legislative assembly thursday october · 2014. 6. 13. · 948 questions. [assembly.] thursday, 25...

Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

THURSDAY, 25 OCTOBER 1951

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

948 Questions. [ASSEMBLY.] Questions.

THURSDAY, 25 OCTOBER, 1951.

lVIT. SPEAKER (Hon. J. H. Mann, Brisbane) took the chair at 11 a.m.

AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORT.

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS.

Mr. SPEAKEH announced the receipt from the Auditor-General of his report on the public accounts for the financial year 1950-51.

Ordered to be printed.

QUESTIOKS.

MIGRANTS AND COU)[TRY OF 0RIGI)[.

ll1r. LOW (Cooroora) asked the Secretary for Mines and Immigration-

'' ·what was the number of migrants who arrived in Queensland for the year ending 30th June, 1951, and the quarter ending 30 September, 1951, respectively, and their country of origin~''

Hon. W. POWER (Baroona) replied-'' The State Department of Immigration

has jurisdiction only in the matter of nomination, reception, accommodation, and aftercare of new settlers from the United Kingdom. In this regard the answer to the question is-(a) 3,814; (b) 1,388."

BEYER-GARRATT LOCOMOTIVE TESTS.

Mr. CHALK (Lockyer) asked the Minister for Transport-

"With regard to the Departmental test carried out on Monday last with a BeyerGarratt engine on the morning train from Brisbane to Too·woomba,-

" 1. (a) What is the normal scheduled time for the departure of this train from Roma Street, and the scheduled time for arrival at Helidon; (b) similar details regarding departure Helidon and arrival Toowoomba~

"2. (a) What time did the train hauled by the Beyer-Garratt leave Roma Street and what time did it arrive at Helidon; (b) simibr details regarding departure Helidon and actual arrival at 'l'oowoomba ~

'' 3. What were the temperature read· ings recorded within the engine cabin at (a) Helidon; (b) after passing through the longest tunnel; (c) on arrival at Toowoomba ~

'' 4. What was the official maximum temperature registered in Toowoomba on Monday, and at what time?

'' 5. What was the quantity of coal used by the Beyer-Garratt on the Brisbane-Toowoomba run~'' '

Hon. J. E. DUGGAN (Toowoomba) replied-

'' I recently furnished the hon. member ,,-ith a very comprehensive reply on this subject, and do not feel it is my function to continue to gratify his inquisitorial propensities. The further test carried out was pureq aepartmenta1 m cimracter.''

PACKING OF EGGS ON FARMS.

lUr. KERR (Sherwood) asked the Acting Secretary for Agriculture and Stock-

'' 1. Will the Government investigate the farm pack scheme operative in some of the other States whereby poultry farmers supply ready-packed eggs of guaranteed quality to the Egg Board with the view to avoiding unnecessary packing charges and providing an opportunity for retailers to purchase eggs of a quality from reliable fnrmers known to them~

'' 2. Will he indicate whether he favours. such a scheme~''

Hon. A. JONES (Charters Towers} replied-

''1. Yes. I may state, however, that retailers can purchase eggs from farmers direct subject to their holding a permit from an Egg Marketing Board.

"2. I am unable to do so at this stage."

Supply. [25 OCTOBER.) Supply. 949

REFRIGERATORS AT RAILWAY DEPOTS.

lUr. AIKENS (Mundingburra) asked the Minister for Transport-

'' Will he consider installing refrigerators at milway quarter;;, particularly in the North and West, used by foreign trainmen working into the depot in order to prevent the rapid deterioration of tuckerbox food that takes place in those areas~"


'' Water-cooled safes are provided in trainmen 's camping quarters. It is not proposed at present to install refrigerators, but the department will continue its policy to provide improvements in other directions.''

WEST INDIES CRICKET TEAM; RAILWAY LEAVE, TOWNSVILLE.

Mr. AIKENS (Mundingburra), without notice, asked the Minister for Transport-

'' In view of the decision of the Townsville Merchants' Association that those of its employees who attend on both half-days of the West In dies cricket match will not suffer financial loss, will he grant the same concession to railway employees~''


'' The answer to the hon. gentleman's question is as follows: 'This moming the hon. member for Townsville and the hon. member for Haughton received similar telegrams to that handed to me by the hon. member for Mundingburra and I informed those hon. gentleman, as I now inform the hon. member for Mundingburra, that there is need for uniformity in this matter, anu if the departments concerned ca,re to examine the question further consideration will be given to the matter.' ''

PAPER.

The following paper was laid on the table:-

Order in Council under the Factories and Shops Acts, 1900 to 1945.

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES BILL.

THIRD READING.

Bill, on motion of Mr. Power, read a third time.

SUPPLY.

CO:\iMITTEE-FINANCIAL STATEMENTRESUMPTION OF DEBATE.

(The Chairman of Committees, JI.Ir. Farrell, Maryborough, in the chair.)

Debate resumed from 23 October (see p. 934) on Mr. Walsh's motion-

'' That there be granted to His Majesty for the service of the year 1951-52 a sum not exceeding £7 45 to defray the sal:uy of the Aide-de-Camp to His Excellency the Governor.''

~Ir. DEWAR (Chermside) (11.8 a.m.): I propose, in the time that is allotted to me, to deal with the subject in three or four different phases. Firstly, I desire to discuss the world disposition of shortages and the metals in short supply; secondly, to discuss the necessity for the Defence Preparations Act that has been passed through the Federal Parliament recently; and thirdly, not to disappoint the members of the Government, I shall have a little to say on Socialism.

We find that the metals that are in short supply are controlled by what we know as the Allied Nations on a world-wide basis. This control is exercised at Washington by what is known as the International Materials Conference, which sits from time to time and approaches the subject from the viewpoint of the best use of the metals throughout the countries of the world. The metals this conference dealt with recently are lead, zinc, tin, molybdenum tungsten, manganese, nickel, and cobalt,' and four other items, cotton, wool, rubber and sulphur.

We find in "The Economist" of 22 September that the British Commonwealth of l'\ations in 1950 exported 189,000 tons of zinc and imported 217,000 tons of zinc. There are no figures for 1950 for molydenum on the export side, but they imported 61,716 cwt., a very large quantity. In the case of sulphur the Commonwealth has practically no export in that it exported only 6 tons, but it imported 1054 tons.

The report of the Department of Mines for 1950 discloses that Queensland produced 39173 tons of lead, 571 tons of manganese, 4 tons of molybdenite, 857 tons of tin concentrate and 25 000 tons of zinc. It will be seen that Que'ensland produces 25,800 tons of zinc but unfortunately for Queensland, bec~use of the decision of the International Materials Conference on the allocation of scarce materials, Queensland producers who use zinc are hampered in their operations. Recently the motor-tyre trade was establisl~ed in this State and it uses a good deal of z1nc in mixtures with rubber. Because of the health regulations the use of lead in paint in certain circumstances is prohibited in this State which thus becomes virtually a zincpaint' State. Zinc is used for galvanising also. Roughly, nine-tenths of the population of the State live east of the Dividing Range and obviously most of the roofs of houses in Queensland come in close contact with the sea breeze and its salt content which has a deleterious effect on the galvanised iron used for roofing. It is absolutely essential that Queensland should have large quantities of galvanised iTon for roofing alone, in addition to other substitutes, which means that the manufacturers of galvanised iron in the South of necessity require large quantities of zinc. A good deal of the zinc produced in Queensland is exported overseas, to comply with the allocations of the International Materials Conference and in considering the materials produced in this State we should look first to the requirements of the State, to the needs of the manufacturers here. If the production of the paint-manufacturers of Queensland, for instance, is jeopardised

950 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

because they have to use substitutes for zinc, a health hazard for the people of Queensland is thereby created and the new motor-tyre industry could be hampered through a shortage of zinc, and difficulties could develop in the production of galvanised iron.

The United States of America is a very large user of zinc and according to figures submitted to me, which I have reason to Lelieve are correct, half the zinc used in the U.S.A. goes into die-cast work. With diecasting you get very light Lut very quick production and as America is a country that goes in for mass production, naturally it is interested in producing as quickly as possible at the cheapest possible price. I have pointed out that a shortage of zinc must of necessity operate against community life generally in this State and so I suggest that a general survey be made of the problem with a view to ensuring an adequate zinc supply to the people of this country and considering the use of other materials that could be used for the same purpose, now that the United States is using so much zinc for diecast work.

There is no alternative for zinc oxide in paint, I am assured; it produces paint that is nearly as effective as lead paint. On the other hand, we need nickel for metals and if we supplied no zinc America would sav "Y on cannot have it both ways; you wili 'get no nickel or sulphur if you do not supply zinc." We need sulphur and we are getting sulphur.

Mr. Walsh: Some of the zinc we import could have been exported from here and come back in another form.

~Ir. DE WAR: That is possible. The figures just show exports and imports. The point I want to make is that we should look at this problem, of zinc in particular, on the basis of exportable surplus, as we do in respect of wheat with the International Wheat Agreement and in respect of sugar, dried fruits, meat, butter, &c. If we treated the surplus of zinc on the same basis as we do those other materials, the harsh effect that is now apparent to a small degree but could develop as Queensland progresses, would disappear. The principle should be established of dealing with surpluses only in respect of products that have a retarding effect on the industrial and community life of Queensland.

I want to discuss some aspects of the Defence Preparations Act recently passed by the Federal Parliament. It was subjected t'o a good deal of criticism by members of the Opposition in the Federal House of Representatives and having read their speeches in '' Hansard,'' particularly that of the Leader of the Opposition I feel it incumbent on me, as a Queenslander and a loyal Australian, to explain what I believe to be the right attitude to this problem.

~Ir. Walsh: Your own party criticised it.

Mr. DEW AR: I do not expect that the Labour Party will back me up; it is usually

behind in matters of importance. I wish to quote what Mr. Attlee, the Prime Minister, said, as follows:-

''The Government does not believe that war is inevitable, but they believe that peace cannot be assured unless the defences. of the free world are made sufficiently strong to deter aggression.''

I could not agree more with Mr. Attlee on that point. During the period 1951 to 1954 the United Kingdom proposed to spend £4,700,000 and to increase the number of men in the armies to 900,000. The United Kingdom Government, having no constitutional barrier-I point that out for the benefit of the hon. member for Bremer-will use existing controls to reduce the consumption of clothing fabrics, radios, domestic equipment, crockery, glassware, &c.-all reasonably unessential commodities. Measures are being adopted to ensure that manufactmers give priority to defence work. We aH agree that these controls are not liked, but they are forced upon a people who know perfectly well that just as in the past so they will be in the future, the front line of defence in any war, especially in view of the giant strides that have taken place in aviation. With the development of the jet bomber, which can travel about 600 miles an hom, the British Isles are within easy range of any potential enemy, and the British people realise that they must take drastic steps to preserve their identity. They have not hesitated to mortgage their entire future in the interests of the cause that they believe to be just, a thing that has been hitherto unknown in a time of ostensible peace.

In the U.S.A., whose people hate control just as much as the people of Australia, a Defence Production Act was passed last year. It gives the President considerable power to build up the defence potential of the U.S.A. He may direct manufacturers to accept defence orders and to give them priority over all other work. He can allocate materials as he wishes and as required. A national production authority has been set up to control the use of scarce materials. The Act also empowers the President to impose control over prices and wages. Mr. Charles Wilson has been appointed Director of Defence :Mobilisation, with extremely wide powers. That is the second major country of the world that has passed a measure similar to that passed through the Federal Parliament here a few months ago. That country, like the United Kingdom and all free democratic peoples of the world, believes that although war may not be inevitable, the best defence is to be prepared for it.

Let us look for a moment at the Act that was passed through the Federal Parliament recently. The main provision, for the purposes of my argument, is to be found in Section 4. First of all, however, the preamble to that Act reads-

'' Whereas Australia, in common with the United Kingdom, the United States of America, and other nations associated with Australia in the British Commonwealth of

Supply. [25 OCTOBER.] Supply. 951

Nations and in the United Nations, is pledged to support collective action for resisting international aggression.''

Do this Government and the present Federal Opposition agree with that preamble~

Section 4 of that Act reads-'' (1) The Governor-General may make

regulations for or in relation to defence preparations.

"(2) The regulations which may be :nade under the last preceding sub-section mclude, without limiting the generality of the power to make regulations, conferred by that sub-section, regulations for or in relation to-

( a) the expansion of the capacity of Australia to produce or manufacture goods, or to provide services, for the purposes of defence preparations or for the purpose of enabling the economy of Australia to meet the probable demands upon it in the event of war;

(b) the diversion and control of resources (including monel)', materials and facilities) for the purposes of defenc~ prepamtions;

(c) the adjustment of the economy of Australia to meet the threat of war or the avoidance or reduction of economic ~isloc~tion or instability caused by, or 1mpedmg, defence preparations; and

(d) measures to secure the maintenance and sustenance of the people of Australia in the event of war or to contribute towards the maintenance and sustenance of the people of coul}_tries associated with Australia in defence preparations.''

Could any people who sense that there is in this world today a power-mad organisation that threatens the whole of the democratic world possibly write less into an Act~

I propose now to quote something else that will be of interest to hon. members of the Government. The section continues-

" (3) Nothing in this section authorises the making of regulations-

(a) Imposing taxation; (b) With respect to the borrowing of

money on the public credit of the Commonwealth;

(c) For or in relation to compulsory direction of labour; or

(cl) Imposing any form of or extending any existing obligation to render compulsory naval, military or Air-Force service.''

The whole contents of the Bill and the design of the Bill are to regulate Australian trade and the flow of materials along lines that will not be dBtrimental to the defence potentialities of this country should war occur. There is no design to declare war. We have heard in the last couple of weeks, amongst the many blatant and ridiculous statements made by the State Government, two or three references to Mr. Menzies as a warmonger.

llir. Graham: So hB is.

Mr. DEWAR: I feel constrained by the experiences I have had in the short time I have been in this Chamber and associated with politics to ask this question: what country does Mr. Menzies, the Prime Minister of Australia, wish to declare war on~ Would he attack Ceylon, Fiji, Ethiopia, or some other minute spot on the earth? I doubt very much whether irresponsible statements of that kind have any place in the realm of sound reasoning. Anybody who thinks along those linesthat Mr. Menzies is a warmonger-might let this Committee know the country on which Mr. Menzies would declare war.

As I have said, the only. intention of the Act I have quoted is to see that the essential goods and materials of this eountry are directed along the normal channels along which any sensible person would expect them to be directed in time of war or threat of war, or in this time of ostensible peace, for if we have peace at present, it is a peace on paper, it is not peace in actual fact because Australians me fighting in Korea and in Malaya and British soldiers are being killed in Malaya. \V e, for instance, read that 16 were killed yesterday in Malaya. British soldiers are defending the Commonwealth of Nations in Egypt and if anybody says that we are at peace, all I can say is that he is acting as the ostrich does.

The ordinary person in the community knows that Australia produces a certa.in amount of goods a.nd that she imports a certain amount of goods. She produces raw materials and unless our Government in Canberra have the opportunity of saying, "We will not allow certain classes of materials to be manufactured into non-essential goods,'' how can we maintain the normal flow of any commodity, whether it is a gun, a tank or a motor-cycle 9 It does not matter what item one may think of, the Act refers to everything produced in this country in the next two years. I emphasise that the Act can only operate until 1953; it is a temporary measure, because Mr. Menzies, in keeping with the actions nf Mr. Attlee, President Truman, and the Prime Ministers of South Africa, Canada and New Zealand believes that if war does not come by 1953 it will not come at all. By that time the democratic nations of the world will be sufficiently strong to withstand aggression by any country, whether that country is Russia or any other. I do not think that any sane person feels that any other country but Russia threatens war. There is only one threat of aggression and that comes from Russia. The democratic leaders believe that the only way to be sure that there will be no war by 1953 is for us to be strong enough to withstand it should it come. There is no greater deterrent to any aggressor than to know that the one he proposes to attack is stronger than he is. I feel that it is absolutely essential that a Bill of this kind should go through the Federal Parliament, so that non-essential goods will be wiped off the Aus· tralian way of life for the next two years to enable this country to use in the best way the materials it has available. That would help in the defence of this country, and by


that I do not necessarily mean that those materials should be used in the production of war goods. Many other things can be produced that have a bearing on the defence potential of this country, not the least of which is adequate housing. I believe that the Federal Government were wise to bring down this Bill, and it behoves everyone in Australia to co-operate with them in their desire to make this country safe from the aggressor, no matter who he may be.

The following appeared in ''The CourierMail'' of 13 October-

'' The State Electricity Commission report forecast an electricity crisis for Brisb~ne and south-eastern Queensland next wmter because of delays in new generating plant.

''The Public Works Department report reveale_d th_at shortages of bricks, cement, galvamsed uon, structural steel, and certain types of piping were the worst in the State's history.''

That is ample evidence that important works are being held up because of a shortage of materials. Are we to allow materials such as those referred to in the report I have just read, to be used in non-essential work~ The Bill to which I have referred is designed to ensure that war materials are directed into the right channels and are used for the defence of this country.

Quite a number of attacks on members on this side of the Committee have been made by Government members during this debate, not the least of which was the attack that was made by the member for Kurilpa on my colleague, the member for Mt. Coot-tha. In the first place, it ill becomes any member of this Parliament to make a personal attack of any kind. When I first came into this Chamber I said that I was not interested in any member of the Government as an individual except outside this Chamber and that an~ attack I might make w~uld be upon the policy of the Government and on the Government generally as a party. I said that I would not attack personally any member of the Govemment. It disgusts" me to hear abuse hurled across this Chamber and it generally comes from the Government' side. If Government members are not able to compose a speech that is devoid of filth and abuse, they have no right to be here. Once they are in this Chamber, it is incumbent upon them to study sufficiently to be able to make a speech that is constructive rather than personal and abusive.

As far as I am aware, the hon. member for Kurilpa had no real association with the armed forces of Australia during the recent conflict, and it ill becomes him to direct a personal attack at a man who, to say the !east, did his duty at that time by voluuteermg to fight for his country. That is the greatest thing that any man can do. Secondly, he wore an appropriate uniform, and thirdly, his contact with the Germans was gained not in 1936, walking down the streets of Berlin, as the hon. member for Kurilpa said his was, but in Tobruk, where by the guts that he and his fellow-troops proved they had, they

probably made this country safe today. I think it ill becomes any member of the Government party to make a personal attack on any man who has proved that he has the capacity and the courage to do the right thing by his country. The member for Mt.. Coot-tha has fought for his country a11cl it is ''a very poor show'' when members have to listen to the type of speech made by thR member for Kurilpa. It was personal and abusive, which is disgusting in this democratic age.

lUr. Riordan: What did you think ~bout him when he said that the British Empire was rotten~

Mr. DEWAR: I will deal with that remark later.

Now, Mr. Farrell, the hon. member for Windsor said in this debate, or possibly in another debate, that he felt that the unions should use their funds in order to build up workers' co-operatives, and at that time I interjected that I thought it would be a good thing if they did, rather than devote their funds to fighting for the Labour Party at election time. Of course, he made an appropriate reply, which was not very important. I want to enlarge on that statement. I repeat that I agree that the unions should set up workers' co-operatives. They would at least be doing something constructive with their money. Instead of that, today members of unions are contributing a certain amount from year to year to their unions and they have no say whatsoever in how that money shall be spent. They cannot prevent it from going to political funds.

JUr. Walsh: How would you know?

~Ir. DEWAR: There are hundreds of Liberal voters and Liberal supporters who are members of unions and they are contributing the same amount of money as the Labour or Communist voters.

l\Ir. Walsh: Why should they not?

~Ir. DEWAR: What chance have they of saying, ''When you are giving £300 to the Labour Party to fight its campaign, why not give the same amount to the Liberal Party~" I know the retort will be made: why don't these Liberal members of unions go along to the union meetings and make their views known and I reply that if any Liberal member of a union did so,--

1\Ir. Luckins: He might be murdered.

l\Ir. DEWAR: He might be and if he was he would not have to stand any more of this Labour legislation, but he would be called a scab, in the same fashion as the Labour unionists complain the Communists call them scabs. That is what would happen to the average Liberal. Because he is a normal Liberal citizen he says, ''I have paid my money, :ind that is the end of it.'' Because of this state of affairs we find there is a misapplication of union funds; we find that money is being directed into channels it was never intended it should enter.

Supply. [25 OcTOBER.] Supply. 953

The unions missed a great opportunity when they began collecting moneys from their members. The could have set up in many places community centres with public libraries, swimming pools, and other amenities, so that workers could go along to these community centres and enjoy their leisure hours there. I have just been informed that the A.W.U. collected £300,000 in fees from its members. How much of that money goes to the Labour Party~

illr. Walsl1: Whoever told you that is an unmitigated liar. It just shows the lies they will tell.

:iUr. DEW AR: I should like to say a little on the Federal Budget that >vas placed before the people of Australia recently, and on which has been poured a certain amount of political verbiage by the Government opposite, which for them is the rule rather than the exception. The Federal Treasurer, Sir Arthur Fadden, is to be congratulated on having the guts, in the face of political opposition, to bring down a Budget that would hurt the people. The Federal Government are demonstrating, not only their ability to face international problems, but also the capacity and the will to govern the country in a way that will save it from aggression. That is evident in their Defence Preparation Bill. They are showing ability, wisdom and foresight.

Mr. Walsh: They are not dealing with inflation~

Mr. DEW AR: I shall deal with inflation later on, and the source whence it springsthe friends of the hon. gentleman in England. It is tragic to think that a backbencher in Parliament should be required to correct the misstatements of Ministers of the Crown, but I actually had the necessity to do that during my speech on the Address in Reply, when I said that the Secretary for Agriculture and Stock had not given the facts when he said that taxation today was higher than it was during the war. Let me give some figures to indicate the true position.

I take first of all the man on the £500 income scale. During the war he paid £136 13s. in direct taxation. That was the peak during the war years. Last year, under the Menzies·Fadden Budget, his tax was £35 17s., a terrific reduction. Under the most recent scale he will be required to pay £39 5s., roughly an increase of £3 Ss. a year, or ls. 3d. a week. That is what a man in receipt of a net income of £500 a year has to contribute towards the security of his country.

During the war, the man on £600 a year paid £178 15s., but last year the amount came down to £51 13s., and now he is asked to pay £56 16s., an increase of roughly £5 3s. a year, or 2s. a week. A man with a net income of £12 a week is required to contribute an increase of only 2s. a week to provide for the security of his family. Is that very much~ I do not think so.

Now I come to the sales tax. The basic rate has been increased from Sfi per cent. to 12~ per cent. The rate on motor-cars has

gone up to 20 per cent. but the tax on trucks, utilities, panel vans, and similar vehicles, has not been increased beyond the basic rate, the idea being to help the working man. When the average man with an income of £10 to £12 a week decides to buy a motor vehicle he does not bother, generally speaking, to go in for a car but buys a utility truck so that he can carry his camping gear in the back at Christmas-time and take his family as well. I know from experience that he likes the utilitv truck and I know that the differentiation in the rates of sales tax is made to help the average worker who likes to have a small vehicle to run round in at the week-end and to take his family away at Christmas-time.

I have not with me the cutting I intended to quote, but I am sure I read in the ''Courier-Mail,'' on about page 5 just a small notice stating that the Austin 7 car in England, costing £340, was subject to a purchase tax of £162, which must be roughly 47 per cent. Yet cars here in Australia are subject to only 20 per cent.! Hon. members opposite are very quiet when you tell them what the Socialists in Britain do.

The CHAIRlUAN: . Order!

:illr. DEW AR: I was in Britain for 18 months during the war. I am Scottish by birth, and there is no member who has a greater admiration or love for the Mother Country. When I was in England I bought a little canvas and leather over-night bag, which I now have at home, and for which I paid £5 10s., and there was purchase tax of 100 per cent. on it. I bought gloves in Glasgow and there was a purchase tax of 100 per cent. on them. As :f,ar as I know, those high rates of purchase tax still apply in Socialist Britain; yet we hear these ridiculous remarks against the Federal Budget, under which the maximum sales tax is 663; per cent., which is mainly on junk jewellery and such stuff. We hear these quibbles, yet in Socialist England five years ago-and possibly it is the same today-the tax was 100 per cent. on all purchases.

iUr. Walsh: What about the kiddies' icecream~

j}fr. DEWAR: I am disappointed to hear such interjections. I suppose if we do not make ice-cream we shall probably lose the next war! When I was a younger man, and had less wisdom I suppose-the Government may doubt that-I often used to go to the seaside or walk about the area where I lived and I recall on dozens of occasions seeing a man with his wife, a couple of kiddies, and a dog on a leash going up to a shop, and the man go in and come out with five ice-creams, including one for the dog. From now on dogs will not get ice-cream, and they will be much happier for it.

A Government illember: What about baby powder~

lUr. DEW AR: It was taxed under Chif!ey too.

The other day, just after the hon. 111Bmber for Mt. Coot·tha made his attack on the


Socialists of England, we heard a number of speeches from the Government Party challenging our authority for calling the Australian Labour Party Socialist. I admire the British Labour Party for having the guts to call themselves Socialist. I want to outline the steps taken in respect of socialisation by the Australian Labour Party. The first objective of the Australian Labour Party was the cultivation of an Australian sentiment, the maintenance of a White Australia, and the development in Australia of a selfenlightened and self-provident community. That was an excellent objective. I do not think any member would quibble with it.

After the 1921 convention, the socialisation of industry, production, distribution and exchange became the only plank of the Australian Labour Party's platform, all the others being scrapped in its favour.

At the 1951 convention it was altered to read:-

'' The Australian Labour Party proposes socialisation or social control of iJ1dustry and the means of production, distribution and exchange, such socialisation or social control to be achieved to the extent necessary to eliminate exploitation and other anti-social features of the processes of production, distribution and exchange in accordnnce with the principles of nction methods and progressive reforms set out in this platform.''

Just so many more words meaning exactly the same thing, and that is the No. 1 plank of the Australian Labour Party's platform today!

Mr. Walsh: It has been accepted by the people of this 'State for over 30 years.

lUr. DEW AR: By about 44 per cent. of the people.

I come now to the record of various Labour Governments throughout the Commonwealth in socialistic enterprises.

In South Australia the Verran Government of 1910-1912 embarked upon the Parramatta and Yelta copper-mines venture and State brickworks, from which they showed a grand loss of £32,600. ·

In New South Wales the McGowan Government of 1910-1913 and the Holman Government of 1913-1916 conducted the State timber industry, State shipbuilding, State fish shops, State sand, lime and brickworks, showing a grand loss of £1,862,500.

In Western Australia the Scaddon Government of 1911-1916 conducted the State steamships, State quarries, State agricultural implements, State freezing works and State brickworks enterprises, finishing with a grand loss of £3,583,445.

Now we come to Queensland, the Sunshine State, always on top. There we had the Ryan Government of 1915-1919 and the Theoclore Government of 1919-1925 conducting State butcher shops, State fish shops, cattle stations, produce agency, cold stores, canneries, mines, and the State steamer, the ''Douglas Mawson,'' with a grand loss of £4,662,707.

Who pays for Socialism~ You simply cannot just run a business at a loss without expecting someone to pay for it. If the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha and the hon. member for Clayfielcl went into business and showed a loss of £1,000 at the end of the year's trading, someone has paid for that loss. Either they paid for it or the people to whom they sold the goods paid for it in loss of dividends. Who pays for Socialism f Who pays for every socialistic venture that has ever been undertaken in Australia~ John Citizen, always the mug, pays. No matter which way one looks at it, he is tll0 only man who pays under Socialism. Ask the people whether they want Socialism.

I now want to have a heart-to-heart talk as to how Socialism works in the Old Country and I propose to quote from a booklet entitled ''The Proletariat of Westminister.'' The author is Cross-bencher, a correspondent on one of the newspapers in England, the ''Sunclay Express.'' In the first place I want to refer to John Wilmot, the ex-Minister of Supply and Socialist member for Deptford. Mr. Wilmot first achieved political prominence when he won the famous 1933 East Fulham by-election on a disarmament ticket. Now he is the Deputy Chairman of the £2,243,000 engineering firm of Boulton anicl Paul. He is a Socialist. The last dividend paid by Boulton/ and Paul was 20 per cent. but Mr. Wilmot does not have to depend on that alone to supplement his parliamentary salary because he is also a director of the £648,000 drapery firm of Arcling and Hob~s. The last dividend Arcling and Hobbs pa1cl was a modest 75 per cent.

I pass on to Mr. Berry, and Mr. Berry, when he talks of capitalism, certainly knows what he is talking about. Mr. Berry at 2[f August, 1948, was a Socialist member of Parliament and he expressed his views on capitalism in his election address to the electors of West Woolwich when he demanded the smashing of price rings and the control of financial interests. Later in 1945 Mr. Bern became a shareholder and director of the investment Corporation of Canada. The price of the company's £100 stock was at the time £19 10s. The company has benefited from its association with Mr. Berry. It is now called the London Midland Associated Properties. He is still a director, ancl the stock, which was worth £19 10s. in 1945, was quoted in 1947 at £263. It now stands in the market at the equivalent of £160.

And then we have Mr. John Lewis, Socialist member for Bolton at 5 September, 1948. He is a straight-shooting Socialist and at the Election in 1945 said, ''Full employment is only possible if there is stric~ control ov;1; monopolists who put the profit mterest first. He might be termed one of the more successful Socialists. With his mother and brother he holds 567,600 shares in Rubber Improvement Ltd. This week they plan to market some of the company's shares at 14s. a share. 'l'hat will put a price-tag of £397,000 on the Lewis family holding, a tidy sum with which to propagate Socialism.


