legislative assembly thursday october · tenant act of 1948 ( 14 october). auditor-general's...

Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

THURSDAY, 21 OCTOBER 1948

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

State Education &c., Bill. [21 OcTOBER.] Questions. 859

THURSDAY, 21 OCTOBER, 1948.

Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. S. J. Brassington, Fortitude Valley) took the chair at 11 a.m.

QUESTIONS.

SePERV,SION OF CHARITABLE FUNDS.

Mr. NICKLIN (Murrumba-Leader of the Opposition) asked the Acting Premier-

'' 1. Under what existing State legislation, if any, can action be taken to supervise the operations of charitable funds other than those covered by the Patriotic Funds Act, and what is the nature of the supervision that can be exercised~

'' 2. In view of the numerous chantable appeals now being conducted, is any such supervision being exercised~' '

Hon. V. C. GAIR (South Brisbane) replied-

'' 1. There is no legislation of the nature referred to in the question.

"2. No."

800 [ASSEMBLY.] Questions.

PDRCHASE OF (ULWULLA CHAMBERS.

Mr. DECKER (Sandgate) asked the Acting Premier-

'' With reference to the property of Cul· wulla Chambers in Sydney purchased by the Government-

'' 1. 'What has been spent on the property in (a) maintenance and (b) improvements, sin<·e its acquisition?

'' 2. What percentage of the available space is occupied by Government departments m agencies?

'' 3. \Vhat was the net return on the building over the past 12 months 1

'' 4. What is the percentage return on the purchase price, plus cost of repairs and alterations, if any, and any other expenses~''


" 1. (a) £3,932 17s. 7 d.; (b) £52 16s. 6d.

'' 2. Nil. Action is being taken to terminate two tenancies for Tourist Bureau purposes.

"3. £5,383 3s. for the past eleven ( 11) months.

'' 4. Percentage return on an annual basis was 3.35 per cent. Culwulla Chambers were acquired as from 1 November, 1947."

QUEENSLAND'S SHARE OF WAR REPARATIONS.

Mr. LUCKINS (Maree) asked the Acting Premier-

" Of the •reparations to be made aYailable as war indemnity to Australia, partly in machinery, what share has Queensland receiYed to date in money value and in kind from (a) Germany and Italy; and (b) Japan?''


'' The question of reparations by cash or industrial equipment from enemy countries is entirely a Commonwealth mattPr, and I am informed that the net realisations in respect thereof are payable into a special redemption account against war expenditure. I suggest, therefore, that the hon. member approach either the Federal Treasury or the Department of External Affairs at Canberra for the information which he seeks. The hon. member is referred to page 181, paragraph 182, of the report of the Auditor-General for· the Commonwealth for the year ended 30 June, 1947, under the heading, 'Plant, Materials and Equipment allocated to Australia as reparations,' in which, inter alia, the following information is given:-' At the date of preparation of this report, 191 machines had arrived in Australia from Germany, and of ,.,ese 110 were declared to auction, 26 were allocated to Government factories, four were sold by private negotiation, and the remainder were held in departmental stores. No machines have yet been received in Australia from enemy countries other than Germany.' ''

BuDGET FORECAST AT PREMIERS' CoNFERENCE.

Mr. PIE (Windsor) asked the 'l'reasurer-

' 'Will he lay on the table of the House a summary of the financial commitments supplied to the Premier, whereby at the Premiers' Conference a month before the State. Tre.asurer submitted his Budget, the Prcnner mformed the Prime Minister at the conference that Queensland would be faced with a deficit of £2,000,000 this financial year, and whereas in his Budget the Treasurer now forecasts a surplus of £14,000~"

Hon. J. LARCOlUBE (Rockhampton) replied-

'' In my Budget Speech I remark eel that the estimates presented to Parliament were less than the original estimates submitted by departmental officers. Subsequent to the Premier's declaration at the Premiers' Conference concerning the probable deficit in Queensland, grants and general assistance, amounting to approximately £1,723,000, were approved for Queensland by the Commonwealth which greatly improved the State's financial prospects for 1948-1949 and justified the forecast of a surplus for the year. The items were as follows:-

''Additional Taxation Additional Hospital

Grant (estimated) For Price and Rent

(estimated)

Grant .. Benefits

Controls

£ 1,400,000

200,000

123,000

£1,723,000

As usual, the hon. member is reckless with iigures. I did not forecast a surplus of £14,000. He should read the estimate again.''

FINANCING OF 1947-1948 DEFICIT.

lUr. PIE Treasurer-

(Windsor) asked the

"In view of the fact that the Treasurer has reported a defieit of £95,000 for last year will he-

'' J. State whether the Commonwealth and State agreement regarding Public Debt requires that a State must indicate how such :t deficit is to be funded~

'' 2. If so, will he inform the House how it is proposed to deal with such deficit?

'' 3. If he has any proposal in mind, will he state whether it is in conformity with the agreement referred to~''

Hon. ,J. LARCOlUBE (Rockhampton) replied-

"]. No. "2. and 3. For many years the State

has had substantial cash balances which have carried deficits in the Consolidated Revenue Fund. These cleiicits were incurred between the years 1928-1929 and 1931-1932. The smne practice is being followed in respect of the <!_eficit for 194.7-1948.

Questions. [21 0CTOBER.l Dress of 1vlcmbers. 86I

Deficits are reduced from time to time by the amount of surpluses obtained. Since 1938-1939 these reductions have totalled £937,695. This practice does not conflict with the provisions of the Financial Agreement.''

PRODUCTION AND SALES, COLLINSVILLE STA'rE COAL-MINE.

Itir. P ATERSON (Bowen) asked the Secretary for Mines-

"1.'What was (a) the production; (b) the cost of pro-duction; and ( c} the selling

- 1-7-47. 1-8-47.

8. d. 8. d. Screenecl Coal .. .. 28 g 29 2 Navigation Grade .. .. 26 g 27 2 U nscrecned Coal .. .. 25 0 25 fi Slack Coal .. .. .. 23 3 23 8

' '2. (a) Selling prices were fixed by the .Minister with the approval of the Government-Commonwealth control of Stateowned goods and services having reverted to the State some time previously. (b) Factors taken into account in fixing these increases were-(i.) Wages increases, including basic wage rises, new award for colliery staffs, inclusion of war loading in base rates with consequent increases in overtime, Pay Roll Tax, Workers' Compensation premiums and cost of explosives. (ii.) Extra leave of five days granted in 1947.

'' 3. Coal is sold to about 40 or 50 individual customers. Details of tonnages taken are not readily available. The principal sales were to-Railways, 61,816 tons; coke works, 25,284.75 tons; others, 18,651 tons.''

STAFFING OF PUBLIC HOSPITALS.

Mr. ItiAHER (West Moreton) asked the Secretary for Health nnd Home Affairs-

'' 1. How many hospitals are closed thTOugh lack of staff and other conditions in the State at present?

'' 2. How mnny hospitals are carrying on with onl:v partial staffing~''

Hon. A. JONES (Charters Towers) replied-

'' 1. Blair Athol, although an outpatients' service is provided.

'' 2. Of the 113 public hospitals in Queensland 95 are short of staff, but the loyal service of the staffs have enabled an uninterrupted hospital service to be available to patients. It is interesting to note that the number of nurses employed in public hospitals in Queensland has increased from 2,355 to 2,953 during the last six years, and during the same period the average daily number of patients has increased from 4,151 to 5,100.'' -

price of coal at the Collinsville State mine during the year ending 30 June, 1948 ~

'' 2. Who fixed the selling price and what factors were taken into consideration in fixing this price?

