their work in advestising matter, relating wholly or in part to United Kingdom goods, consisted of the production of matter other than price lists and catalogues. The value of price lists and catalogues relating wholly to United Kingdom goods represented only a fraction of one per cent, of the total advertising matter produced by Australian printers.

Senator Allan MacDonald:

– Are foreign catalogues also admitted free?

Senator McBRIDE:

– No; only those printed in the United Kingdom and which relate exclusively to goods manufactured in that country.

Senator Allan MacDonald:

– Is a duty imposed on foreign catalogues relating to foreign goods?

Senator McBRIDE:

– Yes.

Schedule agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without requests; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 2311

CUSTOMS TARIFF (EXCHANGE ADJUSTMENT)BILL (NO. 2) 1939

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended.

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

Second Reading

Senator McBRIDE:
South AustraliaAssistant Minister for Commerce · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This is merely a machinery measure consequent upon customs tariff bills already dealt with by the committee. Under customs tariff bills provision is now made for duties based upon present exchange conditions, whereas, in respect of some tariff items, the British preferential tariff duties were previously struck at a rate based upon parity of exchange as between Australia and London, and a deduction, usually referred to as exchange adjustment, made from the duty to offset, in part, the protective effect of exchange. As the duty level is now on the basis of present exchange conditions, it is necessary to remove these particular items from the exchange adjustment list.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 2311

CUSTOMS TARIFF (CANADIAN PREFERENCE) 1939

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended.

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

Second Reading

Senator McBRIDE:
South AustraliaAssistant Minister for Commerce · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The measure is consequential upon Customs Tariff Bill (No. 4) already dealt with by the committee. It contains an amendment which makes specific mention of “ artificial silk “ in the tariff item which at present covers costumes, dresses or robes .made from, pure silk. At the moment, costumes of artificial silk are charged duty at the same rates as if they were of pure silk, and the amendment is designed to make that position clear. An increase of duty is also proposed on brake linings from Canada. These were previously admitted free of duty under the British preferential tariff, hut the duty under the bill is 25 per cent, ad valorem. This is based upon a recommendation of the Tariff Board, which considers that local manufacturers of brake linings were vulnerable to importations from Canada.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 2312

QUESTION

CUSTOMS TARIFF (No. 5) 1939

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended.

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

Second Reading

Senator McBRIDE (South Australia - Assistant Minister for Commerce [9.4]. - I move -

That the bill bc now read a second time.

This bill varies the duties on goods which form the subject of six reports of the Tariff Board. Increases of duty are proposed on light-weight cotton drills, &c, used in the manufacture of male outer clothing, laundry washing machines within certain price ranges, metallic capsules for bottles, and fine printing papers of type3 produced in Australia. Reductions are made of the protective duties on heavy-weight cotton drills, &c, for male outer wear, on hydro-extractors and variable resistances. In the case of weatherproof braid aerial cables,, the bill clarifies the intention of the Tariff Board by extending protective duties to certain types which, owing to doubt as to the board’s original intentions, were being admitted at non-protective rates of duty. Provision is also made for deferred rates of duty on radiators for motor vehicles, such deferred rates to come into operation when the bounty on Australian-made radiators expires in December, 1940. Protection has therefore been accorded to new industry or to extensions of existing industry, while the protection is reduced to industry which has had time to become firmly established and function under lower duties than those required in the early stages of production.

Senator McBRIDE:
UAP

– I am informed that the manufacturers themselves asked for a variation of duties and that, in order to have an inquiry, it was necessary to refer to the Tariff Board the whole range of products covered by the schedule. The board recommended increased duties on the light-weight cotton piece goods, as was desired by the companies concerned, but it did not consider necessary the existing rate on the heavy-weight yarn, so it recommended a small reduction of the duty.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.

