1953-10-07 20 1 7 SENATE 359 0 1953-10-07 The President (Senator the Hon. A. M. McMullin) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers. 359 bill Assent to the following bills reported : - Entertainments Tax Abolition Bill 1953. Pay-roll Tax Assessment Bill 1953. 359 miscellaneous 359 KOU VICTORIA 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - Whilst I realize that matters associated with family well-being are partly the responsibility of the State governments, many millions of pounds are being expended by the Australian Government on increasing Australia's population by means of immigration, and I should like to know whether the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration will consider making a special grant in addition to the usual social services payments to the parents of the Gilgandra quadruplets who arrived in Australia yesterday. I understand that the family has been living in difficult circumstances, and I should like to know also whether the Minister for Immigration will, in his capacity as Minister for Labour and National Service, see that the father of the children, who is reported to be unemployed, is provided with a suitable job. I am fully aware of the responsibilities of. the State in connexion with this matter, but I bring it to the notice of the Minister because these newcomers are indeed new Australians. 359 K6Z VICTORIA LP Attorney-General 1 0 SPICER, John Senator SPICER - The question of making special grants in such circumstances is a matter for the Treasurer.I understand that in similar cases grants have been made in the past. However, I shall direct the attention of both the Treasurer and the Minister for Immigration to the honorable senator's question. 359 Questions 359 359 JQP CP 0 0 COOPER, Walter Senator COOPER - On the 30th September last, Senator McCallum asked the following question : - Will the Minister representing the Postmaster-General inform the Senate the purpose of the flimsy and unsightly building that is being erected on the National Circuit near the Kurrajong Hotel? Will the Minister direct that this ugly object be removed as soon as possible? The Postmaster-General has advised me as under: - An imported aluminium alloy prefabricated building is being erected on the National Circuit near the Kurrajong Hotel to provide accommodation for an automatic telephone exchange. This type of building was imported from overseas in order to provide the accommodation as expeditiously as possible and it will serve as the permanent telephone exchange for the area. The building will be painted and the surrounds treated with lawns and shrubs so that the property may present a satisfactory appearance. 359 359 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - Can the Minister for Trade and Customs inform the Senate whether there is any truth in a recent newspaper report that the Menzies-O'Sullivan Government does not propose to proceed with the appointment of the Australian Ambassador to Ireland and that the Government intends to close the Australian Mission in Dublin? Will the Minister also tell the Senate about the discussions he had with the Irish Government on this matter when he was in Ireland recently? Is not the Irish Government aware that the MenziesO'Sullivan Administration is not interested in Ireland and that it made only a token appointment because the Senate elections were approaching and the fate of the Minister's colleagues was in the balance? Is it not also true that, because the general elections will not be held until next year, the Government has no further use for Mr. Paul McGuire ? 359 JZI LP 1 0 O'SULLIVAN, Neil Senator O'SULLIVAN - The question asked by the honorable senator is distinctly offensive. If he thinks that by asking a question couched in such language he will do either Ireland or this country any good, I am afraid he is mistaken. This Government is oh the most cordial terms with the Government of Ireland. A great feeling of affection exists in Australia for the people of Ireland, and that feeling is, I am sure, reciprocated. I should be very sorry if the attitude of the honorable senator caused friction and disaffection between two friendly peoples. 360 KKR 0 0 FRASER, James Senator FRASER - Will the Attorney-General inform the Senate whether it is a fact that the Government appointed Mr. Paul McGuire ambassador to Ireland some time ago but that he has not yet taken up the appointment? Does the Government intend to cancel the appointment? 360 K6Z LP 1 0 SPICER, John Senator SPICER - The Prime Minister made a statement in the matter some days ago and indicated that negotiations were proceeding. I cannot give the honorable senator any more information. 360 360 K7A LP 1 0 SPOONER, William Senator SPOONER -On the 23rd September, Senator Henty asked the following question : - In view of the fact that recruiting for the Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Australian Navy is logging, will the Minister representing the Minister for the Navy endeavour to arrange periodical visits of aircraft-carriers to Tasmania in order to demonstrate the work of the Fleet Air Arm? I point out that Tasmania is «n island State and has always contributed a proportionately large percentage of the personnel of the Navy. The Minister for the Navy has now furnished the following information: - Periodical visits by Royal Australian naval aircraft-carriers to Tasmania in order to assist recruiting for the Fleet Air Arm are always, considered when programmes for naval ships are being planned. For example, H.M.A.S. Vengeance will be visiting Hobart from the 20th to the 23rd February.. 1954. Unfortunately, other more urgent commitments arose between H.M.A.S. Sydney's visit to Tasmania in 1.050 and her visit which occurred in February this year. For instance, in 1951, Sydney began an operational tour in Korea. After her arrival in Australia in Mardi, 1953, H.M.A.S. 'Vengeance underwent a refit and, on completion, the ship began training the naval air squadrons who will be embarked in H.M..A.S. Sydney during the forthcoming service away from Australia. In order that the maximum training by squadrons in a carrier can be achieved, it is generally necessary for the ship to carry out that training in northern waters during the winter months. Such a practice naturally restricts the time available for a carrier to be used for recruiting purposes. .Respite the fact that only two visits to Tasmania, have been made by aircraftcarriers to date, other steps have been and will be taken to bring the Fleet Air Arm to the notice of the public. For example, in August, 1953, a senior naval officer lectured in both Hobart and Launceston on the Fleet Air Arm. 360 360 KUA LP 1 0 MCLEAY, George Senator McLEAY - On the 16th September, Senator Mattner asked the following question: - Has the attention of the Minister representing the Minister for Commerce and Agriculture been drawn to a reported statement of the Prime Minister of India to the effect that India and other Asiatic countries were rapidly approaching self-sufficiency in the production of rice? As those countries have been supplied with grain under the Colombo plan and have been purchasers of wheat from Australia, what influence will the home supplies of rice in those countries have upon the market for Australian wheat? The Minister for Commerce and Agriculture has now furnished the following information : - Reports of increased rice production in Asia have been received, and world rice supplies this year are higher than they have been in recent years. The effect of increased rice supplies will naturally vary from year to year, increased rice, supplies would naturally limit the sales of wheat by Australia and other wheat exporting countries which arise from a substitution of wheat for rice in an attempt to make up a deficiency in rice supplies. However, there is normally only a limited degree of competition on world markets between wheat and rice, because of the decided preferences of different groups of consumers for either one or the other, and because of the steady rise in world population it seems that the long-term outlook For the export of wheat will remain sound. 360 360 KSN LP 0 0 MARRIOTT, John Senator MARRIOTT - Will the Minister for Trade and Customs inform the Senate whether the Government would consider an approach to the major oil companies with a request that they arrange to charge a uniform price for petrol throughout each State, thus enabling consumers in rural communities to pay the same price for petrol as that paid by city dwellers? 360 JZI LP 1 0 O'SULLIVAN, Neil Senator O'SULLIVAN - Though the question is of great importance, I do not believe that, the Australian Government could properly extend its activities into the commercial sphere concerned. Keen competition between the major oil companies in itself has some effect upon prices. I understand, also, that petrol and oil products are subject to control by the State prices control authorities. Generally, I would not be inclined to urge the Australian Government to intrude into this matter. 361 361 K7Y 0 0 TANGNEY, Dorothy Senator TANGNEY - I direct a question to the Attorney-General in relation to uniform divorce law. I do not desire my action in doing so to be interpreted as meaning that I advocate easier divorce laws. My purpose in asking this question is to ensure that no person in Australia shall be penalized merely because of geographical considerations in approaching an Australian court. Will the Attorney-General consult with the Prime Minister in order to bring before the next conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers the necessity for introducing uniform divorce laws throughout Australia? Will ho also discuss the possibility of the introduction of legislation to liberalize the meaning of the term " domicile " in. matrimonial cases by applying it on an Australia-wide basis instead of allowing it to apply, as at present, only to State residence? 361 K6Z LP 1 0 SPICER, John Senator SPICER - The honorable senator may recall that the previous Government took action to relieve to some degree the difficulties associated with separate domicile in the different States. That legislation is now operating to relieve that position. The honorable senator's suggestion that this matter might be brought before the next conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers is worthy of consideration, and I shall discuss it with the Prime Minister. 361 361 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - I ask the Minister for Trade and Customs whether there is any truth in the press report that the Menzies-O'Sullivan Government's helpmate and " fellow traveller ", Ernest Thornton, the Communist, whom the Government welcomed back from Peking recently and to whom it has given every help in organizing support for the World Federation of Trade Unions Congress in Vienna, has offered, and his offer has been accepted, to return to Australia to assist the Government's campaign at the next general election? Has the Government promised to. facilitate his re-entry into Australia, and has it given an assurance to him that it will not attempt to depart him ? 361 JZI LP 1 0 O'SULLIVAN, Neil Senator O'SULLIVAN - I do not share the honorable senator's interest: in Mr. Thornton. I am sure that the honorable senator's colleagues are just as thoroughly ashamed of him as are honorable senators on this side of the chamber, because in asking, his question he has grossly abused the procedures and privileges of the Senate. The honorable senator should be thoroughly ashamed of himself. 361 361 JQP CP 0 0 COOPER, Walter Senator COOPER - On the 23rd September, Senator Marriott asked the Minister representing the Postmaster-General - Will the- Minister representing thu l'ostmasterGeneral consider issuing regulations to enable the- provision of rental-free telephone services to blind persons? I point out that this facility would improve immeasurably the living conditions of blind persons in the' community and that as the cost of telephone calls would be paid in the usual way the revenue of the Telephone Branch would not be impaired by this provision. The Postmaster-General has now supplied the following reply : - The policy which has also been followed by previous governments, is to apply the appropriate rental charges in all cases, and it is not practicable for the department to discriminate between one section of lbc community and another in this matter. 361 361 KKR 0 0 FRASER, James Senator FRASER - Can the Attorney-General say whether the Government will give serious consideration to the adoption of a resolution of the International Labour Organization at Geneva in 1951 to the effect that the Australian Government will seek means to apply the principle of the payment of equal remuneration to both male and female workers for work of equal value? Will the Minister take steps to include this item in the agenda of the next conference of Common wealth and State Ministers? 361 K6Z LP 1 0 SPICER, John Senator SPICER - The matter that lias been raised by the honorable senator falls peculiarly within the province of ibo Minister for Labour and National Service, with whom I shall discuss if. I will place before that Minister the suggestion that the honorable senator has made. 362 362 K6P 0 0 BROWN, Gordon Senator BROWN - I preface a question to the Minister for Trade and Customs by pointing out that newspaper reports recently have disclosed what is happening at Woomera, and the action that is being taken by the Government of the United States of America to prepare the defences of that country to withstand attacks by atomic bombs. Will the Minister inform the Senate whether the Australian Government has any plan to defend, for instance, the Queensland cities of Townsville and Cairns, against such attacks? Is the Minister in a position to assure honorable senators and the people of this country that Australia has made satisfactory progress in the matter of defence against those particularly horrible weapons ? 362 JZI LP 1 0 O'SULLIVAN, Neil Senator O'SULLIVAN - I have no hesitation at all in assuring the honorable senator that I, personally, am very confident that our military experts and advisers are fully conscious of the tremendous dangers inherent in atomic warfare. Proper steps are being taken, to the best of our ability, to protect this country and its people from that menace. Doubtless the honorable senator will agree with me that it would be unwise and very dangerous for the Government to broadcast details of what the Department of Defence has in hand and in train in connexion with this matter. 362 362 KAW 0 0 WEDGWOOD, Ivy Senator WEDGWOOD asked the Minister representing the Minister for Commerce and Agriculture, upon notice - Is it a fact that certain areas are found to produce better types of butter than others? Is there any truth in a recently published statement that in areas in New Zealand the best butter in the world is being produced? If no, will the Minister ascertain what factors are contributing to the superior quality of butter being produced in New Zealand, and see that similar methods are adopted in Australia? 362 KUA LP 1 0 MCLEAY, George Senator McLEAY - The Minister for Commerce and Agriculture has supplied the following answers to the honorable senator's questions: - It is generally accepted that some areas in Australia are more suited for the production of high quality butter than others - the main factors being the natural and seasonal conditions. I have not seen any such statement. However, I am advised by experienced technical officers of my department that in their judgment "choicest" quality Australian butter is equal to New Zealand butter of similar grade. It is a fact that a greater percentage of New Zealand butter is graded as being of the highest grade than is the case in Australia. The main reasons are stated to be more favorable natural and climatic conditions and closer proximity of dairy farms to butter factories. There are few essential differences in the methods adopted in the two countries, and there is a continual exchange of information. 362 362 K0Z ALP 1 0 AYLETT, William Edward Senator AYLETT (through Senator Critchley) asked the Minister representing the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice - How many persons are employed by the Australian Stevedoring Industry Board at Hobart, and what are their salaries? How many waterside workers are employed in the southern ports of Tasmania? 362 K6Z LP 1 0 SPICER, John Senator SPICER - The Minister for Labour and National Service has furnished the following reply: - There are seven full-time employees of the hoard at Hobart and two part-time. Their salaries are - One local representative, £1,292 per annum: one allocator-inspector, £1,058 per annum; four clerks, £926 per annum; £890 per annum ; £818 per annum, and £770 per annum ; one Assistant-Typing (Records), £664 per annum; two part-time cleaners, £3 per week and £5 2s. 5d. per week. At Hobart, the only southern Tasmanian port where there is continuous work, the registered labour strength was 634 on the 25th September, 1953. 362 KBW LP 1 0 WRIGHT, the Hon. Sir Reginald Charles, Kt Senator WRIGHT (through Senator Annabelle Rankin) asked the Minister representing the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice - In reference to cafeteria service? mentioned in the last report of the Australian Stevedoring Industry Board as costing something of the order of £33,000, will the Minister state where, in what places, in what circumstances, and on what terms are cafeteria services supplied by the board? 362 K6Z 0 0 SPICER, John Senator SPICER - I have received the following information from the Minister for Labour and National Service: - The food services mentioned in the Board's last report as costing £33,908 for the year 1951-52 are situated in the following places: - New South Wales. - Snack bar, No. 7a Circular Quay, Sydney; cafeteria, Walsh Bay, Sydney; snack bar, No. 37 Darling Harbour, Sydney; snack bar, No. 3 Wharf, Woolloomooloo, Sydney; snack bar, No. 4a Darling Harbour, Sydney; cafeteria, Glebe Island, Sydney; snack bar, Sussex-street pick-up centre, Sydney; snack bar, Town's Bond pick-up centre, Sydney; snack bar, No. ' 11 Walsh Bay, Sydney; cafeteria, Port Waratah, Newcastle. Victoria. - Cafeteria, No. C Berth, Yarraville; snack bar, No. 20 South Wharf, Fisherman's Bend. South Australia. - Cafeteria, Outer Harbour, Port Adelaide; cafeteria, I.C.I. Wharf, Osborne; kitchen, 1 Finsbury; cafeteria, Birkenhead; cafeteria, No. 19 Berth, Port Adelaide; cafeteria, No. 11 Berth, Port Adelaide; cafeteria, No. 5 Berth, Port Adelaide. Queensland. - Snack bar, Newstead Wharf, Brisbane; snack bar, Dalgety's Wharf, Bulimba; cafeteria, Jetty Wharf, Outer Harbour, Townsville. Western Australia.- Cafeteria, Victoria Quay, Fremantle Early in 1943 the then Government decided on the establishment of food services for waterside workers. Also that these services be operated on behalf of the Department oi Supply and Shipping by the Food Services Branch of the Department of Labour and National Service, as this branch was already operating a large number of food services on behalf of other Commonwealth departments. Tit 1948, the Department of Supply and Shipping transferred its interest in waterside food services to the Stevedoring Industry Commission, which was later succeeded by the Australian Stevedoring Industry Board. The circumstances which gave rise to the establishment of waterside food services were, and are, lack or inadequacy of facilities for waterside workers to obtain meals. They were not established at any point where private enterprise or the port authority had already provided adequate facilities. 363 363 232369 ALP 0 0 HARRIS, John Senator HARRIS asked the Minister representing the Minister acting for the Minister in charge of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization - Is it a fact that the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization has officers stationed at the Ord River in the Kimberleys of Western Australia; if so, how long have these officers been stationed on this site? Have any reports been received by the Minister from that centre; if so, what are the results of those reports? 363 K6Z LP 1 0 SPICER, John Senator SPICER - As Minister acting for the Minister in charge of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization I now supply the following information in reply to the honorable senator's questions : - Yes. A technical officer was appointed to the Kimberley Research Station by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization in 1949, and a research officer in 1950. There has usually been one assistant in addition, and there are other officers at the station who belong to the Department of Agriculture of Western Australia. No printed reports on the investigations at the Kimberley Research Station have yet been' issued. However, the Kimberley Research Station Policy Committee, formed as a result of correspondence between the Prime Minister of the Commonwealth and the Premier of Western Australia, has submitted two reports to the Commonwealth and State Governments, dated the 1st May, 1952, and the 23rd March, 1953. The Kimberley Research Station Policy Committee consists of two State and two Commonwealth representatives, the two latter being Mr. C. S. Christian, Officer-in-charge, Laud Research and Regional Survey Section, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, and Mr. G. Rudduck, of the Department of National Development. At its meeting this year the policy committee noted the promise shown by sugar cane, rice and oil seeds, and endorsed a recommendation that work should be concentrated on these crops which seem to hold greatest promise for irrigation settlement in this environment. The committee agreed that the attention of the government authorities concerned with overall development should be drawn to the promise shown by current experimental work at the station. It was noted, however, that additional data were necessary before any firm recommendations could be made concerning this area. 363 363 K0L 0 0 PEARSON, Rex Senator PEARSON asked the Minister representing the Postmaster-General, upon notice - Has the Postmaster-General's Department approved the erection of a new post office at Tumby Bay, on Byre Peninsula, South Australia? If so, when will the work be put in hand? 363 JQP CP 0 0 COOPER, Walter Senator COOPER - The Postmaster-General has furnished the following information in reply to the honorable senator's questions : - Yes. Tenders have been invited for the erection of the building. If a satisfactory offer is received the work will be commenced at an early date. 364 364 KT8 0 0 MCCALLUM, John Senator McCALLUM asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice - When and by what authority was it determined that members of this chamber should be styled " senators " ? What senators are entitled to be addressed as "senator the honorable"? When and by what authority was it determined that members of the House of Representatives should be styled "M.P."? 364 JZI LP 1 0 O'SULLIVAN, Neil Senator O'SULLIVAN - The Prime Minister has supplied the following answers to the honorable member's questions : - On the 12th April, 1901, the Commonwealth Government, led by Sir Edmund Barton, decided that members of the House of Representatives should be designated M.P. and not M.H.R., and that members of the Senate should be styled senator. The designation " senator " appears, of course,in the Constitution itself. The prefix "honorable" is granted, in the case of a senator, to - Members of the Federal Executive Council. Office in the council is held during the pleasure of the Governor-General, and the style may thus be retained when a senator is no longer a member of Cabinet but simply a member of the council " not under summons ". The President of the Senate. The Monarch in the past has been graciously pleased to approve that the style " honorable " be retained by senators who have held the office of President of the Senate for a period of not less than three years. 364 miscellaneous 364 KH5 VICTORIA 0 0 GORTON, John Senator GORTON - In accordance with the obligations of the Foreign Affairs Committee as defined by a resolution of the Houses appointing that committee, I bring up a statement advising the Parliament that the committee has forwarded to the Minister acting for the Minister for External Affairs a report relating to the committee'sactivities and functions. 364 miscellaneous 364 364 JZY WESTERN AUSTRALIA LP 0 0 PALTRIDGE, Shane Senator PALTRIDGE - I present the report of the Public Accounts Committee on the following subject: - Fifth report - Department of Works. 364 bill Bill received from the House of Representatives. Standing Orders suspended. 364 Motion (by Senator Spooner) proposed - That the bill be now read a first time. 364 K0W New South Wales 0 0 ASHLEY, William Senator ASHLEY . - I take this opportunity to speak about a matter of grave importance. I refer to the leak of budget information that occurred a few weeks ago during a court case in which. Mr. Reichenbach applied for an injunction against the directors of Associated Newspapers Limited, and John Fairfax and Sons Proprietary Limited. As most honorable senators are aware, Mr. Irish, a director of Associated Newspapers Proprietary Limited, and Mr. Angus McLachlan. General Manager of the Sydney Morning Herald, were received in Canberra and certain business was transacted. When, in the course of court proceedings, Mr. Irish was asked by Mr. Gordon Wallace. Q.C., how he had arrived at certain figures, he told the court he had learned while in Canberra that the company tax was to be reduced from 9s. to 7s. in the £1 . Such information of course would not only be of considerable advantage to Mr. Irish, but also could be used to great advantage on the stock exchanges of this country. The Government has attempted to brush the matter aside. It has ignored all protests. Would any other government in the world have treated such a matter so lightly? Are the prestige and honor of the Parliament to be disregarded because the Government is reluctant to institute an inquiry into the matter? If ever there was justification for an exhaustive investigation there is justification in this instance. Mr. Irish has admitted that he got the information in Canberra. What are we to assume from that admission ? Who gave him the information? 364 K7A 0 0 SPOONER, William Senator Spooner - When did he say that he got the information in Canberra ? 