Sir Geoffrey Mander, who joined the Socialist Party in 1948, had been defeated as a Liberal in 1945. He thei1 discussed with the Tories the necessity for a National Govemment and in 1948 emerged triumphantly as a Socialist. He is chairman of the £2,336,317 company Manders (Holdings), manufacturers of paint products. The company announced an all-time Tecm·d trading profit of £442,405. Sir Geoffrey 's own holdings in the company are valued at £128,000.

The next I take is Mr. John McGovern, Socialist M.P. for Shettleston at 19 September, 1948. In 1945 he told his constituents-

'' Electors should understand that the Tory Party is a party of bankers, coalowners, oil kings, tobacco millionaires, dukes and lords who own millions of acres of land. They live by the exploitation of the poor of every land, and therefore they are opposed to public ownership.''

Just to make himself quite clear, Mr. McGovern added-

'' Profit is the incentive of big business, but human happiness would be the incentive of publicly owned industries.''

Mr. McGovern >Yas at September, 1948, a directm of the Southern Manufacturing Co. Ltd., first-aid suppliers of Glasgow. The company's nominal capital in 1944 was £200 and Mr. McGovern then helcl five £1 shares.

Now, according to the company's latest return, the nominal capital is £15,000, and of that Mr. McGovem owns 7,432 £1 shares. ThTee or four years as Socialists, and these people be~ome the biggest capitalists in the country.

Here is a man called Diamond, who really shines. He is another Socialist. In his 1945 election address he said-

'' Is the nation to control the wealth and resomces of the nation in the interests of all, or are we to continue forever a 5ystem which protects and promotes the interests of a small section only~''

Mr. Diamond is like the King in ''Hamlet.'' His words fly up, his ,thoughts remain below. He is, according to the latest returns, a director of not less than 16 companies in the Old Country. Am I boring hon. members opposite~

Government Members: Yes!

Mr. DEWAR: Then I will carry on.

Here is another Socialist, and he is no pussyfooter. He is Mr. Mitchison. At a Socialist conference in 1934, he urged the confiscation of all capital. It mattered not that he was the director of five privateenterprise companies with assets amounting to £1,500,000.

I had better deal with the daddy of them all before my time expires.

Mr. Luckins: Are these people all members of Parliament~

Mr. DEWAR: Yes.

Here is another one, Lord Westwood. He is not a member of Parliament, but a former

trade-union official. He controls assets totalling more than £13,500,000. He is only smaU fry!

Here is another one, Mr. George Wansbrough, the Socialist-nominated director of the Bank of England, of all things! He is a director of 13 companies, including the £5 500,000 A. Reyrolle & Co. Ltd. There are to~ many of them to detail, but in 1947 two of them paid dividends of 12~ per cent., which was better than the interest the late Mr. Chifley charged, another two paid dividends of 10 per cent., and Morphy-Richards paicl a dividend of 160 per cent! We are on the wrong side of the Chamber. We should be Socialists!

l\Ir. Sparkes: Have you got their addresses f

Mr. DEW AR: I shall have to get their addresses. They know some tricks that I d<Y not.

Here is another one, Group Captain _Wi!cock, Socialist member for Derby. This u, what is said about him-

'' The use of civil charter air-planes on the Berlin airlift, it is announced, has so far cost the- British taxpayer £3,700,000.

''One of the private enterprise . companies which shares in the proceeds Is the £531447 Skyways Limited. In 1947 Skywayd shmYed a trading profit of £16,555. ''

Skyways has only five aircraft, and it is netting £13,000 a month. One of the shar_eholders in that company is Group Captam Clifford Arthur Bowman Wilcock, the 50-year old Socialist who sits for Derby. To be perfectly honest, it is no laughing mat~er. These men go before members of the worlnng class in their constituencies and pose _as friends of the worker. They put up stones about how they will kill capitalism and ~plift the working class, but all they are domg is stabbing the worker in the back, and ripping the money off him as f3;st as they can. More accumulated wealth I~ held by the seven or eight men I have mentioned than would be held by 50,000 of the type of members on this side of the House,. and t~ose men call themselves Socialists! It IS ter~Ible that men such as they can talk about thmgs they do not even pretend to practice. When _the day arrives when Socialism is introd)lc~d m~o the Australian way of life, Australm w1ll be doomed.

Mr. RIORDAN (Flinders) (12.5 p.m.): I should not like to let the opportumty gO> by without commenting. on the speech. of the hon. member who has JUSt resumed h1s seat. He started by saying that in Er:gland! under a Socialist Government, all mcenhve by private enterprise has been killed.

l\Ir. Dewar: Mr. Farrell, I did not even discuss that.

Mr. RIORDAN: He was _so far off the track and wandering so much, that he does not k~ow what he said. The hdn. member did make that statement and he went on to decry the socialistic Government of Great Britain that was bringing that country to ruin-or that was the suggestion he nmde.


'Then he went on to speak of the wealth that has been amassed by certain Socialists, as he called them, in Great Britain who are heads of various private enterprises. It shows, .at least that hon. members opposite think that the incentive to make profits should not be enjoyed by the Socialists; it should be left in the hands of the capitalist class, as represented by the other side of the House.

An Opposition lliember: Which is "f;lir ·dinkum' '-that is the point.

JUr. RIORDAN: The hon. member was very reluctant to quote the author of the book he was reading from. It was a publication by the Fascist Society, which is under the guidance of Sir Oswald Mosley, the chief Fascist. We have these little swashbucklers, these immature youths, coming in here shooting off stuff that they ·were taught at Mt. 'Tamborine in the school that "·as organised by the Liberal_ Party for the Young Liberals. They come down here and try it on us. I don't mind. When a member will spend 25 minutes of his time reading the piffle that has been read this morning, it is really a great recommendation for the great Budget that is ·before this Chamber. \Vhen a member has to go to Great Britain for all that piffle that has been read out this moming, it shows that he is ha_rd put to it to offer any criticism on the Budget. We have heard no criticism from this side of the Chamber, outside that of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition anr1 'the hon. member for Toowong. Apart from that, so far as constructive criticism goes, nothing has been said except political propaganda against the Socialist Party of Great Britain and the Labour Party of this eountry.

If the people of this State could only get into this Chamber and listen to the debates, they would be shocked and put the responsibility on the people who are supposed to be the King's Opposition. The hon. member wasted 25 minutes of his time, and our time, talking about the Socialists of Great Britain, who had amassed this wealth. I am not coneerned much with what the hon. member said; I desire to comment briefly on some of the statements that have been made by various members opposite.

As I said before, some constructive criticism was offered by the Deputy Leader ·of the Opposition, but again he got back to England-there is an election looming there, and he could not help it. He wanted to show his political spleen; he wanted to cut the economic painter with Great Britain. 'That is the country which, prior to the Socialist Government's coming into power, was lauded by the other side as the greatest ·country in the world. We had to be loyal to the Mother Country! Thev are not· so loyal today. They are losing their loyalty because of their political bigotry.

Then we have :mother example, in which the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha made the famous or infamous Btatement that Great Britain was rotten to the core.

Mr. MORR1iS: I rise to a point of order. 'The statement that the hon. member has made is untru'e, deliberataly untrue, and

<>ffensive to me. I dislike hearing this untrue statement, and I ask that it be withdrawn, because I did not make the statement in this Chamber that Great Britain was rotten to the core. I resent the hon. member's attributing it to me. I ask that it be withdrawn.

The CHAIRMAN: I ask the hon. member for Flinders to accept the denial of the hon. member for :Mt. Coot-tha.

Mr. RIORDAN: In accordance with parliamentary practice--

lUr. MORRIS: I rise to a point of order again. I have the constitutional right of asking you, Mr. Farrell, to demand the withdrawal of that statement if I say it is untrue and it is offensive to me. I ask you to carry out the duty that I have a constitutional right to ask. I ask that the statement be withdrawn.

The CHAIRlliAN: I have asked the hon. member for Flinders to accept the denial of the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha that he did not make the statement and I think I have gone as far as I am required to do. I think I am asking the hon. member for Flinders to do everything he should be asked to do in asking him to accept the denial of the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha.

~Ir. RIORDAN: I do so in accordance with your IYishes, nfr. Farrell, but I happened to be in the Chamber when the statement was made.

~Ir. MORRIS: I rise to a point of order again. The statement is not true, and the hon. member is merely trying to get ronnel your ruling by reiterating an untrue statement, which is offensive to me. I have the constitutional right to ask that the statement be withdrawn and not repeated. I ask you, Mr. Farrell, as Chairman of Committees, to see that a constitution8l right of a member of the Opposition is upheld.

lUr. RIORDAN: I withdraw the statement. I do not want the hon. member to take up too much of my time, because it is very valuable. An hon. member read from a paper the very statement I have made in this Chamber today. That shows that people blinded by political bigotry are even prepared to go so far as to condemn the country that has done so muc!Jl for this country, regardless of whether some of us like to say so or not. I am not one of those wlw disagree altogether with the statement made from time to time that we should give up being the wood-and-water joey for Great Britain or any other country. You must remember that England, with all her resources on the table during the last war, before she could get one pennyworth of credit from America had to sell everv ounce of the oversea capital she had invested to the American capitalists. And these are the people today who want to cut the painter with Great Britain, to get into the dollar pool, to grab it for all they are worth. That is what they are trying to do.

lUr. l:tlorris: What you are saying is untrue.


Mr. RIORDAN: What I am saying is true.

JUr. Morris: I am not going to allow ) ou to mislead anybody by making untrue statements.

:i1Ir. RIORDAN: Let me get back to my subject again. During the course of the speech by the hon. member for Roma I asked him whether he agreed with the Commonwealth Budget in its effect on the wool-grower in the averaging of his income, a11d the hon. member very rudely and in a loud voice told me to shut up. I am not like the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha, thin-skinned-I had to take it.

I now come to the hon. member for Toowong, who made a very constructive speech on the Budget with which I agree in the main. I draw the attention of the Committee to ~he speeches made by the Opposition and then defence of the J<'ederal Budget, but there was not one ounce of criticism of the State Budget. They were endeavouring to throw a smoke screen round the Federal Budget. Members opposite wish to cover up the fact that in their policy of retrenchment the Federal Government were sacking thousands of men from the Government service and the fact that they had imposed an iniquitous tax on the workers both direct and indirect. They felt that those things had to be covered up, so while they were putting up that smoke screen the Government \Yere spared any severe criticism.

The hon. member for Toowong tackled the Budget in the way in which it should be tackled. He pointed out that at the present time ,the relationship between the States and the Commonwealth was not all that could be desired. We have to work out a better formula under which discrimination cannot be made, one that will protect the interests of the State and protect the Constitutions of the Commonwealth and the States for the preservation of democracy in the Commonwealth. I hope to be able to prove that that can be destroyed by our present method of gathering taxes.

Mr. Hiley: We agree with that. We have been saying it fm years.

Mr. RIORDAN: I am agreeing with you now; I cannot be real well today. (Laughter.)

\Yhen the uniform tax Bill was brought down in this House it was significant that the Labour Party opposed it, or the giving of powers, and the Opposition were all for it. I remember the speeches made by members opposite, particularly the speech of the ex-member for We&t Moreton, now Senator Maher, who was all for a uniform tax, although I know he has altered his opinion now. He was one of the chief speakers.

Mr. Hiley: That was a war-time measure.

:illr. RIORDAN: I know; I will get on to that shortly. Thne were only two or three speakers on this side who opposed it and I was one of them. I said at that time what I propose to say today-that uniform taxation, if continued without a real chart being

drawn up as a formula to cover all moneys. given by way of taxes or reimbursement, could easily destroy the very basis of the Constitution.

~Ir. Hiley: That is the end of Federation.

:ilir. RIORDAN: That is the end of Federation and possibly the end of the Constitution. I will prove how that could come about. First and foremost, when Federation took place the Federal Government were given certain taxation rights in peace-time, and in war-time certain things were to apply. During the war the :E'ederal Government used the occasion to bring in what is known as uniform taxation. In wartime it is quite possible that it is a good thing, but in peace-time when you see t~e political juggling with the taxation of this country that goes on-juggling wit? . the· people's money-you have other opimons, I do not care what political party is i~ power in the Federal House-they all use It.

lUr. Hiley: Quite right.

~Ir. RIORDAN: They immediately get hold of the smaller States and bargain witru them. I know that it does not appear in '' Hansard'' or conference reports, but when Mr. Playford comes along from South Australia, Tom is a good fellow, and Toll1 and Bob have a yam-and the latest recruit to the pool is Mr. Cosgrove, the Labour Premier of Tasmania-and they have to come to terms because they know that if they work to a formula they will not get much more out of it. If they pander to the Comm,onwealth Government, the Commonwealth Grants Commission comes into the picture and the special gra"nts to these· smaller States become much greater. There you have a clear example of bargaining by the Commonwealth, two members of the Commonwealth Government and three State Premiers working against three other State Premiers, irrespective of their political colour.

Today we have heard mention of the gracious way in which the Commonwealth Government have treated this Government. Nothing could be further from the truth. No, special concession was made to this Government, any more than to any other Government, ancl the figures I have relating to the· reimbursements for 1950-51 will prove it.

The grant due to New South Wales from the Commonwealth for the year 1950-51, under the formula, was £34,900,000. The additional grant distributed by the Commonwealth was £13,000,000, making a total of £47,900,000; If the total of the grants hacl been distributed according to the formula, New South Wales would have got £48,400,000, but as the· formula was not applied, the loss to that State was £500,000.

The amount due to Victoria under the formula was £20,400,000. The additional grant distributed by the Commonwealth was £9,100,000, making a grand total of £29,500,000. If the total of the grants had been distributed according to the formula, Victoria's -proper share would have been


£28,200,000, which means that by the departure from the formula Victoria gained to the Bxtent of £1,300,000.

Queensland's share under the formula was £14,100,@00. The additional grant distributed by the Commonwealth was £4,900,000, making a total of £19,000,000. If the formula had been applied, Queensland would have received £19,500,000, so that by the departure from the formula, this State lost £500,000.

In South Australia the grant under the formula was £7,400,000, the additional grant distributed by the Commonwealth was £2,400,000, making a total of £9,800,000. That State lost £300,000 because of the departure from the formula.

Tasmania's grant under the formula was £2,800,000. The additional grant distributed by the Commonwealth was £1,200,000, making a total of £4,000,000. If the moneys had been distributed according to the formula, that State shoulil have received £3,900,000, so that it gained to the extent of £100,000 as a result of departure from the formula.

When the payments recommended by the Commonwealth Grants Commission come along, there will be a different picture. Arguments will be put up to the Commonwealth Government for special payments and the small States will get grants from the Commonwealth through this special meansthey will get it by another route.

There are other interesting figures in this matter and I should like to bring them before the notice of the Committee in particular before the notice of those who say that the Commonwealth Government are giving something extra special to Queensland. I want to give the Commonwealth's disbursements to the States under the States Grants (Tax Reimbursement) Act and the additional grants on the basis of population. The figures are-

£ s. d. New South Wales 11 4 10 Vi0toria . . 9 18 8 Queensland 11 17 11 South Australia 17 15 5 Western A:ustralia 23 12 4 Tasmania . . 12 12 4

Hon. members cannot deny those offi!'ial figures. They show, all things being taken into consideration, that the allocation was -detrimental to Queensland.

Mr. Kerr: No worse than under the previous Government.

Mr. RIORDAN: Unless the formula is applied to all things the Constitution and Federation could be destrovcd. How can hon. members opposite say that this Government have geen treated graciously? We must get an assurance from the Commonwealth that the formula will be strictly applied to the States or we shall have to go to the court and ask that uniform taxation be defined, or appeal against the decision of the High Court and let the Commonwealth take over the functions of the States, because we are more or less mendicants looking for funds. If the Commonwealth Government

can bargain with three States by means of grants by the Commonwealth Grants Commission and dish out moneys under no set formula, the States might as well go out of business. Something along those lineH has to be done, because, I am sorry to say, we cannot go much further under the present system. An hon. member interjected that the same thing went on under the Chifley Government. The same bargaining with the States may have gone on; I will not say it did not. All Prime JliiinisteTs will bargain to get a better deal for the Commonwealth but what I want to say is that the Chifley Government in the disbursement of moneys always applied the formula. They are getting away with political bargaining and it is going to ruin the States.

I want to deal now with the effect of the disbursement of the moneys taken in taxation from the people of this country. It has been argued by the Opposition that the money is taken from the people to build up our defence in the event of war or, should I say, for defence p1_1rposes. I realise and so does every responsible person, that we have to have some form of defence or at least be prepared for war. We do not want to do as we did after the last war, rnn rounrl accusing everybody else of ~ris mistakes. The most likely enemies to tins country woul<l come from the Far North, and the far northern part of this country has been completely ignored by the Commonwealth Government. No attempt is being made by the Commonwealth Government either to populate the North which is one of the best means of defende or to develop it in a way that would ~ttract more population. Every plen by this Government for help in carrying out major projects has been more or less swept aside by the Federal Gm·ernment. I refer to such things as the Burdekin Dam, the Tnll;v Falls hvdro-electric scheme, the development and expansion of the coking works at Bowen and the development of the coal resources of Callide and Blair Athol. An excellent repori on the Bowen coking works was made juHl before the last Federal elections, but it com· pletely disappeared; nothing further wa' heard of it. The hon. member for Bowen wm not exaggerating the other day when he out lined the immense potentialities of the Bower district. Older members in this Chamber wil remember that I said the same things a dozer times during the period when I representer' Bowen in this Parliament. The State GoY ernment cannot do everything without receiv ing some help. Private enterprise is nol prepared to go to these places because greater profits can be made in the city area. \Vr want something from the Commonwealth Gov ernment in return for the money they arr taking from the people of this State. Thr amount of money coming out of the wool an< mea.t industries of this State in the way ol taxation is colossal, but very little of it j, being put back into the western and northen parts of Queensland.

I heard the hon. member for Chermsiclr say this morning that Sir Arthur Fadder was to be congratulated on his Budget. Thr Country Party, however, is not too happ;


about that Bnilget, whilst the Liberal Party is less happy about it. Hon. members have probably read in the Press recently that Mr. \Yanstall had returned to Brisbane after having a cunfe'rence with Mr. Menzies in Canberra on Liberal Party propaganda and the general business of the party. The truth, howewr, is that Liberal Party officials were summoned to Canberr::t as the result of insistent demands by their supporters to go a bit easy on taxation. That conference took place at the request of Mr. Mcnzies for the purpose of attempting to quell the rising that was taking place in the various electorates. Mr. V\' anstall returned to Queensland to put the soft pedal on the opposition that was being offered in the various electorates, not only of this State but throughout the Commonwealth, to the Federal Budget.

lUr. Jllorris: You should try to get hold of a new spy.

lllr. RIORDA~: If ever I am loo.king for a new spy, I will call on the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha. If I want somebody to get around school yards, he will be the right man.

The Country Party also is taking the Federal Government to task. There is outright rebellion in the party because of the Federal Budget. The Federal Government say that the Budget has been accepted by the people, but nothing is further from the truth. It was a tragic blunder to budget for a surplus of £114,000,000. Where is this surplus coming from? Senator Spooner said that the Federal Government would spend that surplus over his dead body, which shows that there must be a feeling in some quarters that the Federal Government might spend it. It is the workers of this country who will provide the Federal Government's surplus. The hon. member for C!tennside has made a comparison of this taxation with taxation that has been levied in other years, but I will quote the official journal of the Liberal-Country Party, which is the Bible of the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha.

lUr. 1\Iorris: Tell us what the journal is.

liir. RIORDA:N: This is "The CourierMail'' or ''The Sunday Mail'' and it is Harold Cox's ''Canberra Comment.'' There i~ a little par under the headings ''Fad den Budget is accepted by people-Opposition attack goes up in smoke.'' It deals with those who have applauded it in various ways anc1 then further down reads-

'' On the per-capita basis, this is not 10 per cent., but almost exactly 60 per cent. greater than last year's level of £30 5s., and nearly hvo and a-half timrs greater than the peak war-time rate of £21 3s. lld."

That is ''The Courier-Mail.'' It is there in blac·k and white, and yet you have the hon. member for Chermside getting up here and stating how much lower it was than any other previous taxation that has bc'en introduced.

The most remarkable thing about the dcl!ate, from the point of view of the Government. is that there has been no real cr•.tleism

1951-2H

of the present Budget. You see the as·.mrance that has been given, that whilst ther2 is to be a cut of 16 per cent. there w1ll be no retrenchment in Queensland. There will still be full employment for all the people of Queensland; there will be no heart burning,> in homes when the breadwinner gets the sack, as he does under the Commonwealth Budget. Of course, they are working on Professor Hyttcn 's scheme that you cannot get an accumulation of profits unless you have o smplus of labour, a surplus of at least 100,000 workers in Australi~. That has been accepted by the Country-L1beral Party as a basis for the scheme in the Federal Government.

I do not say that greater taxation is not necessary in a time of war, but you cannot justify the present iniquitous tax that has been levied on the people of Australia in a time of peace. All this talk about preparation for war ·sometimes makes me smile. The hon. member for Chermside in this Committee this morning said that if we can dodge a war until 1953 there will be no war. 'l'hey are frightened of the aggressor nation, Russia. It is the first time I ever knew that anyone would wait 2~ years or 3 years for the democracies to get ready to go to war· with him.

An Opposition Jllember: What about the atom bomb'?

1Ur. RIORDAN: I do not know anything about the atom bomb, but I should say that from what we have heard of the disappearance of professors who were in touch with the manufacture of the bomb, disappearing !O Russia, Russia might have the. atom bomb m greater quantities than Amenca. How are we to know?

li'Ir. Itlorris: You would know. Mr. RIORDAN: How would the hon.

member know~ Unless someone gave him a bmille book he would not know anything, he is so blind with political bigotry that he could not see anything. It is ridiculous f.or anyone to get up here and say that a coui!-tTV that is supposed to be an aggressor 1s g~ing to wait 2;! years. I an~ not so sure that all this talk about "War 1s not peacetime propaganda for the ad vancem~nt . of certain people's causes that ~la Ye Fasc1st-hke tendencies in this csuntry, JUSt as the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha has.

Jlir. H. B. Taylor: It is a pity you are not a student of strategy.

:ilir. RIORDAN: I do not know anything about strategy.

:ilir. H. B. Taylor: You should study something about strategy.

Itir. RIORDAN: I do not know anything about war. I do not want to !mow anything about war. I do know that the people who die in wars are the workers of this country and other countries. I clo not want to see war and I should say no-one else "·ants to see war. The people who do not want to see \Yar are those who have seen most of it.

lUr. H. B. Taylor: The best"way to maintain peace is to prepare for war.


~Ir. RIORDAN: It is suggested that Russia will wait for two and a-half years until the democracies are armed to the teeth. Such an idea is too stupid for words.

~Ir. lllorris: The Prime Minister of Great Britain said so.

JUr. RIOUDAN: And the hon. member deeried him the other day.

:'llr. lllorris: I did.

}lr. RIORDAN: And the hon. member also said that the people who elected him belonged to a country that was rotten to the tore.

llir. lllorris: You may have to withdraw another statement yet. I made no reference to the people. You will create another incident and I will play ball with you.

}lr. UIOUDAN: Anyone who boasts that he has still got the King's uniform and insults the people of the King's country has something wrong with him.

lllr. )!orris: I did not do anything of the sort. I did not say anything about the

,people.

Mr. RIOUDA~: I must not let the hon. member waste the time of the Chamber any further. I mmt to finish on this note-that the irresponsible members on the other side of the Chamber are so blinded with Fascist tendencies that they will say anything about this GoYermnent, about their being a Socialist Government. I do not disclaim the fact that I am a Socialist. I am a Sorialist and I am proud to be one.

Go;-ermuent }!embers: Hear, hear!

}Ir. }!orris: The hon. member for Fortitude Valley said that he was not a Socialist.

)lr. UIORDAN: I do not care what the h<Jn. member for Fortitude Valley or anybody else said. I am saying that I am proud that I am a Socialist. The hon nwmber decries Fascism, hut all the time he ·is demonstr:lting his :F:1scist tendencies and be knows better tlwn anyone else what is the meaning of F:1scism.

}Ir. :!I orris: When I look at you.

ilir. RIORUA~: He is one of a gang thnt meet monthly practising Fascism and prcac hiug the tendencies of :E'a~cism i1. this Rtnte.

llir. }I ORRIS: I rise to a point of order. I kno"· tlwt the hon. member does not believe ,,-lwt he sn;·s. It is not true, it is offensiYe to me ( Gowrnment interjections) anc1 I rcpe~tt for the benefit of the Treasurer who is shouting, that the remark is not true, and offensiYe to me, and I ask the hon. member for Flinc1ers to accept my denial.

The 'l'EJIPORARY CHAIRJIAN (Mr. Clark) : l am not going to allow the hon. member for :\It. Coot-tha to make a speech ,,-hen he rise~ to a point of order. He must state his point of order ancl be clone with it.

lUr. ~I ORRIS: I rise to a point of order. The hon. member for Flinders made the statement that I was a Fascist, that we meet regularly once a month to pursue-if I heard him correctly-Fascist tendencies. It lS not true and the hon. member must accept my denial.

'l'lle TE~IPORARY CHAIRJUAN: I ask the !ton. member for Flinders to accept the denial of the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha.

lUr. RIORDAN: It is a bit tough to have to ,l'ithdraw it but I will accept your advice, Mr. Clark, and withdraw the statement.

The TE~IPORARY CHAIRIIIAN: I am only asking the hon. member to accept the denial of the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha.

l\Ir. RIORDAN: I will accept llis denial. If necessary, I will withdraw it. I do not care. I am easy about it because I know what I said is true. If needs be, I will tell him their meeting place-where they meet.

I\Ir. Ill orris: Tell us. I challenge you to tell us.

I\Ir. RIOUDAX: The hon. member does not ,yant me to tell him. (Laughter.)

I\Ir. I\Iorris: I want you to tell me.

I\Ir. RIOUDA~: Then I shall tell him. I repeat the statement that they do m.eet monthly in a house at Ashgrove preachmg ancl teaching one another on Fascism and the tendencies of Fascism.

JUr. PLUNKETT (Darlington) (12.45 p.m.): I listened c:1refnlly to the hon. member for Flinf1ers, who spent most of his time talking about the Federal Budget and saic1 little about the Rtate Budget. He went to extraordinary lengths to tTy to build up a case against the Commonwealth Government to excuse the shortcomings in our Budget.

Budgets arc based on taxation. Members of the GoYernment have blamed the Commomn•:llth Go,-ernment for the lack of money ayaila hle in the State and they end ea rour to tlll'O\\' the blame on the Federal Goyernment for the fact. that they haYB not accomplished man:' things that they promised to do. We ha,·e uniform taxation and I do not hear members opposite, especi:1lly those on the front bench, askiug for the State right of taxation again.

.iUr. 1Yalsh: We should have it any time if it was returned to us. \V c could clo a better job with the money than the Commonwealth.

3Ir. PLU~KETT: Why don't you take it?

JUr. Walsb: Because we cannot.

3Ir. PLU~KETT: It has been offered to you.

::IIr. Walsh: No such thing; they never offered to, return it.

I\Ir. PL UNKETT: The hon. gentleman prefers to ask for all the money he can get


a!l(l when the Government do not accomplish what they promised the people, they say that they would have done it but the Commonwe,:lth Government would not give them the money. All the State can do is keep on applying to the Commonwealth Government for more money and yet more money, but they have not the slightest idea of spending !he money even when they get it. My opinion 1s that as long as the State is a sovereign State it should impose its own taxation and look after its own expenditure. If I were a member of the State Government I would advoca,te Queensland's getting back from the Commonwealth Government the right of taxation that they had previously.

JUr. Walsh: You do not have to be a member of the Government to do that; you can get your own party to advocate it.

JUr. PLUNKETT: Hon. members opposite do not want to get it back. All the State Governments ru-e playing on the goodheartedness of the Commonwealth Government, and when they do not accomplish their programmes they blame the Commonwealth Government. 'rhey have been doing that for some time. Some taxation may not be in the interests of the States. :b'or instance, income tax may be all right, but there are other taxes that they do not want the right to impose. They should take full responsibility for these ta.xes and for the expenditure, but today they are not doing that. They forecast many grandiose schemes and when they are not carried out they say that the Commonwealth Government would not give them sufficient money. \Ve should take full responsibility within the State if we want to develop the State in our own way. This Government prefer to blame the Commonwealth Government for their own shortcomings and ineptitude and inefficiency in developing the State.

All States have reached the stage when they are living beyond their means. The more money they can get from the Commonwealth Government, the more they misspend in many ·ways without taking any responsibility for it.

JUr. Walsh: You cannot say that about this State.

lUr. PLU.:'\KETT: Much as I dislike saying any thing against my own State, I am forced to say that about it.

When we see that the note issue has risen from £49.4 million in 1949 to an estimated £231,000,000 in 1951-52, we realise how extravagant we are getting. Actually, the Labour Party does not really believe in State Governments. It believes in having only one Government, a national Government, and in order to achieve that aim its governments endeavour to decry their own States and do as little as possible to develop them. They want to get to the stage where they can say, "We cannot carry on as a State; we want to be taken over by the Commonwealth.'' That is their policy, and in my view it is a rotten one.