'' 3. To whom ·was the coal sold, and IYhat amount wns sold to each purchaser~''

Hon. T. A. FOLEY (Normanby) replied" 1. (a) 172,061.2 tons; (b) 27s. 5.89d.

per ton; (c) selling prices were varied on five occasions during 194 7-48 as under:-

Price per ton at-

4-8-47. 10-11-47. 2-2-48. 10-5-48.

s. d. s. d. s. d. 8. d. 30 5 :n 2 31 4 31 10 28 5 29 2 29 4 29 10 26 8 27 5 27 7 28 1 24 11 25 8 25 10 26 ·!

RUBBISH NEAR LODGE.

Itir. SPARKES (Aubigny): Mr. Speaker, will you take action to have that dirty filthy heap of junk removed from the end of Parliament House nearest the Lodge?

~Ir. SPEAKER: Instructions have been given for the removal of the mnterial refened. to and it will be done as soon as possible.

PAPER.

'l'he follo1ving paper was laid on the table:-

Order in Council under the Landlord and Tenant Act of 1948 ( 14 October).

AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPOHT.

DA'rE OF PRESENTATWN.

1Ur. NICKLIN (Murrumba-Leader of the Opposition) : .Mr. Speaker, ''Will you inform the House when the Auditor-General will tab le )1is rep01't ~ "

lUr. SPEAKER: I cannot give the Leader of the Opposition official advice, but it has lJEcn intimated to Y\18 that it will be m ail· able within a week or 10 days.

DRESS OF MEMB.ERS IN REFRE·SH:MENT ROOMS.

~Ir. AIKENS (Mundingburra) : Mr. Speaker, in view of the approach of the smmner months I should like you to give some ruling, if you can, as to whether members may take of meals in the Parliamentary Refreshment Room without their coats. This was ~' concec~sion gr·anted some time ago by yc.u ancl unncc·ountably withdrawu agam in the early part of this year.

~Ir. SPEAKER: The hon. member for l\fundingbuna is not to take this as a ruling. As a matter of practic0, a decision as to whether members may in view of the heat,

862 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

dispense with their coats in the refreshment rooms will be made when the circumstances -11ris~.

llir. AIKENS: Who will decide it?

lUr. SPEAKER: I will decide it· I :always have and I will in the future. '

SUPPLY.

COMMITTEE-FINANCIAL STATEMEN'r

RESUMPTION OF DEBATE.

(The Chairman of Committees, Mr. :\iann, Brisbane, in the chair.)

Debate resumed from 19 October (see p. 845) on Mr. Larcombe 's motion-

'' That there be granted to His Majesty for the service of the year 1948·49 a· sum not exceeding £500 to defray the s~Iarv of the Aide-de-Camp to His ·Excellency' the Governor.''

.H_on. J. E. DUGGAN (Toowoomba~rmster for Transport) (11.23 a.m.): I should like at the outset to offer my congratulations to the hon. the Treasurer on the very excellent summary he has given of the State's finances and also on the obvious care he has shown in preparing this very important State document. In spite of the criticism offered by hon. members opposite I think it reveals that the T-reasurer, in collaboration with the officers of the Treasury Department has been most careful to embody in that dodument all the relevant financial information required by members. o~ t~e Committee and to give a general mdrcat10n of the economic development that ha.s taken place in Queensland.

There was a time when a sum approximating £30,000,?00 ~vas discussed with some degree of awe m thrs Chamber, but -during and since the war such astronomical sums have been expended by Gov<.1rnments that the figure of £30,000,000 no longer has the significance we previously attached to it. I feel, despite the ~endency for Government expenditure to mcrease on tne scale and to the magnitude that has occurred in all the countries in the world, there is no reason why we should be eareless in an examination of a doeument of this kind. The Treasurer, I am sure, weleomes constructive criticism of any alleged extravagance or the possibility that any accounts have not been presented in a fashioi\ that enables hon. members to ascertain the truth about the Government's activities.

The. Budget provides an opportunity of assessmg the degree of prosperitv that has been attained in the State. I think on an examination of the -document all will agree that very healthy signs of our future development in the State are manifest in it. I believe that over a period of year·s the Government's record is a most meritorious one. As I propose to show-and I am sure the Treasurer will consolidate this aspect of the matter-the State has made very great progress and is destined to be the most important State in the Commonwealth.

Recently there has been a battle of political ideologies, a clashing between the We~tern democracy on the one hand and

Russia and her satellite countries on the other. It is indeed a matter for regret that those entrusted with the responsibility of directing Governments cannot obtain agreement bet\vcen member Governments as to the course of human affairs, and it seems that unless early agreement is reached on these important matters we might have the unfortunate spectacle of another blood-letting in Europe. I believe this task of reconstruction to which responsible statesmen have applied themselves is capable of solution and in recent weeks there have been much healthier signs as the result of a new vigour that has been shown by the democratic countries, and that the prospects of peace have been considerably enhanced.

Perhaps, with the exception of creating dollar credits, we have very few external problems of great magnitude to settle in Australia. It is true we have many internal difficulties and theoe can be dealt with if the right approach is made by everybody concerned, but it is true, also, that the impact of world events are felt in this country very quickly after decisions have been made abroad. I should like to speak on this subject at some greater length towards the latter end of my speech, but at this stage I want to say that as far as our internal problems are concerned, I believe they are capable of solution if the people of this country are willing to exercise the qualities of tolerance, co-operation, hard work, and good will. If we do that this country will avoid many of the pitfalls that have beset other countries since the recently concluded war.

Fortunately, this debate provides hon. members with full opportunities of speaking on a wide range of subjects. This and the Address in Reply debate afford hon. members full scope to criticise Government policy, to propound their pet schemes, to submit constructive suggestions that might be considered by the appropriate Ministers and members of the Government genen.lly. It is well this opportunity is afforded. I believe that the Standing Orders of Parliament in Queensland give a wider opportunity in that regard than those of many other Parliaments in the Dominions and I feel, therefore, that we should be very careful in exercising this privilege to ensure that we take the maximum advantage from them.

Some hon. members use this opportunity to discuss Government finances. Others take some aspect of Government policy that they believe to be wrong or needs rectification. There are others who take upon themselves the task of convincing members of this Committee of the efficacy of their particular schemes, which they believe will be of benefit to this country. Indeed, the debate is all very well justified. And in the course of this exercise by hon. members of their prerogative in this respect my department, like others, has been subjected to a certain amount of criticism. I should like on an occasion such as this to speak on matters outside the ambit of my department. At times there is a tendency on the part of hon. members who

Supply. [21 OCTOBER.] Supply. 863

have been elevated to Ministerial rank to confine their contributions to debates to matters affecting their own particular departments. I suppose it is felt that when an hon. member has the opportunity of specialising on subjects embracing his department's activities he is more or less expected to confine his comment to such matters, but I feel that at times it is a good thing if we expand the range of our speeches to embrace subjects in which we are interested and upon which members have the opportunity of judging whether our contributions to the discussion of these subjects are worth while or not.

I hope later to develop a line of argument that I think is of tremendous importance to this country, bnt before proceeding to discharge the responsibility that I feel rests on me in that respect and without wishing to assume the role of lecturer or preacher I want to say that a healthy democracy can only survive when free and frank discussion is permitted and is capable of being directed against those charged with the administration of the Government of the country. As long as that privilege remains we have a reasonable opportunity of giving expression to the wishes of the majority of the people.

Unfortunate!;~·, I have been charged by some l·cople, including the hon. member for Aubigny and the hon. member for Dalby, with being unduly sensitive to CTiticism. The hon. membeT for Da.!by, whether beca.use of the quality of his speeches or because of the political policy that he follows, or because of his wealth, commands a considerable amount of space in the paper that is published in Toowoomba, the '' Toowoomba Chronicle,'' >vhieh circulates freely in his electorate, consequently any comment that he eares to make on any subject is usually very fully Teproduced in that journal.