364 K0W 0 0 ASHLEY, William Senator ASHLEY - He said it in the court. Perhaps Mr. Irish got his information from the Minister for National Development (Senator Spooner) on an earlier occasion and not when he visited Canberra at the time in question. 365 K7A 0 0 SPOONER, William Senator Spooner - He did not say what the honorable senator has attributed to him. 365 K0W 0 0 ASHLEY, William Senator ASHLEY - I shall be able to show that he did. He was in Canberra not only on this particular Sunday when he received attention, in regard to company affairs, which no other person had ever before received, when he had the benefit of office accommodation and was also provided with a typewriter and everything else. The Government of this country has not appreciated the seriousness of the fact that apparently budget information was given out to certain people before the budget was presented in the Parliament. In the past, this Parliament has been guided by the practices of the parliaments of the United Kingdom and other democracies. We have tried t,o follow the traditional customs of those parliaments. Honorable senators no doubt remember that, when Dr. Hugh Dalton was Chancellor of the Exchequer in England, information concerning the budget, which had not then been presented to the Parliament, was handed out to the press. Although no advantage was sought thereby, and although the incident was an entirely casual one. Dr. Dalton was obliged to resign his office. The late Mr. J. H. Thomas was also forced to resign the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer in similar circumstances. Yet this Government has treated this matter lightly and has attempted to brush it aside. It should not be forgotten that Mr. Irish, is an accountant in a very big way. In fact, he is an officer of an organization which represents a. large number of accountants in Australia. Therefore, by acquiring that information, he was placed in a most advantageous position. It is admitted that he was in Canberra for only two hours on the Sunday when he did this important business on. behalf of Associated Newspaper Proprietary Limited and the Sydney Morning Herald. It has been said that only three persons, the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies), the Treasurer (Sir Arthur Fadden), and the Secretary. Department of the Treasury. Dr. Ronald Wilson, were aware of the contents of the budget. Where, then, did Mr. Irish obtain his information? He was able to glean information which could vitally affect his company and be used toadvantage on the stock exchange. The Minister for National Development has expressed doubt whether certain statements were made during the court hearing.In order to convince the honorable senator. I propose to refer to a portion of the transcript of the evidence. At pages 149 and 150 of the transcript of Wednesday, the 16th September last, the following questions and answers appear : - Q.Astothe£130,000towhichyouhave deposed asbeing your estimate of the savings to be effected - naturally that would be before the payment of tax? - A. Yes. Taking the tax as it then was at9s. in the pound;first of alla saving whichno doubt you included in the £130,000 would be, say,at5% on the £678,000by which you would reduce your overdraft? - A. Yes. That equals £34,000 does it not? - A.Yes. Q. £34,000 from £130,000 equals £96,000the balance? - A.Yes. Then. I suppose, you will readily agree that the tax on the £130,000 would be £58,500 at9s. in the £1? - A. Yes. So that the savingsaftertax would be £71,500? - A. Yes. And on a9s. in the £1. basis upon which you were no doubt working - correct? - A. Yes, and no. You did not know the budget, didyou? - A. I had a good idea, I think, You did not know it was going to be a 2s. reduction? - A. I happened to have certain discussions in Canberra about it which made me realise it would be close to that figure. I suggest that this is a matter of grave importance. Although it has been stated in sworn evidence, the Minister for National Development denies that it was said. No doubt he would like to wave the matter aside, but I suggest that it is too serious for that to be permitted. The most exhaustive investigation by the Government is called for. The evidence proceeds - Q.Areyousuggestingthatyou,Mr.Irish, couldhaveanydiscussionsatCanberrabefore theissueofthebudgetatwhichyouwould getanyreliableinformationastowhatthe provisionsofthebudgetonsuchanimportant matterwouldbe?-A.No,butIwasableto conclude- How was he able to conclude, unless he spoke to somebody who knew something about the budget? The evidence continues - Mr. Wallace. ; Q. I understood you told me that you worked on 9s. in the ?1? - A. Yes, and also 'considered other figures. We will come to the other figures in a moment. Let us adhere to the 9s. for the moment. So there you have net savings, after tax, of ?71,500. \o\i have agreed with that, have you not? - A. Yes. His HONOUR - I do not follow that, Mr. Wallace. Mr. Wallace. ?130,000 the tax there at 9s. - that is the current rate - ?58,500. That leaves a balance of ?71,500 as the net savings after tax. His Honour. - It depends on what you call net savings. You had already put it to Mr. Irish that they saved ?34,000* in interest. Mr. Hardie. ; Q. Mr. Gray, in one of his affidavits, referred to the fact that in 1933 some substantial reduction in ordinary capital had been made. Was that a repayment of share capital? - A. From inquiries I have made, no. What type of capital reduction was it? - ' A. lt was a reduction of capital to write off the capital losses on the Guardian and Evening News. You were asked questions yesterday about the appointment to the Board of Associated Newspapers of two additional Directors, namely Mr. Fairfax and Mr. Henderson? - A. Yes. You said that that, in your view, was the best possible protection to you. What were you referring to there? - A- By "us" 1 meant Associated Newspapers as a party to the arrangement with the Sydney Morning Herald. Why, in your view, was it the best possible protection to your Company? - A. If the two representatives of that major shareholder .became Directors of the Company, they automatically assumed a duty of trust towards the whole body of shareholders and, from my post experience, where you have two different companies trying to work in a joint venture an arrangement such as that has proved to be of great practical benefit and protection to the general body of shareholders. The next question is important because it refers to a previous visit to Canberra. The transcript continues - Reference has been made in some part of the case, I have forgotten whether it was in an affidavit of Mr. Packer's or elsewhere, to your presence at Canberra in the week between the 19th August and the 20th August. Were you in Canberra during that week? - A. Yes,, on the morning of the 20th I gave evidence on behalf of the Institute of Chartered Accountants before the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee. It is possible that he may have got the information at that time. I do not limit the period when he may have obtained it to the Sunday because he was in Canberra on that particular Sunday for only two hours. In that time apparently he was able to get close to some members of the Government or its supporters to discuss the matter. The record of the court proceedings continues - Your business in Canberra on that occasion had nothing to do with this matter? - A. No, not at all. In fact you are Vice-President of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Australia? - A. Yes. You are also Chairman of the New South Wales Council of the Institute? - A. That is correct. Exhibit " Q " is a copy of a memorandum to the Chairman dated 30th September, 1952, signed by you on behalf of the Committee. Do you know the document? - A. Yes. That evidence, which was given in a court of law, suggests that Mr. Irish obtained the information in Canberra. He could have obtained it only from persons who knew the contents of the budget. 366 K7A 0 0 SPOONER, William Senator Spooner - Where does Mr. Irish state in the evidence that he obtained the information ? 366 K0W 0 0 ASHLEY, William Senator ASHLEY - I wish that he had stated in so many words where he obtained it. The Minister for National Development could be implicated. It is the duty of the Government to discover where Mr. Irish obtained it. 366 K7A 0 0 SPOONER, William Senator Spooner - He did not say that . he obtained it. 366 K0W 0 0 ASHLEY, William Senator ASHLEY - The Government should ask Mr. Irish where he obtained the information so that it can be cleared of the implication that it divulged important information concerning the budget proposals. If the Government did not give it to him, why did Mr. Irish state in sworn evidence that he obtained it in Canberra ? He did not go to Bourke or Broken Hill, but to Canberra, where he would find somebody who had knowledge of the budget's contents. Moreover, he found the person who could give it to him. If a representative of the Government is not guilty of furnishing budget information to Mr. Irish, the Government should take action against him to clear it of the charge. 367 KFW 0 0 GUY, James Allan Senator Guy - There is no charge. 367 K0W 0 0 ASHLEY, William Senator ASHLEY - Surely Senator Guy is not suggesting that Mr. Irish perjured himself in a court of law ? He has done irreparable harm to the Government and to the prestige of the Parliament by his allegations. I suggest that the Government should appreciate the seriousness of the position in which it has been placed and that it should initiate an inquiry to clear the reputation and prestige of the Government and the Parliament. Such an inquiry should be held as early as possible. I wish to refer now to the medical health scheme that was incorporated in a measure presented to the Parliament on the last day of the previous sessional period. That measure was framed to provide for pharmaceutical, sickness and hospital benefits, medical and dental services. The bill was introduced into the House of Representatives on the last day of the sessional period and was taken to the second reading stage. No opportunity was afforded honorable senators to discuss the measure. Since then, it has been put into effect by regulation. 367 JZI 0 0 O'SULLIVAN, Neil Senator O'sullivan - I rise to a point of order. I do not wish to stifle discussion, but the honorable senator should know that the matter to which he has referred is on the notice-paper in another place. In such an event, it is out of order for him to discuss the matter at this stage. Senator Ashley will have an opportunity to discuss it when the measure is being debated in this chamber. 367 10000 0 0 PRESIDENT, The The PRESIDENT - Order ! I uphold the point of order. 367 K0W 0 0 ASHLEY, William Senator ASHLEY - I suggest, Mr. President, that I am in order in discussing an order that has been put into operation by regulation. It is now operating. 367 JZI 0 0 O'SULLIVAN, Neil Senator O'sullivan - The honorable senator can discuss the matter when it comes before the Senate. 367 K0W 0 0 ASHLEY, William Senator ASHLEY - I ask for a ruling, Mr. President. 367 10000 0 0 PRESIDENT, The The PRESIDENT - I have ruled that discussion at this stage is out of order. 367 K0W 0 0 ASHLEY, William Senator ASHLEY - The measure has been put into operation by regulation, and it is already affecting a large number of persons. 367 10000 0 0 PRESIDENT, The The PRESIDENT - The honorable senator is not in order in discussing tha matter at this stage. 367 K0W 0 0 ASHLEY, William Senator ASHLEY - I am astounded. 367 KTN 0 0 MCKENNA, Nicholas Senator McKenna - I rise to order. I believe that there may be some misunderstanding. I agree completely, Mr. President, with your ruling that no reference may be made in this chamber to a debate that is taking place in another place or any legislation that is pending there. Unquestionably, that is correct, but I submit to you that many provisions of the health scheme are actually in operation. They have been put into force by regulations made under the National Health Act. Senator Ashley proposes to comment on a portion of the scheme that is in force under existing regulations. Perhaps you did not understand him on that point. I suggest that he is completely in order in discussing provisions of the measure that have been operating by regulation for many months and, in some cases, for years. I believe that your ruling was not directed against that portion of the health scheme. 367 JZI LP 0 0 O'SULLIVAN, Neil Senator O'SULLIVAN - I wish to make my point of order clear. I agree with the submission that has been made by the Leader of the Opposition (Senator McKenna). I rose to order earlier because I understood that Senator Ashley was criticizing a bill that was on the notice-paper. I would not press the point of order if Senator Ashley's comments have relation only to something that is an established fact. 367 10000 0 0 PRESIDENT, The The PRESIDENT - Order! In the circumstances, Senator Ashley may proceed. 367 K0W 0 0 ASHLEY, William Senator ASHLEY - I do not propose to make any comment upon a measure that is to be discussed, but I direct attention to provisions that have been put into effect and are already operating. They include hospitalization, medical benefits and pharmaceutical benefits. Discussions have been held in connexion with the supply of medicines to certain persons, and disputes have followed deputations by chemists on the question of prices they are receiving for medicines that they supply to pensioners. Complaints have reached me in connexion with certain organizations that are associated with the health scheme. Yesterday a complaint waa referred to me by a person who joined the Hospitals Contribution Fund of New South Wales, which has its head-quarters sit 7 Hamilton-street, Sydney. He claims that he is not a chronic sufferer. This patient was in hospital from the 10th May, 1953, until the 7th June, 1953. He was a patient for 28 days at 24s. a day, a total of £33 12s. From that amount there is to be deducted a government allowance of £.!t 4s. Although that man had been subscribing to the Hospital Contributions Fund of New South Wales, he received a bill for £22- Ss., after the Government allowance of £11 7s. had l,een deducted, and he was asked to remit that amount. That instance illustrates what is happening in respect of these benefits. I remind honorable senators I hut recently a spokesman for the friendly societies stated' publicly that those societies were prepared to make up prescriptions for age and invalid pensioners ;it a cost of 4s. 6d. each. Officers of friendly societies have told me that the most lucrative part of their activities is the making up of prescriptions for pensioners at that rate. Yet, some weeks igo, the Minister for Social Services (Mr. Townley), when he was acting for the Minister for Health (Sir Earle Page) in the absence of the latter abroad, and, subsequently, the Minister for Health himself, received deputations from, representatives of the chemists who stated that it would be unprofitable for chemists to make up prescriptions under the Government's pharmaceutical benefits scheme at ii fee of less than 10s. each. I should like to know how the chemists can justify that claim, when, as I have said, friendly societies find it profitable to make up proscriptions for pensioners at a fee "f 4s. 6d. each. Having regard to those facts, the Senate should demand a comprehensive explanation from the Government dealing with the operations of the pharmaceutical benefits scheme. T have mentioned only one aspect of the scheme that is causing grave concern in the community. 1 appreciate the difficulties which confront' the Government in fully implementing the'' scheme, because my colleagues and I recall only too well the difficulties which confronted the Leader of the Opposition (Senator McKenna) when, as Minister for Social Services in the Chifley Government; he endeavoured to implement the health and medical services scheme which that Government evolved. Dealing with, this Government's health and medical services, I point out thai, the Medical Benefits Fund of Australia, which is an approved fund for purposes of the scheme, is controlled by doctors. I have noted some strange happenings in respect of that organization. For instance, whenever a. government; advertisement relating to the health scheme has been published in the press, almost invariably one has seen alongside it an advertisement for the Medical Benefits Fund of Australia. Indeed, in the early stages of the scheme, advertisements on behalf of that organization were illustrated by a photograph of two healthy Australian girls emerging from the surf which bad originally appeared in a brochure published with th imprimatur of the Minister for Health. The advertisements of the Medical Benefits Fund of Australia also contained a paragraph to the effect that the fund was sponsored by the medical profession. When I was challenged on this matter by the British Medical Association, I produced evidence to show that 19 of 23 directors of the fund in New South Wales, five out of six directors of the fund in Queensland, and all five directors of the fund in Tasmania, were doctors. Surely no honorable senator can justify on ethical grounds a position in which an approved organization under the Government's national health scheme isoverwhelmingly controlled by doctors who in their capacity as officials of the fund will supervise the distribution of benefitsamounting to approximately £1,000,000' from which the net benefit must ultimately be derived by doctors. Such a position is untenable, and the Government should rectify it as soon as possible. 368 KPI 0 0 KENDALL, Roy Senator KENDALL - The doctors do not derive any benefit in their capacity as directors of an approved fund, becausethe fund is a. non-profit-making organization. ° 368 K0W 0 0 ASHLEY, William Senator ASHLEY - The Medical Benefits Fund of Australia, like other similar approved organizations under the Government's national health scheme, has been set up in competition with the friendly societies which for nearly 100 years have been the medium through which benefits of this kind have been made available to the community. In that sphere, those societies have rendered a wonderful service, and I can see no justification whatsoever for setting up other organizations to compete with them. Senator Kendall has said that the Medical Benefits Fund of Australia is a nonprofitmaking organization. That fund will certainly not make much profit if it, continues to incur expenditure on publicity at the rate at which it has incurred it; up to date. On one day alone, the cost of advertisements inserted in the press on behalf of that, organization was £350. The Government should not condone a system whereby the distribution of subsidies which it rnakes available is coutrolled by a section of the community which, obviously, must derive most benefit from the provision of such financial assistance. For these reasons I trust that the Government will afford an early opportunity to the Parliament to discuss the measure that was introduced during the last sessional period, but upon which, n p to date, only the Minister for Health has made his second-reading speech. Members of the Opposition could make a valuable contribution to such a discussion as the result of the experience that was gained by the Chifley Government in its endeavours to implement its national health scheme. 369 KT8 NEW SOUTH WALES LP 0 0 MCCALLUM, John Senator McCALLUM . - At this juncture, I do not intend to take any notice of the remarks which have just been made by Senator Ashley because the Senate will be afforded an opportunity at the proper time to deal with the matters that he discussed. Government supporters will then be able to answer any point that he raised that really calls for a reply. I intend to address myself to the problem of. the development of the National Capital. I have raised this matter on previous occasion?, somewhat sporadically, perhaps, in questions that I have addressed to the appropriate Minister. A reply that was supplied to me only this afternoon in answer to a question that I asked on this subject completely supports the thesis which I now intend to put forward, namely, that Canberra has not been developed at any time in the manner in which it should be developed. I hope that no honorable senator will interpret that remark as a criticism of anything that has been done by this Government or by previous governments. Indeed, I make it in criticism of the citizens of Australia as a whole and of members of the Parliament regardless of their party political colour. There has been towards this capital city an attitude of contempt, carefully cultivated in the press and by certain special interests. Therefore, I wish to go back to the beginning and remind the Senate why this city is here. It is here because of an obligation in the Constitution, Section 125 of which reads - The seat of Government of the Commonwealth shall be determined by the Parliament, and shall be within territory which shall have been granted to or acquired by the Commonwealth, and shall be vested in and belong to the Commonwealth, and shall be in the State of New South Wales, and be distant not less than one hundred miles from Sydney. Honorable senators who have studied the history of the framing of the Constitution know that that provision was inserted in order to overcome certain jealousies and animosities, which unhappily existed at that time, between the colonies, particularly the two more populous colonies of New South Wales and Victoria. There was a clear obligation on the Parliament to honour that provision, and a good deal has been done to develop the very magnificent site that was chosen. Last year I had an opportunity to see some very beautiful country in other lands, including the Scottish highlands, parts of France, and the Rockies in North America. I know of no cities in other countries which can compare in pleasantness, picturesqueness, and absolute grandeur with Canberra. People who have been to Washington, the capital city of the United States of America, have said how marvellously better off is Canberra. It is a better place in every way, and I congratulate members of both Houses of the Parliament who, in the first decade of the Commonwealth, chose this site. The events of those days have been described fully in the reminiscences of the late Mr. W. M. Hughes. I shall not venture to say who deserves the greatest credit, but Mr. John Christian Watson, a former Prime Minister, who had a discerning eye for beauty, said that it was a magnificent site, and much has been made of it. We all should pay great tribute to the original plan, and certain modifications of it. I do not think that the plan was a perfect plan by any means, but it is not possible to evolve a perfect plan. Every plan should be capable of being altered and adapted, particularly in the initial stages, and it would probably be very good if this plan were modified a little further. However, I give credit to the people who accepted it, and particularly to people responsible for planting the trees which, next to the natural surroundings, the hill and valley and so forth, are the main attraction of the place. I do not think there is any other place in the world where there is such a marvellous collection of trees. We have our own native trees. People make the foolish complaint that this city is not distinctly Australian. What is distinctly Australian ? Australia will be what we make it. We started with, natural surroundings, but we could not be governed entirely by that consideration, and consequently there were planted various trees as distinctly Australian as any other, but we have also planted here trees of every othercontinent. The result is something very pleasing, and something that .makes a natural setting. But what people call the main part of a city has not yet appeared. Somebody has described. Canberra as a number of suburbs in search of a city, and London Punch, for once recovering some of its former humour, is reported to have stated that London was a city without a plan, but that Canberra was a plan without a city. There is a great deal in that comment. But Canberra is taking form much more quickly than many people realize. Since 1949, when I became a member of the Senate, a great many changes have taken place, and we shall see many more. I now wish to make a specific complaint against the kind of thing that has happened in Canberra. I believe that it was the duty of successive governments to see that buildings erected here conformed in every way with the intentions of the founders. But what do we find? The only building which in my opinion even approaches grandeur is the Australian War Memorial, about which I have no word of criticism. The building in which we are now sitting is quite a dignified structure, and this chamber, as well as the other House, is a very pleasant place in which to sit. The facade of the building is quite dignified, but I always feel, as I walk up the front steps, that its appearance is like a Scotsman's change - right, but only just. I think that the Parliament of the Commonwealth deserves something finer and more magnificent than baa been given to it. Partly because of the exigencies of war and the immediate post-war period, and partly also because a harassed department can always put up a plea for doing something in a hurry, an enormous number of unworthy buildings has been erected in Canberra. I remind honorable senators of an answer that was furnished to-day to a question that I had asked the Minister representing the Postmaster-General, upon notice, concerning a building, which I described as flimsy, unsightly and ugly, that is being erected near the Hotel Kurrajong. I inquired whether it would be removed as soon as possible. The Minister for Repatriation (Senator Cooper.) read to the Senate a perfectly honest and straightforward reply that had been supplied by the Postmaster-General (Mr. Anthony), to the effect that the building was an imported aluminium prefabricated structure, and that it would be a permanent building. The building is being placed right in front of what I believe to be the site for the permanent Parliament House, just below Capital Hill, where every visitor to Canberra, will see it, and it is to be a permanent building! Without apologizing for that fact,. but indicating that it needed apology, the Postmaster-General stated that the building would be painted, and that lawns and shrubs would be planted so that the surroundings would present a satisfactory appearance. That seems to them to be sufficient in the capital city of Australia. If it were something placed miles away from anywhere else I could understand that attitude, but I wish to say emphatically that a prefabricated aluminium building is not the type of building that should be a permanent building in this city. Many people will say, instinctively, that the authorities tried to hide it with shrubs; 1 hope that ^poplars will be planted, in order to hide it completely. 