Provision for defence and other matters essentially connected with defence runs into

a great deal of money, but no loyal person could object to that expenditure so long as the money is spent wisely for that purpose, and I wonder whether we are wise in spending so much on many of the schemes the Government have in mind.

Another important point is that it is not much use spending vast sums on preparations for war and defence if we do not at the same time ensure an adequate supply of food. I remind hon. members that even in these days of peace there is a shortage of food in Australia, but nobody seems to be worrying about it. If war should overtake us and if we should find it necessary to seek help from the soldiers of other countries, we should find it impossible to feed those extra soldiers. That being so, one of our most important tasks at the moment is to overcome the food shortage. We should do everything possible to see that the people of this country are fed and to ensure that if we should be involved in war we are able to feed extra soldiers as well as our own. History has proved that wars have been lost through lack of food.

Much has been said about inflation in this country, but there is no doubt that the only way of meeting it is by increased production of goods and services. Are we doing anything in Queensland about iU Australia is a primary-producing country and we should be able to supply other countries with the primary goods they require, particularly the goods we grow. If we keep on going as we are our exports will dwindle, and then we shall be in serious financial difficulties. Our imports are increasing and the whole economy of the country is becoming unbalanced.

We should examine the position to see why our exports are decreasing. One of the reasons is the labour shortage in the primaryproducing field. No matter what monetary methods we adopt ·we cannot provide decent living standards and adequate defence on the rotten foundation of a 40-hour week, and the sooner we realise this the better; We have reached the stage where, except in a few isolated cases, it is impossible to establish any new industries on a sound economical basis, particularly with the present-clay cost of materials and labour. When a primaryproducing country gets to the position where we cannot economically establish people on the land because of shortages of labou-r and raw materials, it is a poor lookout for it. It is now uneconomic to establish people on the land, because what they might produce will not be got on an economic basis. Most of those on the land work anything up to 56 hours a week and labour is not prepared to work 56 hours a week in isolated areas out in the country and under all sorts of conclitions 'vhen it can come to the cities and larger towns and work a 40-hour ''"eek, and, 'vhat is more, enjoy the amenities of city life. \Ye have lost many of our people from the country and it is clear that they will not go back to the countrv after they haYe hacl a taste of city life with all its ainenities. Our 'vealth procluction, which has always l1een in the country, must drop as a result. As time


goes on, it is becoming more apparent to everyone that the 40-hour week is damaging the general welfare of this country.

We have heard a great deal of criticism of the Federal Government from hon. members opposite since the present Federal Government came into power. Before that, everything in the garden was lovely!

:i\Ir. Walsh: I am glad to hear you admit that.

::lir. PLUNKETT: The Acting Treasurer is waxing fat on the money that the present Commonwealth Government are giving him. This State is being treated far better now than it was in the days of the Chifiey GoYernment. We shall receive a total of £19,000,000 this year, equivalent to £15 10s. 5d. a head of population, whereas the average for the whole of Australia is £14 Os. 7d. The only State that will receive a greater amount per head of population than Queensland is Westem Australia. The amount that this State receh-ed from the Chifiey Government was £10,230,000.

Jir. Walsh: Why do you not tell the whole story~

Jir. PLUNKETT: I should like to be able to tell the whole story, but I have not the necessary time.

In 1950-51 the Menzies-Fadden Government gaye this State £14,500,000 and in 1951-52 they will give us £19,000,000. As a matter of fact, this Goyernment have received more money from the Commonwealth Government than they could spend. It would appear that all this grouching about the Common\Yealth Goyernment is engaged in with the idea that if you repeat a thing often enough, the people will eYentually believe it. There are no grounds for grouching against the treatment that we are receiYing from the Commonwealth Goyernment. In 1946-4 7 this State receh-ed a loan allocation of £6,379,000, but only £4,521,000 of that amount was spent. In 1950-51 \Ye receiYed £19,630,000--

Jir. "\Valsh: The Commonwealth Government do not grant us the loans.

Jir. PLUNKETT: This Government got the monev from the Commonwealth Govern-ment. "

Jlr. Walsh: We did nothing of the sort.

}Ir. PLUNKETT: Where did the Government get it?

}fr. Walsh: From the Loan Council.

}Ir. PLUXKETT: The Acting Treasurer 1vill next he wnnting me to name the man who gaYe him the money.

I shoulr1 like to draw attention to some matters thnt are of Yital concern to the community generally. One is the shortage, the gro1Ying shortage of foodstuffs for our people. Why hns it all happened~ It has been brought about by strikes and the 40-hour 1Yee1,, all bred and fostered hy Commnnism in onr country, which is threatening the \Yhole economy of our State.

A Government ])!ember: The population is growing too quickly.

:i\Ir. PLUNKETT: And production is declining.

lUr. Walsh: There has been an increase in production of 4.3 per cent. since the introduction of the 40-hour week.

J)Ir. PLUNKETT: When I blamed Communism I emphasised the fact by putting the onus on the people opposite who supported them at the recent referendum.

lUr, Devries: There are only 2 per cent. of Communists in the country.

The CHAIRJIAN: Order! I hope hon. members will permit the hon. member for Darli1igton to continue his speech.

lUr. PLUNKETT: We should all like to look at the bright side of things, but we haYe to take notice of what is happening in Korea today; we have to realise what has happened in China, in Persia and Egypt, and in other countries.

J)Ir. Devries: Do you know that the individual Chinese has been persecuted anJ exploited at eYcry turn of the road?

J)Ir. PLUNKETT: I think the future of Australia should be our first consideration. Today ,,-e haYe Australia at war.

J)lr. Walsh: There has been no declaration of war.

lUr. PLUNKETT: I did not say there had been, but 1vhen we realise that there are tecmin o· millions of people to the north of Queensland and that they are coming under communistic control-the control that hon. members opposite supported here in Australia -it should make us think.

lUr. J)euies: Could we stop them if they came in tomorrow g

}Ir. PL UNKETT: These teeming millions are living under conditions that are different from those in Australia. Our way of life am1 our liYing standards are much higher than theirs. How are 1YC _gojng t.o maintain our standards~ The fact IS that m the past South-east Asia, In?ia, Burma, Indo-China and Dutch East Indres were controlled bv the military strength of the IV est ern P01vers. ·

Jir. Den·ies: Tell us how we can stop 17,000,000 Indonesians from coming into Australia tomorrow?

The CHAIRJIAN: Order!

Jir. PL U:XKETT: I would suggest that thev 1vill be c1ra1vn into Australia by con;munistic plans.

1\Ir. nen·ies: How could we stop them? Thnt is the question I am asking you.

1\Ir. PLUNKETT: If the hon. member is a defeatist, I am sorry for him.

Tile CHAIRJIAN: I hope the Minister will obey my call to order. T~1e hon. member for Dm·lington has the nght to make his speech without giying explanations.

Mr. these

PLUNKETT: countries by

The domination of the ·western Powers


created a military protection for Australia. This country always had a small population but with the help of the military strength of \Vestern Powers in the East we have been able to enjoy the living standards we have today. With the exception of Japan, these countries had little political strength but their political weakness was a source of protection to Australia. Theh weak economic position ;ms a source of protection to us, too. They could not pro':'ide the arms, the ships and the necessary eqmpment for war and so did not become involved in war. I point to the fact that these defects of the past have disappeared, that Australia has lost that measure of ~rotect~on. On~y the other day ''The Couner-Ma1l'' pubhshed a photograph illustrating the number of countries dominated by Communist rule and unfortunately the are3; is growing and extending towards Austraha. The military position has been transformed and political activity revolutionised si~~e the end of World War II. and European m1htary power has disappeared altogether from Asia. The British have left India and Burma, and they have little hold on Malaya. ~ni.Y the day before yesterday the newspapers mchcated the difficulties of the position in l\falaya. It is fast becoming a danger spot. Self-gov.crnment has been acknowledged in Indo-Chma and the Dutch have withdrawn from Indonesia. 'Therelfore you can see that the protection we ha rl in' th~ past against these teeming millions has gone anc1 we c1o not seem to realise the position with which we are faced. They have a huge population and large undeveloped resources. There are India, Burma, Siam, China, and Indonesia and now the Philippines are an independent State, n? long~r subject to European rule. J\Ianchupa, wh1ch had a population of 30 millions a few years ago and now hns 42 millions, has .established heavy industries capahle of wagmg war on modern lines. The events in Korea must have a repercussion on Australia. All these count~·ies have now gai~1ed th?ir .independe.nce but in the past then dommabon by vv estern Powers was a source of protection to Australia. That has 110w gone ~nd with us it is a matter of populate or pensh. In order to populate we must feerl our people but one of the greatest diffieulties today is to grow enough foodstuffs for the few people ;;·e ha;-c here. Even in this generation Australia is extremely uncertain of being alJle to grow enough foo(l for her mm people. The over-population in the eastern countries, with their po;-erty, compels the people to look towards Australia in search of room for development. They realise that we ban~ onlY 8 000 000 to 9,000,000 people here and if tJ{ey ~an get here they mr~y ha;-e an opportunit;-~' of taking m·er AustralJa generallv. Australia with her nnder-population and "umlcr-rlevelOJ1ment is a big attraction to these people. They k;10w :111 about this countT~' aml its gTeat ca]1acity; aJl(l now these people have become Communistic. .They have absorbed the gospel of C'ommumsm that has been directerl from Russia. The greatest danger facing us is that thesp people are nwrching to the orders of the C\;orthern Hemisphere. Communism took control of China by military conquest,

and Chinese military forces are moving towards India and Burma. It is only logical to assume that their policy of absorption would not be complete until they took Australia. Thim they would have their Asian communistic empire; and what a mighty empire it would be! Where would you and I be if that happened~ We are all aware of where the directing force comes from. In view of the experiences that we have had of what the Communists have done in this country I cannot understand why, when the people were asked to vote the Commonwealth adequate po·wers to deal with these people, the majority of them did not do so. The impregnable powers that have sheltered Australia in the past have gone for good, therefore the survival of Australia cannot be taken for granted. \Ve all know what happened vet we do not want to talk about it because it is a subject that does not please anybody. People would sooner talk about racehorses; hut these things are staring us in the face and unless somebody does something about them this country is running the greatest risk. vV e were never faced with such a dreadful possibility of war as we are today-a 1mr that we should have to fight under adverse conditions because we have not the plentiful supply of foodstuffs that we had before; and they are growing less. I suggest thRt at this time politics between the Commonwealth and the States should be dropped nnd that they all get together in a non-political atmosphere-in a political atmosphere nothing will be done-and investigate the position and devise ways and means of presen·ing our economy and providing an incentive to the people to produce greater quantities of foodstuffs. I do not advocate incrensing prices altogether; that is very helpful, but there are other ways. You may keep on increasing prices and in the long run it woulrl he a bad thing for the producer, just as the practice of incn<.1sing the basic ;yage every three months has been to the dehiment of the worker in the long run. vVe ~Ho a producing country and we have liver! vcr;-~' much on our exports to Britain. vVe know that our exports of wheat, meat, ;;·ool, butter, ancl fruit in previous years gave Australia 80 per cent. of her oveTSeas income. The amount we received from these products gave us the greatest percentage of our >Yealth aml enahlerl us to pay for imports that we wanted.

It ;;-as in that way that we were able to keep our sbmdarrl of li>'ing at a high level, but unless something is done to improve food production, that standard will drop considerably if the present rate of immigration is maintained. It is expected that our immigration rate will eventually mean an increas\l of 11,000,000 in our population, and if that should happen, the extra foocl needed for this increased numher is estimated to be-

220,000 tons of beef, 32,000 tons of lamb,

2:?0,000 tons of pigmeat, 22,000 tons of potatoes,

214,000 tons of sugar, fi4,000.000 dozen eggs,

438,000,000 gallons milk, 12,000,000 bushels of wheat.

964 Supply. [ASSE:.\IBL Y.] Supply.

Some say that if we do not produce these things we shall have to import them, but the great problem is to know from which source they can be imported. Even if we did import them they would cost half as much again as we are paying now, and in any event it is essential that we endeavour to make ourselves self-supporting. We see how the importing of commodities and materials can be overdone when we look at the housing position. If, instead of importing houses, we brought in modern machines to mill all the timber we have available here, a greater number of houses would have been made available to our people.

Nobody seems to be doing anything about the food position. I am gravely concerned about our shortage of foodstuffs, because I appreciate that if war should overtake us, we should not be able to feed our soldiers. It is high time somebody gave some thought to devising some means of levelling out the position, because if it is not levelled out I fear what will happen to Australia in the future.

l\Ir. GARDNER (Bulimba) (2.38 p.m.): I congratulate the Acting Treasurer on the Budget he has prepared and the manner in which he has delivered it. I should like also to thank the electors of Bulimba fer the trust they have placed in me and the confidence they have shown in the Labour Government by returning me as their representative in this Assembly.

As I have never whined in defeat, I have no intention of gloating in victory. Suffice it to say that despite a campaign of lies, insinuations, and innuendoes, despite a campaign of hate, and near-libel, the return of the hon. member for Kedron as representative for what was formerly a Tory seat and the return of myself, with an increased majority, as representative for Bulimba, was the greatest vote of confidence that could have been recorded for any Government.

I take the opportunity also of publicly showing my appreciation for the loyalty and mateship given to me personally by my colleagues of the Parliamentary Labour Party and the rank and file of the Labour Movement, who showed their resentment of the filth and persecution I was subjected to by Labour-haters. For months a campaign of lies, misrepresentation, and personal abuse was waged against me, and I know of no member of the Opposition who did not believe that they had Balimba "in the bag." The electors of this State in general and Bulimba in particular are real Australians, with a high sense of fair play and decency; they showed that they will not be stampeded by the pressure tactics of the Fascist type so often used by the Opposition.

If ''"e are to develop this State to its full capacity it is necessary to put into effect the works programme set out in the Budget. If every section of the community plays its part we shall be ready for any eventuality that might occur.

Faster transport is necessary in the interests of the workers of this city, and it is pleasing

to lmow that provision has been made for the electrification of the suburban railways. Industrial workers are producing today as much as they did before, if not more. Very few of them live near their jobs, most of them do not even live in the same district as their work. This necessitates hours of travelling to and from workshops. That travelling means an early start in the morning. They probably have an early breakfast, have a long alk to the station between 5.30 a.m. and 6.30 a.m., get into a train and come to the city, and then catch a tram or a bus to their place of employment. This means a 10 or 12-hour day, yet the Opposition term it a 40-hour week. These men are, in fact, worse off then the primary producer who lives on the job, because he simply walks down his paddock and starts work. The city man and the industrial worker have to put in 10 or 12 hours a day in order to do 8 hours' work. Hon. members of the Opposition should know that.

l\Ir. Gaven: They work about 34 hours.

l\Ir. GARDNER: They work 40 hours a week, and I am sure they will appreciate the fast electric train service that the Minister for Transport has in hand.

Since my re-election on 14 April I have listened to the cry of more production. I think we all agree with it, and I say without hesitation that more production is necessary and is required from the primary producer if this State is to progress as it should. In the grand parade of cattle at the last Royal National Show in Angust we saw in the vicinity of £50,000 worth of dairy cattle in the ring, but two months later representatives of the dairying interests said that the dairymen were starving. It is common knowledge that the people in the dairying industry, after receiving a subsidy from the Chifiey Government, rather than pay income tax cut their herds in half and tried to carry on by themselves. Today they are endeavouring to carry on £5,000 or £10,000 businesses without labour. Opposition members contend that the dairymen are entitled to a fair return for their labour. I agree that they are, but they will not tell us what they regard as a 1·easonable return for their labour. On their own statements, a farm hand 's wage is £4 a week.

An Opposition Itlember: That is not true.

lUr. GARDNER: Some years back hon. members opposite opposed an award wage for farm hands of £3 15s. a week.

An Opposition l\Iember: What is the award wage today?

iUr. GARDNER: There is no award ''"age.

As I say, dairy farmers base a farm hand 's wage on £4 a week. K o farmer, irrespective of how good he may be, can do more than one man's work in a day, so surely hon. members opposite will not try to tell us that the farmer is getting only £4 a week?


I mentioned earlier the £50,000 parade of eattle at the Exhibition, and that would be a true reflection of the general prosperity of the dairying industry. Instead of coming in here and castigating and traducing industrial workers, hon. members opposite >Yould do much better if they told the people they represent to play the game and get on with the job and produce more. Ho>Yever, they do not appear to be concerned about the primary producers' failure to maintain production.

This is the machine age and the age of speed. Only a few years ago it took almost a full week to tmvel to Melbourne and back, but today it is possible to do it in 12 hours. Many machines are now used that can do the work of 30 or more men. \V e had none of those machines 25 years ago, and if industry could then afford to give the workers 1::\ days' rest a week, surely it can now afford to give them two days' rest a week~ Any person who advocates a longer working >Yeek is doing so for the sole purpose of creating unemployment and breaking down the wages and conditions of the workers. Long hours and low wages are still the policy of the Tory Party, but how can its members justify a claim for a longer working week >Yhen eYeryone kumys that this nation has never been better off than it is today~ That statement can be substantiated merely by rea cling the information that is publishe11 in the newopapers about the balance sheets of the lm·ge companies and the bonus shares they hand out, and by details of savings-bank deposits as they were revealed here the other day.

I read in the Press during the week a statement to the effect that the Metal Trades Employers' Association had filed an D.l'Plication in the Federal Court of Conciliation and Arbitration for the restoration of the 44-hour week. I read also that the Federal Government will, in all probability, intervene in that case. A Commonwealth spokesman pulJlishec1 a statement to the effect that the Commonwealth Govennnent will intervene for the purpose of furnishing statistics to guide the court. This application will affect directly 200,000 workers in Australia, and if it is granted the 40-hour week ,-i]] be jeopardised in every industry.

\Ye have heard Opposition members urging the re-introduction of the 44-hour >Yeek · we han~ seen pub1ic statements by the Lord ?.favor of this citv iu which he has declared ;1in{sclf in fm·our" of a longer working week, nnd as further evidence of the policy of the Tmy Party, we have the published statements of leaders of the Liberal Party in the Federal Parliament, in addition to e"c1itorials in the lending newspapers, >Yhich at all times run in line with Tory policy, advocating a longer working >Yeek. I make this appeal to the Acting Premier and the Government today, that in the event of the Commonwealth Govermnent 's intenening in the fmthcoming case in order to help the employer, this GoYernment intenene in the interests of the people of Queensland.

It is not often I find myself in agreement >Yith statements of members of the Opposition but I wholehem·tedly concur with the statement of the hon. member for Southport that the best farms in Queensland are in Roma Street. I would recall for the benefit of hon. members that prior to Labour's taking office in 1915 not only was the Premier of Queensland, Mr. D. F. Denham, a Roma Street farmer, but the Deputy-Premier, Mr. \V. H. Barnes, also farmed the farmer.

The Leader of the Opposition has stated that competition will govern the price of commodities and that there is no need for price-control. He knows as well as other members of this Committee that in business today there is no competition. We all know that owing to the existence of marketing boards and the control of supplies to the markets by agents competition has been eliminated. They keep the markets short of supplies and they are guided in that policy by the Roma Street farmers.

Another matter that comes to my mind is that most of the farms today are run on the share basis, so that a share-farmer has to earn double what he would if he owned the farm he works.

Another matter I should like to touch upon is the fact that in the past few years there has been a shortage of bricks for building, and as there is likely to be a bigger demand for bricks in the veTy near future, I would suggest to the Government that they give consideration to the creation of a State brick and tile works in or near Brisbane. This would ensure that the Government would have a ready supply of bricks to carry on their home-building programme and their policy of building schools, hospitals and other public buildings. It would also help to offset any unemployment that may arise because of the Budget presented by the Yederal Treasmer. Apart from Government work, theTe will be a huge amount of private and business premises to be built and as the brick position is unsatisfactory, the indic::ttions are that there will be a very grave shortage when permits are issued for extensions to business premises.

Roofing is in much the same position as bricks and >Yhercver you go in Brisbane sulmrl;s vou can sec homes half-finished ;vaiting for roofs. So I would urge the Government to give serious consider::ttion to m;~· suggc'<tion.

In conclusion, ::'vfr. Farrell, I should like the Gm·ernment to consider that in the 2lectrification of the railway to Petrie, they might con~iclcr extending the line from Petrie to Rcdcliffe. Brisbane, unfortunately, is not blessed >Yith surfing beaches, the nearest being Southport, 50 miles distant. I believe _th::t Rerldiffe is clestine(l to become the p1cmc ground of the metropolis, and the provision of an electric rail1ray to that beautiful resort -.,·ouhl also enable Jai·ge numbers of people to trawl dailv to their work in Brisbane. The joumey ,:ould take little ~1ore tim~ than many 11·orkers now spenll m travellmg by trams to the city.


I thank the members of the Committee for their patient hearing and I again wish to congratulate the Acting Treasurer on his Budget.

IUr. NICHOLSON (Murrumba) (2.55 p.m.) : It is customary at this time of the session for private members more or less to wmk and overwork the parish pump in a discussion of the Budget. A part from perhaps passing reference later on to certain aspects of the Budget, I crave the attention of hon. members once again to direct my remarks to continuing my fight on behalf of the sufferers from Hansen's disease. During my speech on the Address in Reply I referred to certain facts and figures but unfortunately the time at my disposal then was not long enough to permit me to bring before the Chamber and the Press certain factors in the welfare of these people that are of paramount importance, not only to the sufferers at Peel Island but also to all sufferers from Hansen's disease throughout the world. I submit my case on this matter as clearly and concisely as my lay mind will permit, free of any party bias or consideration. I frankly admit that many members of the Government Partv are keenly interested in the welfare of 'these people too. I hope to be able to educate our own minds and the minds of the public to believe that the so-called dread disease is not the dread disease it was previously thought to be.

Just recently I had the opportunity, and I shall say the pleasure, of a trip to Peel Island. I had intended during my speech on the Address in Reply to say that I received a very cordial welcome, a welcome indeed with open arms, and courtesy from the medi0nl director, Dr. Gabriel, and I pay a tribute to him and to his very efficient and helpful nursing and administrative staff on the island. These people have given up their pleasures on the mainland to go over to the island to nurse these sufferers and to them I say all good luck and good health. An excellent band of people they are.

Dr. Gabriel has very comageously set out to clean up the state of affairs there, which were a disgrace not only to the Department of Health and Home Affairs but indeed to the whole of Queensland. There is no doubt that things were going on there that defy description but Dr. Gabriel has tackled the problem fearlessly. Perhaps at times he appeared to be a little harsh on the patients but what he did was necessary. Whether he ran foul with the department or brought a certain amount of displeasure on himself through the patients and their relatives and friends, I believe, and all the people believe, that what he did was necessary. He has the co-operation of his staff and the co-operation of 95 per cent. of the people on the island. Dr. Gabriel met me on my arrival and did not attempt to hide the slightest thing. He gave me an open ticket. ''Have a look around for yourself,'' he said, ''you will see exactly how things are.''

There are certain things that I commend to the attention of the department. One is the

establishment of a new galley. The present galley and kitchen are a disgrace to any Government department. I know .that the idea is; if they are going to sh1ft those patients, why spend more money there~ Knowing that govemments hasten slowly-a~1d I say that in all fairness-it may be a considerable time before the colony is shifted to the mainland. I believe that £5,000 or £6,000 \Yould not be m1sted if it was spent for the comfort of these people during the next two or three years. There is a great deal of waste timber there and many huts are half constructed.

A new road has been built from the settlement to the Cleveland side of the island and it is an excellent one. I am led to believe that the object was ultimately to establish a jetty for loading and unloading stores and taking on and putting off passengers. The establishment of that jetty would still be justified; it might cost a good deal, but it would be well worth it, from the point of Yiew not only of the patients down there but of the people visiting Dunwich. The Dunwich boat would call there, and instead of its being a i-hour run from Cleveland it would take approximately a quarter of an hour; and the boat would be able to make calls despite the weather. I believe that only one type of weather-the westerly-would affect it, and that is not prevalent in that area. The establishment of a jetty would also enable friends and relatives to visit the patients and facilitate the transport of patients from the island for hospital treatment.

Another thing that worries the patients is that about 1947 or 1948, when certain improvements were carried out, a promise was made to establish call bells in the huts. Some of these huts are occupied by blind people and others who are unable to fend for themselves, and a call bell is essential; it is worrying for a patient to be left alone with no call between him and the staff. Recently, I believe there was a mishap there, and perhaps the provision of a bell might have saved a good deal of suffering. I believe the c·orrect approach to this problem should be from the point of view of sufferers throughout Queensland and Australia rather than on behalf of the 35 inmates.

Another point I wish to raise is the fact that many people have their meals in the huts and as the area is large provision should be made for a hot-box to keep the food hot till the patient gets it. There may be 7 or 8 meals on a tray but by the time the last one is served it is cold.

I think also that there is need for a trained social worker on the island whose time could be devoted mainly to letter-writing for and reading to patients who are unable to read, and the matter of the housing of patients.

I suggest also that occupational and manual therapy is desirable. I am not certain whether the department agrees, but many experts in this type of disease say that it is essential, and in support of that suggestion,


I quote the following statement by Dr. Ross Innes, pathologist and leperologist to the East Africa High Commission-

'' I am also very keen that patients should be encomaged to work daily in the open air, or at least under a shed, for active physical work will hasten and enhance the good effect of the newer drugs. On the other hand, slowness in cure and complications in treatment are apt to follow sitting and drifting about with nothing to do. Very many leprosy cases are quite capable of physical work and exercise.''

That is the foundation on which I and many of my advisers base the belief that occupational and manual therapy would be of great help to these people. Some of them have learned certain trades and are doing that type of work now. Some are doing leather wo_rk and. one ~s deriving great delight from domg vanous JObs, such as putting verandas on the huts for the department. Those people who have their minds occupied in work are the healthiest and happiest of the patients on the island.

I feel that it will be only a matter of time before the lazaret is moved to the mai:t;tland, and I commend these various suggestiOns t_o the Minister and his department. Once agam I come to the problem of a site for the hospital on the mainland. I believe that a better site than Burpengary could have been chosen. On a previous occasion ! referred to the swamp and mosquitomfe~ted !and, but quite apart from the medical_ side, the fact that so much public money IS to be expended on the institution necessitates a further review of the decisio~ to establish a hospital there.

. In support of my suggestion that a better site could be chosen, I quote the further statement by Dr. Ross Innes that-

'' In e~tablishing hospitalisation for these people, . Island or coastal hospitals should b~ av01ded where possible as the humid climate has a tendency to promote the growth of the particular disease.''

With !hat in mind, a meeting was called some time ago. I was invited to be present and I took part in the discussion. '

The guest chairman was Mr. Justice Mansfield. The following resolution was moved and was seconded by Dr. W. H. Noble and forward'ed to the Minister-

. '' 1. This meeting expresses its appreciation of the steps taken by the Department of Health and Home Affairs in the interests of those suffering from Hansen's disease and in particular the decision to remove the lazaret from Peel Island to the mainland.

'' 2. In view of the statement of Dr. J ~mes Ross I;nnes, ~nternational leprologist, East Afncan High Commission that there is strong evidence that humid ~tmosphere hinders the cure of leprosy and favours its transmission, and that island and the coast leprosaria in Australia need to. be rei_Jlac~d _by inland, upland, dryclimate, mstitutions and in view of the desire of all concemed for the transfrr of the lazaret at Peel Island at the eal'!iest

possible date and with the least possible expenditme of public moneys, this meeting strongly recommends to the Government the transfer to a site at Kenmore instead of the proposecJl site at Burpengary. ''

The Kenmore site is preferable, for the reasons I will mention. In the first place, there are water facilities at Kenmore, whereas water has yet to be struck at Burpengary. There is electric power at Kenmore, whereas none is available at Burpengary. The cost of supplying electric current to the Burpengary area would be the cost of breaking down 33,000 volts to 415 volts which would be the cost of a transformer in the ·vicinity of £20,000. Pernianent roads have been constructed to Kenmore and new roads to Burpengary would have to be laid down at considerable cost, and when you take the cost of building a metal road today -the complete construction from foundation to top surface-at £15,000 to £20,000 a mile, and taking into consideration that there will be 2~ miles to be built, that would be a cost of £30,000 to £40,000 alone. Kenmore is more accessible and has transport facilities whereas Burpengary has none. Kenmore is closer to specialist treatment and closer to hospitals whereas it would take at least one hour to bring a patient from Burpengary. The cost of transporting materials to Kenmore for the erection of the necessary cottages would be less than to Burpengary. There is available suitable land at Kenmore for the building of a leprosarium at which occupational therapy could be carried out. The Minister, and I perhaps am not using his exact words, said that one of the reasons for the choice of the Burpengary site was the fact that it would inconvenience the least number of people. I believe that that is right; it is quite a good approach. We must take into account the inconvenience to a small number of people but on the other hand we must take note of the inconvenience to the patients, and that I believe is the important aspect. Another fact regarding the coastal or island area is that the disease affects many patients in the eyes. Some of them are blind now. The glare from the ocean is very great and it will have a great bearing on whether these people will ultimately lose their eyesight altogether or will come out of the institution with good, sound eyesight. Another question is whether they will come out with good, sound, solid minds .

There has been some controversy lately about the visiting hours and the people who are allowed to visit patients at Peel Island. However, I do not intend to discuss that matter at any length because I believe that ii is now being settled amicably between the patients and the department.

~Ir. ~Ioore: We do that in our department. That is our policy.

lUr. NICHOLSO~: I am quite happy to concede that to the Minister. I am sorrv he was not here when I started to speak. I "said then that I was not trying to fire any political bullets; I am merely trying to pu·t a case for the people on the island.