Schedule

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:
Western Australia

– In division 5, covering textiles, there is an alteration of the duty on cotton piece goods containing a mixture of fibres in which cotton predominates. Can the Minister inform me whether this relates to the weight of cotton cloth that is used in the manufacture of workmen’s dungarees? If it does, will the alteration of the tariff means an increase of the cost of such materials, with a consequent addition to the price to be paid by Australian workmen for dungarees ?

Senator McBRIDE:
South. AustraliaAssistant Minister for Commerce · UAP

– Sub-item o of item 105 alters the duty on light-weight material used in the manufacture of dungarees. The Tariff Board reported that overalls made from light-weight khaki drill now sold retail at 6s. 8d. would, were the rates recommended adopted, probably cost users approximately 8s. l1/2d. The item imposes an increase of the duty, and the board expects that there will be an increase of the price of made-up articles in which light-weight piece goods covered by thi3 sub-item are used. The board expects, however, that there will be a reduction of the cost of articles made from heavyweight cotton piece goods.

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:
Western Australia

– Can the Minister inform me whether the new rates of duty for paper and stationery covered by subitem f of item 334, in division 13, will give adequate protection to the production of paper at the paper mills in Burnie, Tasmania, which we inspected several months ago? A considerable sum of money is invested in that industry and so far as I can judge, the plant is most efficient. Although my political activities have been mainly in the direction of reduction of tariff duties, I realize that protection is necessary in order to give to Australian industries a reasonable chance to compete against imports, not only from Great Britain, but also from foreign countries. Fine papers are being manufactured at the Burnie mills. Will the protection given under item 334 f enable that factory to continue in production?

Senator McBRIDE:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– The duty is designed to give the necessary protection to the paper mills at Burnie. For the information of honorable senators I may say that the manufacturers have the greatest difficulty, at the moment, in meeting demands for their product.

Schedule agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without requests; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 2313

CUSTOMS TARIFF (EXCHANGE ADJUSTMENT) BILL (No. 3) 1939

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended.

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

Second Reading

Senator McBRIDE:
South AustraliaAssistant Minister for Commerce · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This bill is a machinery measure consequent upon the passing of Customs Tariff (No. 5) just dealt with by the Senate. Under that bill provision is now made for duties based upon present exchange conditions, whereas, in the case of tariff item 105 a 1 b, which covers certain cotton piece goods, the British preferential tariff duties were previously struck at a rate based upon parity of exchange as between Australia and London and a deduction - usually referred to as exchange adjustment - made from the duty to offset, in part, the protective effect of exchange. As the duty level is how on the basis of present exchange conditions, it is necessary to remove that particular item from the exchange adjustment list.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 2313

CUSTOMS TARIFF (CANADIAN PREFERENCE (No. 2) 1939

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended.

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

Second Reading

Senator McBRIDE:
South AustraliaAssistant Minister for Commerce · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This bill has the effect of imposing as on, and from, the 7th December, 1940, a special rate of duty on radiator assemblies imported as original equipment of

Canadian motor vehicle chassis. The rate of duty, which it is proposed to apply when the present bounty on radiator assemblies expires, is £1 12s. 6d. each. I may mention that the Customs Tariff Bill (No. 5) provides for the following rates of duty under the ordinary customs tariff to apply as from the 7th December, 1940 : - £1 5s., British preferential tariff ; £2, intermediate and general tariffs. The rate adopted is that recommended in the majority report of the Tariff Board.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.

Progress reported.

page 2314

QUESTION

CUSTOMS TARIFF (No. 6) 1939

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended.

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

SECOND Reading.