371 JZQ 0 0 ANDERSON, Kenneth Senator Anderson - What will it cost? 371 KT8 0 0 MCCALLUM, John Senator McCALLUM - We shall be able to ascertain the cost later. This is not an isolated instance. This sort of thing has been happening for years. Even before the war there was displayed an enormous lack of foresight in Canberra. As a member of the Library Committee, I have been deeply concerned with the development of the National Library, which, as honorable senators know, is united with the Parliamentary Library. 371 KAC 0 0 VINCENT, Victor Senator Vincent - I hope the honorable senator did not agree to the design of the new archives building? 371 KT8 0 0 MCCALLUM, John Senator McCALLUM - I did, but I shall refer to that subject again. I am referring now to the little doll's house near the Hotel Kurrajong. I have been told that it was erected during the depression to provide work - a perfectly worthy action - but that somebody was told to prepare a plan for it within a fortnight. When the Library Committee came to consider the inadequacies of the building, in order to see whether it could be fitted into any plan at all for a larger building, we found that it was virtually useless. It might be a decent library for a tiny village or some country town, but as a library in the National Capital it is absurd. ' The same thing is happening in every part of this city. In a magnificent site, between here and the Prime Minister's Lodge, there is an unsightly collection of huts. They had to be put somewhere. As they were constructed during the war, I do not blame the Minister who was responsible for their construction, but surely he could have chosen a better position for them. They are a blot, not only on the immediate landscape, but on the whole landscape of the city. It has been the policy to erect a rather cheap kind of prefabricated cottage of more or less uniform pattern in certain suburbs. I admit that immediately after the war the urgent problem was to find housing for people, but I do not admit that whole suburbs of this inferior type of building should have been erected. Either temporary accommodation should have been used or a better type of house erected. Comparative cheapness of construction does not necessarily result in sordidness of appearance. It is even possible to have prefabricated houses without dead, dull monotony. Prefabricated houses can be planned with imagination, but no imagination has been used in the planning of the houses to which I refer. I have asked the Ministers and architects connected with the construction of buildings in this city to use more imagination in the planning of the buildings. I have come to the sad conelusion that few people in this country, and possibly few people in the world, are really stirred by the sight of noble buildings and magnificent architecture. I happen to be one who is. In travelling through the world, the sights that remain as abiding memories are the great" buildings. Whether Canberra can be made a city of such buildings has yet to be proved. The Americans have erected some magnificent buildings in Washington which stands on a less noble site than this city. Even from photographs, one can tell that there is something inspiring in that city. Canberra should be built for the future, not for this generation. Senator Vincent said by interjection that he hoped that I did not approve of the huts that had been erected for the library. I did. But I did so most reluctantly and for a good reason. We found that the archives of the Commonwealth which are precious documents, were scattered throughout many buildings, some of which were not fire-proof, waterproof, or vermin-proof. It was essential to place those archives in one building, and it was proposed that Nissen huts should be erected in order to house them. I urged that the structures to be erected should be so intolerable that people would not endure them. These huts which I inspected the other day are enormous. Efforts have been made to take away some of their repulsiveness. I know that when a proposal is made to remove them some one will say that they are wanted for another purpose. Such buildings are the result of what has been called bureaucratic government. In using that term I am not censuring the Public Service, which consists of people of great ability who are giving great service to the country. But each unit of the Public Service consists of people who are immersed in their own special duty. They see matters from the point of view of their immediate problem. If a public servant's department is concerned in the housing of people he becomes determined to bouse people and concentrates on that objective. There is another group of these wretched buildings in this city. On the other side of the Hotel .Kurrajong stands a whole series of government offices which are utterly unworthy to be the government offices of the smallest State. I understand that they were erected because the chairman of the Public Service Board said that he must have accommodation for a certain number of officers within a certain time or the government of the country could -not continue. I appreciate the difficulty that existed. I should not object if temporary buildings which would be taken down in a year or two had been erected. But does any honorable senator believe that those buildings will be removed unless a government is prepared to make their removal a firstpriority job? As soon as a permanent, building is made available for the officers who are now housed in those buildings somebody will ask for them to be used for another purpose. Instead of having the city of palaces that was. originally envisaged we shall have a city of huts and odds and ends of architecture. My first complaint is that even buildings which are designed to be permanent are seldom of the type that we should have in this city. They have been designed largely by men without imagination. My second complaint is that, instead of permanent buildings, so-called temporary buildings are being constructed which may remain for 100 years and damn this place as a collection of dull and unimaginative buildings for all time. Even among the good type. of suburb in this city, the degree of foresight and imagination necessary to make them a harmonious whole has not been exercised. When the Parliament was first moved to its present location Canberra was not a city. It was a place to which the officers of the departments came reluctantly and to which many members of this Parliament came reluctantly. They came as late as they could and they left as early its they could. 1. am happy to say that that era has passed. Many officers now feel that this city is their home and some of our most distinguished public servants have lived here after their retirement. T am. happy to -say that a few members of the Parliament now live here, and when the housing shortage ceases I hope that more of us will be able to live here. This city should become a community. It should not consist merely of public servants. Such a settlement would be very lop-sided and might tend to grow out of touch with the ordinary people of the Commonwealth. I" think it is necessary that the various types of people to be found in Australia should be found in Canberra. It would be very difficult to bring them all here because certain industries flock to natural resources or to places with good communications or where they will be adjacent to allied industries. I do not think that it would be desirable to force Canberra to be a great industrial city or to make it a very large city. But some kind of light manufacturing industries and other industries might well be located in or pear Canberra in order to provide employment for those who are growing up here. It is not good that the young people of this city should feel that there is no future for them in the community, and that as soon as they grow up and want employment, they must go either to the cities or to other country centres. That is not good because it does nor allow families to live together. For that reason, I hope that a considered part of government policy will be to allow the establishment of a certain number of industries here in order to provide :i diversity of employment and prevent Canberra from being more or less out of touch with the rest of the Commonwealth. One institution that has been established in Canberra promises a great deal for this city. I refer to the Australian National University. I propose to speak at a later date about the value of the university itself; to-day I shall refer only to its value to this city and to the Government. It is good that we should have here people pursuing studies and interested in intellectual pursuits who can make personal acquaintance with the other inhabitants of the city, and who, in some instances at least, are available for consultation with members of this Parliament. It is good also that the head-quarters of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization should be in Canberra. Naturally we can have little more than, the head-quarters of that organization here because its work is distributed throughout the entire Commonwealth. It is good, too, that the National Library should be in Canberra, but it is most regrettable that it should be so inadequately accommodated as it is to-day. 1 hope that at an early date we shall have a big and worthy National Library building. In regard to the costliness of Canberra, I am prepared to face all the criticism that can be levelled. Canberra has been costly; but, after all, that costliness has flowed from an obligation placed upon the Parliament .by the Constitution. 1" give great credit to the present Minister for the Interior (Mr. Kent Hughes) for the great effort he has made to reduce the costliness of this city and to see that value is received for the money that is expended. I give great credit also to the Public Accounts Committee which is pursuing a laborious investigation of Canberra accounts to ensure that money voted for the National Capital is expended properly. I am not making a plea for lavish expenditure on Canberra at the expense of the development of outlying parts of the Commonwealth. We owe a very great duty to the States that we represent in this legislature, and to the territories which have no representation at all in the National Parliament. On some future occasion, when one of those measures that present an opportunity for a fairly general debate is before us, I shall expound my own ideas about the development of the No rtb ern TArrritory . I hope nobody will come to the conelusion that because I am advocating adequate .planning and adequate buildings for the National Capital X am wishing to rob any other place. I arn no believer in the policy that is called robbing Peter to pay Paul; but les any one should put forward the claim thai we have no right to spend any money on big buildings in Canberra while some other project is denied funds, I say now that arguments of that kind could be used to stifle almost any expenditure. 1. believe that governments must sometimes be a little arbitrary in their decisions. They must be prepared to say, " We realize that this money could bc spent in other ways, but we have a definite obligation 'under the Constitution to spend it on the National Capital". If I may. without irreverence, call attention to a very famous instance of wealth which seemed to be misspent, and to the answer that was given, I shall refer honorable senators to the gospel of St. Matthew. Chapter 26, verses 6 to 11. I shall not read the verses because I assume that most honorable senators 'are well acquainted with them. They refer to the incident when Mary Magdalene brough an alabaster box of precious ointment and annotated the feet of her Lord. The disciples rebuked her saying that, the ointment might have been sold for much and the money given to the poor. The answer was "Why trouble ye the woman? For she hath wrought a good work upon me".' I say with all due humility that any government that undertakes the adequate development of this city is doing a good work. After all there is much pressure against it and the representative of the citizens of Canberra in the House of Representatives has no vote on national issues. Therefore, Canberra has no real representation in the National Parliament and it behoves the whole of the public of Australia to undertake the task of laying down a policy. propose to make a few general suggestions for this Government and for future governments. First, I think there should be some general revision of the plan of the National Capital. I have heard some very amusing stories about that plan, and certain modification.0 already made to it, but not being an expert, I shall not go into that. I shall mention however certain matters that must strike everybody who travels around tins city. First, it is a most difficult place for any stranger to find his way around. That is hardly an advantage except perhaps to taxi drivers and others whose job it is to transport the public. 1 have never had any difficulty in forming a general idea of the lay-out of any etty built on the old " gridiron plan " as it used to be called. Occasionally I visit Melbourne - in a fruitless search for good weather - and I have no difficulty in finding my way around that city because it is built on a very simple plan. One has only to learn the names of the streets running from the railway station at which one arrives from Sydney to the other side of the city, and from the river Yarra up the hill, to be quite familiar with the main part of Melbourne. The city area of Sydney is just as simple. In New York, the problem is even easier because the streets are numbered. The plan of Canberra on the other hand is like a series of spider webs linked in some fashion, and unless I have a map 1 can easily find myself miles away from where I want to go. Whether any modification is possible to correct that disability I do not know, but it would be most desirable. We should insist upon having the best kind of architecture in Canberra. Recently I was reported in a journal as having said I believed in the modern idiom. That was a misunderstanding. I did not say that. I said I believed it was not impossible for an architect expressing himself in the modern idiom to design something beautiful, because there were some beautiful buildings that were fully modern; but I say most definitely that few of them are in Canberra, and that many of the buildings designed by Canberra architects are bare, uninteresting and even positively ugly. In fact, if one were to get a couple of matchboxes and put two mousetraps in between them, one could make a reasonably accurate model of many of the cottages now being erected here. Something should be done to coordinate the activities of the people of Canberra with those of the people of the Commonwealth generally. We should find some way of making this city serve the needs of both. That might require a modification of the plan, or perhaps it could be achieved in some other way. Next I believe that we should somehow try to put mischief beyond the power of any individual Minister, cabinet, party or parliament.' I have asked again and again why the statue of his late Majesty King George V., standing on that curious collection of masonry, was placed where it blocks the magnificent view from Parliament House towards the War Memorial. I shall not comment on the statue. It may be quite good. I think it is fairly good; but I can see little to admire in the masonry, and certainly the site is utterly absurd. I understand that the site was chosen by some committee. Possibly it was the choice of one member of the committee. We should put it beyond the power of any single person to do things like that. I am not seeking to impose my own fads upon the Canberra community. I merely protest against the things that are going on which most people agree are wrong. Some form of self-government should be found for the residents of Canberra. I do not suggest that they should have a controlling voice in the development of Canberra, because .after all this city belongs not only to the citizens of Canberra, but to the people of the Commonwealth as a whole. Nevertheless, Canberra, residents should have at least an effective voice in matters that concern them more than they concern outside people. There should also be some coordination of the efforts of the various departments. As I pointed out earlier this afternoon I received from the Minister for the Interior a perfectly satisfactory reply to a question. I found that he was pursuing a policy which I think should be pursued. However, immediately after that question was answered, I found that another department was apparently pursuing a totally different policy. That should not happen, and I trust that although I may have taken a little longer than I intended to take to express my views, everybody will realize this is a matter which transcends parties. It is not a matter about which I am in conflict with honorable senators opposite. It is a matter that concerns the whole of the Commonwealth, and I should like all honorable senators to remember that we have a sacred trust to do our best for this city, not merely on behalf of the people who are living in Australia at present, but also on behalf of our descendants for centuries to come. 375 KOU Victoria 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON . - This measure provides for the appropriation of a colossal Sum of money and it should be thoroughly examined before it leaves this chamber. One matter to which I propose to refer now relates to the Parliament itself. Earlier to-day, on behalf of the people whom I represent in this Parliament, I asked the Minister for Trade and Customs (Senator O'Sullivan) a certain question. Whilst his reply may have satisfied his own supporters, I can assure him that it will not satisfy the people of Victoria who are very concerned about this Government's attitude first to representations that are made in this Parliament, and secondly to the activities of one of this country's arch enemies, Mr. Thornton. During the war we were forced to accept the Communists in this country because Russia was our ally, but immediately the war ended, the Government led by Mr. Chifley did everything possible to rid Australia of Communist influences. I have before me a resolution that was carried unanimously at a conference of the Australian Labour party. I realize, of course, that the parties to which honorable senators opposite .belong do not have conferences as we do. Their policy is dictated to them by the " little few ". In 1937 a resolution was carried unanimously by 350 delegates who came from all parts of Victoria to the effect that, in no circumstances, must any branch or member of the party be associated with members of the Communist party or subsidiary thereof in the holding of general meetings, in advocacy of a united front, or any other matter. The resolution also provided that any branch of the party which contravened that instruction would be declared bogus. 375 K2A CP 0 0 RANKIN, George Senator GEORGE RANKIN - Were they allowed to defend. Communists in the courts ? 375 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - I think the honorable senator will find that the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) also had something to do with defending certain organizations in the courts, lt should not be forgotten that when the Leader of the Opposition (Dr. Evatt) defended certain unions, he was defending also organizations that were controlled by members of the Australian Labour party who were completely opposed to communism. The resolution concluded by saying that any member of the party who contravened the instruction would be automatically expelled from the movement. Unfortunately, during World War II., the Australian Labour party was forced to recognize Communist Russia. In the trade union movement in Australia there are many Communists who must be well known to honorable senators opposite. When it suited their purpose, the supporters of the present Government attacked the Communists. By doing so they hoped to bring about the defeat of the Labour Government. If Labour were in office to-day, do honorable senators imagine that Ernest Thornton, who has been conspiring with Communist China to murder Australian soldiers, would have been allowed to return to this country and remain here unmolested ? 375 KPI 0 0 KENDALL, Roy Senator Kendall - A Labour government probably would have appointed him as Minister for Defence. 375 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - I do not know about that, but it seems to me that if he had returned to this country during the regime of a Labour government, the Melbourne Herald and the Sydney Morning Herald probably would have carried headlines to the effect that Labour was co-operating with a Communist leader. When I sought information on this matter in the Senate this afternoon, the Minister for Trade and Customs (Senator O'Sullivan) resorted to tactics which are usually adopted by a person who admits defeat. He told me that I should be ashamed of myself. I hope that the time never comes when I shall be ashamed of myself for trying to defeat communism in this country. 375 K6Z 0 0 SPICER, John Senator Spicer - The honorable senator did not try very hard to do so during the referendum campaign. 376 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - Surely the Attorney-General (Senator Spicer) does not contend that that referendum dealt with communism. This Government has never been prepared to accept the decision of the electors. In 1950, the people told the present Government parties in no uncertain terms that they did not want them. Indeed, the Government parties have been so informed at every election which has been held since that time. I have no doubt that when the general elections are held next year the electors of Australia will return a Labour government, because the Australian Labour party has a policy to place before the people. I venture to suggest that if such an incident as that referred to by Senator Ashley this afternoon occurred during the term of office of a Labour government, every newspaper in the Commonwealth would headline the fact that something " phoney " was going on. In connexion with that matter, this Government has attempted to silence the press, and the Minister for National Development, who represents the Treasurer (Sir Arthur Fadden) in this chamber, tried this afternoon to brush it aside when Senator Ashley raised it. I suggest that abuse by the members of the Government is of no avail. The people, not honorable senators, will decide the issues involved. They will give their decision next year in the same way as they have given it on each opportunity they have had to date. Honorable senators will remember that, earlier this afternoon, I asked the Minister for Trade and Customs (Senator O'Sullivan) whether it is a fact that it is not now proposed to continue with the appointment of Mr. Paul McGuire as Ambassador to Ireland. It also will be remembered that the announcement of that appointment was used with good effect in Queensland during the recent Senate election campaign. Now that that election has been decided, apparently Mr. McGuire is to be turned away. No doubt t he Government has said to him, " Apply again in March or April next year. We may be able to appoint you then". I do not believe that this Government has the right to commit the Commonwealth to the vast expenditure proposed by this bill. The electors have told the Government time and again that it attained office by fraud and that they are tired of it. Although it is possible to fool some of the people some of the time it is not possible to fool all the people all the time. If I remember correctly, the latest budget presented by this Government has been called an incentive budget. It seems to me that that title is correct, because I have no doubt that it will give the people more incentive to work for the defeat of the Government. The budget proposals- do not provide for tax remissions for theworking people. 376 KPI 0 0 KENDALL, Roy Senator Kendall - Why does not the honorable senator read the budget? Obviously he has not done so. 376 JZY 0 0 PALTRIDGE, Shane Senator Paltridge - There is a difference between reading it and understandingit. 376 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - It would be impossible for certain honorable senators opposite to understand it, but I suggest they should take the trouble to read it. In the course of the budget speech, the Treasurer stated that the total collection from taxation last year amounted to approximately £988,000,000 and that this year it will be approximately £1,063,000,000. I should like honorable senators opposite to tell me who provides that money if it is not the ordinary men and women of Australia? How can it be suggested, if taxation collections last year were £988.000,000, and will be £1,063,000,000 this year, that tax reductions are being made ? The Government is employing a kind of three-card trick - now you see it, now you do not. The horror budget of 1951 provided, for a surplus of £114,500,000. At that time we were told by the Treasurer that thatsurplus would be taken from the spendthrifts in order to stem inflation. Apparently, the Government claims that it is now giving money back to the people. Its attitude is like that of the farmer who said, "I shall have the cream, and you can have the skim milk or like the man on the track who got his lad to go and look after the horses in the morning. When the lad returned bo said. "I want mv breakfast ". The man said, " I have had mine ", and when the lad asked what he had had, he replied. "I had boiled eggs. You can have the broth ". The people who do the work will receive nothing from this budget. Those who support the Government parties and made their election to office possible will benefit by it, but the basic-wage earners will not. The Government proposes to extract from taxpayers an additional £65,000,000 this year. The only way in which that can be done is by means of increased taxes, whether those taxes take the form of indirect tax such as sales tax, or direct tax such as income tax. Last year, £70,000,000 was collected from customs duty. This year, it is estimated that £83,000,000 will be collected. 