:illr. Sparkes: Which shows how they value his services.

Mr. DUGGAN: I have no comment to make on that observation at the moment, except to say that the leader-writer of that journal joins >Yith the hon. member for Aubigny and the hon. member for Dalhy in suggesting that I am somewhat sensitiye to criticism. I >ay with all modesty that that is not so. I have always wcleomed constTuctive criticism. I believ"e that if it is impaTtial, if it is constructive, T o•houlrl be remiss in my ministerial duty if I did not haw regard to it and take steps to make searching inquiries into departmental ·weaknesses it alleged existed. ln fnct, this work is proceeding day after day in my department. Hon. members and their constituents have occasion to ring, write. or make other representations to me about alleged shortcomings d the Raihray Department and there is no resentment because those rcpresenta· tions arc made.

Onlv YesterdaY the hon. memlJer for \Yar· wick C.ainc to me about a E·erious buck position in his district. I ananged immediately for the Commissioner for Railways 1vho intended to go to Ips1Yich this morni;1g, to

remain in Brisbane for the purpose of receiving a deputation from Warwick interests to see whether we could alleviate the position in any ·way.

The hon. member for Mirani came to the department recently and said he thought it was not doing all it should in the provision of trucks for the carrying of cane in his area. Xo resentment or hostility is felt in the cle1;artment beeause he believes that a better anangement could be arri,·cd at. \Vc are wr.r happy indeed to send special officers to examine the position in those areas r,nd giving him the opporllmit~· to prove his case.

Those are only hr0 in,tnnces, taken at random, of criticism of the department. There arc many others that I could elaborate on. Indeed, the department itself has a Snggestions and r rnpro,·ement Board, \\ hich pays people within it to fnrnish suggestions that are likely to make fm greater efficiency and perhaps ·will result in the more streamlined working of this very hreat department of the State.

Of course, the ventilation of grievances, the exposure of maladministration, enahles the autiJorities to reetify such matters as they Ot<·m from time to time. As long as hon. members in this Assembly are willing to voice their criticisms of the department that I temporarily haye the honour of controlling, I have no quarrel with them at· alL I shaH be very pleased at all times to give them the maximum amount of help and co-operation in an effort to see that this great instrumentality of State is used in the best interests of the State.

It is to be expected, of course, tha.t in an Assembly of this· kind, comprising members drawn from various occupations in the community, the quality of the critics of the Government should vary widely, as widely indeed as their stvle of oral presentation. We have, for instan<;e, the fiery and declamatory critic, the hon. member for West Moreton; the destructive, rhetorical critic, the hon. member for Munding"burra; the coldlv disdainful and analysing hon. member for "Logan; the pertinacious hon. member for 'roowong; the quiet retiring hon. member for Nanango; the nnostentatious but· canny and competent critic, the hon. membeT for Stanley; the loquacious, inepressible hon. member for Bundaherg; the <:onf'istently fair and courteous hon. member~ for Mm·rumba and Albert, and, as a s~1itablc anti-climax, the thoroughly unpredictable and unreliable member for Aubigny.

I haye described the hon. member for Aubigny in these terms because I did not quite know what his contribution to the Budget debate would be. Prior to his speech, I did hear something of his braggadoeio, howeYer, and I took the reasonable precaution of arranging for a competent shorthand writer to take down any comments he might make, because he sugges.ted t:hat he proposed to cxposP the TranspnTt Department.

I took that precaution because, as you know, Mr. Manu, it is contrary to the Standing Orders for an hon. member to read from

S64 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

the official '' Hansard'' report of a curreat debate. I am prepared to vouch for the efficiency of the person taking the notes and I am sure that when the '' Hansard'' report is seen this report will be found to be in accord with '' Hansard.''

'l'he hon. member said, in an endeavour, ·of course, to lay a charge of insincerity on me, made a splenetic attack and said I had a difficult job as Minister for Transport and that I had a most difficult department to control, but, he said, that I could not go scot-free. In the course of his speech he referred to the fact that I was lacking knowledge, was complacent, and showed an indifference to the western parts of the State. He made other attacks, principally in the .(iirection that I was anxious to kill two new members in the hon. members for N anango .and Dalby. I have no serious criticism to offer against the hon. member for Nanango in his personal capacity, nor against the hon. member for Dalby. It ill becomes the hon. member for Aubigny to talk about brow-beating on my part. The hon. member is entitled at all times to criticise but ·contrast the attitude of the hon. member for Auhigny, who even yesterday, instead of dealing with a relevant interjection by the hon. member for Gregory, whose knowledge of sheep and pastoral industry in this State is of high order, referred to the interjection as being crimson rot.

lUr. SPARKES: Mr. Mann, I rise to a point of order. I have never said anything <>f the sort. I have never wished to avoid anything I have said, but I say definitely now that I never referred to remarks bv the hon. member for Gregory as crimson' rot. Those words never came from my lips and I ask the Minister that they be withdrawn.

The CHAIR~IAN: I ask the Minister to .accept the denial of the hon. member for Aubigny.

lUr. DUGGAN: I am bound to accept it hut as I stated I quoted from remarks that I had recorded and I said that I hoped their accuracy would be shown by a comparison with '' Hansard.'' The onlv result will be that the statement I made 'will be at variance with the '' Hansard'' report because the term used by the hon. member was bloody rot.

lUr. SP ARKES: Again the hon. member is far out. The remark did not relate to the hon. member for Gregory but to the Secretary for Agriculture and Stock. That is plain, and it is still in the '' Hansarc1'' report.

Tlle CHAIKUAN: Order! I wish to eonect the erroneous impression of the Minister for Transport that hon. members may not refer to a previous debate on the Budget this Session. The Standing Orders provide only that members may not refer to a conduded debate. This debate has not concluded and any statement made by an hon. member on the Budget is open to criticism :and '' Hansard'' can be quoted.

~Ir. DUGGAN: Hon. members may recall that when the ex-member for Kelvin Grove was in this House, a man who had a keen wit and made some very fine interjections, because they hurt the hon. member for Aubigny, he threatened to do a surgical operation on him. That is the man who is talking about my brow-beating somebody.

I am not resentful of any suggestions relating to the Railway Department. Last year an attempt was made by an hon. member selected to speak on behalf of the Queensland People's Party to offer criticism of the transport undertakings of this State. The hon. member for Hamilton, in a very closelyreasoned speech, offered certain suggestions to me as Minioter in charge of the Railway Department. We examined those proposals, and where it was possible to give effect to them we did so. Onlv a few moments ago I made it clear that I was prepared to 'give effect to any constructive and useful suggestion concerning the Railway Department.

The hon. member for Aubigny went on to say that I bemoaned the fact that we had roads and aerodromes in Queensland. The truth is that I haYe never bemoaned the fact that we have roads and aerodromes in Queensland. What I did say was that there was no country in the world of which I was aware that was able to provide road, rail and air facilities at a standard that we should like, and that each countrv in the world was obliged to lay down a· standard and specification in accordance with its financial capacity to construct them.

~Ir. ,Sparkes: The U.S.A.

lUr. DUGGAN: Despite all the eulogies we have heard of the U.S.A. let me remind the hon. member that when the general manager of the Brisbane ''Telegraph'' returned to Australia recently he said that undoubtedly the U.S.A. possessed the finest trains in the world, but it also had the worst trains in the world. If our trains are so bad, why was it that Mr. Godfrey Morgan, who at one time was Minister for Railways, contended in this Chamber that the train running between Brisbane and Toowoomba was the best in Australia and the best train in the world travelling between cities similarly linked. The hon. member for Aubigny can have it any way he likes. I do not say that I agreed with the then hon. member for Murilla.