JUr. JUoore: You were on my side on the clay of the deputation. I appreciate that.

961> Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

~Ir. NICHOLSON: My word I was. If no better site than Bnrpengary can be found, I shall still be happy to sec the institution established there. The main thing is getting these people to the mainland. I am not trying to foist in onto another electorate. If I was, I should be trying to foist it onto a Labour electorate.

Another thing that is worrying the people on the island is the dilapidated condition of the jetty at Cleveland at which patients and >isitors have to embark and disembark. A Department of Harbours and Marine wharf is in the course of construction, and the likelihood at present exists of someone being drowned or injured as a result of the collapse of the old wharf will undoubtedly be overcome when the new one is put into use. Quite a length of the new jetty has been complet~d and I think some provision, e\·en though rt may be only temporary, could be made for the loading and unloading of passeng.ers and .P~tients. The old jetty is in a shockmg conchbon, and anyone who is game enough to walk on it deserves a V.C. Of course, I realise that that is not the fault ~f the department; it is a privately-owned .Jetty and the department is using it only for the time being.

Once again I should like to mention the construction of a hospital. I believe plans have been drawn up, but I should like to have some~hing to say about the dormitory-type of buildmg. Tha,t type of building may be all right in some instances, as in the War Veterans' ~ome at Caboolture, but, as I explained prevwusly, I do not think that it would be in the best interests of sufferers from Hansen's disease. Since I made my first speech on that point, I have received the following letter from a patient on the island-

'' A certain number of single-room dormitories may be suitable for short-term patients, but such accommodation is wholly unsuitable for patients like myself, who :uust look f~nvard to spending many' years m the hosprtal. For such patients there should be individual rooms with verandas and bathrooms. To confine a number of blind people in single-room dormitories would be unhygienic. The lack of privacy would border on the indecent, and the fire risks would be appalling. Surely we can look for something more constructive from Dr. Fryberg 's visit to Carville than the apparent determina,tion of his to copy one of Carville 's worst features~

''Dr. Fryberg told us here that the dormitory system was in use in Carville, but he carefully refrained from mentioning that the Carville patients would not use the dormitories if they could get other accommodation.''

I believe that in the approach to this some consideration should be given to reconsidering whether these people are to be housed in dormitories or in separate huts, as they are at present on Peel Island.

While I am on the subject of the confinement of these people to their huts, I would mention that most of them are either crippled or blind, and I should like to commend to

the Minister's notice the fact that recently there has come onto the market ·what is known n,s ''The Talking Book.'' It is a device that is more or less a record player with an amplifier attached. The Repatriation Commission has seen fit to provide one of these ''Talking Books'' for each of its blind patients. ''The Talking Book'' has a device that plays a record, and a whole book can be recorded. All that is necessarv is for the blind patient to set the record in" motion and sit down and listen to it. A library of such Books is available, under the Repatriation Commission's system, which contains all classes of books, classics, mystery stories, and any other type that a patient desires. Considering the number of people who are suffering from blindness on the Island I believe the department could well provide one machine for each patient. The price of the machine is not exorbitant. It is being imported into the country from America by the CommomYealth Government at the low price of £22. It is free of duty and free of any sales tax, of course.

A Government ~I ember: Are the records costly~

~Ir. NICHOLSON: A library would be established and the patients could draw a certain number of records. The cost of the records is no greater than the cost of ordinary gramophone rec01·l1s. There are no royalties to pay. The records can be either of quarter-hour duration at a speed of 33~ or they can be played at the ordinary gramophone speed of 78 r.p.m. The special recorder will only play the special records provided for it, so there is no possible chance that any of this material will get into the hands of the public to sell willy-nilly over the countryside. It is purely and simply reserved for blind people.

It is very important to have something like that for sufferers from Hansen's disease. One of the misfortunes of the disease is that the patient loses feeling; it is a nerve-destroying disease. Therefore a blind Hansen's disease patient cannot take the advantage of reading Braille.

This book would be a great advantage to the blind patients as it would help them to live the rest of their lives in a happier state of mind than they are in today. There are many other things I should like to discuss on this subject. I should say, according to the few statements in the Press, that the department is doing a good job on the medical side, but there is need for some livening up and straightening out on the hospital side. I firmly believe that an advisory panel should be set up, not on a State basis but on a Commonwealth->vide basis, so that all the information gleaned from the various institutions throughout Australia and the world, could be thoroughly examined. Recently word came to us from America that unfortunately this disease is endemic in Korea and that the military authorities are very worried because they fear troops returning to America may ultimately pro>'e to be affected with Hansen's disease, or leprosy, as it is commonly known. It is causing concern to the


American authorities, and as we have our own troops in Korea, it should be causing us some concern too. This advisory panel should be established on a Commonwealthwide basis so that every atom of knowledge that can be gleaned can be thoroughly examined and experiments conducted in the search for a cure for the disease. I have suggested its establishment on a Commonwealth-wide basis because recently the Victorian Government appealed to the Commonwealth Government to take over the control of Hansen's disease in Australia. They made the appeal on the ground that two patients admitted to the hospital there as positive cases of Hansen's disease were immigrants. It was thought that it should be on a Commonwealth basis so that greater facilities for the screening of immigrants who came to this country would be provided.

I know that the medical profession still have a great deal to learn about the symptoms of the disease because a person may have it for 10 to 15 years and it may not be detected. Recently it was found that a sufferer admitted to Peel Island had had it for 20 years without realising it, which suggests that the medical profession are still staggering along in a state of blind ignorance of this disease. The establishment of an advisory panel on a Commonwealth-wide basis would be a step in the right direction.

In its approach to this subject the department should take into consideration the abolition of compulsory segregation. It should also have a trained welfare officer on the staff, and it should establish means for occupational and mental therapy. It should also continue the dependants' allowance while the patient is still unable to work, which may be for a period of six years. There is a considerable amount of mental strain and worry on the part of the dependants because they ,know full well that when a pati~nt is released on parole from Peel Island he immediately becomes in turn dependent on them, who were getting the allowance from the Government while he was in the institution. On Peel Island there is a plentiful supply of necessaries for the patient and he usually receives £30 worth of clothing, but when he is discharged or let out on parole the £30 worth of clothing no longer belongs to him. He merely gets a new suit or a sports coat and trousers when he leaves the island, and the fact that when he goes out in the world his dependants have to pay for his clothes and keep him is very unfortunate. It is a very poor approach to a matter of such importance and some alleviation of their distress should be seriously considered by the department.

Mr. lUoore: It has been.

1Ur. NICHQL,SON: I am pleased to hear that. The invalid pension is obtainable by a patient, but that is a Commonwealth matter and is subject to the means test.

Another point regarding the effect of the non-payment of the allowance to dependants is that a patient is not forced to leaYe the

island: he can remain there as long as he likes; if he does not sign his parole he cannot be forced to leave.

On behalf of the patients suffering from Hansen's disease I wish to thank all those persons who have helped in any way to alleviate their position. If there are any members on the Government side who wish to talk on the subject I hope they will do so at a later date. I thank all the people who have helped to make the lives of these people a little more endurable. I exhort the department, in its approach to the medic,tl and humanitarian aspects of this problem, to have Queensland set an example-not take an example-that the rest of the world may copy.

I wish to deal now with another matter, and on it I may not be so well received or appreciated as on the one with which I have just dealt. I said earlier that my reference to the Budget would only be in passing. I believe it is not necessary for me to endeavour to enlarge on any aspect .of . the Budg~t, which was completely dealt with lll a masterly and very businesslike manner by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, ably supported by the hon. member for Toowong. I heard one hon. member say that the Opposition offered no constructive criticism.

Mr. Walsh: The Leader of the Opposition made the best fist of them all.

JUr. NICHOLSON: I am .glad the hon. gentleman reminded me of him. I had the Leader of the Opposition in mind but I fo!g~t to mention him as the third. However, It IS hardly necessary. I believe the admirable criticism by the hon. member for Coorparoo, followed by the speakers I mentioned previously has left the Treasurer somewhat at a loss.

I shall be very interested to hear the reply prepared for him by his backroom boys to the suggestions made by the Leader of th.e Opposition, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the hon. member for Toowong.

One thing for which I cannot take credit is the discovery of the transfer of _£5,000 from Consolidated Revenue to the Diseases in Stock Fund. This was discovered by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Walsh: That is nothing unusual. That is helping the farmer.

~Ir NICHOLSON: The hon. gentleman is st~aling my thunder. The point is that only an expert like the Deputy Leader of the Opposition or the hon. rr:ember for To?wong could have discovered It. The fact IS that £5 000 was transferred to boost that section of the Department of Agriculture and Stock, and rightly so, because no-one reaps more benefit from the operations of the Diseases in Stock Act than the public.

:;ur. Walsh: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition said we were juggling the funds.

)fr. XICHOLSON: And he was right. He meant that this transfer could have been shmYn in bold type instead of being concealed in the way it was. The paltry pittance handeu out to the farmers of this State by


the Department as compensation for st_oc.k destroyed is the most miserable and ridiculous sum anvone coul(1 hear of and I propose to compare the Queensland situation with that obtaining in Victoria.

In Queensland, £6 is paid for. a _beflst that is destroyed or condemned, and If It IS under three years of age the compensation payable is £3. The levy on milk is one-sixth of a penny a gallon. The cream-producer does not contribute anything; only the person trading in milk is compelled to have his stock tested. This does not apply to the man who confines his operations to cream and one can realise how quickly and easily disease from an untested cream herd could be spread to the tested milk herd, but the time has arrived when the Government should consider not a miserly whittling down of the levy paid by the milk-producer to perhaps oneeighth of a penny but the raising of the standard of payment to the farmer whose beast is destroyed.

The Cattle Compensation Act of Victoria, which came into force in 1924, provides that compensation is payable in respect of any cattle destroyed, or carcasses that are condemned because they are affected with any one of the following diseases-

Actinomycosis, contagious pleuro-pneumonia, tuberculosis, malignant tumor, hydatids, and Johne's disease.

The compensation is payable out of the Cattle Compensation Fund which is made up of a duty-stamp tax at the rate of one penny in the £1 or portion of £1 of the purchase money on all sales of cattle. The maximum amount of duty payable in respect of any one head of cattle is 2s. 1d., and the duty stamps must be affixed by the vendor or his agent.

In the case of cattle affected with tuberculosis, 60 per cent. of the amount payable as compensation is paid out of the Cattle Compensation Fund and the other 40 per cent. is contributed from general revenue. In the case of an animal affected with actinomycosis 80 per cent. is paid out of the fund and 20 per cent. from general revenue.

In Victoria the amount of compensation payable is based on the market value of the animal condemned, calculated as if a sale took place with delivery on the property on which the animal was condemned. Note the difference in our Act there. In Victoria the value of the beast is reached by mutual agreement between an inspector of the Department of Agriculture and the owner of the animal. The existence of the disease is not taken into account when determining value and the maximum value at which any one animal could be valued is £35. It is to be noted that the value in Queensland is £6. Condemned animals are to he slaughtered on the owner's property or sent forward to an abattoir for slaughter under supervision and arrangements for such slaughtering are made by officers of the department. Since the inception of the scheme £1,005,949 has been paid in compensation and the fund is in credit to the extent

of £151,966. \Ve in Queensland have a credit of £41,000 and a miserable £6 is paid to the farmer for each beast condemned.

It grieves me deepl,r to lning ~orward. the next matter that I mtend to all" pubhcly. Recently I sat in this Chamber and heard tl_le most scathing comment I have ever heard m my life made by the Secr~tary for :Mines ~nd Immigration when replymg to a q~es~IOn asked of him by the hon. member for Calhde. PaTt of the reply of the Minister was-

'' The hon. member is looking for further trouble by interfeTing in matters in another member's electorate.''

I know that the Minister was quite right in saying that-in criticising any m1e "·ho interferes in anybody else's electorate.

lUr. Walsh: The Minister for Mines?

lUr. NICHOLSON: As that hon. gentleman has now come into the Chamber I will repeat what I said. He said-

'' The hon. member is looking for further trouble by interfering in matters in another member's electorate.''

lUr. Aikens: What about the Labour men who interfere in our electorates?

~Ir. NICHOLSON: I think that the Minister was sincere in his statement, because of the reports I have heard of him that he gives credit where credit is due. That I cannot say of the whole bang lot. of the Ministers and the Secretary for Mmes and Immigration should request his own Government to clean up their own backyards before criticising Opposition members for interfering.

Jir. Power: The Minister for Mines ;is quite able to look after himself.

lUr. NICHOLSON: The hon. gentleman has enough troubles of his own. Recently it was brought to my notice that th~ ~.C.E. ha.d established the precedent-and It 1s one of the lowest forms of political trickery ever played, apart from roll-stuffing and ~he_ gerrymandering of electorates-of estabhshmg the adopted-member scheme in an Opposition member's electorate. The Q.C.E. requests that a certain hon. member attend to the business of the A.L.P. in that electorate. That in itself is ali right, but unfortunately the hon. member concerned gets over-encouraged or imbued with the idea that he can handle more than one electorate and starts to interfere with things that do not concern the A.L.P. Any organisation at all in my electorate, irrespective of creed or colour, that is working for the welfare of that communitv will receive from me all the help I can pos~lbly give it, but I will not sta_nd f_or the sneaking tactics that are adopted m ellsclaiming responsibility for certain things and claiming that certain other things have been won by the A.L.P.

Some time ago I brought to the notice ?f the :Minister the matter of court days m Redcliffe. and I should like to quote the following Press cutting dealing with that matter-


'' :t'rom next January, a magistrate will visit Redcliffe for one day in the first week of each month and another day two weeks later.

"This information has been received by Redcliffe Branch A.L.P., following requests by the branch that additional court days be given to Reclcliffe.

''At present tlre visting magistrate comes to Reclcliffe on the first Thursday and Friday of each month. ·

''A letter to the branch, sent via Mr. E. Lloycl, M.L.A., from the AttorneyGeneral, says that the Chief Magistrate does not consider that any additional elates are necessary at Redcliffe at present.''

Although I brought that matter up in the first place, I am not claiming any credit for it. Long before the A.L.P. was established in Redcliffe, the chamber of commerce, in conjunction with my predecessor, the Lead·er of the Opposition, made representations in that respect. That was in 1948 and 1949.

lUr. Walsl1: Did you get a reply to your representations~

lUr. NICHOLSO~: Yes, about two days after the A.L.P. got its reply.

We heard the story of the member for Isis about amenities for the wharves, and we have here another little piece of political pirating.

A Government 1\Iember: The member for lsis has neyer complained.

lUr. NICHOLSON: I am complaining on behalf of the whole of the Opposition. I have here a Press cutting that reads-

" No hope yet of a secondary school for Redcliffe. The erection of a new primary school--"

I will not read all of it--

GoYernment Jllembers: Take it as read!

lUr. NICHOLSON: The purpose of the deputation to the Minister was to push for the erection of a secondary school as soon as possible. The Press cutting continues-

"Members of the deputation told Mr. Hilton that recent approval of a secondary school in Redcliffe by the Minister for Education had been the result of three years' agitation by Redcliffe A.L.P. Branch and they felt that some measure of priority should be given.''

I am right behind any agitation for the erection of a secondary school at Redcliffe, but I venture to say that three years ago the Rcdcliffe A.L.P. consisted of a disorganised rabble, until Eric Lloyd organised them before the last election.

The CIIAIRJUAN: Order! The hon. member should refer to other members in the correct form.

lUr. XICHOLSON: I am sorry. I referred to the hon. member for Kedron bv name because I class him as a friend of mine; for how long, I do not know.

On 5 May, 1948, the follo>ving letter was >Yritten to the then Secretary for Public Instruction-

'' The members of this Chamber of Commerce, being keenly interested . in the provision of an Intermediate and Secondary School on the Redcliffe Peninsula, would greatly appreciate an opportunity to discuss the subject with you.''

It is quite obvious that the Redcliffe branch of the A.L.P., which has only recently been formed, is trying to stPal the thunder of the chamber of commerce, w)J.ich is doing a great job on that peninsula, in conjunctior. w;t ;l my predecessor, the Leader of the Opposition. Approval for the erection of the schoo I was given not recently but in 1949, when my predecessor was representing Murrumba. On 6 October, 1948, there was a deputation to the Director of Education requesting the establishment of that secondary school.

On 10 July, 1950, r, letter was sent to me from the Chamber of Commerce about the need for a permanent clerk of petty sessions at Redcliffe. There was also a previous movement on foot in respect of the Housing Commission Homes, which I fully support. On 18 August, 1949, Mr. Nicklin received a letter which read-

'' I have received your letter of the 4th instant regarding the possibility of the Housing Commission erecting homes at Red· cliffe, and in reply wish to advise that this matter has been referred to the Commissioner of Housing for report. On receipt of ad\"ice from the Commissioner I shall let you have further information.''

The letter is signed by the Honourable the Secretary for Mines, then Minister for Works and Housing. On 8 August, 1949, the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Nicklin, had received the following letter-

'' Further to your letter of the 4th instant regarding the possibility of State rental homes being erected at Redcliffe, I wish to advise that I find on inquiry that the Housing Commission has no building sites in this locality.''

That is signed by the Honourable the Minister for Mines and is dated 8 August. Yet we have in bold headlines in the papers that the A.L.P. has approached the Minister and got permission to build houses in Redcliffeonce again trying to take the credit from the poor old chamber of commerce, which has worked harder than anybody for the benefit of the peninsula, and take the credit from my predecessor, the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition. I haYe already said that I approve of it and I am helping all I can to get it.

\Ve all know on this side of the Chamber, and we are not particularly worried about it, of the interference in the electorates by the various A.L.P.s. \Ve know that many members on that side do not agree with that policy, but it is condoned and aided and abetted by members of the Cabinet. There are members who do not subscribe to it and


\Yho think it positively smells to high heaven, nll(] thcv would like to stand on their hind legs ancl say thnt they do not approve of it.

A GoYernment ll'Iember: Name one!

::\Ir. NICHOLSON: They are not game. There are a lot on that side of the Chamber who are like puppets, who dance for the big boss, the Q.C.E. When he pulls the strings they wag their feet and move their tongues. I refer hon. members to the Minister, who in no uncertain terms told us to look after the business of our own electorates. On behalf of members of the Opposition, I tell members on the other side to look after the business of their own eleetorates and we will look after the business of ours. When we think that we are not capable of looking after the affairs in our electorates, and when we think we should giYe way to somebody who is more capable, not one of us will refuse to do so. We will not become puppets on a string like the hon. members opposite.

I\Ir. BROSNAN (Fortitude Valley) (3.54 p.m.): I desire at the outset to compliment the Acting Treasurer, not only for the Budget which he has introduced, but for the way in which he introduced it. It is no easy task for any Treasurer to bring down a Budget of the magnitude that is necessary in the affairs of this State; it is the more meritorious on this occasion because of the little time that was available to the Acting Treasurer, occasioned unfortunately by the illness of our Premier. However, he has done the job and done it well, and at the same time it is a reflection of the capacity of our Acting }0 remier, who was Treasurer for a part of the time.

I agree with the hon. member for Flinders and other speakers on this side that the criticism of hon. members opposite has not been levelled at the Budget but at the statements made by members of the Government Party who have drawn attention to the shortcomings of the Federal Government. Apart from that, they have simply defended the Federad Government. The criticism of the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition will be very competently and capably answered when the Acting Treasurer replies.

It has been said tha.t we balanced our Budget last year because of Commonwealth aid, but do not get the idea that the Commonwealth Government handed anything to this State Labour Government. They gave us only a hand .out. that they gave the other States; they did not even give us our quota according to the formula. They have not been liberal to Queensland. The facts are that when the extra sum of £15,000,000 was allocated the Commonwealth determined that Queensland should have £2,000,000, or almost £500,000 short of her quota. Again this year, when the money was allocated to Queensland we were £500,000 down, so that the magnanimous gesture of the Commonwealth Government has had the effect of depriving Queensland of £1,000,000. I do not care how closely the accountants in Opposition are associated 1\"ith the Commonwealth Government or what

business enterprise or ability they have or how they may juggle figures with the accountant's skill or turn them over, they cannot get away from the facts.

The hon. member for Murrumba complained about the adoption system of certain A.L.P 's. in his and other electorates. I draw attention to the fact that he congratulated members on his own side on the way in which they had ha;Jdled this debate, but forgot to mention the Leader of the Opposition. Since he forgot such an important person and heaped encomiums on hon. members opposite on the way in which they had pulled the Budget to pieces-according to him-let us examine his statement in its application to all members of the Opposition. Very like his namesake the famous bicycle-rider, he got off his bike when interjections were directed to him. He is actually doing what he is complaining about. Other hon. members opposite have no complaints about A.L.P. branches in their electorates or of their adoption by any hon. member on this side of the Chamber, but apparently the hon. member for Murrumba has complained for them all and so himself usurps. their rights. He talked of puppets and said that when they feel this and feel that and feel the other thing they would do certain things, which reminds me positively that there m·e certain types of people who are incapable of feeling. He may come within that class.

I have been brought to my feet today for several reasons, not the least of which are the statements by the hon. member for Chermside about the hon. member for Kurilpa and those of the hon. member for Mt. Coottha in relation to me. The hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha took unto himself the right to bandy my name about the Chamber on several occasions, whereupon I told him that I was quite capable of looking after myself. I am glad to see that he is coming back into the Chamber to hear what I have to say. First of all, let me deal with the remarks of the hon. member for Chermside. He was very worried about personalities. He was also worried when he talked of the wav in which a member on this side of the Committee, the hon. member for Kurilpa, spoke the other day. He immediately, by inference, innuendo and accusation virtually branded him a cur and a coward. Let me tell the Committee that the hon. member for Kurilpa Yolunteered for service in the Army. I do p.ot hear any interjection from the hon. member for Chermside and his scathing comments now. He volunteered for service and was B·class and served for over three years in the Army, rising from private to warrant officer with a speed excelled only by the Prince of Wales; and he refused pips when offered them because he did not like the type of person he saw round him with pips on their shoulders (Opposition interjections). He was in the first A.T.T.D.

I\Ir. Dewar interjected.

I\Ir. BR01SNAN: The hon. member for Chermside would not understand; being tolerant and Christianlike, I will explain that it is the Australian Trade Training Depot. Furthermore, the hon. member for Kurilpa


was in its Trade Testing Section. I suggest that in time of war it would be very impCilrtant to have men of skill, ability and courage in the Trade Testing Section. The hon. member for Kurilpa was there and he rose to the rank of warrant officer in just over six months, under seven months, which is a tribute to his efficiency, ability and skill.

lUr. Dewar interjected.

lUr. BROSNAN: I have no doubt the hon. member for Chermside would know of people capable of buying themselves anything, anywhere, anytime.

'l'he Moores family have a very good record. Of the other two brothers eligible to be in uniform, Ralph served four years and was in New Guinea and Arch served in the Army and Navy. In addition to that, in order that the stormtroopers could parade themselves before the people of Queensland and yell about men who joined the colours, two nephews were killed in action. If that is not sufficient answer to the hon. member for Chermside I do not know what is.

lUr. De war: I still want to know whether that gives him the right to abuse a 'l'ol1ruk Rat~

iUr. BROSXAN: The hon. member for Kurilpa expTessed an opinion, which is his right. The hon. membCT for Kurilpa will in this ChambeT OT outside stand up to Tobruk Rats, New Guinea jungle men or anybody else, and will also stand up to the member for Ch~rmside and the member for Mt. Coot-tha.

GoYernment lliembers: Hear, hear!

lUr. BROSNAN: The hon. member for Chermside referred to the A.W.U. and its alleged £300,000 income. Members of the Australian Workers' Union pay 30s. a year for membership of the union and of that 30s. 25s. goes to the union itself. That is the cheapest and best insurance premium any body of workers could pay, have ever paid or will ever pay. It ensures to the workers that the party represented in this Chamber by the likes of the hon. member for Chermside and the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha will pay what they are justly obliged to pay under the awards of the Industrial Court. ·why, the Australian "Workers Union obtains more for its members as a result of litigation-the prosecuting of employers for breaches of awanls-than it does by way of income from its members.

The hon. member also complained that the membeTs of the union contributed to tho Labour Partv 's funds. I remind him that the unions "'are formed, established·, and funrtion in accordance with a constitution that is registered with the Registrar of Trade Unions under the 'l'rade Unions Act, and with the Industrial Court. The balance sheets of those unions are available to their members, nncl I would like the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha to make available to me the balance sheets of the companies in which he is interested. I hem·d about one balance sheet that I should like him to produce, but

he can answer for thnt to someone else. I refer to a matter of about £3,500 about which I have heard.

The Labour Party had its origin in the b-ade-union movement and its members contribute to its funds. Surely the hon. member does not expect that they should contnbme to the funds of the Liberal-Country Party vvhen they find themselves taxed to an extor.t 2,! times greater than they had to pay during the war, only to fine! themselves faced with 10 000 dismissals made to establish a labour po'ol. The hon. member for CheTmsido made a statement this morning and ran from the Chamber. He was answered by the hon. member for Flinders who quoted Mr. Harold Cox the correspondent of ''The CourierMail'' at Canberra.

1\Ir. Dewar: But you do not believe "The Courier-Mail.''

lUr. BROSNAN: But the hon. member does, and this ought to satisfy him. If it does not, he is a twicer. The point is that Harold Cox, the Canberra correspondent says that per capita we are not 10 per cent. but 60 per cent. higher in taxation and we are paying 2~ times more than we were during the war, under a Labour Government.

This £300,000 that the Australian Workers' Union is supposed to have could not possibly be obtained from subscriptions by members because it has not so many members in the whole of the Commonwealth. I think it will be found that the membership of the Australian Workers' Union is about 120,000. We should be spending all our funds on Labour Governments in the interests of the workers.

I want now to put the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha out of his misery, anxiety and expectancy, and refer to statements he has attributed to me. He has informed this Committee at different times of what I do and what I do not do. He is rather good at informing. I have a recollection of seeing a photograph not long ago in a newspaper of a gentleman going up the Treasury steps, and I said at the time that I thought it was the best photo of an informer I had ever seen, and I still think so. The hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha has attributed to me certain things that are not true and that he knows are not true, and I intend to answer him. He has been strutting ancl parading around this Chamber saying that Government members were paying him a compliment by speaking of assertions and statements he has made. I am very charitable in not qualifying the type of his assertions and statements. He has been strutting and pararling, not with the majesty and glory of a peacock, but rather like. a peahen in. moultwith head down and tarl clown. It rs neressary when such hon. members make these statements that one should answer them.

On 11 instant in this Chamber the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha used these •vords, ''The m em beTS who comprise the Government Dre avowed Socialists.'' At the time I said that that was not true and my interjection was made for a dual purpose. In the first place it was to refute the statement.

JUr. Sparkes interjected.

Supply. ,[ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

}Ir. BROSNA:X: The hon. member for Aubigny is continually interjecting. There are two ways of making a speech-one is to stand and address the Chair and say in a matter of 40, 50 or 60 minutes all one has to say, and the other is by staccato interjections from the cross benches to occupy the full time allo>Yed by the Standing Orders, and then by persisting in that course virtually get an extension of time, which he knows he cannot get in Committee of Supply.

As I was saying the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha used the term "Socialist" as meaning Communist. Is that not so~ In other words, he meant that we were avowed Communists.

lUr. ~I orris: I do not need you to interpret my speeches.

~Ir. BROS:X AN: I am not interpreting, I am quoting what the hon. member said. He said later that Communists and Socialists were the same thing, and that you could not deny that thev were bedfellows. I asked a question and "I thought he would have the good manners to reply. I have given the first reason for the interjection and the second reason is this: some clays prior to the 11thand I am not going to go into the question of the amendment of the Primary Producers' Organisation and Marketing Act-during the debate on that Bill, the hon_ member for Mt. Coot-tha said that the legislation was Socialist and that it was even worse, that it was Cam: munist. He differentiated and said that it was worse that Socialist legislation and was Co.mmunist legislation. A few days later he sard that the Communists and the Socialists were the same. My interjection was pertinent and loaded.

During the Address in Reply debate I had the temerity to give a little dissertation on Christia!l ethics and suggested that they may be applied to those persons who subscribe to the Christian way of life and the Standing Orders and Rules of this Committee. The reason for that was that people should keep on the right track and not accuse others of something they might find rebounding on themselves. Here the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha did a complete somersault which is typical of and in accordance with Communist tactics I spoke of. It was typical of the Communists' somersaults. Hon. members ?PPOsite get their training from the CommunIsts, not because they attend their schools but because they do not know any better and follow their lead.

Mr. Dewar: They do not march with them.

~Ir. BROSNAN: That interjection is timely and pertinent and is appreCiated. The day I marched clown the streets of Brisbane with the Premier, the Deputv Premier, Mr. Cole, Mick Healy and Gerry 'Dawson of the Trades Hall, I did it as a trade unionist.

Dawson and Healv were sent as the delegates representing t'rade unionists associated with the Trades Hall, Cole and I were sent as the delegates representing the trade unionists associated with the Australian Labour Day Celebration Committee, and the Premier and the Deputy Premier were there as the leader and the deputy leader of the

Parliamentary Labour Party, the party that has been in office, with the exception of three years, since 1915. If there is anything wrong democratically with marching do,Yn Queen St., Brisbane, in a procession that was constitutional in that a permit was obtained for it, if there is anything wrong in trade unionists having the democratic right to select their o'vn representatives, regardless of whether they are Liberals, Communists, Country ~art:y, or whatever they are, the sooner notice IS taken of the hon. member for Kurilpa and we don the jack-boots and gird the cutlasses and mow them down, the better. I make no apology for marching down Queen Street, and I make no apology for abiding by the law of the land.