377 KPI 0 0 KENDALL, Roy Senator Kendall - More beer is being consumed to-day. 377 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - I am delighted to hear it. Excise, which last year yielded £113,000,000, will yield £121,000,000 this year. Do not the taxpayers provide that huge sum? 377 KPI 0 0 KENDALL, Roy Senator Kendall - Cordial manufacturers do so, do they not? 377 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - I pay my share of it. Seriously, although all the people pay these taxes, the Government proposes to give tire benefit of tax reductions to only some of them. Sales tax, which, last year returned £89,000,000, this year will' return £96,000,000. Is that a tax reduction ? 377 K6Z 0 0 SPICER, John Senator Spicer - That indicates greater prosperity. 377 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - Let us consider the interjection of the Attorney-General. In 1951, the Treasurer told us that if there were greater prosperity tax reductions would be possible. The Government claims that there is now greater prosperity, but no remission of taxes is to be made as far as the working people are concerned. In my opinion, it is entirely wrong for persons who enjoy a salary such as that of politicians to tell the people that a totally incapacitated ex-serviceman is properly compensated if he is paid a pension of £9 a week. If that attitude is adopted, how can we expect the men of this country to come forward in the future and be prepared to defend the country? Those who use the age pension as a political football should be severely castigated. I certainly do not propose to do so, nor have I ever found it. necessary to adopt that course. Whether a person receives an age pension or a. fixed income of some other kind, he has as much right to live as any other member of the community. It is useless for the Government to give pensioners 2s. 6d. a week and then try to convince them that they are better off. The Government proposes to reduce the sales tax on a number of articles including cordials, matches, hooks and buttons, slide fasteners and aeroplanes. Perhaps honorable senators can imagine the happiness of the people that I represent when they learned that the sales tax on some aeroplanes was to be reduced. Imagine then coming to me and saying. " We are going to sell our old aeroplanes. Senator, and buy a new one"! Does the Government believe that everybody in Victoria flies to work in an aeroplane? It is ridiculous to expect the people to rejoice because the sales tax on aircraft has been reduced. 377 KPI 0 0 KENDALL, Roy Senator Kendall - It will permit a reduction of fares, perhaps. 377 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - It will only help the wealthy people who own thousands of acres of land and fly around their properties. Sales tax was introduced in. 1930 as a temporary expedient. 377 KNR 0 0 HANNAFORD, Douglas Senator Hannaford - It was introduced by a Labour government. 377 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - That is the kind of interjection that I expected. The Liberal Government in 1929, with its political friends and the daily press, decided that it must have some story that would put the Labour government into office in the lower House but give the Liberals control of the Senate. They announced that they would abolish the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration. As a result, Mr. Scullin was returned with a big majority in the House of Representatives, but he was unable to enact any sound legislation to alleviate the shortcomings of the previous anti-Labour government because he did not have a majority in this chamber. 377 KOW 0 0 HENTY, Norman Senator Henty - The Labour government of the day was scared of a double dissolution. 378 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - It was not so easy to get as the double dissolution that the Liberal-Australian Country party obtained in 1951. Honorable senators on the Government side make shameful allegations about the achievements of the Labour Government from 1929 to 1931. It did not have a majority in the Senate' then as it did when it was returned to office in 1941. In that year, the Menzies Administration was prepared to sell the Australian nation to the Japanese. The Labour Government led Australia through the war. The late Mr. W. M. Hughes is recorded to have said that the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) could not lead a flock of pigeons borne. At that time the Prime Minister expected the present Treasurer (Sir Arthur Fadden) to stab him in the back at any time. The Labour Government led the nation through the war successfully. 378 KPI 0 0 KENDALL, Roy Senator Kendall - We won the war in spite of the Labour Government. 378 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - At the' end of the war in 1945, the Labour Government introduced a budget totalling £700,000,000. Australia was then at the top of its war effort, but by 1949, when the Chifley Government was defeated, it had reduced the budget by £200,000,000. 378 K6Z 0 0 SPICER, John Senator Spicer - The Chifley Government did not abolish the sales tax. 378 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - It reduced taxation by £200,000,000. It had also reduced the sales tax, but it could not do everything overnight. The leaders and supporters of the present Government stated in 1949 during the election campaign that taxation was not being reduced quickly enough. They promised to reduce taxation if they were given the reins of office, but since 1949 budget expenditure has been increased from £500,000,000 to. £1,000,000,000. It lias been doubled. That money can be obtained only from the people by taxation. That is why the people are hostile to this Government. They know that it gained the treasury bench by means of a flood of misrepresentation. The people have shown their indignation at every by-election and at the Senate elections this year. The day of reckoning for the Government is not far distant. I direct the attention of the Senate now to the vote for defence. The Australian Labour party has a defence policy. 378 KPI 0 0 KENDALL, Roy Senator Kendall - I would not have thought so. 378 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - The honorable senator does not need to go to a library or to the associated trading banks to read the Labour party's policy on defence. It can be read in an issue of the Melbourne Herald that I have in my possession. Honorable senators on this side of the chamber believe firmly that the Government's approach to defence is not the correct one. It is ridiculous to provide £200,000,000 for defence. 378 K6Z 0 0 SPICER, John Senator Spicer - Is it not enough? 378 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - It might not be enough. I do not know. If this Government sabotages the country and the Labour party is given an opportunity to salvage it, we shall know more about the matter. What does the Government propose to do with the sum of £200,000,000? When a question of that nature is submitted by an honorable senator on this side of the chamber, either he receives an abusive answer or the question is evaded. A parliamentary committee should be appointed to supervise the expenditure of the vote for defence. The Labour party has a plan for the defence of Australia. It declares that essential factors in defence are water conservation and power for the production of essentials as well as armaments and aeroplanes. The Labour Government had initiated a plan to produce more power at Yallourn when this Government was returned to office in 1949. This Government was conversant with that programme, but the same quantity of power is not required to-day because many industries that would use it under a. Labour government are not working now. At Morwell, in Victoria, electrical equipment valued at from £11,000,000 to £12,000,000 is lying idle because the Victorian Government has not sufficient money to proceed with its construction programme. That equipment was bought with the consent of successive Liberal, Country party and Labour governments in Victoria, so it is obvious that the purchase was not political. Each of those governments from 1945 -onwards sanctioned the purchase of the equipment from Germany, but it is rusting because the tax-grabbers at Canberra have not made sufficient money available. As to the Snowy Mountains hydro-electric scheme, those who were associated with the Parliament at the time will remember that the present Prime Minister and his friends boycotted the opening of that project. They said it was not necessary. Now they claim the credit for the progress that has been made, miserable though it may be. The Labour Government planned to make money available to provide houses for the people. If good citizens and good soldiers are required, they must be housed and fed properly and given good working conditions. A large proportion of the vote of £200,000,000 for defence should be withdrawn from the direction of the military brass hats who spend it flagrantly. It should be put to better use for the completion of works that will be necessary if the nation should be plunged into another war. When this Government was returned to office in 1949, its leaders told the people that war would be upon them again within eighteen months. They said anything to frighten the people. We have not had that threatened world war yet and I hope that we do not have one. The Government should make money available for the provision of power, water and housing to the degree that is necessary for defence. Honorable senators have been told from time to time that the Australian Loan Council makes money available to the States and fixes the rates of interest. At the last conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers, the State Premiers told the Prime Minister how much they required for their works, but the Canberra dictators told them that they could have a much smaller sum and they could take it or leave it. 379 KNR 0 0 HANNAFORD, Douglas Senator Hannaford - The Premier of South Australia, Mr. Playford, was satisfied. 379 KOU 0 0 HENDRICKSON, Albion Senator HENDRICKSON - The Premiers of the other five States were not satisfied. I have some sympathy for this Government because it cannot get the money that is required by the States. Those who are in a position to lend money are not prepared to place it in the hands of this Government. During World War II., the Labour Government asked the people to lend it money at 3-J per cent., and the people put every penny they could afford into government bonds. The Labour administration maintained the value of the bonds at par or better, but when this Government was returned to office, it allowed the price of those bonds to fall to £82. Those who had lent their money patriotically and later needed to cash bonds because of sickness or accident, received only £82 for them instead of £100. That is one reason why the people will not make their money available to this Government now. They would lend it to a Labour government, however, just as they did during the war years. National projects should not be financed by direct taxation. Big projects such as the power, station at Yallourn should be financed from loan moneys and future generations should help to pay for it. This Government has no mandate from the people to bring down the budget that it has introduced. Honorable senators on the Government side should realize that and the Government should resign. 379 KAW Victoria 0 0 WEDGWOOD, Ivy Senator WEDGWOOD . - I do not intend to reply to the remarks made by Senator Hendrickson. He said nothing; he merely indulged in one of his hysterical outbursts, and his arguments were as addled as his story of a diet of boiled eggs and broth. I propose to address myself to the operation of the Mental Institution Benefits Act, which was passed when the Chifley Government was in office and was piloted through this chamber by the present Leader of the Opposition (Senator McKenna) when he was Minister for Social Services in that Government. It is proposed to provide from the National Welfare Fund for this purpose the the sum of £495,000, which is £25,000 less than the amount that was voted under this heading last financial year. The Mental Institution Benefits Act was enacted as a result of an agreement that was made between the Australian Government, and the State governments, which was to be effective for five years as from the 1st July, 1949. Under that agreement the Australian Government agreed to pay to the Victorian Government - I take that State as an example - benefit at the rate of ls. 2d. a day for each person, or such other amount as was from time to time agreed upon between the Commonwealth and the States in respect of persons receiving care and treatment in mental hospitals and similar institutions, provided that the State Government did not impose means tests or charge fees" as from the 1st November, 1948, to patients in such institutions. When that measure was being debated in the Parliament, honorable senators and honorable members generally submitted that patients in mental hospitals should be entitled to receive the amount of basic benefit payable in respect of patients in any other hospital or institution. At that time, the basic hospital benefit was 6s. a. day, and ir has since been increased to 8s. Since the 1st July, 1949, the basic wage has increased considerably and, at present, in Victoria it is now £11 16s. a week. In the interim, costs of maintenance of mental hospitals have increased substantially. That cost in Victoria has increased from £908,146 in 1947-48 in the succeeding years as follows, £1,092,891. ,314,522, £1,640,268. £2.263.807. and £3,700,000 for last year. The average person in the community is becoming increasingly aware of the needs of the mentally ill. When a pensioner is admitted to a benevolent home or institution, the institution concerned receives a proportion of the pension paya bie to the pensioner, but no age or invalid pension is payable in respect of a patient in a mental hospital who is of pensionable age. Indeed, if a. person happens to be receiving a. pension when he, or she, is. admitted to such an institution payment of the pension immediately ceases. Official statistics show that over 26 per cent, of patients in mental hospitals in Victoria are of pensionable age. If such persons were in the care of private individuals or institutions of another type a pension would be payable in respect of them. As the Australian Government has accepted the principle that it will assist to maintain age pensioners who are inmates of benevolent homes or homes for the aged, I can sec no reason why it should not. agree to accept the greater responsibility in respect of persons who are inmates of mental hospitals. Many inmates of benevolent homes could more properly be cared for in mental hospitals and, conversely, many inmates of mental hospitals could more properly be looked after in benevolent homes. A person of pensionable age should not be penalized because he, or she, happens to be an inmate of a mental hospital. In addition, numbers of people who are now inmates of such hospitals would be receiving invalid pensions if they were at home or were in the care of other institutions. To-day. the basic hospital benefit is at the rate of Ss. :i day. Patients in an early treatment centre or a reception house should receive the same benefits as they would receive if they wore inmates of any other public or general hospital for the treatment of acute complaints. The outlook for victims of mental diseases, if they are treated by modern methods, is just as hopeful as is the outlook for victims of physical ill health; but the great majority of mental patients are obliged to remain inmates of mental hospitals for many years. The Government lias an added responsibility in respect of persons who are condemned to such a fate. It is a terrifying fact that the number of bed patients in mental hospitals is greater than the number of bed patients in other hospitals, excluding maternity hospitals. I am now referring to the actual number of bet! patients; the turnover of such eases is not so great. On previous occasions, I have commended the Government for its appreciation of the need to encourage victims of tuberculosis to obtain early treatment, but I believe that the problem of mental health is of much greater magnitude than is that of tuberculosis. Whilst tuberculosis is a communicable disease, the number of bed patients in mental institutions is very much greater than is the case in respect of victims of other diseases. It is estimated that the number of beds needed for patients in mental hospitals is not fewer than four beds for every 1,000 of the population. In New South Wales and Victoria the number of beds available for mental patients is totally inadequate. Frequently, I visit the mental hospital at Kew; and I assure honorable senators that if they saw at first-hand conditions1 that exist in institutions of this kind the Parliament as a whole would completely change its approach to this problem. In the mental hospital at Kew, beds are practically jammed together. In some wards it is impossible for a person to step out of a. bed and turn around. The early treatment of mental illness from the point of view of both the patient and the community cannot bc over-emphasized. The presence of a .mentally ill person or a mentally defec-1 i ve child disturbs the whole balance of normal home life, and the impact of the mentality of the afflicted person on the home is far greater than when a member of a family is afflicted by any other disease. The evidence available shows that schizophrenia, which is more commonly known as split personality, is responsible for the occupation, of most beds in our mental hospitals. The victims of this disease are frequently young persons, clever and artistically inclined, who if they were normal mentally would bc regarded as being brilliant. If such persons are unable to obtain special treatment, such as insulin coma treatment, which has been proved to be most successful if it is administered in the first year of illness, t hey are obliged in the great majority of eases to remain inmates of mental institutions for the remainder of their lives, in some cases up to 30 or 4.0 years. We should not regard, the present position as something that has been inherited from a previous government. I do not in any way criticize the benefit that was provided under the Mental Institution Benefits Act: 1948, or the intention at that time, but. as I have said, the community is increasingly anxious that patients in mental hospitals should be placed in exactly the same position as are patients in general hospitals as recipients of social services benefit. One of the great difficulties in mental institutions is to get inmates to occupy themselves at useful work I do not wonder at that. In order to ascertain whether the position with respect to the care and treatment of the mentally ill has improved or deteriorated in recent years I perused the relevant statistics which showthat the position has not changed in. either respect. Details published in the Commonwealth Year-Boole show that whereas in 1950 in public hospitals there were 32,805 patients who were being looked after by a medical staff of 6,382- that is, one doctor to every five patients - and a nursing staff of 22,935, patients in mental institutions in that year totalled 25,996 and they were being looked after by a medical staff of 138 - that is, only one doctor to every 185 patients - and a nursing staff of only 4,826. Unfortunately, much the same position exists to-day. Mental hospitals experience great difficulty in recruiting staff. Further, they are short of essential equipment, and facilities are lacking for research work with the object of enabling patients to make a complete recovery. In Victoria we are fortunate in having the services of Dr. Cunningham Dax us our mental hygiene authority. The Minister for Health (Sir Earle Page) said recently that he would be prepared at any time to cancel the existing agreement between the Commonwealth and the States for the provision of mental institution benefits because, as he said, it was a " rotten " agreement from the viewpoint of mental patients. I could not agree more under the existing conditions, but I hope that this Government and future governments will not continue to treat these people so badly. They have been treated as Cinderellas whenever benefits have been handed out. Probably for the reason that they were not entitled to vote and could not speak for themselves. The Treasurer (Sir Arthur Fadden) has stated that the present benefit of .ls. 2d. a day will be cancelled, but, he has not told us whether another benefit will be substituted for it. I sincerely hope that this matter will not be pushed backwards and forwards between the Commonwealth and the States, because I consider that it is a Commonwealth responsibility to see that mental hospitals arc provided with the finance that they so badly need and which they so richly deserve. I emphasize what I said at the outset, that public opinion will be behind any move to assist the mentally afflicted members of the community. In Victoria recently a. heart-rending article by Mr. E. W. Tipping was published in the Melbourne Herald, and within a very short period of time a substantial amount of money was subscribed to the fund that was started by that newspaper. The money has been applied to good purpose. The cottages at Kew, which were a disgrace, have been painted voluntarily by public-spirited men, and now they represent the first ray of hope in Victoria as far as the mental institutions are concerned. However, additional finance is required urgently in order to carry out structural alterations and provide the many improvements that are needed. Due to the good offices of the Melbourne Herald and the men who worked voluntarily, the babies' wards are now equipped with many of the things that are necessary. However, people who understand this problem know that many of the babies will never leave the institution, and when they grow older they will be transferred to other wards, where they will be condemned to the kind of life that has been endured by many inmates of the institution for many years. I regret that the proposed vote is so small, and I sincerely hope that the Treasurer and the Minister for Health will be able to grant a new deal to the mental hospitals, so that they will not remain a blot on the Australian nation. 382 L8E Victoria 0 0 CAMERON, Donald Senator CAMERON . - I first wish to direct the attention of the committee to the plight of the age pensioners in the community, many of whom worked hard throughout their lives until they reached pensionable age. In many instances they reared families, but the wages that the bread-winners received were sufficient only to pay for shelter, clothing and subsistence. All of the wealth that they created in excess of the amount necessary to meet those costs was appropriated by others. The age pension was introduced some years ago to alleviate the hardship and poverty that existed in this connexion, but to-day the purchasing power of the pension is much less than it was formerly, due to the effects of inflation of the currency and the operation of the means test. Both of these factors have penalized the age pensioners. The present Government has done absolutely nothing to endeavour to check inflation. As I have said before, it lacks the moral courage to do so, although the problem does not present an insuperable difficulty. The Government - proposes to increase the present rate of the age pension from £3 7s. 6d. to £3 10s. a week. In my opinion an amount of £3 10s. will not now purchase as much as £1 purchased in the 'thirties. It is true that the amount of the age pension has been progressively increased, but the purchasing power of the pensioners has gradually decreased. Although the pension has been increased substantially, in terms of money, due to fraudulent inflation fewer commodities can now be purchased with the pension than formerly. It has been stated by some learned gentlemen, that the discontinuance of the system of quarterly adjustments of the basic wage will result in an improved state of affairs. However, I am convinced that prices will rise further, and consequently the purchasing power of the pensioners will continue to decline. It is evident that this Government does not intend to abolish the means test. Whenever I have asked about its plans in this connexion the Minister for National Development (Senator Spooner) has asked " Where is the money coming from ? " The Minister made this reply when I interjected recently and asked why the Government had not totally abolished pay-roll taxation. In 1940, a very interesting booklet, entitled How to Pay for the War, was published by J ohn Maynard Keynes, who has since died. Lord Keynes was a leading British economist, and one of the British Government's principal advisers. He advocated that fiat country should impose a capital levy in order to pay its way. I commend the booklet to honorable senators opposite, who apparently do not know how the abolition of the means test could be financed. The method that Lord Keynes advocated should be adopted in order to liquidate the public debt of Great Britain could also be utilized to enable the Australian Government to make suitable provision for the mentally afflicted members of our community, to whom Senator Wedgwood has referred, and abolish the means test. Referring to World War II., Lord Keynes stated in his booklet - If the war continues for two years or longer, the National Debt will reach an unmanageable figure, which will hamper national finance for years to come. In such circumstances a Capital Levy will he advisable just as (in my opinion) it was at the end of the last war, if it could have been carried out before the postwar slump. Lord Keynes then went on to state, in effect, that there existed in Great Britain a colossal accumulation of unearned capital, which was not taxed. He advocated the imposition of a capital levy in order to enable Great Britain to liquidate its debts. That was not a Communist proposition, or a proposition based on the philosophy of Karl Marx. It was expounded by a leading British economist. Lord Keynes continued - If the Levy is to be paid in a lump sum. it should be discharged at the earliest possible date after the close of the war, especially if temporary boom conditions seem imminent. But it might be preferable, as facilitating collection and greatly lessening the disturbance, to collect it in a series of instalments over a