Let us examine this matter to see how far the construction of roads and aerodromes has extended in Queensland. This Government, of which I am pleased to be a member, have provided in recent times a subsidy of 50 per cent. to local authorities for the purpose of constructing aerodromes in various parts of the State. We have encouraged them to build aerodromes. We have encouraged them to maintain roads, and the Main Roads Commission has provided the maximum amount of funds and equipment for the purpose of increasing the main roads of the State. We have been charged with denuding transport facilities by transferring to Consolidated Revenue revenue collected by a levy on heavy

Supply. [21 OcTOBER.] Supply. 865

vehicles, the inference, of course, being that we make no comparable disbursement from Loan and Consolidated Revenue Funds. I am not going to justify the imposition of the transport fees just now. As a matter of deliberate policy, the Government felt that if alternative forms of transport are to take the more remunerative traffic from the Railway Department they should be prepared to make a commensurate contributioil to consolidated revenue.

The total collections last year from motorvehicle registration fees was £967,817, and receipts from Federal Aid Road grants amounted to £1,030,256, and, giving the hon. member the benefit of the fees credited to consolidated revenue under the State Trans· port Facilities Act, amounting to £313,401, we have a grand total of £2,311,474 from all sources in Queensland. Our expenditure dur· ing the 12 months on roads in Queensland was £3,746,079, so that there was an excess of expenditure over revenue of £1,434,605.

lllr. Low: Do you think that Queensland should get a greater share of the petrol tax~

lllr. DUGGAN: I am not arguing about that. My point is that we are charged with transferring £313,000 from the State transport fees to consolidated revenue without making any corresponding disbursement from consolidated revenue for road-making purposes, whereas if we made our disbursement only in accordance with the proportion col· lected probably £30,000,000 less would have been spent on road construction, apart from the amount that the Main Roads Commission collects-that sum, of course, is sin0e the inception of the Main Roads Commission.

In the report that we have tabled, you will see that a total of £70,000,000 has been expended by the Main Roads Commission since it was established 20 years ago, and expenditure over and above its total collec· tions from all sources in that period of £30,000,000. Some of these works undonbt· edly had military value and a value of that kind.

Now that we have come to an examination of the amount spent on roads in Queensland, it is well to remember, too, that we have been charged with Tetarding progress• of motor transport because of our failure to give road transport an opportunity of engaging on a more generous scale in the transport of goods and passengers throughout this State. We have been charged with neglecting maintenance of and the estab· lishment of main roads. I will tell the Committee a story which might seem fantastic and untrue but which is not fantastic and which is very true. A deputation was received by a responsibile Minister of the Crown in one of the Australian Parliaments less than 20 years ago. This is what the hon. gentle· man said in reply to the deputation, which asked for the construction of five miles of road in order to provide an all-weather road between a provincial city and a metropolitan city, and he said it with some heat:

''Australia had gone motor mad, and that millions had been spent on roads

1948-2F

which should never have been built. Figures, he said, failed to reveal that motors had increased by one bushel the production of wheat or the production of wool by one bale. It was a pity motor transport ever came to Australia. Motors had caused unemployment by making saddlers close up their shops and through less horse feed being sold. One of the principal causes of the depresison we were experiencing was the millions of pounds sent out of Australia to buy motors. Money was borrowed from England, and, instead of being used to develop the State, h~d been sent to foreign countries to buy motor cars, petrol and oil.'' He went on to say with particular refer·

ence to the Brisbane-Toowoomba Road-

'' 'l'hat road should 'never have been started, and he would take full responsibility for any delay in completing the road.''

The great oracle of imagination who made this statement was the man who, as a mem· ber of the Opposition, which was in power at the time, was entrusted with the portfolio of Secretary for Railways and Minister for Transport in this State.

Government lllembers: Ah!

lllr. DUGGAN: He was the Hon. Godfrey M01·gan. Here we are indicted by the hon. member for Aubigny on a charge of putting our heads in the sand, with waggling our feet, and with adopting a complacent attitude on road transport when we have spent £30,000,000 more than we have collected in fees in providing roads. Yet when another Minister chosen by hon. members opposite as the most competent to take charge of that department was asked he stated that the road in question, that between Grantham and Gatton, should not be built.

llir. Sparkes: I told you I knew all about it.

lllr. DUGGAN: Yes, because you subscribed to the policy on that occasion.

Then the hon. member for Aubigny says I am sensitive of constructive criticism and become personal and that I exercised ~y office in an attempt to damage and lnll politically the hon. member for Dalby, and that I would seek to go outside this Chamber and kill him in his industrv too. What are the facts? A peculiar relationship seems to have developed in this Chamber. I was very dubious and I warned the hon. member for Aubigny when he made this attack and asked him if he had the full concurrence of the hon. member for Dalby to proceed in this fashion. I gaye him ample warning before he proceeded to develo~ h~s . att~ck against me because of alleged d1scrumnat10n a.gainst the hon. member for Dalby and ask~d him was he prepared to take the consequences of it. That interjection was made audiblv for the hon. member told me I would have to take it. If the hon. member for Dalb:r seeks to use the hon. member for Aubigny to ventilate criticism in this House,


and then sees the hon. member for Aubigny is irresponsible, it is indeed unfortunate, but he must accept the responsibility.

But if these facts are as accurate as the hon. member says they are, they must have been furnished by the hon. member for Dalby or somebody in his employ, or with the concunence of the hon. member. If hon. members of the Opposition seek to be treated in departmental mattel's on any other basis than that which applies to the members of tlw general public, they can go to the Comnnssiou~r for Raih.-ays. I do not want people commg and asking for some intlividual favour if they want me to issue an instruction that impeaches or countermantls some policy enunciated by a departmental official. If I feel that their case does not justify some alteration of policy, I do not expect them personally or through somebody else to make a fierce attack about me, trying to enpple me personally.

])'[r. Sparkes: You said he could not take it.

Mr. DUGGAN: For the information of the Committee I want to point out that the hon. member for Dalby booked some trains from the drought-stTicken area. It is one of my sincere regrets that a greater measure of relief cannot be afforded to the pastoralists in the removal of starving stock. I have tried to do everything I could to increase the production of locomotives and induce employees to work overtime and to get train cre>vs to work more than eight hours' overtime, in order to give some relief to those people, because I realise that irreparable damage is done by catastrophic drought losses; but because so many people are in a similar position we have to lay down a policy in regard to the removal of stock. That policy is to have a committee in Brisbane, consisting of two representatives of the United Graziers' Association two representatives of the Fat-Sheep Brok~rs' Association, a live-stock clerk, with the general manager for the South-Eastern Division of the railways as chairman. It is this committee that makes the allocation or the allotment, after taking into consideration the degree of hardship operating in various parts of that area. ~he hon. member for Dalby made representations for a number of trains in April this year. If he did not feel that he was treated fairly, why did he not let matters take their course in the ordinary 1vay~

Mr. Sparkes: They do not handle store stock.

lUr. DUGGAN: They do handle store stock. That is their function. 'rhis committee handles• this problem. The hon. member for Dalby came and asked me whether I would help him because he \Yas in a rather difficult position. I asked Mr. Moloney whether he could make special efforts to help the hon. membe~. Four trains were provided, one on 27 Apnl, two on 4 May, and one on 11 May. Those trains were provided. The hon. member. ~or Aubigny_ get~ up and says, "What a p08'lhon to VIsualise, particularly after

droving your sheep 50 miles by road without feGd from a drought-stricken area-to find when you arrive that no trucks arc available to load your starving sheep! The Minister complacen~ly sits down and wags his foot." If the trams hall not been provided, instead of a loss of 1,200 sheep-for "1\hich I am sorry-there would have been possibly a 100 per cent. loss.

JUr. Sparkes: Three days late.