If hon. members opposite nse the term ''Socialists'' and point the finger across the Chamber, as the .hon. member for Mt. Coottha does, I remmd them that they cannot use the term ''Socialists'' as synonymous with the term ''Communists'' and get away with it. Secondly, when the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha points his finger, let him remember that three fingers are pointing back at himself. For every accusation th.at he makes across this Chamber, three fingers are pointing back at him. Let him who ~s without sin cast the first stone! (Opposition interjections.) I am prepared to throw stones, gibbers, or anything else. Make no mistake about that!

Opposition interjections.

The TEMPORARY CHAIR~IAN (Mr. Graham) : Order! Far too much interjecting is going on in this Chamber.

~Ir. BROSN AN: I have here the Rules and Constitution of the Australian Labour Party and in so far as it has for its objective the constitutional utilisation of the means of industry, production, distribution and exchange, I, in the same way as every other member of the Australian Labour Party, am a Socialist. Nowhere in this book is the term "Socialism" used. The objective of this party is its aim, its goal. Socialism is a political ideology, it is a philosophy, and one would expect that Socialism would have Socialists as its adherents, in the same way as Communism has Communists and as Trotskyites adhere to the ideology of Trotsky, and Tories to Toryism -and in passing I should say that the definition of ''Tory'' as applicable to some members opposite, would be one who is a member of the Queensland People's Party postulating Liberal dogma as interpreted by the Country Party. That is my definition. I will explain that later to the hon. member for Chermside. I am entirely Christianlike in my attitude and approach; I do not mind helping '' Brucie the Second.'' Nowhere in our constitution and rules have we anything about Socialism. I suggest that the hon. member for Mt. Gravatt gave a very explicit and express interpretation in a few words when he said that it was social utilisation.

The people opposite also have an objective. It is to try to defeat the Labour Party and the method by which they seek that objective is open to question by some of us because


they attempt to assassinate your character, another typical Communist attributealthough the hon. member for Mm·rumba was very kind and did say that we had clone a lot of good things in his electorate. He at least did play the game in that regard.

Mr. Farrell, when we consider that the objective is one thing and the method of obtaining it is another, we see this Socialist bogy they would raise in a different light. Certainly the objective is the social utilisa· tion of the means of production, distribution and exchange, but how are we going to bring it about~ We have certain methods laid down in the Constitution. We have been in office in this Parliament, with the exception of three years, since 1915. In looking at the methods that this Labour Party has adopted you will find that they are all based on the Constitution, the constitutional utilisation of the Federal, State and municipal Govern· ments, parliamentary and administrative machinery. Is there anything wrong with thaU Is there anything wrong with persons living within a democracy binding themselves together under a constitution to do the best they can to see that the distribution of property and the distribution of wealth are more equitable and that property and wealth are more evenly spread over a greater number of people~

And, Mr. Farrell, we proceed towards our objective by means of the methods set out in our constitution. Nowhere in our methods, and nowhere in the procedure, do we find that there is anything that can ally us with the philosophy of Socialism, and do not for· get that Max Beer wrote two volumes on it! Socialism goes back, as the hon. member for Nort,h Toowoomba pointed out, a little further than the hon. members opposite would have us believe. Consequently, as it goes back so far, we must be cognisant of the constitution and rules of this Labour Party to which we belong. I repeat that in so far as, and to the extent that the platform of this party and its implementation are allied to Socialisation, and to the social utilisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange, then to that extent and in that direction I too am a Socialist.

I would draw wour attention to the fact that in England just lately-in June of this year, as a matter of fact-there was a gathering of Socialists and the Socialist International was revived. It had died, after the split that developed in 1914. Eminent writers and authoritative statesmen made the statement that the manifesto that emanated from that International was such that it could be adopted by any Liberal and Tory Conservative Party. Hon. members opposite are silent now because the manifesto had for its basis the control of profits, prices and wages. You can see that it would' not be in accordance with the policy of the Opposition to control profits and prices. That would never do, but the control of wages, oh, yes. Exit the storm troopers!

Where could we have a greater example of socialisation than when Mr. Chandler took over the bus services in the city of Brisbane. I suggest also that South Australia offers

another very prominent example of socialisation inasmuch as that State limits itself to the socialisation of the industries that will be of immense and immedi&te benefit to the general working public. Mr. Playford, the Premier of South Australia, is a very astute gentleman and no doubt he has remained in office because of the use of sound Labour policy and doctrine.

I thank the Chamber for the hearing that it has given me. It gave me the opportunity to give the lie direct to the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha and it gave me the opportunity too, on behalf of the hon. member for Kurilpa, who could not speak again, of redeeming his good name and that of his family, otherwise he would haye been defamed and his good name cast into the gutter by the hon. member for Chermside, who took what I believe to be a mean adYantage. It allowed me also to give hon. members opposite some food for thought. When they point the finger across the Chamber, let me say to them that members of the Australian Labour Party are proud to belong to that party. It is a party that does not deYiate from its rules and constitution and has no need to change them every time the weather changes.

)Ir. DECI{ER (Sandgate) ( 4.28 p.m.): I desire to take advantage of this debate to mention several matters that I may not have the opportunity of raising later on. Some time ago the Government created the ValuerGeneral's Department, which in the opinion of Parliament of the time and in what I think is still the opinion of Parliament was a very great advance towaTds the standardising of valuations throughout the State. The objective was uniformity of valuations and that I think will be achieved. Of course a tremendous job lay ahead, not only in the creation of the department itself but in making fresh valuations throughout the State and co-ordinating the valuations of one district with another. I congratulate the Valuer-General on the work that he has done up to date. He has divided the State into valuation districts and some of them have already been valued. He has undertaken to haYe the valuations of the city of Brisbane available to the Brisbane City Council in time to enable it to assess its rates in respect of the second half of 1952. The undertaking is a huge one. The city of Brisbane is a tremendous area.

Lately we had figures for districts in three Brisbane subdivisions, Sandgate, Wynnum, and Coorparoo, that have caused a good deal of concern, owing to the great increases in Yaluations. I take this opportunity of saying that this could not very well be avoided. In the city of Brisbane we must expect valuations to increase in certain areas, particularly when we realise the great development that has taken place since the war years. Many areas that were not thought important before the war are now suburban settlements and the demand for land in the city area is great and cannot be satisfied and the demand outside has increased tremendously. The old-established areas in Brisbane, which carried what we considered

976 Supply. [ASSE.iYIBL Y.] Supply.

high valuations . for many years, bore the greater proportiOn of the rates load in Brisbane.

But not much consideration has been given t? spiral.ling costs of today. No body assoCiated \nth the Value1·-General 's Department could foresee. that , this inflationary spiral would grow to such magnitude that it has become almost ungovernable. Valuations are going to have a big influence on the ability of people to pay their rates in the future. We may ~ave been_ a?le to lay down a policy of valuatwns, but 1t 1s problematical whether we ,could lay down a policy to meet all the. peculiarities of the present inflationary penod. When we come down to tintacks the only thing we could do was to instruct the Valuer-General or his officers to value with due regard to the present market values of the properties in the different districts.

A policy of high valua tions and low rates is an inflationary policy. It depends entirely on the taxing authorities how it will work out. It has been stated that when the valuations in Brisbane are completed it is most likely that they will be doubled. The amount is not so important as the reaction of the taxing authorities. For example, if the values were doubled, and the council was in a position to halve the rates, most people would say "That will leave us in the same position as we were in before.'' But does it? It does in respect of the high-value property, but when we go outside it means a great incre:;.se for the majority of people where valuatwns may have risen to six times the original valuation. I have received numerous complaints about these valuations. It is not uncommon to find in the outer areas three or four allotments that may have been valued at £70 previously. It is no wonder that the owners are shocked when they get a notice from the Valuer-General that their valuations have been increased to £450. Yet, when one looks at the surrounding area one cannot see how the Valuer-General could have done anything else, if he wishes to value the land on a comparable basis. So that whatever council will be striking the rate ultimately on the new valuation, there are people in Brisbane who will be hit particularly hard, and unfortunately they are the poorer people of the community who have not had the money to buy into the richer areas and have gone outside to cheaper areas. It is going to be hard for those people to meet their rates under any circumstances. The system of high valuations with low rating increases the responsibility on those people who, in most C':_lses, are least able to bear the burden.

Then there is no guarantee that the council will halve the rate because, with the preEent spiral of inflationary costs, \Yhich increases the cost of carrying on municipal affairs, the local authority might feel that it was compelled to impose an extra '\d. and thi-; would have a devastating effect, because it would not be very long before the rates would creep to such an extent that property values in the city area would be ruined. I repeat that increasing the rates will depreciate the value of properties, and in my

opinion the best system to adopt-it is impossible to do it now-is a low valuation with a high rating.

:ur. Walsh: There is a trick in that, too, for the man who wants to escape land tax.

}fr. DECKER: I know there are disa bilitics from every angle, but we have gone so far now that we cannot even adopt the suggestion I am making. I still say the Government have done the right thing in trying to make land tax equitable and uniform throughout the State, but in doing this we have had to and shall continue to have to gamble with the inflationary spiral. I prefer the low valuation with a high rating because an authority that is rating at a high level w 1< tches every penny very carefully indeed. An authority that rates to the extent of ls. 6d., ls. 7 d. or Is. 8d. in the pound is more likely to keep within reasonable limits than one that rates at much less. If that rating is based on a low valuation it usually gives an equitable result to the owner, but where we give a local authority the opportunity, hy compelling it to adopt a high valuation compulsorily and then. leaving it to strike a low rate, it is not long before the low rate begins to creep up gradually. What would be an advantage in the first instance, would be a distinct disadvantage in later years. 'l'he time might come when the Governmentand I am speaking of the new valuations that are being determined-might have to take steps to create a new rate in the city and other local authority areas affected. We all agree it is right to have uniform valuations, but none of us has given much consideration to what might follow in the path of the reform.

I warn the people in all suburbs of Brisbane and other areas affected by the ValuerGeneral's valuations, to take advantage of the right of appeal that the Government have provided under the Act. Many people are afraid to appeal against a Government department and think that once a valuation comes out from a Government department it is impossible to appeal against it. They think that it might be expensive, and that they will get nowhere with their appeals. Under the Act they have every right of appeal against valuations, and they would be doing the right thing by their neighbours if, wlien they thought that their properties had been over-valued, they took advantage of the appeal section and went to the Valuer-General's Department, obtained the necessary form and filled it in within the time specified and fought their cases for reductions in values. 'l'his would not be an insult to the valuers. If I was sent out to value an area and somebody followed in my wake our valuations probably would not agree, because we should approach the matter from different angles and accumulate different evidence to support our valuations. Valuers are not infallible by any means. In working over an area they do their 1vork faithfully and make their assessments according to what they believe to be the values, and if when people compare those valuations they find discrepancies they should avail themselves of the right of appeal and fight the cases.


This is not a difficult matter to do. It is not difficult to put a case up to the dopa rtment, because if the valuation is under £1,000 a person can haYo the appeal heard before the Valuation Appeal Court; if it exceeds £1,000 the appeal is to the Land Court. Anyone can have an appeal heard by the Land Court, whether the valuation is over or under £1,000. The general practice in the department, however, is not to allow appeals to go so far. If there is a general appeal from a whole area and from a great number of O>vners, it would not be the policy of the department to force all appeals into court. The natural thing to do would be to call in all the interested parties and have a round-table conference, and see whether the Valuer-General could not come to a compromise to settle the valuations in dispute. This is done for two reasons: firstly, to get valuations level without fuss, and secondly, to avoid congestion in the courts. As I am reminded, they can do that now.

I repeat that people who are dissatisfied with values should adopt the procedure laid down. Other than postage, it costs them nothing to fill in a form and appeal against the Yaluation. It takes very little time to accede to the request of the Valuer-General's Department to take the matter up with its officials. The chances are that at such interviews thousands of cases would be settled to the satisfaction of all concerned. However, if a person is still not satisfied he has the further right of appeal to the Valuation Appeal Court or the Land Court, according to the value of his property. A,nd so today I make an appeal to members of this Committee-and particularly to metropolitan members-to advise their people. as I am doing, to take advantage of the protection that this Parliament has given them regarding the valuations that they think should be attached to their properties.

High valuations have another effect, which has already been mentioned by the hon. member for Toowong. The increase in land values will make many more residents vf this city subject to the payment of land taxation. The present exemption is £300, and I doubt whether very many people in this city will have land that is valued at less than £30(1 after the revaluation has been finished. I fully support the suggestion of the hon. member for Toowong that the present exemption should be increased so that these people will not be called upon to pay increased council rates as a result of the increase in valuations by the city council, and State land tax brought about by increased valuations placed on properties by the Valuer-General. I think the present exemption should be increased to at least £600. It may even be necessary to increase it to £750 so that the people of this city will not have to bear the burden of State land tax.

Another field of taxation, that is, Federal land tax, affects properties valued at more than £5,000, and many properties will be brought into this field of taxation as the result of these increased valuations. Under all the circumstances, I think we should get in early and ask the Federal authoriht>s to

haYe due regard to the increased valuations that haYe bt>en placed on properties by the Valuer-General. \Ve should try to get the Commonwealth Government to increase their exemption, so that a further heaYy bnrden of taxation will not be imposed on the people of this city. The State Government, as I haYe already said, owe it to the people to increase their exemption and I think the State should point out the position to the CommomYealth so that it may cvnsider increasing the exemption level for Federal land tax.

I desire to take the opportunity now of speaking on another matter as it may not be possible to do so during the debates on the Estimates. It affects the policy adopted by our Department of Public Lands. The Acting Treasurer has had considerable experience in that department and he must realise, from other speeches I have made, that I think an injustice has been created by unnecessarily boosting land values in this State. ~When land has been subdivided for perpetual-lease building sites in the city, why not adopt the old system of having a reserve placed on the land so that when that reserve is reached at the sale all the people who are taking part in the auction can ballot for the block~ The value that is placed upon the land should be the fair market valne.

iUr. Walsh: These are not freehold allotments.

Mr. DECKER: They are not. They are perpetual-lease allotments. I think the land should be valued at a figure comparablp with that of the land round it, and that should be the limit to which the Crown will allow the purchasers to bid. After all, the idea of the perpetual-lease blocks was to give the working man a chance to invest his earnings in a home instead of in the land itself. He got a title to that land and paid for it on the basis of three per cent. That is to say, if the overall valuation was £100 the purchaser would pay £3 a year. That was to enable that man to get a site cheaply so that he could put the balance of his £100 into his home and would not be burdened by high interest and would have a chance of paying off the improvements he would put on that block.

We must not forget that we have the inflationary spiral of which I have spoken and it is the bounden duty of the Government to take all steps to correct it, but the Department of Public Lands has not moved in that direction. It should be its duty to stabilise land values by fixing a fair upset price and adhering to it. Then it should conduct a ballot for the blocks. Instead, it accepts exorbitant bids and so this real takedown business on the part of the Crown continues.

::IIr. Walslu You advocate the de-control of land sales~

}Ir. DECKER: Yes.

iUr. Walsh: Then freehold allotments can have the sky as the limit.


:!Ur. DECKER: Can the hon. gentleman tdl me honestly that the sky should be the limit in the sale of porpetu;:tl·leaschold blocks?

nir. Walsh: If it is good enough for freehold it should be the same with perpetual lease.

lUr. DECKER: It does not apply to freehold. Let me illustrate my point by a reference to the snle of some low·lying land with a frontage to the sea at Eventide. It had no real value in its original state and it was believed that it could be made revenueproducing and suitable for homes for the workers. Values were placed upon it and on one block of 21 perches the reserve was £371, an amount that had never been paid for 21 perches of freehold in that neighbourhood, yet the people, believing that all they would be required to pay would be 3 per cent. on the capital value of £371 or whatever the purchase price turned out to be, bid above that figure and the Government allowed the land to be bought for £810. Here was a block of land of 21 perches valued at £371 by the Government and sold for £810.

3ir. Walsh: The Land Court would call that fair market value.

JUr. DECKER: That price has never lwen realised for freehold land in the neighbourhood. The Government are supposed to represent the workers and the ·workers' Homes Act vvas designed to give the worker a home.

Jl[r. Walsh: You are not suggesting that the worker paid £810 for this block.

Mr. DECKER: I am. He thought that all he would be required to pay was 3 per cent. on £810 or an annual rent of £24. He did not realise that he would be liable for council rates based on the price he had paid and that eventually he would perhaps have to pay £1 a week for life in respect of that allotment which should have given him a home on cheap terms .. The Crown itself fixed the value at £371 and then accepted the maximum bid it could get from the worker.

JUr. Walsh: No more than freehold was bringing-not as much.

])fr. DECKER: If the Minister could point to a piece of freehold land that had 1Jrought £3 71 there would be something in his argument.

])fr. Walsb: I can show you where a piece of perpetual lease was sold at a price higher than freehold, not by the Crown, but by an individual.

iUr. DECKER: It is time the Government realised the position. They have talked of the spiral of inflation but what have they done to meet it~ They have not done anything.

)fr. Walsll: The fact that our cost of living is lower is an indication that we have done something.

~Ir. DECKER: The ambition of the Government is to remain in power. As far

as spiralling costs aTe concerned they have not done one thing. If they were sincere they would eliminate a system in one of their own departments that would not be tolerated if it was done by a pTivate person. If pTivate persons attempted to rob the public as barefacedly as the DepaTtment of Public Lands does, the Government would bring down legislation to stop him. What they are doing is abhorrent. The Government are supposed to represent the working man. Why not give him some protection? Can you tell me that it is right to allow a department to put these values up to such an extent that they are extoTtionate ~ They are merely trading on the ignorance of the worker, who has no idea of the true value because he does not pay out the cash; he woTks it out on how much it will cost him by multiplying the amount by three. If it is £300 he says that the amount it will cost him will be £9 a year. Comparable freehold land may not be worth £50 or £60.

I refeT to a case that I brought before the Chamber before-and there are many of these. On Bribie Island, at a spot called the White Patch, land was sold by auction by the Caboolture Shire Council and it brought £19 to £20 a half-acre block, freehold. The Govemment offered comparable land with the same areas and on the same level at an auction and their values went to £80. That happened within a month or two.

Let us take another example. At Coolangatta blocks of land that were comparable with blocks valued at £300 realised £1,200 and £1,500 under the hammer. And the Government took the money! The Secretary foT Public Lands and Irrigation has told this Committee that he feels it his duty as Minister to get the maximum values this land can realise on the open market. I maintain that he is failing in his duty to carry out the intention of the law, which is to give the workers a fair deal in perpetual leasehold suburban allotments by giving them a minimum value. Anything over that is not a fair price. If I did it they would want to prosecute me, but if they do it as a Government they say it is their duty to do it. The duty of the Government is to see that true values are not overstepped by unwitting people. The workers should have their just rights, as laid down in the Act.

lir. :E'oley: The amount bid is only the capital value of the land. He pays only a rental based on that value.

iUr. DECKER: And there lies the danger. Instead of paying only 3 per cent., as is his right under the Act, which is supposed to be designed to help him get a cheap home, that man is charged anything from J 2 per cent. to J 8 per cent. a hove the fair, equitable value of a comparable freehold block, and that charge is levied in peTpetuity, subject to reappraisement after seven years.

Mr. Burrows: And a Smart Alec commission agent will '"ant him to sell it for double that amount the following week.

Mr. DECKER: A Smart Alec commission agent has nothing to learn from this


Government. It is high time Government members talked it over amongst themsdves, it is time they discussed the numerous cases they know of, and if they do that they will realise that the practice has grown out of all reason. 'l'he Government have a duty to keep valnes down during times of rising tosts, instead of joining in the scramble and tecoming one of the mckcteers. To put it s~1ortl:y, they are simply engaging in legalised r0bbery.

'vVhen the Crown is selling land the sky 1s the limit. There is nothing the Government will not do to get the maximum possilde birl out of the unsuspecting public, but i [ they are resuming land, if they are taking a man's propertv fTom him and telling him to get out lwcause" they want it for public purposes, they take the opposite view and cut him down to the lowest possible value. How can we have a settled land policy under those cil·cumstances~ Either the Government believe in their present policy with regard to sales, and do not believe in their policy with regard to resumptions, or they do not believe in their policy with regard to sales and do belive in their policy with regard to resumptions.

o,·er the last six or seven years there has not been a greater threat hanging over the heads of the owners of land than GXists today. Prior to the war, the Brisbane City Council and certain Government departmentR had the right to resume laud for public purpose,,, but that right was not exercised to any extent, although in my opinion the resumptions that were made were always made in an unfair way. Today the resumption of land for public purposes is becoming extensive. Hardly a session passes when we do not have sewral Bills before us conferring powers on some department or some body else to acquire land for a particular purpose by compulsory resumption. Virtually every department of State is clothed with that power to resume private property, every local authority is clothed with the same power, and virtually every board that is created has had extended to it the power of acquisition. The Commonwealth Government also use their power of resumption in this State.

JUr. Walsh: It does not matter what the authority is so long as the resumption is in the public interest.

iUr. DECKER: The thing I am concerned about is the protection of property-owners.

Mr. Walsh: They can go to the Land Court.

Mr. DECKER: With the tremendous growth of acquisition, the only right the owner has is to appeal on the question of price, which he can do through the Land Court. Other than that he has no say in the matter whatever, no matter how he holds th<:J land.

II'Ir. Walsh: Under the Commonwealth lawf

II'Ir. DECKER: No, under the State law.

Mr. Walsh: That is not true. They are entitled to compensation for distmbancc or severance, apart from price.

JUr. DECKER: Who settles that? lUr. Walsh: The Land Court.

Mr. DECKER: I know this case backwards; the hon. gentleman is only splitting straws. I know that it is a touchy matter that has been simmering under the surface and has not been brought to light. I repeat: the only right a person has is that of appeal to the Land Court on the question of price. If the Government, a board or a local authority wants a particular piece of land, it sends out a scout. He comes back with a recommendation and if the department thinks it a good one it says, "We want Mr. 'vVo?d's propert{· Give him notice to sav that h1s property 1s required for a public purpose.'' If Mr. W oocl happens to be a Parliamentarian he has a little pull but unless he is a Parlia_m_entarian he has Buckley 's chance of avmdmg the acquisition. He would have no right of appeal because the very fact that. the land or property is wanted for a pl:bhc purpose rolls him of his freehold title to 1t. The only right he has is on the question of price and he can fight over . value in the Lan~ Court. That may be all nght when a block ls taken from son~eboc1y and another block from somebody else but the position today is that the State Housing Commission sends out. scouts all OYer Brisbane and they have theu eyes on all vacant blocl's in the Brisbane area. That Commission has the power to resume as much land as it likes for the building of homes ana has taken thousands of allotmen~s in the Greater Brisbane Area. Land 1s becoming scarcer every day and when the scouts rannot find vacant allotments they east their eves on farms and the commission has been t:iking farms for housing purposes.

It was only by a miracle that farmers at Petrie were not deprived of their farms. It took a lot of agitation on the part of the Iion. member for Murrumba to prevent those farms from being resumed for the purpose of housing.

II'Ir. Burrows: Was it a miracle that the hon. member for Murrumba was able to notice it~

II'Ir. DECKER: No, it was a miracle that the Minister listened to his appeal. In s_uch a time as this when we have under-productiOn, it is a terrible thing for the Housing Commission to resume farming areas for the purpose of building houses.

Mr. Dewar: It is short-sighted.

}Ir. DECKER: It is not only shortsighted, but is unfair and m;ju_st in the extreme. If the Housing Comm1sswn cannot find suitable land close to Brisbane, whv does it not go to areas outside the city~ Housing shoulrl be spread over the entire State. Some definite policy should be formulated. It should not be a haphazard rush to see how many houses can be built in the city area.

It is time that the people had some rights in this matter of being deprived of their lands by the Housing Commission. I remind hon. members of \Yhat has been done by the Railway Department. Can anybody tell me that if \Ye had a judicial tribunal that would


hear the case of an owner whose land the Railway Department desired to resume, it would have allowed the department to take over those excellent building sites at Virginia, Northgate and Boondall and use them for railway workshops? There are vacant lands only a little further out that are crying out fm some use. It is time some tribunal was set up to hear the cases of those people whose lands are resumed by Government departments. Any person who had a notice of resumption served on him could then appeal to that tribunal, and the department would be forced to disclose its real reason for wanting the land.

lUr. Walsh: That is already done.

lllr. DECKER: The only thing that the owner is told is that the land is wanted for public purposes. I appeal to the Government to set up a judicial tribunal-it could be called either a resumption appeal board or an acquisition appeal board-to which any person whose land was resumed for public purposes could appeal.

lllr. Walsh: Suppose you were going to resume land for a school and the tribunal said you could not, what would happen~

lUr. DECKER: You could not get it. There is a need for this appeal board. I do say that you would have very little trouble in resuming land if you were prepared to pay better for it. Just because you select a site for a new school, it does not follow that there is not an alternative site that would cause less trouble and less disturbance to others. People have rights and these rights could be brought before a tribunal that could decide between the rights of the Government on the one hand and the rights of the individual on the other. At the present time, all a person can do is to ask the court to settle the price argument for him and even then he is not always satisfied with the result.

I think my suggestion is a good one. The department is growing and growing and the need for land for public purposes is growing. We read in the paper the other day that the Forestry Department might have to resume land for forestry purposes. It is strange that in a State the size of Queensland, with all the land that is owned by the Crown, it should be necessary to resume land for forestry purposes.

Apart from that we have land that is resumed for soldier settlement and under the Act that governs the matter the resumption powers are terrific. As a matter of fact, there are very few people who hold land who will not soon need this protection. It was once thought that if a person owned land his home was his castle, but once the department sets eyes on his land for public purposes he is ''gone a million'' and the only rights he has is an appeal to the court on price.

}fr. Foley: That has happened in all the older countries. They have been reduced to very small estates.

Mr. DECKER: You cannot compare the older countries with the areas that we have

here in Queensland. In some of the older countries very little country is available. There must be some balance, and to keep this balance in check you must have two things. The first is an appeal board and the second is to give a better value and a value more comparable with real values to the people from whom you are taking the land.

lUr. Burrows: You can pass it on to the soldiers.

JUr. DECKER: It does not matter who is affected, you must put yourself in the place of the person who is dispossessed. If you have a property and the Crown takes it from you, you have to acquire another property. You have yom disturbance and you are entitled, in my opinion, to get the highest possible price that property would realise in the market, plus a very decent margin for distmbance too. It is your right and that is the least you should get. The Government take a man's property from him and give him no say in it at all. They should pay him well for it. My proposal would cause the Government to hesitate about taking a valuable property unless they actually needed it. It would compel them to pay the highest price it would bring on the open market plus an additional amount to compensate the owner for disturbance. It would give the owner a measure of protection. The land is being taken against his will and he should have just compensation for it. TJnder the present law that does not happen. The Government took the land in the "\V andoan district and then compelled the owner to fight them in the Land Court for a fair deal. Do you think that is right~

JUr. Power: They are allowed a retention area.

Mr. DECKER: That would be no use to a cattle man; he could not go farming. The hon. gentleman must understand the position. You cannot take a dairyman off, say, 2,500 acres and ask him to grow mixed crops.

}fr. Walsh: Is that not the history of farming settlement in this State-from grazing to farming~

Mr. DECKER: A man may work very hard on a property for 15 to 20 years and bring it to a. stage of high development, and then be deprived of it. The Crown grabs it and gives it to someone else. That is wrong.

}fr. Walsh: We should not have had the settlement in the Burnett if your pohcy had been carried out.

}fr. DECKER: You cannot err too much on thE' side of generosity when land is compulsorily resumed.

Mr. Burrows: They did not own the land at Wandoan; it was leasehold.

}fr. DECKER: The hon. member need not tell me that. Does he mean to say that the Crown would go to the holder of n perpetual lease and say to him, ''You are not the owner of the land. We are going to take it and give you as little compensatior as we like.'' (Time expired.)


1\Ir. 1\IARSDE~ (Ipswich) (5.27 p.m.): I congratulate the Acting Treasmer on his Budget and I congratulate the Acting Premier on his splendid work as Treasurer prior to his clcYation to the positiOn of Acting Premier consequent upon the unfortunate illness of the Premier. The Acting Premier has the full support of eyery member of the Govcmment party. In the past few vcars we haYe had the unfortunate spectacle of Premiers becoming ill and dying. Our pre';ent leader, the Hon. E. M. Hanlon, is ill in hospital at the present time and his portfolio is being worthily administered by the Acting Premier. He has received the praise (lf the majority of people of the E!tate.

I was amused last week to hear the hon. member, for Fassifern refer to a trivial matter. He complained that I had re~oeived a letter about the construction of a small bridge in his electorate. He took umbrage . .at that fact and complained that he Llid nut get his until two clays later. He got the letter all right but being too busy with his own personal affairs he forgot to send it to the local council and its contents did not appear in the local paper. I did not think that the hon. member read '' 'l'he Queensland Times'' because I recollect that not so many months ago a representative of tJ.,, Press ·sued him fOT defamation in relation to what he ha'l said, as published in that lo ~al paper. He got a verdict, too, but owing to a tc•ehnieality the appeal was upheld. Tl>c hon. member probably had more money than the reporter.