period. What does this Government propose to do? Sitting suspended from 5.45 to 8 p.m. 383 L8E 0 0 CAMERON, Donald Senator CAMERON - It has been said that it would cost the Government between £60,000,000 and £70,000,000 to abolish the means test in connexion with pensions. During two world wars the amount of privately owned capital has been increased by hundreds of millons of pounds. Lord Keynes, the most competent economist in the United Kingdom, said that a capital levy should have been imposed after the first world war. From the end of that war up to the time of his death he said, repeatedly, that the only way to establish a reasonably balanced' economy in any country was to reduce the national debt by the imposition of a capital levy. I do not believe that honorable senators read anything about economics or they would not make the stupid statements that they make. At page 73 of his brochure, entitled How to Pay for the War, Lord Keynes made the following statement: - And we ended up with a national debt vastly greater in terms of money than was necessary and very ill distributed through the community. A levy averaging 15 per cent, would have allowed the same relationship as before between money wage rates and the cost of living; so that the pressure of the former to chase the latter upwards would have been withdrawn. Lord Keynes explained that the burden of taxation on the wage-earner would be lessened if a levy were imposed on capital. A capital levy would have enabled the Government of the United Kingdom to establish a sort of working economic equilibrium. Instead of reducing the national debt of Australia by means of a capital levy, the Government has placed the whole burden of the cost of the war of 1914-18 and the war of 1939-45 on the shoulders of the wage-earners and pensioners whose standard of living has been reduced to the lowest possible level. Honorable senators opposite have claimed that wages and pensions were never higher than they are now. The fact is that purchasing power was never lower than it is now. That is why a serious economic position exists in Australia, in the United Kingdom and in the United States of America. The. Australian national debt is now £3,500,000,000. The annual interest payable on that amount is approximately £95,000,000, £70,000,000 of which goes overseas. Because the national debt is increasing the Government has levied greater tribute on the wage-earners and it has reduced the purchasing power of wages and pensions to the lowest possible level. This matter may seem technical and involved to those who have never studied it. But the average man who applies himself intelligently and consistently to understanding the position can see that the whole process is a colossal racket. The enormous national debt is the reason for the existence of widespread poverty in the midst of plenty. This is the fundamental contradiction of the system that is advocated by honorable senators opposite. The means test could easily be abolished without inflicting hardship on anybody provided that the Government had the brains and the courage to do the job. But the Government lacks both brains and courage. That is the reason why there is a housing shortage. The Government will not attack that problem. It has ignored the fact that capital which has been neither earned nor taxed is continually accumulating. The Government has the audacity to excuse itself by saying that costs are becoming prohibitive. Anybody with an elementary knowledge of economics knows perfectly well that costs in terms of the amount of labour time required has never been lower. But costs in terms of fraudulent inflationary currency have never been higher. The bodies principally responsible for inflation are the banks including the Commonwealth Bank, which acts in collaboration with the Government. The Government may think that it can escape the consequences of ite policy, but it cannot do so. Eventually a revulsion of feeling among the people will cause a resistance to Government policy similar to that which occurred recently in Prance and Italy. In those countries millions of people challenged the existing system, not because they understood the economic technique involved, but because they felt the physical effects of that system. Members of the Australian Government have posed as intellectuals and saviours of the country but they are doing more than amy one else to ruin the country. In one of my aggressive moments I would classify the members of the Government as educated ignoramuses or literate illiterates or glamourized paranoiacs Honorable senators opposite may think that I am being unnecessarily critical and unnecessarily personal. But I suggest that the Minister for National Development (Senator Spooner) should have had his speech on the pay-roll tax set to music. It sounded so well but lt meant so little. Yet the man, who made the speech does not realize that» fact. But he will realize it. He will find that if the policy of the present Government is continued this country will have strikes and revolutions similar to those which occur in eastern countries. The Government should adopt an intelligent approach to economic matters and carry out the advice of Lord Keynes. 384 K2S 0 0 ROBERTSON, Agnes Senator Robertson - Is he a friend of Karl Marx? 384 L8E 0 0 CAMERON, Donald Senator CAMERON - No. He has been acknowledged as the leading economist of the United Kingdom. He negotiated the loan which was made by the United States of America to the United Kingdom in 1946. As a result of the humiliation to which he was subjected by stand-over financiers and the acquiescence of the Government of the United Kingdom he died of heart failure. He was acknowledged as one of the most famous economists by all authorities including the Government of the United Kingdom and the Government of the lini ted States of America. I confessthat his proposals do not go us far as .1 should have liked them to go. He emphasized that unless governments imposed a capital levy on the huge accumulations of money and materials, capital that had never been earned or taxed, they would continue to experience economic difficulties. The Government has reduced the standard of living of the wage-earner to thu lowest possible level. Its policy has similarly affected those least able to help themselves - the aged and helpless folk who built up the wealth of this country. The Government has treated them as pariahs. It has given them a paltry increase of 2s. 6d. a week, subject to the means test. The Government should be thoroughly ashamed of itself. In all sincerity I advise it to make a more intelligent, sympathetic and honest approach to this subject. It will then agree with me that it should impose a capital levy and abolish the means test. It should take measures also to assist the hundreds of thousands of people who cannot obtain housing; and it could bring many more thousands of immigrants to this country. Immigrants are now being invited here under false pretences. Some confidence men find themselves in gaol, but others find themselves in Parliament. 384 KQQ South Australia 0 0 LAUGHT, Keith Senator LAUGHT . - I am afraid I cannot agree entirely with Senator Cameron's statements. We appreciate his good humour but wo cannot brush aside his utterances lightly as he is a respected member of the Labour party arid a former Minister of the Crown, and was the leader of the Victorian Labour team which contested the Senate election in 1951. Therefore, his proposal for a capital levy cannot be taken with a grain of salt. It must be regarded as an expression of the policy of the party to which he belongs and I believe it to be one of the most reprehensible suggestions ever made in this chamber. Such a levy would be sheer plunder. It is the technique adopted by the dictators of ten or fifteen years ago. The honorable senator claimed that this Government had done nothing to arrest inflation. I take exception to that statement. I remind the Senate of something that was said in the Commonwealth Arbitration Court last month by Mr. Eggleston, Q.C., counsel for the Australian Council of Trades Unions in the wages and' hours case. Mr. Eggleston's submissions apparently were accepted by the court because the employers' case was rejected. He said that inflationary pressures had virtually disappeared in this country, our exports were expanding, our overseas funds increasing, and employment rising. He also said that the current employment outlook was favorable and productivity was increasing. A comparison of the state of our economy in 1949-50, when Senator Cameron gave up his seals of office as Postmaster-General, with the state of the economy to-day reveals a striking improvement. Yet Senator Cameron would have us believe that the Government has done nothing to halt inflation ! The president of the Australian Council of Trades Unions, Mr. Monk, said after the budget had been presented - The budget clearly shows that in the opinion of the Government the Australian economy is stable. That opinion, as I have pointed out, is shared by the trade unions. Senator Cameron said that he would impose a capital levy to provide funds to abolish the means test. Just imagine what a capital levy would mean to this country! Millions of people who have savings in the banks would have some of their money taken from them. The honorable senator did not explain fully his conception of a capital levy, but that is the nearest approach I can make to it. The people of South Australia would be particularly unfortunate because savings bank deposits in that State are higher per head of population than those of any other State. The average in South Australia is approximately £150 a head, which is about £40 a head higher than the average elsewhere. South Australians are very proud of their savings, and would be justifiably hostile to any proposal for a capital levy. The Government has already taken real steps towards the eventual abolition of the means test. Tinder the budget proposals, the permissible income of a single pensioner has been increased to £5 a week, and the permissible income of a pensioner couple to £11 a week. In addition, of course, pensioners are able to own their own homes. A married couple may have £2,500 worth of property and still receive a full pension. I point out, too, that this Government has conferred some real benefit on pensioners by providing free medical treatment and free medicines for them. That is something that the Labour Government failed to do. In addition, of course, life-saving drugs are available free of charge to everyone. In reply to a question that I asked in this chamber, I was informed that as the result of pension liberalizations, an additional 100,000 people will be eligible for pension payments this year. More important still, those people will also be eligible for free medical treatment and free medicines. I have nothing more to say about Senator Cameron's speech. I propose now to deal with some of the things that have happened since the Twentieth Parliament was elected. The first session of the' Twentieth Parliament is to end in another two weeks, and I feel it is appropriate that I should review the progress that has been made during that session. The life of the Twentieth Parliament so far has been attended by considerable sadness. On the day after the opening of the first session, Mr. J. B. Chifley, a former Prime Minister, died. Since then, His Majesty King George ' VI., three members of this chamber, and eight members of the House of Representatives have died. The second session of the Twentieth Parliament will begin in the new era, which people have been pleased to designate the " Elizabethan era ". Let us review the work of the Twentieth Parliament so far. This is an appropriate occasion to do so because the measure now before us contains the estimates of expenditure for the current financial year and it is the duty of this Parliament to vote money or to withhold it as it thinks fit. The then Governor-General said at the opening of this session, two years ago, that the major task of the Government was defence preparations. He said it was the intention of the Government to strengthen the armed forces and increase defence production. To that end, he said, an endeavour would be made to strengthen the national economy because that was the foundation of our defence effort. Obviously, if we cannot defend this country, any superstructure that we erect in the form of social services, education systems, and so on, can have no security. Does the Opposition consider that this year's defence allocation of £200,000,000 is too much? Senator Hendrickson avoided that question when it was put to him by the Attorney-General (Senator Spicer). Senator Hendrickson said he was eager to see greater production of primary products. But what did the Labour Government do in that connexion? It continued to levy the land tax and other taxes on primary producers. When this Government removed the land tax; honorable senators opposite said that, if they were returned to office, they would reimpose it. Would a Labour government also introduce compulsory unionism in the Commonwealth sphere? Would compulsory unionism help to increase primary production? Those arc some of the questions that crop up in our minds, particularly in view of current actions by the New South Wales - Government. I believe that this Government's defence preparations have been splendid. The outlook has been transformed. The permanent army and citizen forces have been doubled. Military equipment has been modernized and jet aircraft provided for the Royal Australian Air Force. Great progress has been made with the Woomera pro:ect and, in collaboration with the United Kingdom, Australia is playing an important part in atomic bomb research. Iri Labour's last year of office, the defence vote was £50,000,000, and in Labour's last three budgets, the total allocation for defence was £169,000,000. This year, the Government is setting aside £200,000.000 for defence, which will bring the total for the last three budgets to £550,000,000. The Senate will recall that the Opposition in thischamber at first opposed the introduction of national service training; in 1950, and that the relevant legislation was passed only after outside pressure had been brought to bear on Labour Senators. In matters of defence, this Government's policy is to co-operate with the United Kingdom and the United States of America. The Twentieth Parliament has seen a remarkable improvement in our economy. In 1951-52 we had an adverse trade balance of £585,000,000. In the following year, because of the Government's capable administration of import restrictions, there was a credit balance of £171,000,000. I do not suggest that governments, as such, produce anything, but I do suggest that they create the climate, as it were, in which private enterprise may flourish. This Government has created such a climate. In the last year of the Chifley Government the national income was £1,958,000,000, whereas in 1952-53 it was £3,578,000,000, or nearly double. Senator Hendrickson complained this afternoon about the incidence of taxation at the present time, but he did not present the true position in that respect. When our national income was £1,958,000,000, the Chifley Government took £504,000,000 by means of taxation, which left only £1,454,000,000. Now, when our national income is £3,57S,000,000, this Government is taking only £S50,000,000 in taxes, which will leave £2,72S,000,000, or more than twice the amount left by the Chifley Government. I remind honorable senators that the important thing is the amount that a government leaves in the hands of the taxpayers. I assure the Senate that the individual taxpayer can do much more with his money than can the Government. The present Treasurer (Sir Arthur Fadden) has left in the hands of the taxpayer considerably more than double the amount with which he was left by the previous LabourTreasurer. During the life of this Parliament, the production of black coal in Australia has increased by 24 per cent., electricity generation by 35 per cent., and superphosphate by 11 per cent. In the field of primary production, beef production has risen by 35 per cent., processed milk by 35 per cent., wool products by 28 per cent., and wheat by approximately 20 per cent. I do not suggest, of course, that the Government has been directly responsible for any of that increased production, but it has provided the atmosphere, or climate, as I have said, in which such increased production has been possible. It has also given confidence to the farmers, businessmen and others, and has provided them with the incentive to go ahead and increase production. Under this Government, controls of all kinds have been relaxed. When the Government came to office in 1949, petrol rationing was in operation. One of its first acts in 1950 was to de-ration petrol. Ar. that time, members of the Opposition said that that could not be done without severe damage to the national economy. That they were wrong is proved conclusively by events in my own State of South Australia. The de-rationing of petrol gave impetus to the motor-body industry, which is one of the most important industries of the State. Had petrol rationing not been removed, stagnation would have existed in that industry and in the allied industries. Every time this Government has removed or relaxed a control, economic activity has expanded. It is gratifying that no provision has been made in this budget for the payment of £1,000,000 in respect of prices control. The removal of that item of expenditure is an event of signal importance. In my opinion, this Government must be given credit for that action, because it stands to reason that where prices control operates black markets, restrictions, the filling in of forms and much waste of time also exist. Approximately a year ago there were six categories of sales tax, whereas now there are only two. The proposal of the Government to relieve approximately 50,000 employers of the obligation to pay pay-roll tax and fill in the requisite forms is also most gratifying. In addition, land tax has been abolished, and entertainments tax will end when the budget proposals become, effective. In my opinion, those matters clearly indicate the policy of the Government towards taxation. One of the most signal events in the history of this Government was the action which it took to deal with Communists. T remember, as a new. member of this Senate approximately two years ago, when legislation was presented to provide for secret ballots in unions. Every honorable senator opposite opposed that legislation tooth and nail. Yet, it has been one of the most salutary actions of the Government because it has made the unions healthy. I wish now to refer to the excellent work which has been done by the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) in negotiating dollar loans. Honorable senators opposite sneer when I say that, because they know that dollar loans come from America, a country which some of them hate. When Mr. W. Morrow was a member of this Senate, he traduced the American point of view whenever possible, and other honorable senators opposite have also done so. However, the late Mr. Chifley apparently did not agree with that attitude, because in the last speech lie made, on the day he died, he paid a very great tribute to the help which the United States of America had given to this country. He was speaking in the House of Representatives when certain honoured American guests were present in connexion with the Jubilee Celebrations. In 1951, this Government negotiated .a loan of .100,000,000 dollars in America, and, in 1952, it negotiated an additional loan of 50,000,000 dollars. Those loans were negotiated on the most advantageous terms to this country and have resulted in a great increase of production. As a result, heavy earth-moving equipment, electricity generating plant, and diesel.electric trains have been brought here. Honorable senators have only to travel between South Australia and Western Australia to appreciate the amazing difference which such trains have made to rail transportation between the east and west of Australia. The effect of such loans on the South Australian railways has also been most marked. The present rate of production of brown coal at Leigh Creek would not have been possible had such loans not been negotiated. The importation of agricultural machinery, including hay-baling and top-dressing equipment, has been made possible by this stroke of genius on the part of the Prime Minister. I appreciate that a number of problems have yet to be solved during the life of this Parliament, but I hope that all of them will be solved by the time the Parliament is prorogued. It should be remembered that this Government will proceed progressively to eliminate the means test. In accordance with its past record, it is proceeding' surely towards that end. The Public Accounts Committee, which has been established during the life of this Parliament, is going from strength to strength, and I expect that its work will prove to be of increasing significance. Perhaps the great success of the committee is due to the fact that it consists of members of all political parties in the Parliament and that it is fearless in its reports. It looks at affairs of state from a non-political party point of view. The great problem which confronts the orderly internal working of this country is the need for governments to grasp the true idea of federation. That is a problem with which I fear we shall not get very far until something is done to make the States financially responsible for their own actions. Perhaps it will be necessary for the Commonwealth to return to them major taxing powers. The solution of the problem cannot long be delayed, because at the present time the States lack a sense of responsibility for raising the money which they desire to expend. I commend this bill to the Senate. I suggest that this Government should be allowed the money which it seeks because, during its period of office, it has had a very good record and has plans for a great future for Australia. 388 KMN New South Wales 0 0 GRANT, Donald Senator GRANT . - We have an opportunity tonight to discuss, in the words of Lewis Carroll, many things, such as " ships and shoes and sealing wax, and cabbages and kings ". I had intended to make remarks entirely different from those which I now propose to make. I have changed my mind because of the astonishing comment of Senator Laught concerning a capita] levy. Perhaps I should explain, for the benefit of the honorable senator, that a capital levy has nothing to do with money in the bank. If it had, then this Government would be guilty of imposing a very severe capital levy. If, eight or nine years ago a person had £500 in the bank, and the effect of inflation reduced the present purchasing power of that money to only £250, that would be a capital levy. It is a great pity that honorable senators opposite, who are supporters of bourgeois parties and who represent the nouveauriche in the community, have not read Keynes's book, entitled Economic Consequences of the PeaceThe peace referred to, of course, was that after World War I. When the Treaty of Versailles was being negotiated, Australia Was represented by a now deceased gentleman who never failed to refer to it as a very wonderful treaty. Keynes, however, has shown that it was a most stupid treaty because it imposed upon the Germans conditions with which it was impossible for them to comply. It was that treaty which plunged the world into the terrible position in which there were 6,000,000 unemployed persons in Germany, 13,000,000 in America and 3,000,000 in Great Britain. It permitted Adolf Hitler to rise to power, and it produced throughout the world governments of the same kind as that which honorable senators opposite support today. They backed the Communists to fight the fascists and now they are backing the fascists to fight the Communists. Senator Laught said that the Government , had succeeded in defeating the reds. It will be a bad day for the Government when it does so because then supporters of the Government will have nothing to talk about. This Government has a long' string of stupid actions to its credit, but one' of the most stupid was the prosecution of three Communists in Sydney. In that case the Government's timing was as bad as it has always been. Just after Stalin died, long after his time, the Russians did not know which way to turn. They had built Stalin up to the standard of a god. Immediately after his death, they lifted their stranglehold upon East Berlin, because Stalin's death had thrown the Communists all over the world into a flurry. They discovered that the Communist government in charge of East Berlin could not hold down the German workers. This Government then prosecuted the Communists in Sydney for an allegedly seditious article. The Sydney Morning Herald published the article almost verbatim when the case was before a magistrate, Mr. M. S. Meagher. Previously practically nobody had read it in the . Communist Review in which it was first published. Mr. Meagher ruled that the article was not seditious, and I could see nothing wrong with it from the point of view of truth. It may not have been in good taste as the magistrate commented. It dealt with the genealogy of the Royal family and the relationship of the Mountbatten family to the German-born banker, Sir Ernest Cassel, but fortunately the magistrate dismissed the case. The Communists were on the toboggan. In the Lang byelection they received 1,000 votes. In the previous election in Lang before the death of Mr. Daniel Mulcahy they received 1,900 votes. But the prosecution of the Communists to whom I have referred was manna from heaven for them and their supporters. The people of Great Britain would be not so foolish as to prosecute in such a case. I shall give honorable senators one illustration to show how the British in one fell swoop did more to weaken the power of the Communists in Great Britain than this Government has done with all its stupid propaganda and actions. A well-known German Communist named Gerhardt Eisler was arrested in the United States of America. While on bail, he absconded and reached England. The United States Government asked for an extradition order against Eisler. He appeared in a Bowstreet court before a magistrate and the Communist paper in London, the Daily Worker, proclaimed under heavy headlines that it was a farce to pretend that Eisler would get a fair trial. That newspaper stated that Great Britain was in pawn to the United. States of America and was its tool. What happened? The magistrate said that he knew of no law of England that had been violated by Eisler and that would warrant him ordering Eisler's extradition to the United States of America. Eisler himself then stated, " I did not know that there was such freedom in the world ". The way to beat the Communists is to give them economic and political freedom and to abolish the bad conditions in which communism thrives. An honorable senator opposite hypnotized himself into giving an impression that he believed Australia was a terrible country when the Labour Government was in office. He implied that everybody was worried to death in those days. The truth is that it was a lovely country then. A person could get full value for his money. According to honorable senators on the Government side the country has now been rehabilitated. They have suggested that nobody is worried. Senator McCallum has said that the best people in Australia are those who have saved a little money for their old age. Every supporter of the Australian Labour party will agree with that statement, but where are the people who have saved for their future ? What will happen to them if we have deflation? 