Jir. DUGGAN: That is rather unfortunate, but this the explanation. The diversion of sheep loaded from Charleville for Glcnmorgan to Mitchell resulted in the inalJility to proYide the vans on 4 August. It wn~ necessary to delay till 7th August. :ehe diversion of a t•rain with starving stock 1s not an unusual circumstance.

lUr. Sparkes : It is pretty tough.

1Ur. DUGGAN: It throws the whole schedule out.

])fr. Sparkes: You must admit that it was pretty hard on the hon. member.

JUr. DUGGAN: And very hard on others. We have orders for approximately 1,200 vans to 1:1ove sheep from the starving stock areas. Is It not a considerable hardship to men in those ~reas who would like to trans-ship stock to agistment areas in other parts of the State g It is a heavy hurtlen for these people.

This is the important point. The hon. member for At~bigny said that an experienced <lrover sa1d that at least 75 per cent. of the loss of the sheep was due to the negligence of the Railway Department. The hon. member himself states that the area from wh~ch these sheep ~~ere taken was droughtstncken; they were m a weakenetl condition and for 50 miles they were driYen along th~ road. \V hat is the maximum rate sheep would travel a day under those conditions f Six miles a day. Cons-equently these sheep were on the road for eight days without a bite to eat.

lUr. Sparkes: Who said that?

Mr. DUGGAN: You said so. Mr. Sparkes: You did not hear aright.

The CHAIRlUAN: Order!

Mr. RUSSELL: I rise to a point of order. I do not .see why my private business should be bandie·d about the Chamber. I never asked the lton. member to bring the matter forward, bnt what he said is true. He saw the sheep and knew of the losses.

The CHAIRlliAN: Order! The Minister has the right to reply to any stn tement made by any other hon. member.

IUr. Sparkes: He never made any other complaint.

])fr. DUGGAN: These are the words of the hon. member for Aubigny-

' 'Just visualise it youmelf, Mr. Manu, particulaT!y after driving your sheep by road without feel!.''

JUr. RusseH: Tl1ey had feed. (Government interjections.)



l\lr. DUGGAN: I am replying to the hon. member for Aubigny.

The CHAIRl\iAN: Order! I would remind hon. members on my left that the Minister is quite capable of making his speech without any help and I ask them to let him do so without interruption.

lUr. DUGGAN: I labelled the hon. member for Aubigny as the unpredictable and unreliable member for Aubigny, and we have confirmation, fortunately, from the hon. member for Dalby of his unreliability.

I\Ir. Sparkes: Read "Hansard."

Mr. DUGGAN: Let us disabuse our minds of personal attacks. There are several hon. members on that side of the Committee who have interviewed me on private matters, but I have never disrusse·il them in this Chamber and I neYer will; but I object to the hon. member for Dalby who thinks, that for some particular reason-by either birth or position-he is the only person \Vho is entitled to level attacks against me and criticise me personally and that I should not have the right of reply. The hon. member for Aubigny takes up the cudgels on his behalf, but I warn him not to buy into this matter. He states that '''I' he hon. member will have to learn to take it.'' If I have to learn to take it, the hon. member for Dalby will have to do the same. Last year the hon. member for Dalby said .. in this Chamber that what he called our obsolescent and inefficient railways should be folded up and the job handed over to road transpOTt and it would be better for tlie State. He used words to that effect.

lUr. RUSSELL: I rise to a point of order. I never said that. I never made such a statfment in my life. I ask that my denial be accepted. • ·

The CHAIRl\IAN: Order!

I\lr. DUGGAN: I accept the denial of the hon. member, but one need only read his speech o! last year as reported in '' Hansard.'' He made a series of charges against me. He said that political patronage was responsible for inefficient administration. He also said we should ''lift the lid off transport fees and let those who can do the job open up the country.'' But what happened when the unfortunate railway strike was on in ·Queensland 1 He was the first to come along to ask me for help to get wheat from Dalby. I told him there was no hope of getting train crews, but on 9 February we arranged for 1,000 bags of wheat to be brought to Brisbane to help the hon. member. As the strike continued, the hon. member again came to me and asked, ' ' Can you help to provide road transport for my wheat to the mills~ ' '

iUr. Rnssell: It is not my wheat.

I\Ir. DUGGAN: The mill's.


I\Ir. DUGGAN: The flour mill in which the hon. member was financially interested. He said, ''Can you help? The licensed carrier in my area does not like me. I cannot get him to transport my wheat.'' I said, ''As a personal gesture to you I will see what r can do.'' I immediately got in touch with one of the largest road-b-ansport operators in this State and said, ''Can you, as a personal gesture, arrange to transport wheat back to Brisbane~" that is, to enable this mill to be kept in operation to provide the flour requirements of the people of Brisbane and to keep the employees engaged in this mill in which the hon. member is financially interested. He sai<l, ''I have a tremendous back-log of orders for transport to Brisbane, but as a personal gesture I will do what I can.'' T arranged for the wheat to be brought to Brisbane for £2 a ton, without payment of any road-transport tax at all.

'l'he serret of the whole thing is that the hon. member for Dalby did not elect to take advantage' of that offer, for the reason that the rail freight ·was 15s. lOd. a ton wh~re~s he \\'Onld be obliged to pay £2 a to~ 1f, /t came down by road transport. He sa1·il, I cannot afforcl to give my competitors the mm· gin between 15s. lOd. and £2 a ton.'' We went to the extent of offering to fmnish him with documents for submission to the Prices Commissioner for an increase in the price of flour, on application for the allowance of an increased cost of transport charges to bring the wheat down here. Ha said '' 'rhat would be no good.'' He wanteil a sl{bsidy because otherwise he would be a• a disadva~tage with his competitors.

Notwithstanding the hon. member's failurll to accept the help offered, we arranged that the very first traillj. that _ran from Too" woomba when the ra1l sernce was resumed shoulcl carry wheat for the hon. member's mill.

lUr. Pie: What right have you to give him or anyone else preference~

lUr. DUGGAN: None at all. . I was trying to keep the flour supply gomg here, and incidentally help the member for Dalby. W'hat I am concerned about is that instead of trying to kill the hon. member politically and injure his business-and here I am vindicating myself on the charge that I have been doing such things-I have gone out of my way to help him.

I\Ir. SJ}arkes interjected. lUr. DUGGAN: I make this promise here

-and do not go running round the country as the hon. member for Aubigny probably will in that political larrikin style of his--

JUr. Sparkes interjected.

I\Ir. DUGGAN: Let me say now that I shall be very careful in future of requests that emanate from these sources for any personal intervention by me to countermand or alter an official decision.

lUr. Sparkes interjected.

The CHAIRlliAN: Order! I do not want to have to deal with the hon. member for Aubigny but I warn him that if he does not


allow the Minister for Transport to make his speech without interruption I shall have to deal with him. I have warned th~ hon. member repeatedly during this session and I am not going to continue to -do it.

lUr. DUGGAN: The next allegation made by the hon. member for Aubigny was that the Government bave instructed me, as Minister for Transport, to proceed, at a cost of between £4,000,000 and £5,000,000, with the electrificr"tion of the Brisbane suburban rail" ays. He baid, ''I will be quite frank. Hon. members on this side are not opposed to the electrification of the Brisbane milways, but the Minister ould be better occupied, instead of dangling his foot again if he saw to it that e1·cn steam trains went out into the far western parts of the State.'' I do not propose to deal with the report on the elecrification of the Brisbane railwavs, because the Government have not yet fin'any detennined their attitude on that matter, but a good deal of inquiry is procee·ding at present and I want to say that all the preliminary intelligent planning that can go into this task ~f providing for the railway development of tins State has been done and iSJ going on the whole time.