Senator McBRIDE:
South AustraliaAssistant Minister for Commerce · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This bill is complementary to the Ship Bounty Bill which* has already been dealt with by this chamber. The Government’s policy with respect to shipbuilding provides for the payment of bounty on vessels within certain tonnage ranges. This aspect was fully covered during the discussion on the Ship Bounty Bill. Both the Tariff Board and the Government take the view that assistance by duties has failed to place the shipbuilding industry on a proper footing, and, consequently, the Government has abandoned that form of assistance to thu industry in favour of the bounty method. Accordingly, the Government proposes in the present bill to admit at rates of free British and 15 per cent, foreign, vessels up to 500 tons gross register which were previously subject to protective duties under tariff item 424n except the following: - (a) Vessels not exceeding 100 tons gross register; and (b) Vessels over 100 tons but not exceeding 500 tons of a type on which bounty would not be payable if they were manufactured in Australia, for example, wooden vessels. Protective duties will continue to apply to the vessels excluded from admission at rates of free British and 15 per cent, foreign. Vessels of over 500 tons, at present admitted at non-protective rates under item 424 b, will continue to be so admitted. It is also proposed that machinery, boilers and auxiliaries for the construction in Australia of vessels eligible for bounty shall be admitted free of duty. The proposed alterations of duty will not operate until a date to be proclaimed. That date will coincide with the date of proclamation of the Ship Bounty Bill.

Senator LECKIE:
Victoria

.- I should like the Assistant Minister to explain whether machinery, boilers and auxiliaries for use in the construction of vessels are to be admitted free altogether.

Senator McBride:

– Under by-law.

Senator LECKIE:

– If this proposal means that machinery, boilers and auxiliaries for use in the construction of vessels are to be admitted free and, at the same time; no encouragement is to be given to their manufacture in Australia, I have strong objections to it. The Assistant Minister may have a good answer to offer to my objections, but reading the item simply as it stands, it would seem that this proposal will be detrimental to local industry.

Senator McBRIDE:
South AustraliaAssistant Minister for Commerce · UAP

– The proposal to admit free of duty machinery, boilers and auxiliaries for use in the construction of vessels in respect of which a bounty will be paid, was fully discussed when the Ship Bounty Bill was under consideration. I then pointed out that this would not mean that Australian firms would necessarily be deprived of an opportunity to make these articles. In any case, as no ships of this class are now being constructed here, Australian firms will not be any worse off as the result of this proposal than they are at present. As I said previously, it has been found desirable even in Great Britain, where this class of manufacture has been brought to a very high standard. to admit, free of duty, in certain circumstances, machinery, boilers and auxiliaries for use in the construction of vessels. If this were not done it might very well be suggested that even the present rate of bounty would be insufficient in certain cases to encourage the construction in Australia of ships of the class desired. The sole object of this proposal is to encourage shipbuilding in this country.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.

Schedule

Division 6. - Metals and Machinery

Item 176 (Machinery, boilers and auxiliaries for use in construction of vessels).

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:
Western Australia

– In view of the question asked by Senator Leckie and the answer given by the Assistant Minister, I would like some more information before the committee agrees to sub-item a of item 176. When we discussed the Ship Bounty Bill, I was under the impression that, when considering the question of the free importation of the necessary machinery for vessels constructed in Australia, the procedure would be along these lines: If a shipbuilding yard proposed to build a motor vessel on which bounty would be claimed, the Government would be advised of the company’s intention to apply for the admission of the engines, free of duty, under by-law. 1 mention motor engines because a number of our coastal vessels are powered by Norwegian or Swedish motors. The Minister could then give permission for the importation of these motors, but if another shipbuilding yard intended to build a similar vessel and to fit it with the ordinary steam turbines, permission would not be given for the importation of the engines because they could be manufactured in Australia. That was the impression I gained when we were discussing the Ship Bounty Bill. If that is not the position, I would like to hear further from the Minister as to the procedure that the Government would adopt in the event of a shipbuilding yard applying for a licence to import machinery from overseas.

Senator McBRIDE:
South AustraliaAssistant Minister for Commerce · UAP

– Should a shipbuilding yard desire to construct a vessel, and to claim bounty upon it, application could be made for the admission, under by-law, of either steam or diesel engines. The Tariff Board considered that the disparity between the overseas and Australian costsof a complete vessel, including the engine and boilers, would be so great that unless the engines and boilers could be admitted duty free, the amount of bounty recommended would not nearly be sufficient to permit of local construction. Consequently, in order to ensure the establishment of the shipbuilding industry, the Tariff Board recommended that in the initial stages firms should concentrate on the construction of the hulls only.