I\Ir. I\Iuller: Why did you receive the letter at all~

I\Ir. I\IARSDE~: The hon. member knows well that the offices of the Moreton Shire Council are situated in the centre of my electorate.

I\Ir. iUuUer: The Moreton shire is not in your electorate.

I\Ir. I\IARSDEN: The Moreton shire office is, and the men who work there live in Ipswich. If the hon. member cannot send his correspondence out, why blame me for it~ I receive letters from the Boonah Shire Council but I do not send them on. I want to know what is going on in my district, the same as the hon. member does. We represent the whole of the State and not one section.

Before my election to Parliament one of my duties when working for a legal firm was to visit country centres and I know that the dairy farmer has never been better off than he is today. I have seen the income-tax returns for dairy farmers, and I know what they are making-and good luck to them! I do not begrudge them a penny of what they get, because they are entitled to it.

I\Ir. Sparkes: Don't you think they earn it?

1\Ir. I\IARSDEN: Yes. What I am pleased about is the fact that whereas in the old days the king-pins were the bank manager and the produce merchants to whom the farmers were indebted, but now the farmers

can walk np the street without overdrafts hanging over their heads because they are free men.

An Opposition )!ember: Who do you think paid the dairy farmers then~

lUr. 1\IARSDEN: The workers. Some Opposition members referred to local

authoTities and said that the Government were not doing anything for them. I happen to know something about local-authority woTk, because I was with the Ipswich City Council foT seven years. The local authorities do not take advantage of the offers of subsidies made by this Government. I must say that the Ipswich City Council has taken full adYantage of the subsidy arrangement offered by the Government, and at the present time the only sewerage work of importance is being carried out at Ipswich. I refer to the East Ipswich sewerage scheme, which is being supervised by .Jack Mulholland, who is one of the most eminent engineers in Australia. In the next few weeks we expect that the :first chain will be pulled at East Ipswich. (Laughter.) At the present time 5,000 household installations are connected with the Ipswich Sewerage scheme, the householders being charged nothing for the installation cost. They pay a yearly rate of £6 a year, which includes a garbage service. I might mention that the garbage service is carried out by clay labour and we have absolutely no tTouble ~whatsoever with it.

For the last three years Labour aldermen have controlled the Ipswich City Council. As a Tesult of their wise administration it >vas not necessary for that authority to bring clown a supplementary budget when the Act was amended last vear to enable local authorities to do that. The general rate of Is. 6d. in the £1 >Yas not increased, and it will not be increased next year. For the benefit of those hon. members who do not know the position, I point ont that this Is. 6d. in the £I is made up in the following way:-

s. d. Debit balance from previous year 0 0!!; Street expenditure 0 5!!; Salaries 0 3:l: Street lighting 0 H Park maintenance and supervision 0 I:l: General charges; interest on

ove'rdra:ft; printing, ac1Yertising, stationery an cl stamps; legal expenses ancl telephone c.harges :

Fire brigade subsidy Aldermen's expenses (attending

meetings) and aldermen's telephone charges

\Vorkers' Compensation an cl payroll tax ..

Main Roads Commission (annual maintenance payment)

Tools ancl implements; quarry plant maintenance, and employment of night watchmen

Cutting grass on streets and cleaning concrete water channels

Health account expenc1iture Other items of expenditure

0 Ot 0 0~

0 Oi

0 I

0 0~

0 Oi

0 0~ 0 0~ 0 I

16


vVe ha\·e now a greater Ipswich scheme, and <luring the last three years the Labour aldermen have done an excellent job. I feel confident that they will be re-elected next year.

The other night the hon. member for Kurilpa criticised the Brisbane City Council, but one thing I can say in favour of the Brisbane City Council is that when the State Transport Act was brought into effect it took the opportunity of taking over the bus services of Brisbane. I was a member of the Ipswich City Council at that time, and that authority formed a select committee, to which I was appointed, and we proposed to the council that it should take over the buses in Ipswich. The council rejected the suggestion. Today four bus services are operating, three of them giving a service that could not be improved upon-they have new busses, give every attention to their passengers and run to timetable-but the other service is giving the worst service in the world. Unfor· tunately that service runs through my electorate. (Laughter.) If my wishes had been acceded to the whole of the bus services in Ipswich would have been taken over by the council. The council has this power under the State Transport Facilities Act, but it refused to exercise it then, and it is not much good now, when three of them are giving such a valuable and splendid service. We do not want to penalise people who are giving excellent services.

Mr. Lnckins: The fares are cheap.

lUr. lUARSDEN: The fares are all right. There is no complaint to be made about fares, my only complaint being that now and then the front wheel of our bus comes off. (Laughter.)

As State funds have been cut, so have the funds of the Ipswich City Council and the council's loan money has been eut G9 per cent., which means tnat only 41 per cent. of its loan programme can be carrier] out during the financial year. That is rEwealed in the report of the City Administrator, Mr. V. N. Smith, who states that of £530,506 sought by the council only £218,066 has been approved by the Australian Loan Cr.uncil. To the credit of the council it might be said that not one man has been dismissed from its employ.

Mr. Sparkes interjected.

The CHAIRMAN: Order!

Mr. MARSDEN: I appreciate the interjection made by the hon. member for A ubigny because I have a lot of time for him. You know where you stand with him, because he is either with you or against you. r have a recollection of him when I first came into this Assembly in 1949 when there was a disturbance in the lobby outside the Chamber and I must say of the hon. member for Aubigny that when the hon. member for Mt. Coot·tha was kicking the Minister in the belly down there-assaulting him-the hon. member for Aubigny said, ''Don't use the boot." (Laughter.)

One matter that has not received very much consideration from this Chamber is the work that is being done by the Department of Health and Home Affairs. Last year I had the opportunity of going to North Queensland, where I saw much of the work that is being done by that department. It is a department that receives very little publicity, and I must compliment the Minister on the good work he is doing. I visited the various hospitals in North Queensland. I visited also the Yarrabah Mission, which is controlled by the Church of England and is about 12 miles from Cairns. I went also to the Monamona Mission, and it behoves every member who has the opportunity to visit these places and see what is being done by the Department of Health and Home Affairs to help the natives of this State. The natives at Monamona Mission have their own cottages, which are supplied with electric light and water and are well furnished. They have also their own sawmill and their own stock, and they are very happy there.

JUr. Keyatta: They have their own farm.

Mr. lUARSDEN: They have their own farm, too. The cottages at Yarrabah were not as neat as those at Monamona.

We then paid a visit to Palm Island, where at a gathering in the school, the Rev. :Mr. Gribble, who is giving a wonderful service to the natives of this State, said that the Queensland Government were the only Government in Australia who were looking after the welfare of the natives of Australia.

We then went to Fantome Island, which is about 12 miles from Palm Island. There we found a hospital settlement for the treatment of natives who are suffering from Hansen's disease. It is on Fantome Island that the members of a French-Canadian order-the Franciscan Sisters of Mary-have devoted their lives to helping these people who are suffering from Hansen's disease or leprosy, as it is commonly called. They have a modern hospital equipped with a pedal wireless set and a very good pieture theatre. Many patients on the island are being cured by these very worthy people, but those who have been cured will not leave the island. They are quite happy to remain there.

I read with interest the report on the railways. We have in my electorate th<".· biggest workshops in Queensland. Over 3,000 men are employed there and they are doi11g an excellent job.

I have the assurance of the Minister for Transport that in the very near future Ipswich Railway Station will be built. I have seen the plans, and the station will be an acquisition to the State. I do trust that the Minister for Transport will give a kick to some of his officers there. (Laughter.) In Rockhampton tenders were called and no tenders were accepted. Why not transfer the activity to Ipswich~ At present there is only a single platform in operation at Ipswich. If we could get the plans put into effect immediately I feel that


in tll"o years lYe should haYe the station completed, as the foundations are all there, and t!Jere arc plenty of skilled workmen in Ips1Yich.

In Ips1Yich we have the only woollen mills in the State, producing the best material you can get. You cannot buy it here b~cause it all goes down South, and we have 1n buy southern stuff. The materials from our factories is of such good quality that they send it down South and the people thera pay extra for it.

.iUr, Sparkes: Like our beef.

~Ir. lUARSDEN: I paid 15s. 6d. for a skmny old roast the other day. (Laughter.) J\femb~rs m; the other side do not appreciate what IS bemg done by the workers in this State.

I\Ir. Low: Tell us about the shaking bridge across the Bremer.

_Mr. I\IARSDEN: That has been fixed. Drd the hon. member not notice in ''The · (,lueenslnnd Times" a photo of the last log being put in position W That was done by the help of the Railway Department. Private enterprise could not provide the timber and the Minister for Transport made it available so that the job could be finished.

lUr. DUFFICY (Warrego) (5.55 p.m.): I trust that the good humour displayed by hon. members will continue during my remarks. As a new member in the Chamber I feel, Mr. Farrell, that you will see that there is extended to me the courtesy of being heard without undue interruption. I shall endeavour to refrain from personalities but I shall be compelled to attack some of the statements made by hon. members opposite. ~y chief reason for taking part in the debate Is to correct some of those statements, and to present another phase of a subject that has been debated at some length.

During the whole of the speeches by hon. :nembers opposite, one section of the dairying mdustry was completely neglected by them. I refer to the employees in the industry. The statements by hon. members opposite that the employees in the darying industry are covered by an industrial award are completely untrue. Hon. members on this side know the f~cts, but for the information of the Opposi_twn I_ sho_uld like briefly to trace the ~ndustnal history, not only of the dairying mdustry, but of other rural inclustires in this State.

It is interesting to remember that the first Rural Workers' Award in Queensland was gazetted near the end of 1927. It was known a~ The Farm Workers' Award-State. It drd not remain in operatiolli very long because, as the people of Queensland have every reason to remember, the Moore Government assumed office on 11 May, 1929, and the award was declared inoperative by Order in Council on 23 May, 1929, only 12 days after they assnmed office.

The hon. member for Chermside questioned the advisability of industrial unions to supply funds for Labour campaigns. I

suggest that no better reason could be given than the one I have just given. Industrial unions realise that the only means whereby they can retain their industrial conditions is to keep the Labour Government in office. They know that during the brief period the Moore Government were in office, not only was the farm workers' award abolished 12 days after they assumed office but the station hands' award also was abolished; and that famous statement, that the Arbitration Court would be ringbarked, was made by a responsible Minister of that Government. Believe me, it was no idle boast; they put that threat into operation.

Two industrial awards were abolished by the Moore Government by order in council. This did not affect just a few people, but thousands. Surely the industrial unions are entitled to have regard to the welfare of their members who pay contributions~ What better method could be used to maintain their industrial rights, their awards and conditions, than to keep in office a Labour Government who have been responsible for the industrial legislation of this State~ If I may depart from my theme for a moment it is to say that the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act in Queensland is, in my opinion, the finest piece of industrial legislation in the world.

Government Ill embers: Hear, hear!

I\Ir. DUFFICY: I am speaking about something of which I claim to have knowledge. For 22 years I was an official of the largest industrial organisation in the Southern Hemisphere, and in that capacity I handled at least 200 awards. I have appeared in Industrial Courts all over Queensland, and I claim to know something of not only the State Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act but other Arbitration Acts in Australia. I know something also of the industrial legislation in other parts of the world because, as a union official, it was my duty to keep abreast of industrial affairs not only here but in other parts of the world. I pay full credit not only to this but to past Labour Governments who framed our Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act and I want to put it on record that in my opinion it is the finest piece of industrial legislation in the war Id.

Our Workers' Compensation Act compares more than favourably with similar Acts in any part of Australia. I admit that the New South Wales Act is comparable in many ways so far as benefits are concerned, but there is the difference-and this is very important to the worker-that in New South Wales the benefits payable are in the hands of an insurance company. Insurance companies, because of their almost limitless financial resources, can retain the eest legal brains in the Commonwealth for the purpose of defeating the 1vorkers, even those who have just claims under the Act. In Queensland, however, the Act is administered by the State Government Insurance Office and, because of that fact, is administered sympathetically. Because it is administered sympathetically,


claims that would be rejected without a moment's hesitation in other States are paid in Queensland. The union of which I was an official for 20 years has spent thousands of pounds in New South Wales and other States fighting insurance companies on behalf of its members with respect to compensation claims.

I have got slightly away from the theme I really wanted to develop, but I did think it was important to pay that tribute to the Queensland Labour Government for their recent and earlier industrial legislation. What I really started out to traverse was the industrial history of the dairying industry. Before doing that, and in case there should be any foolish interjections as to what I might know about it, I crave your indulgence for a moment, Mr. Farrell, to explain that I have had very practical experience of the dairying industry. My first job after leaving school at a fairly early age was on a dairy farm, and the impression that I gained from my first employer has remained constant so far as dairymen in general are concerned as employers. My first employer worked me from 14 to 16 hours a day for a shilling a day. It is a fact that I worked only 6! days a week, having half a day off on Sunday, when I worked only 8 hours. I repeat that I gained very practical experience of the dairying industry in my first job.

Before I was 21 I managed one of the largest dairy farms in the Burnett district, and I claim to know something about the dairying industry from the producers' point of view. As a union official I have visited cheese and butter factories from Rockhampton to Roma and I claim to know something about that end of the industry as well. Also, in my capacity as a union official I investigated the working conllitions of very many men on dairy farms and I know the conditions under which they 'York. I know also the exact elate when the a'Yard in that industry became operative; I know how it became operative and when it ceased to be operative.

I defy truthful contradiction on the statements I am about to make. In 1943 representatives of the dairying industry approached the then Labour Commonwealth Government with a request for an additional subsidy. The industry was already receiving a subsidy and wanted an ad(1itional subsidy, but that Government, very rightly, asked: whnt were the conditions of employment of the men in the industrv and how did it arrive at the wages facto"r in its cost of production~ There was no answer to that because no award was operating in the industrY. Under National Security (Industrinl Peace) Regulations, which were then in operation, the Minister for Labour and National Service had the right to refer any industrial matter to the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration for hearing and determination and before a subsidy was granted to the dairying industry the relevant Minister referred the question of an award-in other words the working conditions of employees in the industrv-to the CommonwE'alth court and the Commoinvealth court on 1 July, 1943, made

an award. I have a copy of that award. It was the first award that ever operated in the dairying industry in Australia. That award continued from 1 .July, 1943, until the National Security (Industrial Peace) Regulations were declared inoperative in 1948. When those regulations were declared inoperative this award ceased to operate, but, Mr. Farrell, a very interesting point is involved there. We heard hon. members opposite, during the course of a recent debate-in fact in reply to an interjection by me-say that I knew nothing about the dairying industry and I should not know if an award was in operation now. I want to demonstrate that I know something about the dairying industry from every angle, and particularly from the industrial angle. Hon. members opposite cannot tell me what award is in operation or what award is not in operation.

There is also this interesting point: although the regulations to which I have referred were declared inoperative in 1948, no action was taken to declare this award null and void. The producers' organisation, however, knmYs very well that it is inoperative, because our general secretary was notified that it had obtained the opinion of a King's Counsel on the matter to the effect that the award could not be legally enforced. IV" e, too, as an industrial union and a party concerned, obtained the opinion of Eric Miller, K.C., of Sydney, as to whether the rates and conditions of this award could be enforced, and his opinion coincided with that obtained hy the representatives of the dairying industry, that is, that it could not be enforced because the National Security Regulations under which it was made were then inoperath·c. It is an interesting fact, however, that representatives of the dairying industry stili advance the rates under this award as those that are being- paid, and as the rates that thev are legally compelled to pay, when they are" asldng for an increased price for their commoditY. That is the point I want to make. If this award was still in operation, the rate payable under it at ~he present time, allowing for the automatrc mcreases to accord with the cost-of-living figures, would be a minimum of £8 13s. a week and a maximum of £9 18s. a week, and after the next automatic adjustment, which will be made next month, tl~ose rates would be increased in the case of adult males bv a further £1 ls. a week. It is all right "for representatives of the dairying industry to say, ''This is our cost of production; this is the award under which we »·ork; this is the rate of wage that we must pay our employees; consequently, we nre entitled to this figure for our commodity,'' but the actual facts are that they are not paying those rates and that they cnnnot be compelled legally to pay them.

JUr. JUuller: How do you know they are not paying them~

lUr. DUFFICY: For 22 years I was an official of the Australian Workers' Union. I 'ms stationed in Oharleville and was in charge of the union's affairs in the whole of the South- West, and I can tell the h_on. member that I know they are not paymg them.


In the award that I have just quoted was a clause-and it is common to several awardsmHlcr YYhich the employee could enter into an agreement with his employer to 1vork for less than the award rate.

.liir. }fuller: You cite me one case of-

Illr. DUFF ICY: I can cite the hon. member a dozen.

I\Ir. I\Iuller: Cite me one.

.illr. DUFF ICY: All right. The hon. member has had his opportunity of speaking, so I should like him to permit me to have mine. I can bring hundreds of such cases from my office.

JUr. IliuUer: I do not want you to cite eases that happened 20 years ago. I want examples of any that are happening now.

lUr. DUFFICY: The award is inoperative now, so there is at present no need for any agreement. Surely the hon. member can understand that? Where is the necessity for any agreement Yvhen no award is in existence~ I am talking about the clays when an award was in existence.

There was a provision in that award, and EO that there will be no misunderstanding I will read it- '

''Notwithstanding anything elsewhere proYided or prescribed in this award any old or infirm or slow worker may be' paid a lower rate than that prescribed by this award, to be fixed by agreement in writing between the worker and his employer and to be signed by each of them not later' than one week after the commencement of the employment of the worker at such agreed rate.''

That. clause is .not found only in this award, for mstance, m the Station Hands A ward there is a similar clause, and in south-western Queensland-the area under my jurisdiction when I was district secretary in Charlevillethere YYere far more graziers than there were dair:y farmers, but that clause was invoked by grazwrs not more than three or four times during the years I was district secretary there, but I would say YYithout hesitation that the dairy farmers in that area-a number not less than 200 or 300-took advantage of that clause.

Hon. members opposite might say that after all it was an agreement and that the employee must have agreed to it, otherwise he would not have signed the agreement. In reply to that, I would say that the bank manager who handed over the cash to Ned Kelly y;as also a party to the agreement, the only difference being that Ned Kelly held the revolver. The same thing applies exactly in the case of any agreement between the employer and the employee.

lUr. lUuller: Are you likening the dairy farmer to Ned Kelly~ It is what you would expect from that side of the Chamber.

lUr. DUFFICY: I would expect the hon. member to be able to take it, because he loves to give it, and surely he can take facts. If he can attack any of the facts that I have stated here tonight, I am willing to apologise. When he knOIYS me better in this Chamber he will realise that I never make statements that I am unable to stand up to, and when I am speaking on this subject I am speaking on something of which I have had practical experience during the whole of the time this award was in operation, and I say that when the rates that would be provided under this award-were it in operation-are now advanced by the dairying interests as the wages cost in the cost of pr.oduetion, t~1ey are asking for an increased pnce for their commodity under false pretences, because they are not paying those wages.

JUr. Sparkes: You are a bit "crooked" on the dairying interests.

lUr. DUFFICY: I am not "crooked" on them but unlike the hon. member for Aubigny, I believe in being fair, and I do not believe in making misstatements for the purp?se of obtaining political benefit. Let us stick to facts. Let us be able to face the facts. I know this industry from both the industrial angle and the practical angle and my facts cannot be truthfully denied.

Let me leave the dairymen for the time being and go a little farther west; after all, I am more interested in the outlying parts of the State. Let us have a look at the wool-growers. I assume that hon. members opposite should be, if they are :r;ot, at least a little interested in the wool-growmg industry, and in view gf that fact I am absolutely amazed that during the course of this debate the hon. member for Roma, for instance, did not have some condemnation for the Federal Budget. He seems to be completely out of step with the United Graziers' Association; of course that would not be tlie first time.

.illr. Ewan: Of course it would not be.

lUr. DUFFICY: He was out of step with that organisation once before but he is completely out of step with it now.

lUr. Sparkes: You would not say that you were in step with it.

lUr. DUFF ICY: After all, I am not a wool-grower but I shall try to prove that at least I am more in step with the wool-growers than hon. members opposite are. I wonder if hon. members read ''The Brisbane Telegraph'' of Monday, 22 October. The heading is very interesting, for it says-

'' Pay 22s. in £1 under Budget, says U.G.A. President.''

That is very interesting. Then there is quite a lengthy statement but most of the meat, I think, is in the concluding paragraph-

'' I feel \Ye must spend the next 12 months fighting this Budget and 'press very strenuously for the return of the averaging system.''


It went on to say-'' Protests have already been lodged by

the Queensland Country Party .... '' That is interesting. It continues-

'' ... and it is up to it and graziers to register individual and collective protests against this legislation.''

lUr. Burrows: Who said that?

.l\Ir. DUFFICY: The president of the United Graziers' Association, Mr. Gunn. I know Mr. Gunn fairly well. I had the privilege of meeting him on numerous occasions; as an executive member of the A.W.U. I had occasion to meet him as an executive member of the United Graziers' Association. I found him to be a perfectly honourable gentleman, level-headed and one who had the best interests of the wool graziers at heart. That statement, coming from a man snch as he, must be g~ven some weight. It is amazing that in this Chamber hon. members of the Country Party have had nothing but praise for the Federal Budget. I have not heard one word of condemnation, even from the hon. member for Roma or the hon. member for Condamine, who have at least a little wool in their electorates. So far as the balance of hon. members opposite are concerned, I do not. think they know very much about the wool mdustry, and I am inclined to think that they care less. As for the hon. member for Roma, I think he would ha.ve been consistent if he had registered in t~Is Chamber the protest that his organisahon has stated that the Countrv Party in Queensland have registered. It is an arnazin thing. I wonder whether the reason is t~1at the Country Party is under the domination of the Liberal Party in this ParliamenH

Jir. Ewan: Did Gunn say the Country P:nty had protested~

}fr. DUFFICY: I realise that the hon. member is very slow on the uptake, so I will be generous enough to read the quotation a second time.

I fjuote-' 'Protests have aireadv been lodgecl by

the Queensland Country· Party.'' ·· Coulc1 anything be clearer than that? It is amazing that nothing but praise for the Fecleral Budget has emanated from hon. members of the Country Party in this Chrtm ber. Can it be that thov tell one story here rtnd another story wheil they get Ollt nmong the wool-growers in their electorates? At least I try to be just n little consistent. I srtid during the Address in Reply debate that I thought the tnxation of the woolgrowers was unfair and it was a form of trtxation not imposed on anv other section of the community. I am also consistent when I say that the present form of taxation under the recent Budget is equally if not more unfrtir; so nobody cnn charge me with being inconsistent. However, I am not holding a bTief for the wool-grower; I am holding a brief for \Vestern Queensland.

Oo.-ermnent ::liembers: Hear, hear!

Jrr. DUFFICY: Anybody who knows RJiything rtbout ·western Queensland realises

that the whole of the economy of that paTt of the State is bound up in the wool industry. It is not a question only of the wool-grower. I know he is prosperous; I know the industry is prosperous; but I know this too; any nction that i& detrimental to the wool-grower has a detrimental effect also on every pastoral worker in Western Queensland, every business man, and every person who lives in the area. You cannot injure an industry such as the wool industry without injuring the whole of the economy of Western Queensland.

It is important to remember that the policy of this Government has always been one of decentralisation. We cannot hope to encournge decentralisation if the Federal Government cripple the only industry that will maintain a population in WesteTn Queensland. I do not want anyone to gain the impression that I am holding a bTief just for the wool-grower; I am holding a brief for IV estern Queensland and every person who lives in it.

To expand that argument a little; let me say that I think something should be done to arrest the drift to the city and the decline in population that is taking place in the outlying parts of the State. One means of accomplishing this is to embrtrk upon an extensive housing project in the \Vest. I realise that the Go1·ernment ai1d the Minister concerned appreciate that fact, nnd I want to place on recoTd that I have received every help and sympathy from the Secretary for Public Works, Housing, and. Local Government. But I believe that possibly gTeater efforts could be made to establish an extensive housing project in the outlying parts of the State because, with the acute housing position throughout Queensland, it is inevitable that a drift of population must occur to those places where housing accommodation is provided. If we embark upon an extensive housing project in the metropolitan area, or close thereto, we are merely helping the drift fTom the country to the metropolitan area, whereas if we reverse that process and embaTk upon an extensive housing project in ·western Queensland and other outlying centTes, the drift of population will be to \Yhero the housing is avrtilable. As our policy is one of decentralisation, I think it is high time that serious consideration was given to that suggestion.

Before concluding, I want to mention a matter that has been discussed by hon. members opposite almost continuously during the short peTiod I have been a member of this Assembly. I refer to the question of Socialism and Communism. It is rather hackneyed, but I think it might be oppoT-

. tune for me to say a few words about it. It is an amazing thing that the catch-cries

and slogans of the Opposition have not changed over the past 40 years. That is probably why hon. members are still in Opposition. I was reading through some old newspaper files recently and in one newspaper I saw a cartoon of Andrew Fisher astride a tiger. Underneath that cartoon was printed-

'' An drew Fisher rides the Socialist Tiger.''


That was in 1910. He was riding the Socialist tiger then, and the article accompanying that cartoon made me think that I was listening to a speech by either the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha or the hon. member for Chermside. Their policy has not changed at all, and it goes to show how bankrupt of ideas the Opposition are. They are endeavouring to apply a bullock-dray policy to a jet-plane age; they have not changed at all. The only little variation they have brought into the question is Communism, and that so far as the Opposition are concerned is a comparatively recent innovation. For 22 years I was fighting Communism when hon. members opposite were hand-in-glove with them in the hope of defeating the Labour Party.

GoYernment ~I embers: Hear, hear!

lUr. DUFFICY: In every position I have occupied in the Labour Movement, from organiser to district secretary, executive member, delegate to Federal conventions, and in every position I have officially occupied, and even in the recent by-election in which I was successful, I was opposed by a Communist. I expected I should be because for 22 years I have been consistently fighting their philosophy and fighting the spread of Communism in this State. It is a remarkable thing that hon. members of this Committee who speak violently against Communism are extremely silent when they are on the public platform even when their own candidates are opposed by Communists. Prominent members of the Opposition, including the Leader of the Opposition and the hon. member for Roma and also prominent members of the Country Part:-· in the Federal Sphere, took part in the Warrego by-election and not one single v;ord "·as uttered by them against the Communist who was also a candic1ate in the byelection. The whole of their venom was concentrated on the Labour PaTty. If they are so sincere in their opposition to Communism, \Yhy not voice their opinions in the place where the public can really hear them and not in this Chamber, which is more or less a coward's castle?

lUr. -:!I orris: Don't forget the last referendum.

1\Ir. DUFFICY: I do not forget it, nor do I forget my years of fighting Communists as an official of the A.IY.U., nor do I forget the fact that the moment I was elected to this Assemblv I was branded bv hon. members opposite' as n Communist. i am entitled to resent that because I state again thnt I was fi_g·hting Communism when hon. members opposite were hand-in-glove with them, hoping that they would defeat the Labour Party.

3Ir. Sparkes: \Vho paid the Communists' fiines in Queensland¥

3Ir. DUFFICY: The hon. member has more money than I.

In conclusion, I want to say that I have been accused of many things in my time, I ha Ye heen subjected to accusations on the inclustrinl field, subjected to vilification and

abuse by most of the leading ~ommunists in Austrnlia-and I say that advisedly-and I place in the same category as those lea?i.ng Communists hon. members of the Opposition who nbuse me now and try to ally me with the Communist Party of Australia.

Hon. E. J. WALSH (Bundaberg-Acting Treasurer) ( 8 p.m.), in reply: Since the Financial Statement was presented some three weeks ago there has been much discussion, and hon. 'members on the other side have traversed the universe-they have dealt with such places as Korea, Britain, Abyssinia and Italy-all because they could not find an_Y fault with the Budget as presented to this Chamber on behalf of the Labour Government.

It is a tribute to the Government that the Leader of the Opposition took upon himself the responsibility of handing over to the hon. member for Coorparoo the task of initiaiing the debate on behalf of the Opposition. I say it is a tribute, because we have had previous experiences of efforts by the hon. member for Coorparoo to analyse Financial Statements, and the hopeless muddle and mess that he has made of his deliberations.

Opposition 1\Iembers: That is not right.

Jir. W ALSH: I tl::link hon. members opposite will remember his attempts. He came in here with a flare of trumpets, as one who stood very high in the field of accountancy. I do not want to take that reputation from him, but I will say for the hon. member for Toowong, who is equally well versed in the field of accountancy, if not better, that he at least had sense enough not to attempt to deal with public finance in the same way as ordinary finance might be dealt with by private accountants.

I do not know what \Yas in the mind of the Leader of the Opposition in doing what he did, lmt I know all the intrigue that is going on \Vithin his party in an endeavour to undermine him. The history of the Liberal Party in the Federal sphere shows that exactly the same tactics are being adopted there in relation to the Country Party.

)Ir. Sparkes interjected.

3Ir. WALSH: The member for Aubigny knows as well as I that an attempt is being made-and it is meeting with some successto push the Country Party right out, and it would appear that the Leader of the Opposition is intelligent enough to realise that the same intrigue is going on in this State. It may haYe been a mnsterstroke of strategy on the part of the Leader of the Opposition, knmYing that he could not himself successfully nttnck the Budget, to put up the hon. member for Coorparoo as his dummy. \Ve all know the hopeless mess that the hon. member for Coorpm·oo mnde in attempting to prese~t what he hoped might be a clear analys1s of the budget.