389 KOW 0 0 HENTY, Norman Senator Henty - Their money will be worth more. 389 KMN 0 0 GRANT, Donald Senator GRANT - If Senator Henty believes that, his opinion is not worth having. In 1949, before this Government was elected, the Labour party put forward a proposition. It expressed the belief that, prices must not be allowed to continue to rise and if they did rise, Australia would be costed out of its markets. It announced that it would control prices for some time if it were returned to office. Moreover, the Labour party promised that it would submit its proposals to a referendum and with the backing of the trade union movement it would fix wages. The Labour Government was defeated, and from 1949 ' until 1951 everybody complained that the situation had become worse. They asked when the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) intended to restore value to the £1 as he had promised to do. In 1951, the Prime Minister did not bring that rabbit out of the hat again. Instead, he produced the red rabbit - the Communist. Foolishly, the people forgot about the Government's promise to put value back into the £1. Since then' the economy has gone from bad to worse. The Prime Minister is a lovely talker, but his oratory is simply a facade. I have never heard him say anything that has shown definitely that he has a grip of the intricacies of the situation. 389 KSL 0 0 MAHER, Edmund Senator MAHER - The honorable senator has not listened to the right honorable gentleman properly. 389 KMN 0 0 GRANT, Donald Senator GRANT - I have listened to Senator Maher, and, if he is a representative of the Prime Minister, I am convinced of the truth of my statement. In 1949, the Government abolished control of capital issues. Anybody who wanted to manufacture diamond-studded bracelets could do so. That was in contrast to the Labour party's policy of putting first tilings first. After the war, hundreds of thousands of men were returning to civilian life from the armed services with plenty* of money to spend and the Labour government of the day believed that it must have time to maintain controls. Australia had a balance of £800,000,000 in Great Britain. But when this Government was elected, people who had never dabbled in the stock exchange before began to do so. The Minister for National Development (Senator Spooner) has said in this chamber that the progress of the nation can be judged by the way in which the people subscribe to government loans. This Government put up interest rates until they have now reached 4$ per cent. How can industry progress when those who can invest" in it can obtain an Assured return of 4$ per cent, from government loans? Why should they take the risk of investing in industry for a possible return of 6 per cent. ? Great Britain reduced interest rates last week but rates have risen. Everybody is frightened to death. 390 K0L 0 0 PEARSON, Rex Senator Pearson - Who fixes the rate of interest? 390 KMN 0 0 GRANT, Donald Senator GRANT - I believe the rate of interest for the current loan was fixed by the Treasurer (Sir Arthur Fadden). 390 KNR 0 0 HANNAFORD, Douglas Senator Hannaford - The rates are fixed by the Australian Loan Council. 390 KMN 0 0 GRANT, Donald Senator GRANT - Possibly it is a case of Jacob and Esau all over again. If it will please honorable senators on the Government side, I shall agree that the Australian Loan Council fixes the rates of interest. Does it matter who fixes them ? When the Government has to pay 4^ per cent, interest on loans that is dear proof that the country is not prosperous. The people have no confidence in the Government. I presume that whoever was responsible for fixing rates of interest in respect of loans raised since this Government came into office was also responsible for fixing rates of interest on war loans when the Chifley Government was in office, and, aa we know, every government loan that was floated during the regime of the Chifley Government was over-subscribed. 390 JZY 0 0 PALTRIDGE, Shane Senator Paltridge - That is not correct. 390 KMN 0 0 GRANT, Donald Senator GRANT - Perhaps, the honorable senator will tell us what he knows about the matter when he speaks in this debate. I know something about conditions that existed at that time, not only in Australia, but also overseas. American soldiers who were in Australia in 1946 and 1947 could buy for the equivalent of a dollar twice as much in Australia as they could buy for a dollar in the United States of America, but a. few years later the position was reversed. When the Chifley Government was in office the cost of living in Great Britain was half as much again as it was in Australia; to-day the position is the reverse. When Government supporters claim that the Government has curbed intiation, they remind me of the burglar who. after robbing a mau, gives him a shilling for his tram fare and the victim is so pleased that he forgets that he has been robbed. In similar fashion, this Government, after having increased rates of sales tax to an unprecedented degree is now reducing those rates in the belief that the people will be prepared to forget that it taxed them so heavily two years ago. I now refer to the matter that was raised by Senator Ashley regarding the leakage of budget information. That honorable senator dealt with the visit by Mr. Irish to Canberra on a Sunday to obtain consent to the issue of additional capital by Associated Newspapers Limited. Is it not a. terrible state of affairs when neither in this chamber nor in the House of Representatives, the Government's spokesmen have given a satisfactory explanation of that episode in reply to numerous requests by members of the Opposition? When Senator Ashley was speaking on this matter the Minister for National Development (Senator Spooner) interjected, "That is not so. Mr. Irish did not say that"; but when the honorable senator read extracts from evidence given by Mr. Irish in court proceedings to substantiate his statement the Minister remained silent. The fact is that Mr. Irish obtained in advance information about the Government's budget proposals and passed on that information to the interests that he represented, and those interests acted upon it. Senator Ashley also referred to the resignation of Dr. Hugh Dalton, who was Chancellor of the Exchequer in a Labour government in Great Britain. Dr. Dalton, as he entered the House of Commons to deliver his budget speech, made a remark to a friend and inadvertently disclosed information about a proposal that was contained in his budget. His friend immediately contacted a newspaper office which published the information. Although Dr. Dalton had disclosed that information inadvertently his lapse was regarded as unpardonable and he resigned from his position as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Surely, the people of Australia are entitled to an explanation of the leakage of budget information to which Senator Ashley ieffered. I have been endeavouring, of course in vain, to ascertain the foreign policy of this Government. Apparently, if one desires to know what the Minister for External Affairs (Mr. Casey) is going to say next Sunday one needs only to read what Mr. Foster Dulles, the American Secretary of State, said last Sunday. The charge has been made that members of the Opposition are anti-American. That charge is absolutely groundless. Incidentally, I should say that the persons responsible for the design of the Australian-American memorial, which is being constructed in Canberra, are anti-American. All Australians realize thai but for the assistance that the Americans gave to us in "World "War II. we would not now be in control of this country. Nevertheless, if the Americans say that two and two make six, must we agree with them? Likewise, when the United States of America says that Chiang Kai-shek is the real representative of the Government in China, I disagree with that claim. Similarly, I disagree with the statement made by Mr. Foster Dulles that Bao Dai is going to be the real representative of Indo-China. "We know that Bao Dai has no possible chance. During the last few days our Ambassador at "Washington, Sir Percy Spender, has been reported as saying that Indo-China is the key to the situation in Asia and that the rebel forces in Indo-China must be defeated. Incidentally, the rebels are always on the side that we are not on. A great national movement is on foot in Indo-China. Although the French are expending 75 per cent, of their military and naval budget in that country, their position there is worsening. I have spoken with conservatives in Great Britain who regard as nonsense the statement that Chiang Kai-shek represents China. Any Labour man in Scotland, who said that Chiang Kai-shek was the representative of China, would not be given a minute's hearing. Can this Government say what the United States of America is really trying to do? Apparently, the Americans ignore the existence of 400,000,000 Chinese and the entire population of Indo-China. I have not the slightest doubt that.no Korean peace conference will over take place. The Government should tell the Parliament about the agreement that has been made on the side between Syngman Rhee and Mr. Foster Dulles. Can anysane person expect that a Korean peace conference will be held, if red Russia and red China are to be barred from such a conference? The Government's international policy is like its internal policy; it is a case of the blind leading the blind. My criticism has been rather trenchant, but I hope that when I conclude my remarks a spokesman for the Government will define the Government's foreign policy. If it is a policy of blindly following the United States of America, we do not need to send representatives to conferences abroad. All necessary documents could be despatched to this country and could be signed here. The plain fact is that if we had followed old John Bull's diplomacy we would be in a much stronger position that we are in to-day. I repeat that the Russian Communists have no chance whatsoever of dominating China. Australia and its allies should have made a deal with Mao-tse-tung. The Russian Communists have failed to dominate East Berlin. Instead of getting behind the Japanese we should be supporting the Chinese. To-day, the Japanese are rearming, and to-morrow they will be able to ask the United' States of America, wlm'" that country intends to do for them. With. Russian forces poised over Sakhalin the Japanese are scared to death; and they will turn that position to their own advantage by making greater demands upon the United States of America. If war should break out in the Pacific and an American vessel be sunk, Australia, as a signatory to the Anzus pact, will have to go to America's assistance. Where will we get off then? Are we to fight the Asian peoples? 392 KSL 0 0 MAHER, Edmund Senator Maher - Suppose red China sinks an Australian vessel, what then? 392 KMN 0 0 GRANT, Donald Senator GRANT - So far as I know, red China has no navy at all. How can any one imagine that a handful of Australians would be able to conquer red China? I am completely antiCommunist, but, at the same time, I am a realist. Any one who believes that Australia would be capable of conquering red China is merely foolish. But if Australia becomes embroiled in a war with the teeming millions of Asia, history will repeat itself. During World War II., fewer than 1,000,000 Chinese pinned down far greater forces of Japanese. Japan failed to conquer China. In any event, strong ties exist between China and Australia. Many years ago, Chinese merchants established prominent businesses in this country. I give credit to the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) for the brilliant way in which he handled Dr. Malan. The right honorable gentleman said that Australia would perhaps look at things differently if there were five times more coloured people than there are white people in this country. The right honorable gentleman handled that episode very cleverly. If we became involved in a war with China and the Americans bombed that country, such action would not solve any problem. It is useless for any one to say that a person who criticizes American foreign policy is necessarily anti-American. I criticize American foreign policy because I believe that it really benefits the Communists, just as the policy of this Government encourages the Communists. We should be well advised to placate the Asian people and to do all in our power to' improve living conditions in Asian countries. Those people are not interested in our way of life, nor are they interested in what the Communists do. When the Communists talk about democracy they have in mind Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia; and when we tali about democracy we have in mind Australia, New Zealand and the United States of America. What do the Asian people care about democracy? All they want to know is what democracy means* in bowls of rice. If the United States of America had expended one-quarter of the money in rehabilitating China that it has expended in bombing Asian countries, the Asian people would be more favorably disposed towards us. 392 KH5 0 0 GORTON, John Senator Gorton - What part of China did the Americans bomb? 392 KMN 0 0 GRANT, Donald Senator GRANT - The Americans supplied Chiang Kai-shek's army to the tune of millions of pounds in order to enable him to fight Mao Tse tung. I give credit to this Government for bringing Asian students to Australia. I am a soccer fan, and when the Chinese soccer team was recently in this country I went to see their matches. - I was pleased to observe the spirit of good-fellowship that was evidenced among the hundreds of Chinese spectators and Australian onlookers. I repeat that our primary purpose in our dealings with Asian countries should be to help those countries and to do all that we can to make up for the mistakes that we have made in the past in our dealings with them. 392 JZQ 0 0 ANDERSON, Kenneth Senator Anderson Senator Anderson interjecting, 392 KMN 0 0 GRANT, Donald Senator GRANT - Senator Anderson was a prisoner of war of the Japanese. How does he justify support for the Japanese in view of the fact that he and other Australians were tortured by them as no prisoners have been tortured by an enemy during the last 100 years? 392 KOW Tasmania 0 0 HENTY, Norman Senator HENTY .- - Usually, I listen with interest to Senator Grant, but to-night he reminded me of the old saying, "You do not have to be mad to be a socialist, but it helps ". That comment aptly applies to his knowledge of finance. During the course of his Sydney Domain address he mentioned two matters to which I shall refer. He referred again to the fact that officials of the capital issues control performed official duties in Canberra on a Sunday. I am amazed at the short memory of members of the Opposition and their knack of remembering certain evidence and forgetting other evidence. The Chairman of the Capital Issues Board has made a statement, which has not yet been contradicted or challenged, that during the war' period he was instructed by the Labour Government that was then in office to grant consent for a capital issue to the directors of Courtaulds (Australia) Limited on a Sunday. Yet honorable senators opposite persist in criticizing the chairman's action on this occasion. It is obvious that they have a convenient memory. I do not intend to allow Senator Grant's statement about the repayment of Commonwealth loans to pass without comment, because such loans are guaranteed by the Australian Government, and repayment has always been made at maturity. The honorable senator stated that during this Government's term of office the market value of Commonwealth bonds has been as low as £82 for a £100 bond. 393 KMN 0 0 GRANT, Donald Senator Grant - I did not say anything of the kind. 393 KOW 0 0 HENTY, Norman Senator HENTY - I remind the honorable senator that during the thirties, when a Labour government was in office, the market price of Commonwealth bonds fell to £65 for a £100 bond. Nobody has ever yet lost one penny as a result of investing in Commonwealth loans. It is a recognized principle that long-term loans carry a higher rate of interest than short-term loans. It is unreasonable for an investor to expect to be paid long-term interest rates on short-term loans. I point out that the market price of short-term loans bearing interest at the rate of 2£ per cent, and 2$ per cent, is at present £102 for a £100 bond. The honorable senator has attempted to undermine the confidence of the people of Australia in Commonwealth loans. His statements were factually untrue, and could cause a lot of damage. Honorable senators opposite are continually endeavouring to undermine the confidence of the investing public in Commonwealth loans, in the. hope of embarrassing this Government, which has made finance available from 'revenue to the States for public works. This Government had .to increase taxation in order to finance the States' public works programmes. But what thanks have we received from the Opposition and the Premiers of the States? None! If the Commonwealth had not provided the States with money from revenue for that purpose, about 75 per cent, of State public works would have been closed down, due to the extravagance of the State governments. I shall deal fully with this matter at a later stage of my remarks. I have before me the report of the Auditor-General of New South "Wales and the report of the Auditor-General of Tasmania, both for the year 1952-53, and I shall refer to them in a moment. Senator Laught has referred to this Government's efforts to correct the state of aif airs that existed when it took office in 1 949. It has reconstituted the Public Accounts Committee, which is the watchdog of public expenditure. I pay tribute to the Public Accounts Committee, which is composed of members of all three political parties in the Parliament. It is doing a splendid job. I also pay tribute to the Government for reconstituting the committee. Although the accounts of only a few departments have so far been investigated already other departments have felt a cold blast on their back. Senior officers of those departments, realizing that their accounts will be scrutinized by the Public Accounts Committee, are doing all possible to get everything in order before their turn arrives.. To a lesser extent, I believe that the Public Works Committee is earnestly endeavouring to ensure that the taxpayers shall receive full value for the money that is expended on new government buildings and other major public works. I deplore the fact that plans and estimates in relation to more projects are not referred to the Public Works Committee for investigation. In far too many instances there have been referred to the Public Works Committee details of projects that are a bit difficult, so that if subsequently anything goes wrong at least Ministers will be able to say that the Public Works Committee recommended the action taken. I contend that the plans of all proposed public works exceeding a certain value should be referred to the Public Works Committee, so that all aspects of the proposals can be thoroughly investigated before approval is given for work to commence. As I am a Tasmanian representative, it is only natural that I follow closely public affairs in that State. I shall bring to the notice of honorable senators certain comments that have been made by' the Tasmanian Auditor-General in his report for the financial year 1952-53, because I believe that it should be possible for the Commonwealth to exercise control in relation to the expenditure of money that it makes available to a State government, j.f the conditions revealed in this reportare typical of conditions in the other States, it is evident that public funds have not been expended wisely but have been poured down the drain. As the States are not responsible for collecting the money that they expend, they engage in reckless expenditure as fast as they can obtain money from the Commonwealth, without proper control. The Auditor-General of Tasmania, at page 108 of his report, dealing with railway services, stated - Included as an Expenditure item in the Railway Trading Account is " Loss on Disposal of Reinforcing Steel (imported), £14,55* Ss. 5d.". This refers to 365 tons 8 cwt. 1 qi. of Japanese steel which the Commission had in stock- That was the Transport Commission of Tasmania - and which had originally been purchased at an average price of £75 ls. Id. per ton, or a total purchase price of £27,343 7s. 2d. The Commission, having no use for it,- Nobody has yet explained why the steel was bought - found that the only source of disposal was the Hydro-Electric Commission, which was propared to pay the Australian price of £35 per ton. The sale was effected at this figure, or a total sale of £12,789 8s. 9d. The resultant loss of £14,554 8s. 5d. to the Commission was written off as indicated above. This is an instance of loan money and overseas credit having been used to import steel, which it was admitted the Commission had not use, for, and in respect of which it sustained a. loss of more than £14,000. On almost every page of the Auditor-General's report dis-satisaction is expressed in relation to the Tasmanian administration. 1 shall now refer to a loan that was made by the Tasmanian Government to Furex Proprietary Limited. This matter is referred to at page 167 of the report of the Auditor-General of Tasmania, under the heading, "Loans on Mortgage ". The Tasmanian Government constructed a factory for Furex Proprietary Limited at a cost of £27,300. The company is renting the factory from the Tasmanian Government. I have no quarrel with that. In addition, however, the Tasmanian Government has lent the company £10,000 for five years at 4£ per cent, interest. Repayment of the loan was guaranteed by Grocery and General Merchants Limited, of Sydney. That was the only security that the Tasmanian Government obtained in respect of the loan. I point out to honorable senators that, according to the press, a bank in New South Wales recently stepped in and appointed three directors to control the activities of Grocery and General Merchants Limited, because of the huge losses that that company had incurred. I do not consider that the Tasmanian Government obtained adequate security for the money that if lent to Furex Proprietary Limited. 394 KSL CP 0 0 MAHER, Edmund Senator MAHER - Did Furex Proprietary Limited execute a bill of sale or mortgage? 