Senator Allan MacDonald:

– In effect then, the bounty is on the construction of hulls.

Senator McBRIDE:

– Yes, quite apart from boilers and machinery.

Senator Allan MacDonald:

– The bounty does not seem quite so attractive now.

Senator McBRIDE:

– As I have said, the provision for the admission of machinery duty free under by-law applies to steam and diesel engines.

Senator ASHLEY:
New South Wales

– The statements by the Assistant Minister justify the Opposition’s attitude to the Ship Bounty Bill. Honorable senators on this side point out that whilst the Government was granting a bounty of £12 10s. a. ton on ships of up to 750 tons, and £10 a ton on ships of up to 1,000 tons, it was at the same time proposing to allow engines, boilers and auxiliaries to come into the country duty free. The Assistant Minister has admitted that, and has said that the high cost of making that equipment in this country would probably prevent the establishment of the shipbuilding industry; but no consideration is given to the Australian workmen, who could produce that machinery if given the opportunity.

Senator Cooper:

– They are not producing it now, and so they will lose nothing.

Senator ASHLEY:

– They would produce it if they got the chance. The tact that the Government is encouraging the building of hulls will increase the demand tor machinery, and that could be made in Australia. While the Government is assisting one industry by means of a bounty, it is at the same time killing another industry by admitting engines, boilers, Aic., duty free. I suggest to the Assistant Minister that this item be further inquired into, in order that something might be done to assist Australian workmen in the engineering industry.

Senator LECKIE:
Victoria

.- I am not at all satisfied with this sub-item. It is perfectly true, as Senator Cooper has said, that engines, boilers and auxiliary requirements are not being made at the present time, but the fact remains that all that equipment could be made here. This proposal savours very much of robbing Peter to pay Paul. I do not intend to continue my opposition to this proposal, but I suggest that the Assistant Minister should give further consideration to it. If the shipbuilding industry is to be encouraged then that encouragement should be given to all branches of the industry, because one branch is just as important as the other. At the present time marine engines and boilers could no doubt be made here just as cheaply as they could be imported from overseas, but some guarantee would have to be given that when the overseas situa-tion improved, all the money spent in Australia on patterns, jigs and dies for the manufacture of marine machinery would not be wasted. I would like an assurance that the Government will go further into this matter, because I am inclined to think that a mistake is being made. Although possibly no great harm may be done now, it may be done in the future.

Senator McBRIDE:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · South Australia · UAP

– I repeat that the object of the Government in bringing forward these proposals was to facilitate the inauguration of the shipbuilding industry in this country. After an exhaustive inquiry had been made the Tariff Board came to the conclusion that the amount of bounty necessary to ensure that not only the hulls but also the engines and boilers of ships were constructed here would be possibly double the sum proposed to be made available under the bounty legislation which we have recently passed.

Senator Allan MacDonald:

– What if the overseas situation becomes such that engines and boilers cannot be imported?

Senator McBRIDE:

– In that case, no doubt the engines and boilers will be manufactured in this country. I point out to Senator Leckie that, whether the Government is doing the whole job or not, the workmen of Australia will benefit under these proposals, at any rate to the degree to which hulls will be constructed and the fitting of the ships carried out. I might also reiterate that the Minister for Trade and Customs said that he would be prepared to review the proposals at the end of twelve months if the present rate were not sufficient to give real encouragement to the shipbuilding industry. I pointed out earlier that, even in Great Britain where ships are built in huge numbers, the Government thinks it desirable to permit the importation of machinery from foreign sources free of duty. Apart altogether from the cost of manufacturing the machinery, it very often happens that some new type of engine is evolved in a foreign, country which is of real benefit to snipping. The only way in which shipbuilders can take advantage of such a development is to import the new engine from the country in which it is patented, and manufactured. I believe that that wag one of the reasons which influenced the Government to allow free entry of engines and boilers under by-law.