JUr. Evans: It may be going on but nothing has been done.

li'Ir. DUGGAN: Perhaps the hon. member will find many things in his own mill that he is incapable of controlling.

Mr. Evans: I always keep up.

JUr. DUGGAN: Probably the hon. member keeps up but that does not get his sugar to the refineries. I am not condemning the hon. member personally, but there are many factors beyond his control that he would like to see altered.

:i1Ir. Rnssell: As soon as we make a suggestion to you, you resent it.

:i1Ir. DUGGAN: Not at all. The hon. member for Hamilton, the hon. member for \Vindsor-indeed, many hon. membe;·s opposite -haYe come forward frequently With suggestions, which I welcomed with open arms and many of them I have given effect to; but the hon. member for Dalby, without justification, makes a splenetic attack upon me and then, for some unknown reason, asks for immunity from reply.

What is the position regarding electrification~ I believe as a general principle that it will be of advantage to Brisbane to have its milway service ele.ctrified. It will give faster and cleaner travel for the people in the Brisbane area. We feel that the electrification of the railways will be more economic than the steam traffic. It will be faster and it will foster development away from the densely populated parts of the citv.

By quick acceleration and deceleration electrification will move the crowds out of the dly, and remove the traffic congestion caused in our streets when the additional busses and trams are put on at the peak hours of the day. At the present time it takes an hour to go from the Valley to the

Stafford terminus, and a similarly Ion~ tin_1e on other lines, because of the congestwn m the heart of the eity.

Apart from facilitating the moYement of traffic, electrification will have the effect -and the hon. member charges me with ignoring th.is-of maldng avai_lable ·~tea;n locomotives to help the pnmary m~ustnes m the country. \Vhat would happen If we were able to have our tmins electrified~ \Ve should be able to release the 44 steam locomotives that are at the present time in use for the Brisbane suburban traffic. They could be released for use outside. And, furthermore, there are 13 B.18t engines, the most powerful engines used on mail and goods trains, t~1at could be utilised for the movement of starvmg stock. And, what is more, there are the other engines. I would admit the relevance of the hou. ·member's contention if by the Government agreeing to the electrification J?roposals the construction of steam locomotn'es was being impeded. The construction of electrified cars and equipment would not, however be undertaken by firms holding locomotives contracts. \Ve are spending millions of pounds outside the city of Brisbane, in the North and in Central Queensland and surelv Brisbane people are not to be prev~nted froni participating in the expenditure of loan monev because they happen to be situated in Bri~bane. We have time and again refuted the charge made against the Government that the greater part of Government money is being expended in Brisbane.

The present locomotive shops in New South Wales and Queensland are taxed to the utmost in building locomotives. The locomotive programme is greater than their ability to build. There are 114 on order from Queensland at present, but the steel pos_ition is very difficult. I have no quarrel with the Broken Hill Pty. Ltd. in this regard. Although the plant at Port Kembla is working at only 60 per cent. capacity, our steel deliveries last year were 87 per cent. in excess of those in 1938. I say again that we have no cause for complaint ·1\'ith B.H.P.-indeed, we are grateful for its help and co-operation. It is proposed to erect a £20,000,000 steel mill at Port Kembla, and for some years a tremendous volume of steel will be required for the building of that mill. Every engineering firm in the Common wealth has been asked to make a contribution to the steel that will ultimately be required for that purpose. In the meantime our programme will be interrupted.

The Broken Hill Pty. Ltd. pro,-ides steel for wagons at £17 a ton, and compar~ble steel from Englnnd costs £43 a ton. Graz1ers are askin<Y for yyorJd paritv for meat, and, although I am not a spoke_sman for t_he Broken Hill Pty. Ltd., could It not be sm_d, using the same logic, that the B:·oken H_111 Ptv. Ltd. is entitled to world panty for ItS steel' The position in ::'i ew South Wales \Vales is that the Government haYe authorised an additional expenditure of £28_6,000 to meet steel commitments, for the Simple reason that they are unclertnkin~ a programme of building with English steel instead of Australian steel.


JUr. Sparkes: No grazier has asked for world parity.

lUr. DUGGAN: I am sorry if I said world parity instead of export parity. All these constructing authoriti0s have been interviewed, either by myself or the Commissioner or representatives of the Railway Department, and instead of doin~ as the hon. member charges us, burymg our heads in the sand, we have been endeavouring for some considerable time to get maximum production from these works. Indeed, the elecb·ification proposal has stimulated _the close interest_ of ~'' o of the largest electnc-supply compames m Australia, and to such an extent that thev have sent their representatives to England: All I can sav at the moment is that negotiations are proceeding. In expectation of the Government's authorising the electrification of our suburban system they are willing to join with other large companies and come to Brisbane and give us deliveries much ahead of those of existing workshops in the Southern States. The Commonwealth Engineering Company has orders live years ahead for wagons, coaches and other steel requirements. If we can induce these people to come here and bui~d in this country and provide plant and eqmpment from their English parent company, is that not a good thing for this State~ And while we are doing that we are not interfering with the locomotive production prog~amme and we are &'etting something that \nll enable 44 locomotives to be released fOl' service in outer areas. So much for that question.

:ilir. Sparkes: And what is going to happen to the sheep~

JUr. DUGGAN: It is fortunate at times that remarks emanate from unwise men that provide an opportunity for informatiYe information to be given.

The next question that the hon. member raised was the building of the BlackallCharleville railway. I do not want to say at this stage that I reject the proposal that such a link should be constructed. All I want ~o say now is that at the present time, even 1f the Government were willing to authorise the building of this link it would be a physical impossibility to get 'either the men or the material to proceed with it. There is a world shortage of steel rails and we are using secondhand rails in the Railway Department now. Orders were given to the Australian Rolling Mills in 1944 and they are not yet iilled. Every country of the world is in serious need of steel rails and other railway equipment.

:ilir. Sparkes: That has not been the position over the last 30 years.

:ilir. DUGGAN: I am not concerned about 30 years. I am only concerned with problems as they affect me now. The hon. member amazes me. He now charges me with something that happened 30 years ago, but when I referred to a matter mentioned by Mr. Godfrey Morgan \Yhen he was Minister fm; Railways the hon. member for Aubigny smd, ' 'Why go back 20 years I'' It is

extraordinary that he should object when I refer to something that happened20 years ago, !Jut when it suits him to make political capital out of it he refers to the alleged failure of the Labour Government to do a certain thing 30 years ago. I \vant to deal with the problem that \Yas reviwd only on Tuesday last; I do not want to go back 30 years. I did not have a vote 30 years ago and I could not be expected to have much interest in the matter then.

My point is that we are obliged to examine the economies of these things. 'rhere are some aspects of this matter that are put forward not in a provocative \YUY but in the hope that the Government will accept the responsibility of providing a link that would be used only during a eh-ought and as a means of insurance by graziers in the protRction of their areas. It has been postulated that it will open up and develop the country, but I do not subscribe to that view because I believe that the area bebveen Char leville and Blackall would not be any further developed by the building of th~s railway line in this area. Generally speakmg, it is true that when there is a major drought in the Central-~West there is a major drought in the south-western part of the State also, but this year that is not so. I have the figures here. I asked the railway staff to consult with the Observatory on the incidence of drought in these parts of the State.

On top of that, even if the link was constmcted between the points set out it would he physically impossible for the Railway Department to shift all the stock in the prescribed time. New South Wales some years ago lost during a sevm·e drought period 10,000,000 sheep, bnt only 964,000 sheep were Temovecl from the drought areas in that State despite the fact that the areas were well served by rail communications.

Therefore this argument that there are so many hundreds of thousands of sheep in a particular area that could all be saved if rail communication was provided is unsound. Some graziers stock lightly and have pasture longer than others. Other people prefer to gamble and by the time they find the rain does not come thev are unable to make arrangements for ;gistment where feed is aYailable.