394 KOW 0 0 HENTY, Norman Senator HENTY - The only note made by the Tasmanian Auditor-General was - Security - Guarantee from Grocery and General Merchants Limited. Sydney, New South Wales. I shall now refer to the sale by the Tasmanian Government of the Devon Cannery, which was previously owned by the Commonwealth, for £87,833. The Tasmanian Auditor-General would not issue a. certificate for a sale at that price. However, the Tasmanian Government went ahead with the sale and the Auditor-General has pointed out that that figure was £1,764 less than the written down price. He stated in his conclusions, at page 201 of his report - :">. That the alleged objection of the Company to a short delay in proceedings relative to the sale in order that the Auditor-General's certificate might be obtained appears incompatible with the very considerable concession it gained in having passed on to it the rebate of £20,850 allowed by the Commonwealth Government in connection with its loan to the Tasmanian Government made in connection with the original construction of the Devon Cannery. I point out that the Commonwealth granted a concession of £20,000 to the Tasmanian Government, but, as the Tasmanian Auditor-General has pointed out, the Government has passed on that benefit to the present owners of the factory. I emphasize that this is another instance of ba.d accounting and uncontrolled spending of public money by the Tasmanian Government. The Australian Government has had to stand a great many frontal attacks by State governments for imposing high taxation. Yet it has been collecting taxes in order to help the States to carry out their works. Therefore, the State governments should ensure that the money paid to them is used with a sense of responsibility. In his annual report for the financial year 1952-53 the Tasmanian Auditor-General made the following statement concerning the Hydroelectric Commission of Tasmania : - Lists of deficiencies found and reported to the present date covering a considerable portion of the stock held at Hobart Store and seven other stores reveal a total net deficiency of £6,853. However, included in the gross discrepancies there is a deficiency of £10,137 relating to steel stock held at various compounds in Hobart and not subjected to verification for a number of years. In dealing with the Housing Department the report of the Tasmanian Auditor-General reads like a romance. The Housing Department has a deficiency of one type E3 home. The amount of the deficiency in relation to the "War Service Land Settlement Department, however, is only £338 13s. 9d. The report states that in the Hobart store of the Housing Department there was a deficiency of 13,47S super, feet of 3-in. by 2-in. timber, 19,537 super, feet of 4-in. by li-in. timber, and 18,263 super, feet of 4-in. by 2-in. timber. Some system should be devised in order to make the States spend their money in a responsible manner. "While I was travelling on an aeroplane a little while ago a Canadian passenger told me of a visit that he paid to a project of the Victorian State Government. He said that in the course of his travels throughout the world he had endured all sorts of conditions in construction camps and would even sleep on a floor in order to get an order for his firm. Nowhere else in the world had he seen anything resembling what he saw in a. Victorian construction camp. There he was housed free of charge in one of the best hostels that he had ever seen. It had a hot water service and a considerable number of radiators. This is what is being done with the funds that are found for the State governments by the Australian Government. This type of expenditure must be stopped. Honorable senators opposite have complained of the amount of money that the Government has taken from the people in the form of taxes. They have blithely ignored the amount that is left to the people. After giving a great deal of thought to this matter, I have come to the conclusion, that the sooner the major taxing rights are returned to the States the better it will be for the people of Australia. Irresponsibility in State governments cannot be permitted. State governments criticized the previous Labour Government just as much as they have criticized this Government. The late Mr. Chifley once told the Premiers that they could get more flies with a drop of honey than with a gallon of vinegar. There is also another saying that if you want to make love to a girl do not start by kicking her on the shins. That is what the State governments have been doing. The return of taxing rights to the States is an urgent matter. Every year the State Premiers attend the meeting of the Australian Loan Council and make demands on the national income of Australia which are considerably above the level of that income. They have received more money from this Government than from any other government. Yet, after returning home from meetings of the Australian Loan Council they invariably slate this Government. The federal system is a partnership of equal, responsible authorities. The Loan Council was devised on the assumption that the States were responsible bodies. It consists of the six State Premiers and two representatives of the Australian Government. It was formed in order to eliminate competition between the States in the raising of loan money. Before the establishment of the council one State would offer an interest rate of 4^ per cent, for a loan and another would then offer 4$ per cent. The Australian Loan Council was intended to co-ordinate the requirements of the States and fix rates of interest. Yet honorable senators opposite allege that the Treasurer (Sir Arthur Fadden) fixes interest rates. He does not. They are fixed by the Australian Loan Council on which there are five Labour Premiers who have frequently outvoted the Commonwealth on these matters. The Australian Loan Council assesses the amount of money that it can secure from the loan market and what rate of interest it will have to pay. It then asks the Australian Government to borrow a given amount on its behalf. The Australian Government only borrows on behalf of the Australian Loan Council. Y'et honorable senators opposite and irresponsible State governments have claimed that the Australian Government will not grant them loan funds. The Federal Government does not manufacture loan funds. Loans are raised from the savings of the people. The lower taxation that has been proposed in the budget and the lower cost of living that the budget will make possible will enable the people to invest increased savings in these loans. The more the people invest in these loans the greater the reduction in taxation will be. Between £200,000,000 and £300,000,000 of money raised by taxation is still spent each year on capital works. If government loans are filled a corresponding amount of taxation Can be remitted in future budgets because it will not be needed for capital works. I support this bill very strongly. When this bill is dealt with in committee it will provide considerable interest for honorable senators. Many departmental expenses will require close scrutiny. It is the duty of honorable senators thoroughly to scan every penny that the Government proposes to expend. Every reduction that can be made in expenditure will make further taxation reductions possible. The reduction of expenditure is the greatest duty of any government. Nothing will have a better influence on the inflationary position than the action of the Government in reducing expendi- ture and lessening the burden of taxation on individuals and on small and large companies. Such action would greatly help the cost structure. I commend to the Senate the task of closely examining the proposed expenditure. 396 K7Y Western Australia 0 0 TANGNEY, Dorothy Senator TANGNEY . - I was very pleased to bear Senator Henty say that it was necessary for honorable senators to discuss the Estimates in full detail. I hope that his statement may be taken as an indication of the change of policy on the part of the Government because in another place the " guillotine " was so ruthlessly applied to the Estimates that millions of pounds of expenditure were approved in a few minutes. Some departments, including the Department of Health, were not discussed by the members in that place. I hope that a similar state of affairs will not exist in the Senate. Senator Laught and other speakers on the Government side have drawn attention to the defence vote. They have all pointed out that this Government is spending £200,000,000 on defence this year, whereas the Labour Government did not spend half that amount. To talk of defence expenditure or any other form of government expenditure merely in terms of pounds shillings and pence does not give a true picture because the value of money is determined only by the goods and' services that it will purchase. The value of our currency has deteriorated considerably in the past four or five years, and any comparison of expenditure to-day with expenditure four or five years ago must be made in the light of that deterioration of purchasing power. It is not true to say that as this Government is spending £200,000,000 on defence and the Labour Government spent only say £100,000,000 four or five years ago, this Administration is twice as cognizant of the need for adequate defence as its predecessor was. We all realize, regardless of our party affiliations, that our national safety is of primary importance. Labour governments have always shown themselves to be most concerned with the security of this country, and it ill behoves honorable senators opposite to try to convince the public that the Labour party is not interested in national defence. The people know from their own experience during the last decade that when the necessity arises the Labour party i3 willing and eager to take whatever steps are necessary to protect our shores. It is also a mistake to say that Labour is opposed to compulsory military training. We are not opposed to it. We were opposed to some clauses of the National Service Bill, but ultimately we voted for the bill. Much is being made by honorable senators opposite of the fact that the Government is providing £200,000,000 for defence this year. Although we believe that certain economies could be effected, particularly in regard to national service training, we should be loath to see any cheese-paring of expenditure on vital defence projects. It is our earnest wish that Australia should have the very best advice on military matters; that the very best defence plans should bc adopted and the very best materials used ; and that the members of our fighting forces should have the very best equipment that can be made available to thom. Members of the Labour party are wholeheartedly behind any sane proposal for the defence of Australia. Mention has been made of the relaxation of rationing controls during the term of office of this Government. It is true that to-day petrol is not rationed in the sense that coupon tickets are required to purchase it. But petrol, like many other commodities, is rationed by price. To-day, the price of petrol varies from 3s. 6 1/2d a gallon in the capital cities to as much as 5s. or 6s. a gallon in outback areas. That is a very effective form of rationing. I am amazed that the oil companies can be granted price increases for petrol and other products when, instead of utilizing their profits to keep prices down, they are expending vast sums of money on the erection of one-brand petrol stations throughout our towns and cities and along our highways. The general public is not deriving very much benefit from the relaxation of controls because, in effect, controls still exist in the form of increasing prices. I am sick and tired of hearing Government supporters say that the Opposition is anti-American. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are realists. We realize that our first duty is to the Mother Country, and to the British Commonwealth of Nations, but I remind the Senate that in time of crisis in World War II. it was a Labour government that sought and obtained the assistance of America to keep Australia a free country. At that time British men and materials were fully committed in other fields. The Mother Country had, since the fall of Prance, been fighting alone against Nazi aggression in Europe. It was in those dark days that a Labour Prime Minister, John Curtin, took the unprecedented step of calling upon America for assistance. On that occasion the very people who to-day are accusing the Labour party of being un-American were accusing us of being pro-American. Apparently honorable senators opposite change their views on these matters as often as they change the names of their parties. Labour's policy does not change. We called upon the might of America not because we were pro-American or anti-British. We were both pro-British and pro-Australian, but Britain was unable to assist Australia, willing though it may have been to do so. We believed that our chief responsibility to the Mother Country was to keep Australia f.ee. We are told that one of the merits of the present Government is its ability to raise overseas loans. I point out that Labour governments under both Mr. Curtin and Mr. Chifley were able to raise all the money necessary for the prosecution of the war without obtaining one dollar from overseas. That was possible because the Australian people had confidence in their own country. And what better security is there than the Commonwealth itself, and all that this nation and its assets represent? What I should like to know, and what many thousands of my fellow Australians would like to know, is how the 100,000,000-dollar loan from America has been expended. Some Australian industries were brought to the brink of extinction because this country was flooded with imported goods purchased by borrowed dollars. For instance, farming implements of various types which could be produced in Australia were brought in from the United States of America in large quantities. The same is true of tyres. Honorable senators will recall that Senator Ashley spoke in this chamber last- year about thousands of Australian workers being thrown out of work in rubber factories in Sydney while imported tyres purchased out of the 100,000,000-dollar loan were rotting on the wharfs. Before loans are raised overseas, we should make certain that the money required is not available in Australia, and once having borrowed dollars, we have a duty to the Australian people who have to meet capital and interest repayments on overseas loans, to ensure that borrowed money shall not be frittered away on the purchase of overseas goods that can be manufactured in this country. About eighteen months or two years ago we had the spectacle of Australians being thrown out of employment because of the influx of imports for which we have not yet paid and shall not be able to pay for years to come. One honorable senator opposite made a jibe about compulsory unionism. When the people of this country are being forced to join medical benefit societies in order to take full advantage of the Government's health scheme, what else is it but compulsion ? It is economic compulsion, which is compulsion in its worst form. The organizations which people are being forced to join have no responsibility to the people as a whole or to the Government. The Government merely says, " You must join a benefit society if you want this extra 4s. a day ". The cost of hospital accommodation and treatment has become so high in the last few years that it is necessary for people to have all the help they can be given; yet this Government, which has the huge National Welfare Fund on which to draw, is compelling people to pay levies to hospital benefits societies ' in order to receive the full assistance to which they are entitled. If that is not a form of compulsion I do not know what is. There has been a great deal of talk about the permissible income of pensioners. I do not suggest that anything that the Government has done for pensioners should be laughed at. Every little helps, even though some of it is very little indeed; but when honorable senators opposite talk about the improved conditions of pensioners, they are assum-ing that every pensioner can work to supplement his pension. The fact is that 85 per cent, of invalid and age pensioners are unable to work and have no property. So, desirable though the alleviation of the means test may be, and desirable though it may be to liberalize property qualifications, those concessions do not in any way ameliorate the conditions of pensioners who have no other income. Those are the .people with whom we should be concerned. In the past week. I have been told by Government supporters that I have made irresponsible statements about social services. The Minister for National Development (Senator Spooner) said that my claims were irresponsible exaggerations and various other things. Such remarks are not in keeping with the dignity of a Minister. I can prove every statement I have made. I say deliberately to the Minister and to Senator Robertson who said last week that I had allowed my heart to control my head, that there are people in this country who are not getting enough to eat, and are not adequately clothed and housed. I could, take honorable senators to places where they would see these things for themselves. Widows are taking their children to second-hand shops to clothe them in somebody else's cast-off garments. Some households have been without butter for months. I make those statements positively because, in the last three weeks I have been, in places where those conditions exist.' Some families have only margarine. That is a shocking state of affairs in a rich dairying country such as Australia. This afternoon, Senator Wedgwood asked how Australian butter compared with New Zealand butter and she was told that Australian butter was equal to any in the world. It is, for those who can afford to buy it, but a widow who receives only £3 10s. a week and child endowment cannot afford many pounds of butter at 4s. 2d. per lb. I should like all members of the Senate to co-operate in an effort to provide for the introduction of a domestic allowance for civilian widows who have the care of children under the age of sixteen- years, in much the same way as it is provided for war widows. To do so would not cost a great deal. The housing of such people is also a most important matter. Originally, when the Commonwealth and State Housing agreement was introduced, it was decided that a proportion of the nouses built by the Commonwealth should be, after consultation with the States, reserved for the use of pensioners and Others, such as war widows and civilian widows. The rental of those houses was to be, on an economic basis, one-fifth of the weekly income. I should like to bo informed how many houses in the States are being made available to war widows and civilian widows on that basis, which would result in rentals of between 12s. 6d. and 15s. a week. I do not think that a single house has been made available at such rentals, because it would not be economically possible for the Government to do so. Fortunately, in Western Australia, we h.'ive the McNess housing scheme under which houses are provided for the needy at very small rentals. But, of course,there are not nearly sufficient houses of that kind. Until recently, the construction of such houses had practically ceased, and those that are likely to bc built during the next few years are already bespoken for aged couples. I should like to see aged people housed in their own homes instead of in institutions. To my mind, nothing is more tragic than the separation of elderly men and women, in the eventide of life, who have reared their families. In so many cases the men are placed in an institution for males and the women in an institution for females, so that there is no possibility of spending their last days together. In my opinion, that is a pagan approach to this question. The Australian Government, and also the State governments and. municipalities, should endeavour to house aged couples as they are in England. They should not be obliged to spend their last days in the sorry plight which we see so frequently to-day. I wish now to refer to proposed vote for the Australian National University, on the council of which I have the privilege to represent this Senate. A good deal of misconception exists in the community regarding that university. Because students in caps and gowns are not to be seen wandering between lecture rooms in Canberra, some people appear to think that no educational activity is being undertaken by the university. The whole conception of the* university in Canberra is a unique one. When its establishment was mooted- in 1946 its object, as it is now, was a twofold one. First, it was to be a university at post-graduate level for the pursuit of research, and secondly, it was to provide for the training of graduate students in research. That was a conception completely foreign to Australian authorities and also to many such authorities in other countries. The need for a university of that kind is obvious. Those of us who have had anything to do with universities know that one of the main problems associated with Australian universities and their administration has been the difficulty of retaining in Australia many of our brilliant graduates who are obliged to go overseas to study. They go to America, Europe and the United Kingdom and, after completing their researches, decide that their particular field is limited in Australia. Consequently, they stay abroad and are lost t<> Australia. That was a problem which those who helped to frame the original concept of the Australian National University studied very carefully. The result has been that, in the few years since the relevant legislation came before the Parliament in 1946, great progress has been made. The university here will not become merely an isolated unit, but will work in conjunction with the other Australian universities. Already it has provided a great deal of practical assistance to those universities. It has granted scholarships and research allowances to students from other universities and has interchanged staff with them. As Senator McCallum has said, it would be pleasing to see Canberra become known not only as the home of the National Parliament, but also as the home of national learning. Therefore, we should not be niggardly in providing finance for this institution. Certain criticism has appeared in the press concerning the building to be known as University House. Many people consider that that building is long before its time. Surely we have seen, in Canberra ' and in most of our cities, enough of the temporary type of building. We all know that such buildings tend to become permanent. Even this Parliament House is a temporary building, but I suppose it will outlast most of us. The original plans for the university have been considerably modified, but I suggest that if we are to bring to this country the most learned men that it is possible to obtain - and no one will deny that we need brilliant men to direct research- we must be able to offer them decent housing and living conditions. Surely it is better to build one decent building than to have a number of prefabricated buildings of a temporary nature, which will remain for perhaps 40 or 50 years. The Australian National University has gone ahead with the building of University House. Although I am not able to agree that all of the expenditure in connexion with the university is proper, I wish to point out that the houses which were acquired by the university authorities at inflated prices, due to the scarcity of materials and labour, are returning in rentals 4.875 per cent, of their cost compared with 5 per cent, for government-owned homes in Canberra generally. I suggest that that is a reasonable comparison when it is remembered that those homes were -bought at high prices during the peak years of the inflation. During the recent parliamentary recess, in company with Senator Laught and some members of the House of Representatives, I had the very happy experience of a visit to the Territory of Nauru, which is one of our less-known territories. I would like to pay a tribute to Senator Laught for his leadership on that occasion. If problems of national importance could he approached by members of the Parliament in the same friendly spirit of co-operation as is usually evinced on visits of that kind, I do not think that the Australian people would need to worry very much about the political future of this country. It amazes me that we are able to get together on these extra-curricular activities of parliamentarians, as they might perhaps be termed, and do a good job, without friction or squabbling. Those of us who visited Nauru found that we have a great deal to learn about the administration of our other territories. I do not know whether it is generally appreciated that the phosphate industry of Nauru is really a socialized industry. Indeed, I do not even know whether that thought has occurred to Senator Laught. However, it is a fact that that industry is controlled jointly by the Governments of Great Britain, New Zealand and Australia. The British Phosphate Commissioners are pursuing a policy of fair play towards the native people. We found the Nauruans to be very happy, as are the Chinese who work there as indentured labour. The Gilbert and Ellice islanders, sometimes referred to as the Gilbert and Sullivan islanders, helped us to enjoy ourselves while we were there. We were able to see five groups of people - Australians, New Zealanders and English, native Nauruans, Chinese, and Gilbert and Ellice islanders - all with their own national characteristics and way of life, living and working together in perfect harmony. We should do well to attempt to emulate their example. I was most impressed by the high living standards of the native peoples. They are not exploited. Instead, they are decently housed in little cottages, and have a regular income. Their land has not been taken from them, and they are not regarded as social outcasts, as are the Australian aborigines. They still own the land and are paid royalties for every ton of phosphate which is mined from that land. In addition, they are paid rent for their land, and if they wish .to work on the leases, they are paid for their labour. There is a good hospital and there are also schools which have been provided by the three governments responsible for the administration of the island, but more particularly by Australia, which is the delegate of the United Nations organization. What is being done for the natives in Nauru should also be done for the Australian aborigines. Yet one looks in vain in the Estimates for a worthwhile contribution to native welfare. In the proposed vote for the Northern Territory, which is the main part of the Commonwealth administered by this Federal Parliament in which. there are natives, the total proposed expenditure is not as much as will be the rebate to some of the people of Australia when entertainments tax is abolished. If the north-west of Western Australia and the north of Queensland are taken in conjunction with the Northern Territory, half of the area of the Commonwealth will be accounted for. Yet that vast area is almost completely undeveloped and is populated by only a few thousand people. In both the Senate and the House of Representatives members of the Parliament have paid lip service to the development of those vast areas of the north which are important not only from the point of view of the security of the nation but also from that of the pioneering people who went there in the past and those who are still working there against overwhelming odds. The Estimates contain no provision for the building of even one schoolroom in the Northern Territory. The amount of money to be provided for educational facilities in the territories for which the Commonwealth is responsible is totally inadequate, particularly when it is remembered that the Estimates provide for a total expenditure of more than £1,000,000,000. The Opposition joins issue with the Government not so much on the question whether the amount' being expended on defence is too great, but whether that money is being spent to the best advantage of the people. Honorable senators on this side of the chamber regard defence as of No. 1 priority. We are of the opinion that one of the most important aspects of defence is the national development of Australia. Yet, in the Estimates, it is found that the proposed expenditure on national developmental works throughout the Commonwealth has been reduced. We believe that such works are definitely a part of the defence policy of the nation and should not be cut down. We also find that the proposed vote for the Northern Territory has been reduced. Nothing has been said on behalf of those people who live north of the 28th parallel of south latitude. I direct the attention of the Senate now to the need for uniform divorce laws throughout Australia. Some years ago when I referred to this matter, I received a number of letters. Some were from persons who thought that the idea was a good one. Principally, they were people who had suffered handicaps in their matrimonial problems because of geographical difficulties. I also received letters of abuse from some women's organizations because - they claimed that I was trying to break up family life and make divorce easier. That is not my intention. When the States were given charge of matrimonial matters, travel was slow and a person would take a fortnight to travel across Australia. Time and space have been almost annihilated by aircraft but many women are still in difficulties in . many cases because they are unable to travel from place to place to get their freedom or to sue for maintenance through the courts in their matrimonial jurisdiction. Iri most cases a man can easily board an aeroplane and travel to another State within a few hours. When a woman has a family, she has not the time or the money or the ability to follow her husband. The laws regarding maintenance cannot be enforced legally in a State other than that in which the original order was made. Many anomalies should be brought to the light of day, not so that divorce can be made easier or to break up homes. Nothing could be further from my thoughts. Divorce is against my religious convictions but if divorce is recognized on the statute-book, no man or woman should be at a disadvantage in matrimonial matters simply because of geographical difficulties. Therefore, I hope that the Attorney-General (Senator Spicer) will start an investigation of some kind towards completing the work of inquiry into this social problem that was begun in 1949. I am not speaking so much for the sake of the women or the men concerned. I speak for the children of the broken homes who will suffer most if economic circumstances are such that they are 110t given their birthright. Every child is entitled to a decent upbringing. Parents should not be able to escape their responsibilities by skipping from one State to another. I shall refer to the matter later when the Estimates are being considered in detail. in summing up may I emphasize again the importance of the Australian National University in the community life of Australia. I believe that we should not be too critical of the expenditure by the. university upon research or the buildings that are being erected. I believe also that we should try to devise a new deal 'for the aboriginal people of Australia. We have done much for the people of Nauru and we should do something to improve the housing, education and hospitalization of the Australian aborigines. More time could be spent profitably in this Parliament in discussing the problems of the Northern Territory, the north-western section of Australia, and the northern parts of Queensland. I suggest to' the Minister that an all-party committee should be formed with that object in view. It should not be a Kathleen Mavourneen committee travelling from place to place on little trips. It should bring forward constructive suggestions from time to time to improve the services that are available to the people in the outback. I also ask the Attorney-General to try to give justice to many people in Australia who are faced with matrimonial problems because of the lack of uniform divorce laws. 402 KH5 Victoria 0 0 GORTON, John Senator GORTON . - I propose to spend most of the time that is available to me in. a discussion of the activities of the Department of Externa] Affairs and of the problems that come within its purview. I shall discuss also the means by which the department and its Minister are attempting to grapple with those problems and to guide Australia in its relations with other countries. External affairs are of overriding importance to Australia as they are to every other country, particularly in present world conditions. The way in which world problems are tackled will determine whether we can snatch foi- the people of the world the glittering prize of peace that is still within reach, or whether we shall see brought upon mankind the dire punishment that will follow inability to secure peace. On that, in turn, depends not only the lives of many of our people, but also conditions of trade with other countries, the result of that trade upon our economy, and decisions as to how much of our resources can be diverted from unproductive defence to productive development. 