Item agreed to.

Division 16. - Miscellaneous

Item 424 (Vessels)

Senator E B JOHNSTON:
Western Australia

– The proposed new paragraph 3, sub-item v item 424 provides that if a vessel was ordered in 1932 and entered at .an Australian port before the 14th January, 1934, no duty is chargeable. It seems to ma to be an extraordinary thing that orders which were placed seven years ago might not yet have been fulfilled. If it is a good thing to admit duty free ships ordered seven years ago - it seems likely that these would be big interstate vessels- surely it is also a good thing to admit free of duty, ships ordered only two or three years ago. This would appear to be a particularly sound policy in view of the fact that under existing conditions we are having great difficulty in getting shipping space for the transport of our primary and secondary products to the markets of the world. If any Australian firms have ordered big ships, even although the orders were placed only last year or even this year, the same concessions should apply.

Senator McBRIDE:
South AustraliaAssistant Minister for Commerce · UAP

– That item was put in because of an undertaking entered into under the Ottawa Agreement, whereby Australia agreed to impose certain duties’. The Commonwealth Government considered that it was only fair that those who had ordered ships prior to operation of the Ottawa Agreement should be allowed to bring them into Australia under conditions existing when the orders were placed. That is the reason for the differentiation. The clause has no immediate moment.

Senator E B Johnston:

– What is the duty on new big ships ?

Senator McBRIDE:

– For a vessel of more than a certain tonnage it is British, free, and foreign, 15 per cent. The duty was originally free on vessels from all sources, and not until after the Ottawa Agreement became operative was a duty of 15 per cent, placed on foreign vessels.

Item agreed to.

Schedule agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without requests; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 2317

QUESTION

CUSTOMS TARIFF (CANADIAN PREFERENCE) (No. 3) 1939

In committee : (Consideration resumed from page 2314).

Schedule

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:
Western Australia

– This schedule deals with radiator assemblies. A request was made by the local industry for tariff protection as well as the bounty. I understand that this protection, in addition to the bounty, is now to be given to the industry. Will the Minister briefly indicate the progress made by the industry and the main reasons why it now requires tariff protection to the extent of £1 12s. 6d. on each radiator assembly, in addition to the bounty?

Senator McBRIDE:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · South Australia · UAP

– The proposed duties do not come into operation until December, 1940, at which time the present bounty will expire. The duties are to be substituted for it, and the rates of duty are designed entirely to cover the needs of the industry. I understand that the manufacturers themselves are satisfied with this proposal.

Schedule agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without requests; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 2317

CUSTOMS TARIFF (EXCHANGE ADJUSTMENT) BILL (No. 4) 1939

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended.

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

Second Reading

Senator McBRIDE:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · South Australia · UAP

.- I move-

That the bill be now read a second time. .

This is merely a machinery measure consequent upon Customs Tariff (No. 6), which deals with the duties on vessels. In the latter measure provision is made for duties on vessels under Tariff Item 424 b 1, based upon present exchange conditions, whereas previously the British preferential duty was struck at a rate based upon parity of exchange as between Australia and London and a deduction - usually referred to as exchange adjustment - made from the duty to offset, in part, the protective effect of exchange. As the duty level is now on the basis of present exchange conditions, it is necessary to remove this particular tariff item, viz. 424 b 1, from the exchange adjustment list.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed ti rough its remaining stages without re-“ quests or debate.

page 2318

CUSTOMS TARIFF (No. 7) 1939.

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator MCBRIDE read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator McBRIDE:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · South Australia · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This measure provides for the imposition of a duty of Id. a lineal foot on unexposed sensitized kinematograph film and an increase of Id a lineal foot on positive kinematograph film for exhibition purposes and on home kinematograph film.