There are these factors that must be \\'eighed before we commit ourselves to this policy-rushing in and constructing a rail link. In the last three months I have received 12 deputations or submissions for the construction of rail links in various parts of Queensland. Some no doubt will be justified in time, lJUt each area feels the need for protecting its interests aml is therefore pressing for these rail facilities.

There are only one OT two other general observations I should like to make. The hon. member for Aubigny charges us with extracting very heavy fees through the Transport Department. Transport operators generally have flourished. Further, it is very difficult indeed to accept the responsibility of opening up road transport by reducing transport fees aucl neglecting the revenue that is required for our railway undertaking.


The hon. member for Windsor said also that Government prosperity is wrapped up to a very large extent in the administration of the Railway Department. I agree that if • an undertaking brings in a revenue of £11,000,000 or £12,000,000 annually a decline in its revenue must have an impact on State nuances generally. Hon. members have drawn attention from time to time to the need for prudent administration of the railways to see that they are properly controlled.

lUr. Pie: I also said you had one of the worst jobs in the Ministry.

Mr. DUGGAN: I admit that the hon. member has been very considerate. The point is that the moment we start lmilding a rail link of this kind it would be an uneconomic undertaking for the department. I am not suggesting that it would not be in the best interests of Queensland. It might be desirable in the interests of food production to have such a link, but at the moment I am dealing with a proposed railway that if constructed would operate at a tremendous annual loss. It might be desirable in the interests of Australia and the British people so far as food production is concerned; but I am pointing out that the moment we have a loss on the railways we are charged with maladministration and incompetent handling, and ut the same time hon. members opposite would want wholesale dismissals of the staff, call for retrenchments and ask that wages be reduced. On the other hand, they want the department to provide these facilities and when it suits them they say the railways are a developmental instrument and we should not worry about their losses.

At present I have a road operator who wants to shift 1,000 bales of wool from the south-western part of the State. He states that he is not prepared to move it, because railway officials are going round saying to the graziers, ''If you shift your wool by road, you will not be eligible for the rebate of 25 or 30 per cent. when you want fodder for starving stock when a drought occurs.'' He says that is deterring the graziers from giving their wool to the road operators. They argueand it is a reasonable argument from their point of view-that if they are willing to give this rebate to these graziers, the same as the department, they should be permitted to cart their wool.

I admit that the argument appeared to be quite plausible until I analysed it. The wool traffic i~ r~munerative to ~he Railway Department; 1t IS one commodity we like to cart because we make a proiit on it. If we cannot provide trucks for 1,000 bales of wool it is because we are diverting trucks for sugar, for stock feed f\om Warwick into the starving stock are.as, whiCh no motor lorry will cart. If .":e sa1d we would not accept any responSibility and we would let road transport do it and we would grab all the wool would ther~ not be a Sta~e-:vide howl~ The r~ason why we cannot cart It IS that the department is allocating the maximum available trucks to the 't"emoval of urgently required goods. Only yesterday I received a request for 10 trucks from Emu Vale to Warwick,

and we have orders f~·om Mackay, Bundaberg, and other places for the provision of more timber trucks to carry sawn timber to the northern ports. All these things are being done at great iinancial cost to the department. We are obliged to bring coal from Blair Athol to Brisbane, because the City Electric Light Co. and other consumers can get cheaper coal from West Moreton.

lUr. Pie interjected.

lUr. DUGGAN: Can you tell me any road operator who is prepared to go to Warwick and iill up with stock feed and cart it to Clermont~ Of course you cannot.

JUr. Pie: You said the railways could not handle this.

]Ur. DUGGAN: I am prepared to consider that: if the road operator will agree to this proposal we 1vill cart the wool and let him cart the starving stock and the timber. If what the hon. member says is sound, let us adopt the converse too. It reminds me of the story of the blackfellow who went out shooting with the . boss. They shot a turkey and a crow, and the boss said, ''I will have the turkey and you can have the crow; and if you don't think that is right, you can have the crow and I'll have the turkey.'' It sounds all right.

I should like to develop somewhat further my argument in the defence of our railways, but I have not the time. I have con· fined myself principally to the hon. member for Aubigny because I do feel an obligation to try to scotch emphatically the irresponsible statements of the hon. member. I repeat that if we get constructive criticism from time to time we shall be happy to examine it. The statement that the State is declining and we are in a moribund condition is false.

lUr. EV ANS (Mirani) (12.18 p.m.) : I listened with very great interest to the talk by the Minister, and he has endeavoured to put up a good case for the railways. I believe that since he has been Minister for Transport he has worked very hard and he is endeavouring to do everything it is possible to do.

During the Minister's speech he went back to Godfrey Morgan and criticised the so-called Tory Government, but immediately the hon. member for Aubigny interjected and referred to the policy of the socialistic Government he said, "Why go back to early years~" I am not going to criticise the Minister, because I have had many dealings with him and I have always found him civil, helpful, and intelligent. I have found also that the position the railways have developed into is the result of the actions of men who have been handling the affairs of the department for this socialistic Government. They have put the Minister into such an impossible position that possibly even his eloquence cannot get him out of it.

The position we are facing up to today has been caused bv the action of Governments with lack of busii1ess acumen-the socialistic Governments who have been in office during the last 30 years. What has happened during that time~ They have told us year by year


that production has increased and that development has increased. What has happened to the railways~ They have not kept pace with production.

I do not expect the Railway Department to show a profit. In fact, the balance-sheet of the department is, in my opinion, drawn up unfairly. In prcpa1·ing a profit and loss account of the Railway Department c·redit must be given for dexelopmental work, l'evenue from lands that will be occupied as a result of the developmental work of tllf' raihYays, and revenue from the proc1uction of primary industries. Credit must be taken for these things. We should not wony about whether the ra.ilways are showing a profit or not, but we must wony about our development, and about ensuri11g that we have men handling the affaiTs of the State with business acumen and foresight. Thev should be capable of developing the countr)' by prover hau::ipc~t f!l~ilitiP", r.:rpable of lwndling the production of the State.

But what do we find? A company with which I am connected is pushed Tound in connection with its transport; one year it is by railway but the next year by road transport, then perhaps the following year back to the railwav. There is no securitv. If we had secnrit)· for a periocl of yeai·s we could install our own fleet of mot0T vehicles to carry the proiluce hy road. Further, there is discrimination. For instance, wheat, maize, and other primary products can be carted by road for Li miles wi+hrmt. attracting transport tax, bnt because there was atl the time a Mmis1er i'ur ~,;:;;:;;; port who was· spiteful we find t·hat there is a provision in the Act that we cannot haul five miles.

We in the sugar industry have cncleavonre-1 to relieve the Railway Department of some of its burdens. In my area in all instances where we can cart our cane by road we go on the road, thus releasing trucks and so helping the Railway Department. But when we have to haYe recourse to the road to cart our sugar we have to pay the inequitable transport tax, which no other primary industry has to do. I submit that to the Minister, whom I have found to bB reasonable and fair, in m-der that he may have it investigated and have the sugar industry placed on the same footing as other primary industries in that regard.

On page 19 of his Budget the Treasurer states-

" In 1946-47, £366,479 was made available through the Agricultural Bank for drought relief, but fortunately only £11,227 was required in 1947-48."