'I'he second reason I wish to discuss external affairs is that they are not party matters, but truly non-party and bipartisan. Honorable senators have heard from 402 KMN 0 0 GRANT, Donald Senator Grant - the ebullient speech that they expected from him. I was impressed by his statement that he had spoken to conservatives about certain problems, and that those conservatives had agreed with him. I am glad that that should be so. I am a conservative, and I am sure that I could speak with Labour men, as I have done, and that those Labour men would agree with my views on certain matters. There will, of course be differing answers to any problem that is posed, but the answers can and should be given not on party lines, but on divisions which are as it were vertical rather than horizontal. Let us leave it to the Communists to follow a rigid, dictated party line on these matters. L suggest that the ultimate object of Australia from its foreign policy is to secure a peaceful world, and, if we cannot do that, to secure at least a world in. equilibrium in which there is no actual armed conflict. One of the fundamental factors to which Australia clings in seeking that result is its firm, irrevocable and eternal position as an integral part of the British Commonwealth of Nations. But. it is a part of that British Commonwealth situated in Asia and in the Pacific. Because Australia is so situated, it will inevitably have to follow its own policy from time to time. That policy may differ from that followed by the United Kingdom. A study of history reveals that the prime matter with which the United Kingdom is concerned is the continent of Europe. It always has been so and it must continue to be so, because of the situation of Great Britain. In the great struggles that have convulsed the world from time' to time, including the Napoleonic and Germanic wars, great battles have been decided outside Europe, but always they have been directed by Great Britain around the periphery of Europe for the purpose of closing in so that the final decision can be made in Europe. Great Britain's secondary sphere of interest has always been the Mediterranean and the Middle East where the continents of Africa, Europe and Asia, join in the strategic centre of that part of the world. Great Britain's third interest has been India and only after all those matters have been dealt with has it been able to give its interest to th: Pacific and the Far East. I would prefer that nobody should attack me for advancing those facts, hut I am sure that somebody will. So let me defend myself in advance by saying that there is nothing derogatory to Great Britain because it adopts that attitude. It has been forced upon Great Britain by historical and military reasons. Great Britain has to acf accordingly but we do not. Our urgent and immediate interests lie in the Pacific and the countries of Asia that are contiguous to us. Inevitably from time to time there must be a difference between Australia and the United Kingdom on matters of policy, emphasis on policy or priority of policy. That has occurred in the past and it will occur again if Australia is to follow its own foreign policy as it should. It will not weaken the ties between Australia and the United Kingdom. It has not done so in the past and I am. sure that it, will not do so in the future. The United States of America is a power whose traditional interests also lie not in Europe, but in the Far East. As long as the United States of America has had a foreign policy, and that is not very long, its interests have been directed towards the Philippines and China, and not towards Europe. They will continue to bc -*o directed. .Honorable senators will remember that during World War II. the United States of America gave to the Pacific a precedence and importance equal at least to that given to Europe and greater than that which any other country could give to it. Now as we are interested primarily in what happens in Asia and as the United States of- America also has interests in that sphere, there will again be occasions when our policy will run concurrently with that of the United States of America. I am sorry to think that when that happens some people will say that we are being dragged at the heels of the United States of America. If that statement can be proved, let those who make it produce the proof; but the fact that our policies run concurrently on occasions is not in itself proof that either one or the other is leading in any way at all. As an illustration of that, I shall consider some points that were raised by Senator Grant. He commenced his remarks by saying that if one desires to know what the Minister for External Affairs (Mr. Casey) is going to say next Sunday one needs only to read what Mr. Foster .Dulles, the American Secretary of State, said last Sunday. In endeavouring to prove the truth of that statement, the honorable senator referred to various countries and implied that the policy being followed there showed that what he said was true. He referred to IndoChina. He said "they", by which he implied the United States of America and Australia, desired to hand over IndoChina to Bao Dai. He implied that that was purely American policy and that it was wrong for Australia to oppose Vietminh control of a portion of Indo-China. That is American policy, and also the policy of Great Britain and France. I shall refer to various statements made on this matter in the British House of Commons. On the 11th May last, the British Prime Minister, Sir Winston Churchill, said - During the last few weeks we have watched with much anxiety the deterioration of the position in Indo-China. I am glad to say that, so far as my information goes, it is less serious than was at one time assumed and that the measures taken by the French, together with the arrival of the rainy season, Will probably give a lull of several months. The British Foreign Minister, Mr. Anthony Eden, said - If Indo-China were invaded it would create a situation no less menacing than that which the United Nations met and faced in Korea. The Foreign Ministers of Great Britain, the United States of America and France issued a joint statement in July last as follows : - The three Foreign Ministers agreed that the struggle in defence of the independence of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos against aggressive communism is essential to the free world. Those statements show that the policy being followed in Indo-China by Australia is not a policy of merely being dragged at the heels of the United States of America, but is also the policy of the British Empire, the United States of America and France. Consequently. Senator Grant's remarks in respect of Indo-China will not hold water. It would be very strange if we did not follow our present policy. If one of the three States of Indo-China, Vietnam, were to be overrun by the Vietminh, there would be no bulwark at all between the borders of India and the China Sea. If a satellite Communist government, as distinct from a Titoist Communist government, were to be established in Indo-China, Thailand could fall overnight, and a Communist government would be established on the borders of Burma where already Chinese Communists are penetrating. A Communist government would be established on the borders of Malaya and it would control all the bases from which the Japanese launched their Pacific adventure against Malaya Indonesia and the Philippines during WorldWar II. It would control the only areas in Asia which grow a surplus of rice for export and, consequently, it would be able to hold a pistol at the head of the other consuming countries of Asia. If Indo-China were to fall, the consequent accretion of strength to the Communist bloc would probably be of decisive importance not only in Asia but also throughout the world. India would then be ringed completely by Communist nations dominated by China. China has already taken over Tibet, and Chinese armed patrols are now established along India's northern frontier. India would be isolated. That is one reason why it is essential for the British Empire to endeavour to prevent such a position from arising. That is one of the policies which, I believe, this Government has adopted, and which I believe the Parliament itself would readily support. Senator Grant also dealt with the recognition of red China. He implied that this matter was so simple that anybody who did not see at once that the obvious solution of the problem was to recognize red China was little better than a homicidal maniac. But the matter is not so simple. Not only questions of fact and substance must be considered before such a step could be taken but also all sorts of imponderables must be assessed before a firm judgment can be arrived at. It is all very well for an honorable senator to make a sweeping statement that the mainland China and the people of mainland China are controlled by Communists, and, therefore, it is ridiculous not to recognize the existing government in that country even if it is Communist. But what actual benefit could we expect to derive from recognizing the present government of China? What actual harm could result from such action ? Those two things need to be weighed carefully before any decision can be made in the matter. What advantage in the cause of world peace can we hope to get from recognition of red China? 404 KMN 0 0 GRANT, Donald Senator Grant - Goodwill. 404 KH5 0 0 GORTON, John Senator GORTON - The evidence does not support that view. Great Britain recognized red China and was treated with the utmost contempt. It got no goodwill whatsoever from China. I am simply stating the facts. Sir Lionel Lamb, after he was appointed British Ambassador to China, was not even received by the Chinese Government. He was not allowed to make contact with representatives of the Chinese Government, and the Chinese intellectuals were kept at arms length from him. Furthermore, the Chinese Government, did not establish reciprocal diplomatic relations with Great Britain. There was no meeting of minds, no proper diplomatic contact, and no goodwill between the two countries. That is not the only instance. Surely, if goodwill were to be gained from the Communist bloc, it should have been gained at Yalta when concession after concession - quite unnecessary at the time because the military balance was in favour of the Allieswas made to Stalin for the sake of gaining goodwill. We have tried to gain goodwill, but it would be unwise to go on giving away position after position in the hope of gaining a goodwill which, so far, has not been forthcoming. On the other hand, such a policycould cause grave disadvantages to the free world; recognition involves admission to the United Nations and, consequently, we should have on the Security Council of the United Nations not one country but two countries exercising the veto against any action that might be taken by the United Nations. The United Nations Charter provides that if a country is involved in any dispute it should not use the veto. That provision would make things a little difficult under present conditions. But if Russia were involved in a dispute in Europe, how handy it would be for it if China vetoed action proposed to be taken to counter Russian aggression. And how handy it would be for China, if Russia vetoed action proposed to be taken against Chinese aggression in Asia. 405 KMN 0 0 GRANT, Donald Senator GRANT - What does the honorable senator propose that we should do? 405 KH5 0 0 GORTON, John Senator GORTON - It is not wise to make concession after concession and get nothing in return. If China is to be recognized, such action should be taken only as a part of an overall settlement. At present, the Chinese are engaged in aggression in Indo-China and in Burma, and pressure is being exerted all through the area of South-East Asia. It would be perhaps a different matter if red China were to be recognized as a part of an overall settlement. But it is completely unreal and silly to suggest that we should continue to make concessions without getting' something in return. In the limited time at my disposal, I have not 'been able to deal fully with the various aspects of our foreign policy. J have endeavoured briefly to show that this country is not being dragged at the heels of either the United States of America or Great Britain. I have also tried to explain with, I fear, 'oversimplification, the basis of the policy of this country and of the United States of America in Indo-China, and to show why I do not believe red China should be recognized if, by doing so, we throw away oar own position for no gain whatsoever. 405 JYY South Australia 0 0 O'FLAHERTY, Sidney Senator O'FLAHERTY . - Under this measure we are asked to appropriate something over £400,000,000 for the current financial year, and the debate on a measure of this kind affords to honorable senators the opportunity to deal with any matters that they desire to raise. Although Senator Gorton traced the history of events in Indo-China and China, he did not tell us of the Australian Government's policy in relation to those countries. All he said was that Australia should follow the lead of Great Britain, France and the United States of America in one instance, but that in the other instance - the recognition of China - we should follow the United States of America. We have nothing to lose by recognizing the present Government of China. The Opposition is still waiting for the Government to announce its foreign affairs policy. I suppose that honorable senators on this side of the chamber will go on asking questions about that policy, without receiving satisfactory answers. As Senator Grant has pointed out, immediately after Mr. Foster Dulles has announced the policy of the United States of America in relation to a certain matter, our Minister for External Affairs (Mr. Casey) states that that is also Australia's policy. The plain fact is that, in relation to our foreign policy, we are being dragged at the heels of America. Australia is tied to American foreign policy because the present Government sold out to America in order to negotiate dollar loans, and in that way it has exploited the people of this country. 405 KSL 0 0 MAHER, Edmund Senator Maher - That is absolute nonsense. 405 JYY 0 0 O'FLAHERTY, Sidney Senator O'FLAHERTY - It is not nonsense, but absolute fact. This Government gave to representatives of the United States of America certain, rights and conditions that it was not prepared to give to our own people. 405 KSL 0 0 MAHER, Edmund Senator MAHER - The honorable senator did not speak in that manner when the Coral Sea battle was in progress. 405 JYY 0 0 O'FLAHERTY, Sidney Senator O'FLAHERTY - Senator Maher is always getting back to the Coral Sea battle or something else. Everything that Australia has received from the United States of America has been paid for in good solid sterling converted into dollars. I am not, of course, referring to the members of the American armed forces who were killed during World War II. in the South-West Pacific area, but . to goods. Supporters of the Government should not think for a moment that the United States of America sent its armed forces to Australia for the sole purpose of saving this country. It did not. America used Australia as a jumping-off ground.. However, I am concerned not with past history but with our foreign policy. Honorable senators on this side of the chamber would like to be informed precisely what is our foreign policy. Provision is made in the bill for a proposed vote for the security service, the members of which go around hounding people and making all sorts of inquiries, as is done in the United States of America. Even a person who tries to disseminate the gospel of peace is aware that a security officer is not far away and will soon question him about his activities from the time that he commenced to take an interest in politics or the economy of this country. The purpose of such interrogation is to instill th fear of God into the people of this country, so that the present Government will be able to continue to exploit them and engage in further confidence tricks on them. I shall now refer to the manner in which the War Service Homes Act has been administered in South Australia. At East Payneham, 98 war service homes have been constructed. As a result of the complicated system of administration, responsibility for the construction of those homes passed from the War Service Homes Division to the Department of Works. After the inspectors and architects employed by that department had carried out preliminary work, and probably the department had provided certain materials, a contract by Moore and Son for the construction of the homes was accepted'. While the homes were in course of construction ex-servicemen who were to occupy them on completion complained continually to an inspector of the War Service Homes Division about the rotten materials that were being used, and faulty workmanship. Within 90 days after the ex-servicemen entered into the occupation of the homes numerous complaints were received by the division about constructional defects. In company with Senator Critchley I inspected some of the homes recently. In one instance I was able to insert the whole of my hand in a crack in a wall. 406 JSB 0 0 CRITCHLEY, John Senator Critchley - One crack was big enough for me to climb through. 406 JYY 0 0 O'FLAHERTY, Sidney Senator O'FLAHERTY - It is no exaggeration to say that in some instances the roof prevents the walls from falling over. The ex-servicemen were unable to obtain any redress from the division. I have before me a letter by an ex-serviceman complaining that the verandah roof of his home had the fall the wrong way; rain water drained towards the wall of the house instead of from it to the outside. When he complained to the division he was informed that in view of the length of time that had elapsed since the contractor finished the work, it was now the ex-serviceman's responsibility to make good the defect. This is a shameful state of affairs. When I inspected some of the homes I found many defects in connexion with the walls, particularly where the inside walls abut the outside walls. In some instances no wal! ties have been used, while in other cases wire ties were used. Furthermore, in many instances the walls are not staggerjointed, and although the mortar is suimposed to be cement compost, it can be picked out of the joints with one's finger. In some cases not only the inside walls but also the outside walls are bulging because of the rotten materials that have been used in their construction. That work was passed by inspectors of both the War Service Homes Division and the Department of Works. In a letter that I received from the Minister for Social Services (Mr. Townley) it is stated that although the work was the responsibility of the. War Service Homes Division, it was performed on a. contract basis for the Department of Works. Therefore it is very difficult to ascertain where the responsibility rests. These homes are built on soil that is known locally as Bay of Biscay soil. It was evident from the specifications that the officers of the War Service Homes Division and the Department of Works knew very little about the nature of that soil. The specifications provided that the houses were to be built on piles. As a matter of fact not all of the homes were built on piles, and in some instances those that were built on piles are sliding off them because they were not tied securely. 406 KSL 0 0 MAHER, Edmund Senator Maher - Who was responsible for that neglect? 406 JYY 0 0 O'FLAHERTY, Sidney Senator O'FLAHERTY - That is what I am trying to ascertain. Senator Critchley and I wrote to the Minister and told him. that we were of the opinion that it was the responsibility of the department to make the homes habitable. We asked him to give the matter his personal attention. I have never been so insulted in my life as I was by the reply that I received from the Minister. He stated that he had asked the honorable member for Sturt (Mr. Wilson), in whose district the houses are situated, to convey certain suggestions to the occupants of the homes, which they rejected. He then went on to say that it was not the fault of the Department of Works. Of course the department would not admit any fault on its part. The Minister then stated that as the houses had been erected for a considerable time it had not been possible to call upon thecon tractor to make good the deficiencies. I understand that the contractor has since become bankrupt, or at least he has gone out of business. The Minister states that it is not the division's responsibility or the department's responsibility, but the responsibility of the ex-servicemen themselves to make good the defects. A part of the Minister's replyreads - On the other hand, whilstfrom a purely business point of view the Division has no further responsibility, it has offered the applicants three alternatives.The first is that they should sell the homes and discharge their liability to the Division, when they would be granted second assistance. This would enable them to obtain the benefit of any increase of values since the homes were built. First the occupier of a home must sell it to some other poor beggar, probably another ex-serviceman, although the home is falling down over his ears, and the Minister says that he may obtain the benefit of some extra value. How can there be any extra value? Debate interrupted. 407 adjournment 407 10000 0 0 PRESIDENT, The The PRESIDENT - Order ! In conformity with the sessional order relating to the adjournment of the Senate, I formally put the question - That the Senate do now adjourn. Question resolved in the affirmative. 407 papers The following papers were presented : - Defence (Special Undertakings) Act - Order in relation to a Restricted Area (dated 1st September, 1953). Ex plosives Act - Regulations - Orders of general application Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Northern Territory (Administration) Act - Ordinances - 1953 - No. 1 - Dentists' Registration. No. 2 -Prisons. No. 3 - Landlord and Tenant (Control of Rents). No. 4 - Crown Lands. No. 5 - Minerals (Acquisition). No. 6 - Mining. No. 7 - Aboriginals. No. 8 - Control of Roads. No. 9 - Aboriginals (No. 2). No. 10 - Licensing. Regulations - 1 953 - No. 1 (Supply of Services Ordinance). No. 2 (Brands Ordinance). Public Service Act - Appointment - Department - Health-F. E. Rose. Supply- T. F. C. Lawrence, F. F. McKnight, J. V. Ramsay, L. H. Winter. Services Trust Funds Act - Services Canteens Trust Fund - Report for year 1952. Whaling Industry Act - Fourth Annual Report of the Australian Whaling Commission, for year ended 31st March, 1953. 407 23:00:00 Senate adjourned at 11 p.m.