The Leader of the Opposition made exactly the same mistake as his ex-leader, Mr. A. E. Moore, made in 1933 and 1934, when he put up a man who is also accepted as being well versed in the field of accountancy, the


present Federal Treasurer, to lead the debate on the Budget. I well remember the Aunt Sallies that were put up by Mr. Fadden, as he then was, on those occasions, and how very effectively they were dislodged by the then Treasurer, Hon. IV. Forgan Smith. In his attempt to make out a case, Mr. Fadden got railway charges and various other charges hopelessly mixed up with taxation, with the result that he found himself millions of pounds out in his calculation of the amount of taxation per head of population. From there on he was never of any more effect in this Parliament so far as his contribution to financial matters were concerned. One would imagine-and I am giving the Leader of the Opposition some credit for this-that if it was a decision that was made bv himself disregarding the intrigue of members of hi~ own party, it was an attempt to push the Liberal Leader ahead.

Opposition interjections.

It is obvious that I am putting my finger on the spot-you see so much of it-but I would say tn the Leader of the Opposition that he did attempt to apply his mind intelligently to the Financial Statement, something that cannot be said of the contribution of the hon. member for Coorparoo.

As I said before, if there was any fault to be found in the Budget the hon. member for Toowong would be one of the members in this House who could have pointed it out but he refrained, for the plain reason that th~ Budget !1as been so planned and so prepared that it IS. :>cknowledged, even by the Opposition cnhcs, to be one that is in the interests of the State generally. That is confirmed from the very fact that the Acting Premier, when he represented Queensland at the Loan Counc~l and the Premiers' Conference, presented h1s case so well before those bodies that it resulted in Queensland's getting such a crood {leal, and it was commented upon favour~bly by no less a person that Sir Arthur Fadden and the Commonwealth Co-ordinator-General Df Public Works.

I am placed in the position tonight, strangely enough, of not having to reply to any criticism that has been made by the members of the Opposition of the Financial Statement because in the past three weeks they have merely engaged in a good deal of Federal propaganda. It can be said in the main that the bulk of the contributions from the Opposition, apart from those >Yho have !\one to Korea, Asia and China, could not be m any way related to the financial business of this Parliament. It could be said that the bulk of the contributions from the Opposition Lave been nn apology for the Budget presented by Sir Arthur Faddcn on 26 September. They know it themselves, because one after .another they have got up-with few {'xceptrons-:Uld have concentrated on the Federal Budget, attempting to justify the Budget that has been brought dom1 by Sir .Artlmr Fntlden, which has been described bv some of their own supporters nnd the antiJ,abour Press as being disastrous. You have heard the remarks that have been quoted by

the hon. member for Warrego, and I can realise how it got under the skin of the hon. member for Aubigny when he heard the hon. member for vVarrego get up and, draw attention to the fact that the Country Party have submitted a protest against that Budget. We know that in the Federal Party itself there have been Country Party members-and if we nccept Press reports as being correct, tlwy include no less a person than Senator E. B. Maher-who have had unfavourable comments to make about it. So I can understand the propaganda that has been engaged in over the past few weeks in an attempt to justify a Budget which, when the truth is known-and it will be known-will result in the defeat of the present Menzies-Fadden Government.

JUr. Sparkes: More wishful thinking.

Mr. WALSH: If I might make a few remarks in regard to the criticism of the hon. member for Coorparoo, I would remind hon. members that he mentioned something a bout trust funds. He attempted to show that there had been certain transfers from one trust fund to another. As one who is versed in accountancy and finance, I do not see that he should take any very serious objection to a continuation of a policy that has been pursued in this State over the years by all Governments, irrespective of their political colour. It is true' that there are a number of trust funds in this State and Queensland probably is the only State. that reveals the public finances on a sectional basis by means of trust funds, so that the members here and the people generally know where their finances are coming from and to which funds they are debited or credited. The whole of the trust funds are banked in the one account, but if one trust fund is in debit and the other substantially in credit it does not mean that we are going to close down the administrative activities governed bv the trust fund that is in debit. That is all that happens but why make a song about it~

The hon. member for Murrumba. got up and following the remarks of the hon. member for Coorparoo he misquoted when he referred to a sum of £5,000 as being transferred from a certain trust fund to the Stock Diseases Fund. No such sum was transferred to the Stock Diseases Fund. That just shows how hon. members will misquote. Their remarks go into '' Hansard,'' into the Parliamentary reports, and are accepted as being truthful if there is no contradiction of them. I cannot be expected, in the one and a half hours to >Yhich I am limited in reply, to ans>Yer all the misstatements that have been made bv the numerous members who have spoken in" this debate. I shoulcl say that it is a rather unfair limitntion 1Yhcn you remember that there are /5 hon. members in the Chamber and 74 have the right to speak for an hour each, >Yhile I as Acting Treasurer am limited to H hours in which to reply. If the hon . member for Murrumha will look at the Financial Statement he will find that that particular amount was credited to the Dairy


Cattle Improvement Fund, and not to the i:itock Diseases l<'und. I have to make that correction.

iUr. Nicllolson: You will see that I said the Dairy Industry Fund.

3Ir. W ALSH: The hon. member said the Stock Diseases Fund. A Treasury Officer took a note of his remark and I noted it myself.

The Leader of the Opposition set up numerous Aunt Sallies and sustained them to his own satisfaction even though they were not in accordance with fact and can be completely refuted by official figures. He then proceeded to say that Queensland had got a satisfactory deal from the Commomvealth Government in the tax reimbursement payments. If he had wanted to be fair he could have presented a case fairly by telling the whole story. I do not propose to tell part of the story; I shall tell the whole story because it is so good from the Labour Party's viewpoint, because as I shall definitely show, Queensland has not got a good deal from the Menzies-Fadden Government. \Ve are entitled to ask where all this extra taxation and other revenue are going to. Queensland is not getting it. In ,,-hich direction is it being spent and ,,-ho is getting the benefit of it? I intend to explode the remarks of the hon. member for Coorparoo and as I go along I shall place on record some figures that I know will be infonnatiYe and valuable to hon. members as time goes on.

If there is anything to be said so far as the l<'ederal Budget is concerned, the best Huthoritics I can quote are those that support the Opposition. I direct the attention of hon. members to an editoral appearing in ''The Sydney Morning Herald'' of Friday, 28 September. It is headed "Bad Error should be retraced,'' Hnd after referring to Sir Douglas Copland and implying that he was probably a party to the preparation of the Budget, it goes on to say-

'' Common sense knows better. The Budget is the offspring of an unholy alliance between an improvident Government and a set of self-opinionated bureaucratic planners, and the result is not only thoroughly unsound economies, but an immense political blunder. The Government, admittedly, has had tremendous economic problems to face; but in its 21 months of office it has done little but Hllow them to grow larger. High-sounding talk of defence has ignored the fact that the problem, as WHS shown during the last war, is not to find money, but to get it spent. How will industry be assisted to gear for rearnulment by a staggering Government expenditure of £1,000,000,000, of which probably not more than 12 or 15 per cent. ,_-ill be spent on defence at all.''

That paper has never supported Labour. I clmw the attention of hon. members, particulaT!y the hon: members for Mt. Coot-tha and Landsborough, to the fact that here is a paper that says tlwt of £1,000,000,000 revenue approximately 12 to 15 per cent. only is going to be spent on defence. So much for

the bogy that this Federal Budget is ir:tended to strengthen our defence and eqmp our forces already engaged in Korea. I quote from another authority, ''The Sunday Herald,'' another paper that has always supported anti-Labour parties. Under the heading, ''Budget depresses Government Members, Elates Labour,'' it says-

'' Parliament reassembled on Wednesday with an elated Labour Opposition and greatly deflated Government benches. It adjourned for the week-end on Thursday with Labour more elated than ever and the Government supporters stunned and bewildered by the severity of the Budget and fearful of the effect it would have on their electorates.''

That is the truth of it. Every hon. member knows it is true and that is why, one after the other members of the Opposition got up to speak on the Financial Statement and confinet1 themselves almost to an apology for the Budget presented by Sir Arthur Fadden.

I go further. I have here a publication that is accepted as an authority in the financial world; I refer to the ''Australian Financial Re,-iew," a "Sydney Morning Herald" publication dated 27 September, 1951. Under the heading, '' Fadden 's disastrous Budget for 1951-52,'' it says-

'' No more disastrous series of financial proposals can ever have been presented to Parliament than the Budget for 1951-52.

''With the economy delicately poised between inflation and deflation, Sir Arthur Fadden has chosen to wield the whip of higher taxation in all directions.

''The purpose of budgeting for a surplus-named at £114! million, but, in fact, anything up to £250 million when all the figures are set in place, is camouflHgea at the beginning of Sir Arthur 's speech but bluntly admitted at the end of it.''

Those stHtements emanate from men who hm·c studied financial matters very carefully and very serieusly over the years. As you piek up each publication of any authoritati.-e standing you find some condemnation of the Federal Budget.

I should like no,,- to quote from a local publication. I notice the following in ''The :\In c ka v Dailv Mercury" of }'rida v 12 October -all<]· this ls anoth~r paper that certainly ll:1s never supported the Labour Party and has ne;-er elaimccl to have done so-

"Poor Crop, Budget Hits City Trade.

'' See 'lean ' Christmas. '• Because of the district's poor crushing

:-'e:tson and the 'deadening' effect of the Budget on trHtle, Mackay business men Jn·ctl!ct the 'leanest' Christmas since the C'ncl of the 'mr.

''Some business men-particularly those selling luxmy goods-think their takings cJuld fall by at least 33!! per cent. on those of last year.

'' ~\. >Yi(1l' suney yesterday indicated the rcconl Christmas expenditures of the last t ,yo years could drop Hlarmingly.''

990 Supply. [ASSE:;\1BLY.] Supply.

Take another publication, one that comes nn:clt nearer my a>Yn electorate of BundaLcrg. This appears in ''The Bundaberg K 8\YS-J\Iail" of Tuesday 2 October-

'' Taxing for War Not True Way to Peace.''

That statement is credited to Canon Richards, <1 man who is Yery highly esteemed in BuniblJerg. He took it upon himself to deal •1"ith this Budget from the pulpit. The report of ''hat he said is somewhat abridged, but, amongst other things, he had this to say-

'' The Budget is bringing home to us the fact that if we must have wars we must pay for them. I am told that some people are making money out of war prcIJarations, such as proiits on the manufacture of armaments and interest on war loans. To make money out of the slaughter of human beings is horrible, sordid and certainly un-Christian. The Budget could be considerably reduced if people refused to make money out of war or war preparations. A portion of the taxes we have to pay goes to those who invest in war.

''If it is good enough for some people to giYc their lives in war, it should be good enough for others to give their money, or at least to lend it free of interest.''

I am sure there are thousands upon thousands of people who will agree with Rev. Canon Richards.

lUr. Nicklin: You would not take that ns condemnation of the Federal Budget.

lU:r. W ALSH: I have read only part of it. If the hon. gentleman wants to read it I haYe given him the date and name of the publication. I have taken out that part because it deiinitely indicates that there is a feeling that the present Commonwealth Government are playing up to the monopoly interests, the banking and manufacturing interests of this country, and it will not be long before the people of this country, the young people in particular, regret the clecision they made last April to return the Menzies Government to power. I propose to back each of the statements I make tonight with some authority.

lllr. Sparkes: That is a good one.

lUr. W ALSH: That is a very good one, and I hope the hon. member will try and follow the ideas announced to his congregation by the Rev. Canon Richards and give some thousands of his wealth to the Commomvealth free of interest. I hope the Leader of the Opposition will pTevail upon manv of the wealthv men on that side of the 'committee to fo'Ilow the idea of Canon RichaTcls and give money to the Commonwealth free of interest to prepare for war.

JUr. Sparkes: You put your salary in :a no I will put mine.

lUr. W ALSH: If the hon. member will put his thousands of bullocks in, I am prepaTecl to make a comparable contribution.

The hon. member for Chermside quoted something this morning in connection with taxation and proceeded to make reference to

the right and necessity for the working-man to have a motor-car. The working-man has been able to buy a motor-car only becausP and only when Labour Governments have been in power. If it were not for the fact that Labour Governments made it possible for the ·vwrking-man to have the purchasing power, he would not have a motor-car, but we shall reach the stage, bit by bit, when the workers will have to sell their cars to meet their commitments in providing for the welfare of their families.

I quote as my authority a publication issued bv J. B. Were & Sons-well-known to many 'hon. members opposite in their iinancial dealings-which says:-

"Price pegging by the States is also becoming more severe, and it is evident that the Commonwealth Government's policy of credit restriction is already having reflections in a number of directions. Only a few days ago the Master Builders' Association and the Co-operative Building Societies of New South Wales were most critical of the contraction of funds available for home building iinance. It was then stated that during the past two months the Cooperative Building Societies had to refuse more than 3,000 applications for membership, and that the limitation of the rate which the Building Societies could pay for loans to 3;} per cent. had resulted in drying up the supplies of loan funds at the source. Further supporting evidence of the trend towards tighter credit conditions is supplied by the announcement that one large motor iinance house in Queensland has already notiiied its customers that further iinance for used car purchases will not be available. It has also been disclosed that in several States, deposits on such vehicles 'have been increased to 50 per cent., and the period for the repayment of balances shortened. ''

The extension of that policy will bring a bout considerable unemployment in this country, anc1 whilst we have the spectacle of the Leader of the Opposition and those sitting behind him arg·uing that there should be increased production so as to halt inflation in this country the fact remains that if effect is given 'to the policy of the Menzies-Fadc1en Government, it 'Yill reduce production.

I have a practical example of that. Up in my own electorate, on the occasion of my last visit, I found that not one farmer but a number of farmers who had contracted with local iirms to buv tractors in the belief that they were able to get the necessary iinancial accommodation from the local banks, founrl ,,.hen thev went to the banks that overdrafts hac1 been curtailed and they subsequently went along ancl cancelled the orders they had placed. Does not that indicate clearlv that to the extent that you are going' to limit the farmer in the mechanisntion of his farm, there is no possible chanc0 of his increasing production P Whilst that position applies to some extent in the Bunclaberg area, it applies also all over this State and all over Anstrali::t. As the result of the substantial increase in the rate of interest by the Commonwealth authorities and the private


banks. less money will be available to the farme'rs to deYelop their properties and to buy the necessary machinery, and consequently there will be less production. The Leader of the Opposition cannot argue against that. I am sure, too, that the hon. member for Aubigny agrees that that is correct.

~Ir. Jlluller: Give us figures to prove your case.

Jllr. W ALSH: The hon. member wants figures. I can talk from bitter experience. I had to pay 8 per cent. when I was struggling. I will give the hon. member figures to prove my case.

Jlir. Sparkes: Why did you not go to the Agricultural Bank~

lUr. W ALSH: Of course I went to the Agricultural Bank, and I remained with it till I paid my farm off.

lUr. Sparkes: Did they charge you 8 per cent.?

IIIr. WALSH: No, they charged me 2 per cent. less than the other person from whom I borrowed. There is this difference, too, in borrowing from the Agricultural Bank: any advance that is made by a private bank to a farmer is made on the terms that it is repayable on demand, whereas the repayments of Agricultural Bank advances are spread over 30 and 40 years.

The hon. member for Sherwood made some reference to this matter, and when I interjected to the effect that the Commonwealth Government had increased interest rates he disregarded the factual position and proceeded to say that the Agricultural Bank was taking the producers down.

lUr. Kerr: Nothing of the kind!

Il[r. W ALSH: The hon. member, in reply to me, suggested that the Agricultural Bank would take the farmers down.

lUr. Kerr: The point that I made was that there was no necessity for the Agricultural Bank to increase the rate of interest on loans that had already been made at a lower rate of interest.

lUr. W ALSH: We will take the hon. member at his word. It never has been the practice of the Agricultural Bank to do as the hon. member suggests. As a matter of fact, when the private banks were charging 4-l; per cent.-I am speaking now of recent ypars-and the Commonwealth Bank was ~harging 4t per cent. on advances other than those on farms and pastoral properties, the highest rate being charged by the Agricultural Bank was 4 per cent. Even when the Agricultural Bank was paying an interest rate of £3 15s. per cent. for loan money, it was still charging its borrowers only £3 12s.

1951-2!

per cent. The hon. member shonld not attempt to convey the impression that the Agricultural Bank would increase its rate of interest simply because the current rate of banks generally was being increased.

l\Ir. Kerr: That is a totally incorrect presentation of what I said.

Jllr. WALSH: What the hon. member did was to attempt to put out a bit of propaganda and to convey the impression that the Agricultural Bank would increase its rate of interest because--

.iUr. KERR: I rise to a point of order. I will not be misrepresented. The report of my speech in '' Hansard'' shows quite clearly that my contention was that there was no basis for any increase in the rate of interest charged to borrowers from the Agricultural Bank because the Government had borrowed that :Uoney under the old rates. I deny the statement of the Acting Treasurer.

Mr. WALSH: It appears to me that the hon. member for Sherwood has deliberately stood np and made another speech in order to get into '' Hansard'' the previous statement that he made. In effect, all that he has done has been to prove that what I said of him was correct. There can be no contesting the fact that if hon. members over there are honest with themselves and their constituents they must agree that the increased rate of interest to the producers is going to have a retarding effect on production. You cannot come into this Chamber and argne that by increasing the rate of interest you are going to increase production.

Another thing the people of this country want to know is why, if millions of pounds could be made available in war-time at low rates of interest under a Labour Government, they cannot be made available. for the development of this country d urmg peacetime at as low or a lower rate~ Why don't we have a bit of agitation on that point~

Jlir. Muller interjected.

Jlir. WALSH: The hon. member, and others oitting on the other side has done more to cncoumge the growth of Communism th~n any Labour member has done. I have sa1d to the hon. member that he is not going to drag me into a discussion. tonight but. I will remind him that Church1ll entered mto a pact with Stalin, which can never be .said .of a Labour Government. I will also remmd hm1 that Mr. Menzies and prominent members of his Cabinet attended a cocktail party with the Russian Ambassador Lifanov in Canberra. You neyer saw any photograph of Labour Ministers attending the cocktail party· (Opposition interjections.)

The CHAIRlUAN: Order!


tUr. W ALSH: I know that the Leader of' the Opposition, seeing how active he is amongst branches of the Returned Soldiers League, cannot appreciate that after the Menzies Government gave that recognition to the Russian Ambassador, while our soldiers were in Korea-do nDt forget that-when Anzac Day came along 18 of the countries that were represented in Canberra placed a wreath on the Shrine of Remembrance, but the Russian Ambassador-the man to whom they paid recognition-was absent. But hon. members opposite are taking up too much of my valuable time. (Opposition interjections.)

The CHAIRlUAN: If members will not obey my call to order I shall have to deal with them. Mr. Speaker has laid down a general principle that cross-fire across the Chamber while membeTS are speaking is improper, and I hope the Committee will give the Acting Treasurer an opportunity to make a speech without interruption.

Jir. W AL,SH: I am sure that the hon. member for Fassifern will be quiet for the rest of tl•e evening so far as Communism is concerned. Just let him explain away those ]'lOints I have put to him!

The hon. member for Southport referred to a statement made by Mr. Betts, the secretary of the Queensland Taxpayers' Association. Here is another example of quotation of figures by somebody you might expect to be an nuthority, but our history here as a Labour Pnrty has been that on any occasion when this body has sought in any way to distort figures it has had no regard for the authenticity of its statements. The hon. member for Southport quoted that Mr. Betts said that since uniform taxation began in 1942-43 Queensland taxpayers had paid 11.1 per cent. of it. He then said that of the total Commonwealth income tax Queensland had received 17 per cent. of the reimbursements to the States and that this year Queensland had received 16~ per cent. of the reimbursements and there was no reason why the ratio of payment would be changed. He ac1dec1 that taxation had doubled since 1946 and the reimbursements to the State had also doubled. That is the statement referred to by the hon. member for SouthpOTt. The actnal position is that Mr. Betts aniveu at the 11.1 per cent. of income tax paid by Queensland by not taking into consideration the taxation paid by Queensland at the central or some other taxation office and his figures are quite unsound. Queensland income tax paid in Victoria, South Australia or else\Yhere is not taken into calculation but that figure is presented to the community as being the correct one. It is misleading. It indicated that >Yhereas Queensland pays only 11.1 per cent. of the income tax, she received 11 per cent. in return. Furthermore, the totnl receiHd by <e!ueensland under the nnifonu-tax scheme up to 30 June last was 16.48 per cent. of the total, not 17 per cent. and the amount receh-ed last year >Yas 15.8

per cent. of the total, not 16.5 per cent. as Mr. Betts asserted. That is another bogy exploded.

lUr. Sparkes: When do you come to your own vote~

JUr. WALSH: The hon. member for Aubigny kno>YS that in the early part of my remarks I said that there having been no criticism from the Opposition of the Financial Statement presented by me on behalf of the Government, there was nothing for me to reply to. I am now contradicting the false propaganda that has been placed in the pnges of '' Hansarc1'' in connection with the Federal Budget by hon. members opposite. I can appreciate that the propaganda was either an apology for the Federal Budget or it is very evident that an early Federal election is looming. From the fact that Mr. vVanstall has been called, with other Liberal presidents all oyer A ustra ~ia, _to . a secret conference with Mr. Menz1es rt rs pretty evident that they are getting ready for the next election, which is not far off. \Vhen Mr. Menzies proceeds to the High Court and Sir Arthur Faclden to the Bank Board the split \Yill come and i1: the event of \var. the J.,a!Jour Go.-ermncnt w1ll have to go over mto an atmosphere similar to that \Yhich prevailed in 1941 when the Menzie~·l<'adden Government turned their backs on this nation, dE spite the fact that there \Ye re. millions of Asiatics near our door threatemng Australia and handed over the leadership of the count;-y to the Labour Leader with a minority GoYernment.

I must say u few words about the Federal ]3mlget. There has been some suggestion that I put a good deal of political colour into the J<'inancial Statement presented by me. I should be the last person to c1o it and hon. members opposite know it. I should be the last person to attempt to put political propaganda into a document for pubhc circulation to be circulated all over the \YoTld. If hon. members opposite care to attack the remarks that I make tonight they can accuse me of getting in a little propaganda now. However, I. ~m going t_o say that if there was any pohtrcal colour m the :Financial Statement presented by me at least I am in the company of the Country Party Government in Victoria under the leadership of Mr. McDonald. This is what he had to say in his Budget-

'' In the light of this dual interest which State Governments have in the state of the economy I would have expected to find the Common~'ealth Government seeking a basis of true co-operation with the States in working out a national approach to an attack on the root causes of our difficulties. I fiml it a matter for some concern when I reflect on the real nature of our Federal system of Government in Australia, that the Commonwealth apparently

Supply. [23 OccrouEl~.J ,)'uppl!J.

1u.:ithcr s~cks nor Ueslrcs effectiYc co-uperatioa \Yith tho States. 'l'he ConmlOll\Yealth seems to be beset with the notion that the States as such are subject bodies to IJe disciplined and controlled, mu1 that if this is clone, then as if by some magical touch our problems will be solYcd.

''I think it \voulc1 be appropriate in this year, when we celebrate the centenary of responsible go,·crnmcnt in Victoria am1 the jubilee of the J<'m1eration of the Austmlian States, for some thought to be giyen to the desirable role of GoYernments, Commonwealth and State, in the Federal system. The States nre charged with great responsibilities, yet they have inadequate :financial resources. The llewlopments of recent years point clearly to the confusion that must follow unless this position is recti:ficd. Though the problem goes beyond :finance, it is high-lightec1 there, and I want now to refer particularly to the :financial relationships with the Commomvcalt11 as reflected in this year's budget.''

Then he proceeds to amplify that statement.

If I want justi:fication for a further statement I should like to make I can soon :find it. We have heard a good deal about South Australia. I have here the Budget presented ln· 1\Ir. Plavfon1 in South Australia and I it~vite hon. 'members to register this statement, haYing reganl to the :figmcs that I \Yill quote later on. He says-

'' So far as the 8outh Australian economy is concerned, both the pTesent situation and prospects Temain very gooc1. The produced income of the State has so risen over recent years that the State is clearly no longer one of the weaker Australian States, but one of the stronger. In fact, on the basis of average income per head we arc prohably somewhat aboye the aYel·age, falling a little short of the richly

The tables are:-

om1mYec1 State of Vidoria, 1Jut eomparing favourably for sceoml place \Yith 1\ ew South ~Wales. This achievement has shown that the development costs hitherto undertaken by the State, thongh undoubtedly high, have been amply jnsti:fied.

''Both primary and scconchuy industries have made their valuable contl'ibutions to this remarkable achievement, and I am more than ever convinced tlwt, had the State been able to retain its pre-war share in the income-tax :field, now monopolised by the Commonwealth, it would be entirely free from the necessity of receiYing financial assistance from the Common wealth.''

It is a very interesting statement. I should like hon. members to keep in mind the statements that haYc been made by Mr. Playford in regard to the :financial position of the State and see \Yhether there is any justi:fication for the Menzies-Fadden Government's giving them such a considerable :financial hand-out as has been evidenced over the years.

I have a number of tables numbered from 1 to 9 which, I am sure, will prove infonnative to hon. members. I ask the permission of the Committee for the statements to be i:tcu1·porate<l in '' Hmtsan1.'' I propose to <: .n:l!leut on 1-henl.

The CHAilniiAN: Is it the pleasure of U1c Committee that the tables refcned to by the _\.cting Treasurer, numberell from 1 to 9, lw incorporntcd in '' Hansanl'' without being rc:Hl;

Honourable :ThiemiJers: Hear, hear!

Jir. W AL>SII: The Leader of the Opposition will like these tables; they \Yill improve his outlook; and I am SlUG he \Yill come lmck next session strong]~- supporting the attituclc of the present Government in regard to the unsatisfactory :financial relations between the Commonwealth and the State.

S'J'A'l'.E;o.!EXT SHO\VING CO::\BIOXWBAT!l'H "\~D f)'I\\TER' ~l!.'.JU: TilE l'OOL O:F lNt;O}f_E. TAX COJ.T,EU'l'IOXS FOR .Jr!\E, 1%2.

1038-3\J lll39-40 1940-4l 1941-42 1942-43 1943-44 1944-45 1045-46 1046-47 Hl47-4S 1948-4D 1()49-50 1050-5 I 1051-;)2

PERT OD lS'l' J rJ.Y, 1 OT~. TO

Year.

(a) Collected by the States.

I ('umnw11~ Wl'<llth':-;

KtatP~' ~!la re. Total.

Conimonwealth"o

Share

I Nhare. , I-'rrcen t .. agc

, ' of Total. , _______ ! _______________ _

I £ ! £ £ % ' 11 ,S:J3 000 '(a)17.280,000 29,113,000 40·65

16,43o:ooo 1

1

(a)1 n;o35,ooo 35,465,000 46·33 39,316,000 (a)21 ,GM,OOO 61,000.000 64·45 77,5!14,000 'I (a)32,HS1,000 110,445,000 70·23

106,772,2l3 34,254.787 141,027,000 75·71 149,544,213 !I 34,254, 7R7 183,709,000 81·36 181,279,213 34,2;-1,787 215,534,000 84·11 180,338,213 I 34,25+,787 214,593,ooo s4·o4 167,765,000 I 40,000,000 207,765,000 80·75 1 S7,900,000 45,000.000 232,900,000 80·6S 2l8,602,520 53,744,471 272,3~7,000 80·27 200,1 Hl,721 70,537,279 27.9,H!J4,000 74·7,-; 36l,OB0,903 00,~0~,097 451,4R8,000 79·08

:: 1 453,5oo,ooo 12o,ooo,ooo 573,5oo,ooo 10-os

Supply. [AS()E::VIBLY.J Supply.

QUEK:\'SLAND. COM}!ONWEAWII TAXA'l'ION ltEil\fBURSEliENT GRANTS.

Year" 1042-43 to ~--1 045-46.

Year 1046-47. Year 1047-48. Year 1948-49. Year 1040-50.

Annu.11 I Pc1- Amount. ~~ l'PI~ Amount. I Per- Amount. I Per

I Am nmt. 1centage. centage. centage. cent~ge.

-----------£--1-% ___ £ ___ -- o;{J- ---£-- --o/--:---£---;---o-yo--1-- ~ I

Per-centage

AnlOunt.

N. s. \V,l]p, . . 15,516,830 'I 45·3 16 477 000 41 2 18 536 62) 4°1·2 22,021,712 41·0 25 48U 850 Yll't<" ,,, . . 6,.~vo,2;;9 20·1 ~:s6o:ooo 22·1 o:967:5oo 22·1 12,098,479 22·5 14:3oa:485 (/ll<'f'll>i:tlld . . 5,821,000 l7·0 6 6111 000 16·5 7 426 125 16·5 8,832,622 16·4 10,230,827 ::;outl! .\ust!·a!ia 2,450,043 7·2 s:45s:ooo 8·6 s;s9o:250 8·6 4,630,081 8·6 5,370,255

% 40·7 22·9 16·4

\V .. \ u'tralm 2,644,186 7·7 3 384 000 ::l·5 3 807 000 8·5 4,494,632 8·4 5,172,433 Taemania . . 924,460 I 2·7 1:22o;ooo 3·1 1:372:500 3·1 1,666,945 3·1 1,070,420

8·6 8·3 3·1

Total £ 34,254,787 1 100·0 4o,ooo,ooo 100·0 45,ooo,ooo --10_0_··0-l·-5-3-,7-4-4,-4-7-1-l--1-00_·_0 -6-2-,5-3-7,-27_9_ 100·0 w w

(a) I ncludcs £765,787 paid to certain States as reimbursement for refraining from imposing Entertainment Tax. (b) Exclusive of £8,000,000 special grant to meet coal strike losses, distributed in same proportion as principal

grant:-New South Wales Victoria .. Queensland South Australia Western Australia Tasmania

UN!FORli TAXATION SCHEME.