In the case of unexposed kinematograph film, provision is made for its admission free of duty subject to departmental by-law. It is proposed to exercise the provisions of this by-law in cases where Australian motion picture film studios, such as the film studios at “Waverley, Sydney, and the producers of Australian newsreels, would be adversely affected by the Id. duty. .

The Government’s proposals for additional revenue were introduced in connexion with the Supplementary Budget last week, and are expected to realize approximately £107,000 during the current financial year.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

Tn committee:

Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.

Schedule

Senator McBRIDE:
UAP

– No; these are revenue, and not protective, duties, and they apply to all imported film.

Schedule agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without requests; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 2318

EXCISE TARIFF (No. 3) 1939

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator MCBRIDE read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator McBRIDE:
. Assistant Minister for Commerce · South Australia · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The measure relates to petrol produced from shale by the National Oil Proprietary Limited at Glen Davis, New South Wales. Under the existing excise tariff, petrol derived from shale mined in Australia is delivered free of excise duty. Under the National Oil Proprietary Limited Agreement Act 1937, the Commonwealth Government undertook to grant protection to petrol produced by the National Oil Proprietary Limited from shale mined at Glen Davis up to 10,000,000 gallons per annum, against petrol produced from imported crude oil to the extent of the excise duty then operating, namely, 5£d. a gallon. The. excise duty on petrol produced from imported crude oil was recently increased by id. a gallon, and in these circumstances the Government is now exercising its right under the agreement to impose an excise duty of Id. a gallon on the company’s production up to 10,000,000 gallons per annum. Production in excess of 10,000,000 gallons per annum will be subject to the ordinary petrol excise duty of 6-Jd. a gallon. The additional revenuereturn from this source for the present financial year is expected to be £20,000.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 2318

CUSTOMS TARIFF (NEWFOUNDLAND PREFERENCE) 1939

Bil] received from the House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended.

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

Secondreading

Senator McBRIDE:
South AustraliaAssistant Minister for Commerce · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This measure is complementary to the Trade Agreement (Newfoundland) Bill which has already been passed by the Senate. It merely provides the machinery necessary to give effect to the tariff concession accorded to Newfoundland under the agreement entered into between the Commonwealth and the Government of that country. Newsprinting paper, the produce or manufacture of Newfoundland, is dutiable at the general tariff rate embodied in the Schedule to the Customs Tariff 1933-1939, which, at present, is £4 a ton. Under the bill the British preferential tariff will apply to newsprint of Newfoundland origin. As newsprinting paper, when entitled to admission under the British preferential tariff, is at present free of customs duty, the proposal involves a reduction by £4 a ton of the existing duty on newsprint of Newfoundland origin. The bill places news- print, the produce or manufacture of N ewfoundland, in the same category, for tariff purposes, as newsprint of United Kingdom or Canadian origin. As the Senate has already approved the Trade Agreement Bill embodying this concession to Newfoundland, acceptance of the tariff amendment now before it is merely a formal matter.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 2319

PAPERS

The following papers were pre sented : -

Commonwealth Public Service Act - Sixteenth Report of the Commonwealth Public Service, by the Public Service Board, dated 4th December, 1939.

Defence Act - Regulations amended - Statutory Rules 1939. No. 160.

National Security Act -

National Security (Capital Issues) Regulations - Order of Exemption.

Regulations amended, &c - Statutory Rules 1938, No. 162- No. 164:

Sugar Agreement - Eighth Annual Reportof the Fruit Industry- Sugar Concession Committee, year ended 31st August, 1939.

Taxation Acts - Twenty-first Report of the Commissioner, year 1937-38 - Land Tax, Income Tax, and Estate Duty, and year 1938-39 - Sales Tax, Flour Tax, and Wool Tax.

Senate adjourned at 10.11 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 7 December 1939, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1939/19391207_senate_15_162/>.