£3,260,757 1,829,755 1,308,765

686,983 661,677 252,063

£8,000,000

COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO STATES FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 1950-51.

State. Taxation

Re-imbursement

Grant.

Additional Re-imburse

ment Grant.

I ! I Special ' Total I Per-

1

Per Head of

Population.

Xew South Wales Victoria .. (/lll'<'nslan<l tlouth Au~;tralia \Ycstern cluotmlia Tat:~nlania ..

Total

State.

Xew South Wales Victoria .. Qw·ensland .. South Australia Western Australia Tasmania ..

Total ..

State.

.. . . .. ..

.. ..

.. . .

.. £

Grant. 1 Grants. I centage. f

£ £ I £ I £ I 0/ ,--£-8-. -d-,·-2.'-',538,913 2,026,966 I o,z5o,ooo 3<1,815,879 4().73 1. 11 4 1o lo,337,974 1,lflo,3no 4,750,ooo 22,248,373 ig:~b

1 9 18 s

1~,4g~,556 I 0U,33Z I 2,000,000 1~·F9·~~~ 8 04 i6 lE 1i

5:~o~:~~" I 1~~:¥,~A 1,388:888 1

7;i~~:426 7:94 i 12 14 u 2,248,8-H 159,723 200,000 2,608,564 2·88 I 9 2 3

£ -- 70,398,0_97_ 5,000,000 15,000,000' 90,398,0971l00·00: 10 18 6

CO~BIONWEALTH GRANTS-1950-51.

Grant under

Formula.

Special Grants

all StatPs. Total.

I I I Special Grants

! c~~,rrt'i:l- Total. 1 I Grants

i Con11nission. !

Per head of

Population.

_£ ____ 11

2::l,538,913 16,337,974 11,465,551

6,039,980 !

£ 8,276,966 5,910,399

-3-6-,s-f-5-,8-7_9_ £ 3o,sf5,87~~-1-I_i_· -fo-.-22,248,373 1 22,248,373 9 18 8

2,814,337 ' 14,279,8881 I 14,279,888 11 17 11 1,228,087 ; 7,268,967 5,332,ooo 12,600,967 17 15 5

I i 5,766,838 1,409,5881 7,170,426 5,839,000 13,015,426 23 2 0

2,248,841 359,723 2,608,564 1,004,000 3,612,564 12 12 4

70,398,097 20,000,000 -90,398,097j 12,175,000 102,573,097 I 12 8 0

CO~BIONWEALTH GRANTS-1951-1952.

' I

I Additional I If Total Grants 1 Effect of

under Formula. distributed by 1 per Formula. Distribution. I Grant due Grant Total. 1 dlstributed as Commonwealth

----- _________ I Commonwealth. i £

.. ·.I 34,~oo,ooo 13,6'oo,ooo 47,9~o,ooo I 4s,4lo,ooo Loss 5oo,ooo Xew South Wales Victoi'ia .. (~ueeuslaud .. Hout.h Australia .. Western A ustmlia Tasnmnia ..

Total

20,400,000 9,100,000 20,500,000 28,200,000 Gain 1,300,000 . . , 14,100,000 4,900,000 19,000,000 19,500,000 I Loss 500,000

.: :·1~--~_:6_8_8._·8_8_Z_ 1 ___ ~_:_~8_8_:_&z_8_ 1• __

1

_8_:~ __ 8_8_:8_8_8_11

. __

1

_&_}_8_8_:g_&_8_ 1 _t_~-~-~ _3_1

8_8_:~_)8_8 _ 2,800,000 1,200,000 ll 4,000,000 _ 3,900,000 Gain 100,000

£ i 86,600,000 33,40o,ooo 120,oao,ooo I 12o,ooo,ooo ..


PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF TAX REHIBURSE:Il:ENT GRANTS AND SPECIAL GRANTS (EXCLUSIVE OF COMMONWEALTH GRANTS COMMISSION GRANTS TO SOUTH AUSTRALIA, WESTERN AUSTRALIA AND TASMANIA).

1942-43 State. to 1946-47. 1947-48. 1948-49. 1949-50. 195Q-51. 1951-52.

1945-46.

% % % % 0' % % ,o New South Wales .. .. 45·3 41·2 41·2 41·0 40·7 40·7 39·9 Victoria .. .. .. 20·1 22·1 22·1 22·5 22·9 24·6 24·6 Queensland .. .. 17-0 16·5 16·5 16·4 16·4 15·8 15·8 South Australia : : .. .. 7·2 8·6 8·6 8·6 8·6 8·1 8·5 Western Australia .. .. 7·7 8·5 8·5 8·4 8·3 7·9 7·9 Tasmania .. .. .. 2·7 3·1 3·1 3·1 3·1 2·9 3·3

100·0 100·0 100·0 100·0 100·0 100·0 100·0

SPECIAL COMMONWEALTH GRANT TO STATES (OTHER THAN CmmONWEALTH GRANTS COMMISSION GRANTS TO SMALLER STATES).

1949-50 1950-51. 1951-52. Distributed Rffect o•

··- as per Commonwealth Formula. Distributed. Formula To be Formula Distribution.

Allocation. Distributed. Allocation.

£ £ £ £ £ £ New South Wales .. 3,260,757 6,250,000 6,080,898 13,000,000 13,500,000 Loss 330,898 Victoria .. .. 1,829,755 4,750,000 3,481,197 9,100,000 7,800,000 Gain 2,568,803 Queensland· .. .. 1,308,765 2,000,000 2,443,011 4,900,000 5,400,000 Loss 943,011 South Australia .. 686,982 800,000 1,286,961 2,800,000 2,900,000 Loss 586,961 Western A ustrali~ · .. 661,677 1,000,000 1,228,764 2,400,000 2,700,000 Loss 528,764 Tasmania .. .. .. 252,063 200,000 479,169 1,200,000 1,100,000 I~oss 179,169

Total .. £ 8,000,000 15,000,000 15,000,000 33,400,000 33,400,000 ..

CO::>IMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA.

DEFENCE EXPENDITURE.

Estimated - 1942-43. 1948-49. 1950-51. 1951-52.

--------£ £ £ £

Defence .. .. .. .. .. .. 2,246,694 249,867 421,776 632,500 Navy .. .. .. .. .. . . .. 39,557,016 20,694,626 24,827,042 34,670,800 Army .. .. . . .. .. . . .. 298,376,830 15,315,310 26,754,817 48,023,500 Air .. .. .. 107,274,456 16,906,689 27,814,138 48,709,800 Supply ·a:nd D~fence Production .. .. .. 41,108,266 8,762,258 69,280,370 50,918,600

Total Defence Services .. .. .. 488,563,262 61,928,750 149,158,143 182,955,200

War Pensions and Repatriation .. .. .. 10,051,325 43,279,356 41,896,018 48,604,000 Miscellaneous . . . . .. .. .. 58,434,755 55,332,633 33,272,636 4,530,000 Interest and Sinking Fund .. .. .. .. 24,336,324 57,597,883 58,328,294 58,392,000

Total .. .. . . .. £ 581,385,666 218,138,622 282,655,091 294,481,200

Estimated 1951-52.

Provided From 1942-43. 1948-49. 1950-51. I -------------------l---r-----1------1-----------· Revenue Loan Fund

Total

1942-43 1948-49 195D-51 1951-52 (EEtimated)

£ 178,533,552 402,852,114

£ 581,385,666

Revenue Rereipts.

£ 218,138,622

218,138,622

£ 278,805,398

3,849,693

282,655,091

£ 294,459,000 555,798,000 841,792,000

1,056,104,000

£ 290,356,200

4,125,000

294,481,200

996 Supply. [ASSE:\iBL Y.] Supply.

CO:.VIMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA. DIRECT TAXATION.

- 1942-43. 1948-49. Estimated 1951-52.

-£ £ £

Income Tax 00 .. .. .. 00 00 .. 00 141,109,000 182,091,808 554,500,000 Social Services Tax .. .. .. .. . . 00 .. .. 90,255,065 7,500,000 Wool Deductions .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . 11,500,000

--141,109,000 272,346,873 573,500,000

Pay-roll Tax .. .. .. 00 .. . . .. 00 10,451,000 19,802,924 40,000,000 Other Taxes 00 .. .. .. .. 00 .. . . 10,233,000 13,648,213 22,800,000

Total .. .. .. .. .. .. .. £ 161,793,000 305,798,010 636,300,000

INDIRECT TAXATION.

---Customs .. .. .. .. .. .. Excise .. .. .. .. .. 00 .. Sales Tax .. 00 00 .. .. 00

Other 00 00 .. 00 .. .. ..

Total Taxation .. 00 .. ..

I have shown in No. 1 table the Commonwea.lth and States' shares of the pool of income-tax collections for the years 1938-39 to 1949-50. It shows that in 1938-39 the Commonwealth's share of the total taxation collected in Australia. was 40.65 per cent. I hope the hon. member for Toowong and the hon. member for Sherwood are taking note of these figures. The amount has increased, until at present we have an estimated revenue from taxation of £573,500,000, and the Commonwealth's share has jumped to 79.08 per cent. of that total taxation pool. Since the Committee has agreed to· allow the tables to be incorporated in '' Hansard'' I will not go through them individuai!y but they will provide very interesting reading indeed.

The next table shows the Commonwealth's taxation reimbursements from the vea.rs 1942-43 to 1949-50. Those figures indicate that from the time uniform taxation was introduced under the Curtin Government, and right through to 1945-46, there was no variation in the payments to the States. For each of those years during that period the States received the same proportion by way of tax reimbursement. Then, as time goes on, we find the position altered because of an alteration in the formula. by the Chifiey Government. It was the Chifiey, not the present Commonwealth Government who altered the formula, and the credit for any improvement in Queensland's position under the altered formula must be given to the Chifley Labour Government. The percentages have varied over the years and the table again points out clearly that Queensland's figme has fallen gradually while those of the other States have been increasing.

I make these statements because hon. members opposite have been attempting to make out a case to prove that the Commonwealth Government have been fair to Queensland. As I proceed I shall show that there is ample

.. 00

.. ..

00

Estimated 1942-43. 1948-49. 1951-52.

£ £ 00 20,806,000 63,464,434 104,000,000 00 44,072,000 62,734,781 100,000,000 00 28,846,000 39,029,276 117,000,000 .. 1,709,000 .. ..

95,433,000 165,228,491 321,000,000

£ 257,226,000 471,026,501 957,300,000

justification for the statement contained in the Financial Statement presented to the Committee in connection with the unsatisfactory position between the Commonwealth and the State. In refuting the statement made by the hon. member for Coorparoo, I might mention that nowhere in the Financial Statement presented by me will he find any complaint about the unsatisfactory state of the finances of Queensland. I suggested no such thing and his statement was just another of those Aunt Sallies he puts up.

Statement No. 3 shows the Commonwealth grants to the States for the financial ·year 1950-51. It shows that the taxation reimbursement grant to Queensland was £11,465,551. It shows also an additional reimbursement grant of £814,337. Then we come to the special grant of £2,000,000 that has been harped upon by hon. members opposite as being mainly responsible for this State's ending the year with a surplus. Actually, if the procedure adopted by the Chifley Labour Government had been followed, that £2,000,000 would have been part of the original grant. I want to show what a raw deal we have had from the present Commonwealth Government. My figures cannot be challenged because they are taken from authoritative sources and the figures relating to the grants are taken from the Commonwealth's 0\Yn financial documents. It shows-and I want hon. members to keep this in mind-that the grants per head of population were-

Ne1v South ·wales Victoria Queensland South Anstralin West ern Australia Tasmania ..

The average for all the 6d. and Queensland's higher.

£ s. d. 11 4 10

9 18 8 11 17 11 10 5 1 12 14 D

9 2 3 States \Yas £10 18s. share 1vas slightly


But that is not the whole story. I want to tell the true story, unlike the hon. member for Aubigny, who wants to mislead the Committee. Does he object to having the true story told¥ Statement No. 4 sho\YS the Commonwealth grants for 1950-51, including special grants made on the recommendation of the Commonwealth Grants Commission. If hon. members will remember the figures I have just read out in regard to the amounts per head of population, they will see how the States fared. It shows these amounts:-

£ s. d. New South Wales 11 4 10 Victoria 9 18 8 Queensland 11 17 11 South Australia 17 15 5 West ern Australia 23 2 0 Tasmania . . 12 12 4

The average was £12 Ss. Od. but Queensland got only £11 17s. Jld. but South Australia got an increase of over £6 and Western Australia, went up to £23, nearly double the previous sum.

lUr. Sparkes: And New South Wales?

:illr. W ALSH: The figure remained the same.

:rur. H. B. Taylor: Was there any special reason at that time~

::\Ir. W AL,SH: Special consideration was given by the Commonwealth to South Australia, Tasmania and \V esten1 Australia. What the hon. member for }'linders said this morning, what the hon. member for Coorparoo agrees with, was that so long as the Commonwealth Government have the power to distribute ~evenne at their whim and fancy they can d1ctate to any State and determine its budgetary position.

Statement No. 5 shows the total grnnts rlistribnted, as read out by the hon. member for Flinders this morning. It shows a loss to Queensland of £500,000, a gain to Victoria of £1,300,000, a gain to Tasmania of £100,000, a loss to South Australia of £100,000, a loss to Westem Australia of £300,000, and a loss to 1\ew South Wales of £500,000. South Australia and V\Testern Australia will not complain. Why should they~ Everything they lost in that distribution is going to be made up by way of special grants under the recommendation of the Commonwealth Grants Commission.

I pass on to the next statement, \vhich shows the percentage distribution of tax reimbursements and special grants. It shows clearly the discrimination against Queensland and how the percentages of the other States are increasing all the time whilst Queensland's percentage is diminishing. It shows that between 1942-43 and 1945-46, under the Chifley r~abour Governnwnt, 17 per cent. of the revenue was consistentlv distributed to Queensland. There \vas 1~0 alteration up to 1945-46. In 1946-4 7 the percentage fell to 16.5, until during the last two years of the Menzies-Fadden Gm·ernment it went down to 15.8 per cent. of the total grants distributed. There again is clear evidence of the raw deal Queensland is receiving at the hands of the

present Federal Government. I hope that this table will clinch the arguments I have made in regard to the raw deal and the unfair treatment meted out by the present Federal Government to Queensland.

It shows that under the Labour Government all grants, other than those that were the subject of a recommendation by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, were distributed strictly in accordance with the formula. I should like to remind the Leader of the Opposition/the hon. member for Coorparoo, and the member for Toowong, who have been so outspoken about the allegedly unfair treatment of Queensland by the Federal Labour Party while they were in power, that the figures show that under the regime of Labour Governments in the Commonwealth Parliament, every grant, other than those recommended by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, was made strictly in accordance with the formula. It is only the present Federal Government who have got away from the formula, and evidence of that fact is contained in the gains and losses of the various States, which show that in the last 2 years, 1950-51 and 1951-52, the two years the Menzies-Fadclen Government have been in power, Queensland has lost £943,000.

lUr. Nicklin: On what basis do you work that out'!

1Ur. W ALSH: On what basis do I work it out~

lUr. Nicklin: You know that the State grants are not distributed on a formula basis.

lUr. W ALSH: I said that every grant that was made by the Chifley Labour GoverNment, other than those made in accordance with the recommendations of the Common\Yealth Grants Commission, was made strictly in accordance with the formula. Might I remind the r~eadcr of the Opposition that a special grant of £8,000,000, which was knmvn as the coal grant, was. distributed among the States because of the difficulties arising from the coal conspiracy that was originated by the Communists, and in pap.sing I should like to say that that trouble was handled very effectively by the Chifley Labour Government. That grant of £8,000,000 >vas distributed in accordance \Yith the formula, in the same way as every other grant \\'llS distributed by a Federnl Labour Government. No grant that has been made br a La bonr Govermnent has been made other "than in accordance with the formula. The figures are shown for each State, and as the hon. member reads them he will inform his mind, and will no doubt bo more careful of the statements he makes in the future.

'vV e come now to taxation and defence. Statements 8 and 9 deal with defence expenditure and direct taxation and indirect taxation. When I started, I thought I would take comparable post-war periods ancl be reasonable. I am not attempting to put anything over hon. members. They can check these figures. I took first of all the period 1948-49, when the Chiflev Labour Government were in power, and then I took the years 1950-51


and 1951-52, under the Menzies-Fadden Government. Then I thought it would be a good thing to go back to 1942-43, when this c?untry was engaged in a very serious conflict. At that time the affairs of the nation were being directed by the Curtin Labour Government, after the Menzies-Fadden outfit had scabbed on the nation. These figures show that the defence expenditure in 1942-43 was £581,383,666.

In 1948-49 . . £218,138,622 Those are two periods under the Labour Government.

In 1950-51 . . £282,655,091 In 1951-52 . . £294,481,200

That expenditure was provided from revenue and the total in 1942-43 was £178,000,000 in round figures; £218,000,000 in 1948-49; £278,000,000 in 1950-51; £290,000,000 in 1951-52, and from the Loan Fund £402,000,000 in 1942-43; nil in 1948-49 · £3,849,000 ~n 1950-51; and £4,125,000 i~ 1951-52.

An Opposition lllember: What is your point about that W

llir. W ALSH: If the hon. member will wai~ he will see what my point is. Have patience. I take you now to the direct taxation. In 1942-43 the figures shown here from income tax are £141,109,000; from pay-roll tax £10,451,000; and from other taxes £10,233,000, showing a total of £161,793,000. Then from indirect taxation for the same year the revenue is shown under the various headings of customs, excise, sales tax and other taxes, and amounts to a total of £95,433,000. The total taxation in that year under a Labour Government was £257,226,000. I remind hon. members again that with a revenue of £257,000,000 the Commonwealth Government spent £581,000,000 on defence.

Mr. Nicklin: On war, you should say.

llir. WALSH: On defence. If the hon. member wants to put it ''at war '' we will say "at war." I am going to p;ove to the ~ono_urable the Leader of the Opposition that 1t wrll not make much difference what term he uses. It is shown in the Commonwealth documents as defence expenditure.

If we come to the period of the MenziesFadden Government-! have quoted you the figures and shown that their defence expenditure was £294,481,200, but their revenue from taxation has jumped to £636 000 000 from direct taxation. There was' £1,61 000 000 direct taxation under the Labour Gov~rndrent during the war-if the Leader of the Opposition wants it that way-and £636 300 000 in direct taxation for 1951-52. ' '

But that is not the whole of the story. \Ve find that the indirect taxation levied under Labour while this country was at war-and that is the way the Leader of the Opposition wants it-was £95,433,000. The estimated revenue from indirect taxation under the Menzies-Fadden Government this yeaT is £321,000,000. The Leader of the Opposition can make what excuses he likes. Those aTe figures t~at cannot be disputed and they show, takmg the totals, that during the war year 1942-43, the total revenue available to

the Labour Govemment was £257,226,000. UndeT Labour, in 1948-49, it amounted to £471,026,000 but it went up to £957,000,000 undeT the Menzies-Fadden Govemment in 1951-52.

I am not going to accept ''The CourierMail'' statement as being correct but there was a report in that paper that indicated that the Menzies-Fadden Government had only provided for an increase of £30,000,000 for defence this year. On the figures quoted I am pTepared to concede that it does show an incTease over the Labour Government of £76,000,000 but the figures also show that their revenue has gone up from over £400,000,000-odd to £900,000,000-odd. Yet there is a difference of only £76,000,000 in the defence allocation.

I\Ir. Nicklin: Are you complaining about thatW

lUr. WALSH: No, but I am complaining that the Menzies Govemment should proceed to tax the kid dies' ice-cream to provide money allegedly for defence when they are not spending it on defence.

llir. Nicklin: Do you want more money spent on defence or not W

llir. W ALSH: If the circumstances justify it I do not think that too much money can be spent on defence but for years it has been shown that only the Labour Government have assumed and accepted that responsibility, in respect of both World War I and the last war. It is no wonder that the present Federal Government taxed the kiddies' icecream, the workers' beer and tobacco. There is no tax on champagne.

I\lr. Nicklin: No excise on champagne?

:illr. WALSH: No excise or sales tax on Australian champagne or Australian wineanother hand-out to Mr. Playford. But I am informed that the wine industry is increasing the prices for its wines even though it has not had any excise placed on it. It is a ridiculous position to have luxury drinks going without taxes. You can go down to the fashionable hotels of Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane, sit down to a luxurious dinner and drink champagne while the kiddies .have to pay an extra tax on their 3d. ice-creams. I am surpTised that the hon. member would stand for that. I imagine there is some truth in the statement by the hon. member for Warrego that the Country Party has lodged a protest against the Budget presented by Sir Arthur Fadden.

In the brief time remaining at my disposal theTe are one or two other things to say. The hon. member for Mundingburra is not here and I do not want to make any remarks about him in his absence that I would not make if he was present. He put on his usual clown act but I think every hon. member will agree that there has been a considerable deterioration in his acts over the years.

I\Ir. Kerr: Yes.

lUr. W ALSH: The hon. member for Sherwood agrees. He went to great pains to


talk about the Hermit Park A.L.P. He knows very well that the A.L.P. expelled him and other members of the A.L.P. who allied themselves with Communist-inspired organisations. That responsibility was undertaken by the Labour executive at that time. There were some members of this party who were expelled because they continued to associate themselves with an organisation that had been declared by the Labour executive to be Cr,mmunist-inspired.

That is the reply again to the hon. member for Fassifern-that we have, without fear or favour, dealt with those in the movement who had leanings towards the Communist Party. In contrast with that, let me tell hon. members that the Liberal Party in New South Wales selected a Communist named Hurley to stand for Waverley. It was not till somebody pulled their coat-tail and woke them up to the fact that he was a wellknown Corn. that they selected another candidate.

Mr. Sparkes: Well, --

lUr. WALSH: "Well," the hon. member for Aubigny says. The hon. member cannot quote any instance of the Labour Party's ever having selected a Communist as one of its candidates. (Opposition interjections.) Then you have the other evidence of a Communist chairing a meeting for Sir Arthur Fadden in Western Australia during the 1950 election.

Mr. Morris: Nonsense!

lUr. WALSH: "Nonsense!" the hon. member for Mt. Coot-tha says.

Mr. l\Iorris: Of course.

l\Ir. WALSH: I have not the cutting with me tonight. Sir Arthur Fadden will not deny it. The Press report showed it in Perth, that the Communist candidate chaired the meeting for Sir Arthur Fadden, (Opposition interjections). No matter what his explanation was.

An Opposition Member: He had no truck with them.

Mr. WALSH: Whether that is so or not, he chaired the meeting. The hon. member says he had no truck with him. As the Acting Premier reminded the Committee, when he was Prime Minister for six weeks he made a presentation of public funds to one, Nelson, an official of the Communist-controlled union, and an inquiry by a Royal Commission was held into it, and Sir Arthur Fadden was a witness, and he and W. M. Hughes clearly indicated that they used public funds to hand over to the Communist faction.

l\Ir. l\Iuller: Do you remember that you had a Communist in Mackay speaking fol' your candidate every night~

:ilir. W ALSH: I know the hon. member is being very careless with his facts; he knows that.

l\Ir. l\Iuller: It is true.

l\Ir. WALSH: He knows that is untrue. As a matter of fact, the very person he is

referring to as having supported the Labour candidate is very friendly with the hon. member for :Mirani; and the member for Mirani will not deny it. He will admit that when I say that he bought his fruit from Jack Burnet and sold his vegetables and other things.

Mr. EVAN!S: I rise to a point of order. It is a deliberate untruth and insulting to me. I do not sell vegetables, and I am not friendly with a Communist in Mackay. I ask for a withdrawal.

The CHAIRMAN: I ask the hon. member 1 o accept the denial of the hon. member for 1 <fir ani.

Mr. WALSH: In accordance with the 1ules of the House I accept the hon. mem-1 >er's denial. If I told the truth about him Le would still say it was untrue.

I refer to the remarks of the hon. member for Mundingburra in regard to contributions to the Labour Party. He talked about alleged contributions from liquor interests to the Labour Party. Nobody knows better than he that he reecived contributions from people associated with the liquor interests in his own campaign. He would not deny it, if he was truthful. You would not have to go far away from this building to find some people who contributed to his campaign on the first occasion he sought election to this Parliament. Pick up your "Courier-Mail" tomorrow or any anti-Labour paper and see the huge advertisements given ·to them by liquor interests involving hundreds and thousands of pounds. Then pick up t~e official publication of the Labour Party m this State, "The Worker," and see how many advertisements you get from the major liquor interests. There is only one small advertisement from any liquor interest, and that comes from Melbourne.

Further, if hon. members listen to the radio stations in this city they will find that the only B-class station that has no advertising matter from brewery interests is the Labour station, 4KQ. Station 4BK which is owned by "The Courier-Mail" interests, the Murdoch interests, regularly broadcasts propaganda in favour of one of the brewery interests. I challenge any hon. member of this Assembly to say he has ever heard any advertising matter related to brewery interests broadcast from the Labour station.

That reminds me of the statement that appeared in the Press the other day, credited to one Mr. Edmunds, who is now an organiser for the Temperance League in this State. I understand he is a former Liberal member from New South Wales.

JUr. Riordan: He is a fugitive from Victoria.

Mr. W ALSJI: He is a former Liberal member from one of the southern States.

Mr. ll'Iorris: That is not true.

JUr. W ALSH: The hon. member knows it is true, and when he made the statement that all political parties were receiving blood money from the liquor interests, apparently

1000 Supply. [ASSEl\1BL Y.] Questions.

he knew there 'vas some truth in it as far as the Opposition was concerned. Since he has been actively associated with the parties that oppose Labour, since he has come here as an organiser for the Temperance League, hon. members opposite must accept responsibility for it. I can understand how hurt the hon. member for Coorparoo must have felt the other clay. 'l'hat was evidenced by his vicious attack on Mr. Eclmunds. I repeat that the real test is to be found in the thousands of pounds spent on advertising over the air from B-class stations, while not one penny is spent on advertising through the Labour station.

jUr. Nicklin: What is the strength of that argument~ I cannot see it.

I\Ir. W ALSH: The Leader of the Opposition does not want to see it. If there was any evidence that the brewery interests were supporting the Labour Party, that would be one place where it could be found. We are just as much entitled to get their advertising matter as any of the other B-class stations. As a matter of fact, it might interest the Leader of the Opposition, with his temperate wa~-s, to know that the Labour station was the only station that advertised temperance matter for the Temperance League.

I\Ir. Nicklin: More power to it.

I\Ir. W ALSH: Which shows that the temperance people realise the value of advertising through a Labour station. I think I have exploded the suggestion that the Labour Party is tied in any way with the liquor interests. At no time has there been brought down any legislation other than that 'vhich the Labom Party thought was consistent with what was in the best interests of the whole of the community of Queensland.

Before concluding, I should like to say-

Mr. Sparkes: Something about thP budget.

Mr. WALSH: No, just a little about co-operative sugar mills. I hope, as time goes on, to be able to convince this Government of the necessity for appointing a Royal Commission to inquire into the activities generally of co-operative sugar mills. I believe there is just as much scope within the administration of the affairs of those mills for investigation as there was in the investigation by a Royal Commission into the dairying industry. We have reached a stage when these mills are becoming a greater parasitical growth than ever a proprietary mill could be. All the evidence shows that there are monopoly interests surrounding co-operative mills that are not administering the affairs of those mills in the interests of the growers. At a later stage I hope to be able to bring facts into this Chamber to open the eyes of hon. members.

:illr. Nicklin: I thought you were in favour of co-operation?

11Ir. WALSH: I am in favour of it, but I am not going to stand aside and see co-operative mills and the growers who operate

them being butchered and robbed by their managements throughout the State today and for a number of years.

I\Ir. };vans: What is the Central Sugar Cane Prices Board doing~

I\Ir. W ALSH: There will be a time and place for wllat I have to say. I cannot elaborate on the matter tonight because if I started on it I should want a great deal more time to deal with the matter. There are lots of things that the Central Board cannot cope with and they include weights and tests. The hon. member for ::\lirani cannot tell me, in view of my experience of the Plane Creek mill as to how growers were robbed--

I\Ir. Evans: If that is so, the check chemists are not doing their job.

:ilir. W ALSH: Most of the chemists have been under the control of the managements for years and I can mention Mr. Larsen as a case in point, who would not play the game the mill management wanted him to play. There are the Tully mill and other co-operative mills that are a greater menace to the sugar industry at the growing end than the proprietary mills.

I think I have exploded many of the arguments put up by hon. members about the Federal Budget, and I emphasise again that there has been no criticism of the State Financial Statement. I believe that the people of Queensland will be thankful that they have a Labour Government in this State to watch over their interests against the present Menzies-F~tdden Government.

Government iliemhers: Hear, hear! Item (Aide-de-Camp to His Excellency the

GoYernor) agreed to. Progress reported. The House adjourned at 9.30 p.m.

legislative assembly thursday october · 2014. 6. 13. · 948 questions. [assembly.] thursday, 25...

Documents