But the hon. gentleman cleos not say thr,t the Federal Government: made money available to help the drought-stricken primary industries but his Government refused w take advantage of it. He does not tell us that the Prime Minister condemned this Gove,.nment because they \Yere not big enough to stand up to the obligation of accepting the subsidy of expending pouml for pound themselves. He camouflages it by saying that ''it was made available.'' Why has production

declined and why did producers not- obtain a loan~ Because they could not pay it back. 'rhey lost their crops, their sheep and cattle and pigs because this Government wm·e so niggardly in their attitude that they refused eo do what ?\few South Wales and other Gowmments in Australia did: they Tefused to take advantage of the pound-for-pound subsidy-loan to grant relief to the people \Yho \vcre producing the wealth of this country. Why c1id not the TreasureT explain that fully 1

On page 21 the Treasurer states-'' 'rhe Goyernment will continue, actively,

it~ policy of promoting decentralisation. The Electric Supply Corporation (Overseas) intends to commence operations on its huge scheme to develop the immense coal resources at Blair Athol. Under an agreement entm-ed into with the Queensland Government the Corporation intends to expend the enormous sum of £18,000,000 in ae-\;--e}cpir:.g the winP,A; :in building a railway, in providing port and harbour facilities and otherwise.''

He then says-'' The attack on this plan by certain

critics of the scheme, commonly known as 'knockers·'--"

According to the dictionary, a "knocker" is one who draws attention to or knocks down. I clo not know what interpretation the Treasurer gives to it, but I was one of those who attacked the Government. I have continued to attack them since and I will continue to attack them--

nr. ·Tit~utlui'i i Tiig:ht ~!' ~vrong.

)Ir. EYANS: Rightly, as the hon. member for Herbert knows in his heart, if they endeavour to tie up the resources of this great State. In handing over the franchise to which I have referred the Government have granted ridiculous concessions and tied up the pastoral, agricultural, timber and metalliferous mining resources in that portion of the State.

Let me remind the Government again that if they get coal in N ebo they will not go to Blair Athol. This company is boring at Nebo now. Its object is to build a line to Nebo and exhaust the coal deposits there because it is only 60 or 70 miles from the coast. The Mackay Harbour Board carried a resolution and wrote to the Government nsking for a franchise to build a line into Nebo, but the letter was merely acknowledged. Is there some reason for this~ \Vhy all these concessions? Why should this outside company, with a paid-up capital of £44,000, be given this exclusive franchise to tie up these resources? Is that the way to get decentralisation? Is it the way to get c1evclopment? Is it the way to settle the lancl on the great North Coast line? Is it the \vay to populate and create defence~ It is not.

I have reac1 in the 'Press, and heard it said, that the Premier will not be coming back to this Parliament. I know the skids are under him and that they are well greased. It has often been suggested that

872 Supply. [ASSEMBLY] Supply.

he will be chairman of the Coal Board. I go further and suggest that he may be chairman of the British Electric Supply Corporation (Australia) Ltd., and I think it will be found that I am not far wrong.

In the Financial Statement we always find outstanding mention of the Main Roads Commission. I agree that the Main Roads Commission has done a very fine job. I believe that at its head we have one of the best public servants in Queensland. When we analyse expenditure of all Government funds, however, and relate it to population, we find that the Government are not fair. We know Brisbane pays a big amount in motor-vehicle tax, and we know also that all roads lead to Brisbane. As one who has been chairman of a local authority for many years, I believe that the disbursement of main-roads funds has been equitable, but I cannot say the same of other funds. I regret very much having to say what I am about to say. I have the highest possible regard for Mr. Kemp, who is one of the finest public servants in Queensland, but I believe the Go\·ernment are o\·erworking him. They are pushing him into too many jobs and it is humanly impossible for one man to Rupervise efficiently the many jobs he has to do. I tell the Government that local government is suffering very severely by Mr. Kemp 's having these various jobs to attend to. Chairmen of local authorities come down to Brisbane from the far \Vest and the North and cannot e\·en see him; if they do see him, it is not the Mr. Kemp \VC

used to meet, the Mr. Kemp who was conversant with every detail of every shire in Queensland, but the Mr. Kemp who is wrapped up in Emerald or in his job as Co-ordinator-General of Public ·works.

And what is more, I should give him more than he is receiving today; he gets less than the Commissioner for Railways. Mr. Kemp should be the highest-paid public servant in Queensland. I say that he should be relieved of the position of Commissioner of Main Roads or put back to it and it alone. I do not think any man in Queensland is as efficient as he is but the Government are only killing him through their policy of loading up one of the greatest public servants in Queensland. I ask the responsible Minister to consider m;· suggestion.

The other clay I was surprised and disappointed at a statement made hy the hon. membOT for Kelvin Grove about that ''abusive and filthy statement.'' It is not in '' Hansarcl.'' He said of the hon. member for East Toowoomba, ''He may shout, he may rant and rave as Mr. Fadclcn does, but I advise him to take someone with a much better character than Mr. Fadden. '' He went on to say that at a function at whirh Sir T.eslie \Vilson >ms present Mr. Faclden told a story which turnpcl out to be this'' I like speeches to be likE' women's dresses, long enough to cover thl' subject but short enough to be interesting.·' The '' Telegraph'' of today publishes this paragraph-

'' This will interest the member for Kelvin Grove (Mr. Turner) and others.

The 'dirty, filthy yarn' which Mr. Turner complained about Mr. Fadden telling at a Gatton College function was used by a Church leader to preface his remarks on speech day at one of the State's leading boys' colleges. '' Mr. Fadclen is a personal friend of mine.

He was born at Walkerston and educated at the ordinary State school. We know the part he has played in Queensland and in Australia. It will be admitted that he is one of the most capable accountants in Queensland and it has not been the filthy lucre that he has been after. He has helped many bodies in Queensland, including one with which I am connected. The hon. member for Herbert knmvs that Mr. Fad den's services were avail'lble to assist in the taking over of the Tully Mill. When the commission in connection with the Mackay Harbour Board was appointed Mr. Faclclen offered his services l:(ratuitously. He did not want any monetary consideration; he wanted to help the district of his birth to get the harbour. Would the l10n. member for Kelvin Grove do that~

JUr. Wanstall: He would not be capable of it.

JUr. Turner: We know what was in his mind.

JUr. EVANS: When the hon. member for Keh·in Grove talks a bout minds I say that only a person with a perverted mind would put the construction on the statement Mr. Faddeu made that the hon. member for Kelvin Grove has put upon it.

Let us consider the hon. member for Kelvin Grove on the other hand. He is a church elder in his electorate, and we admire him for it, but he should be consistent.

Itlr. Wanst.all: He does not practise what he preaches.

JUr. EV ANS: Of course he does not. Let me go a little further. The hon. member moralises on gambling-he does not believe in it, it is terrible, it pollutes the minds of people. He does not take part in it, or does he~ Of course he does. The sweep that was conducted at Parliament House was won by the hon. member. \Vhen nobody saw him he took some tickets in it.

]Ur. TURNER: Mr. Devries, I ask for a withdrawal of that statement. I am an elder of the church and I am proud of it. I have never opposed gambling when it ·was controlled by the Government. (Opposition laughter.) I have always held that anything properly controlled and concluctecl was a legal organisation. (Opposition laughter.)

The TKUPORARY CHAIRitlAN: (Mr. Devries) : What is the point of order~

Itlr. TURNER: I did not take a ticket in the sweep.

Opposition .lUembers: You won it.

lUr. TURNER: I was put in the sweep. I had no idea I was in it. (Opposition laughter.)


'l'he TE.JIPOUARY CHAIR~IAN: Order. This is not a matter that should be a subject of merrimei1t. It is a rather serious matter. I suggest that the hon. member for Mirani accept the assurance of the hon. member for Kelvin Grove that he is not guilty of the act ascribed to him by the hon. member for Mirani.

)Ir. EV ANS: I will accept the undertaking of the hon. member for Kelvin Grove that someone put him in the sweep and that he won the money.

lUr. TURNEU: I wanted to complete my statement. I was put in by someone. \Vhen I was informed that I won it I gave the money to charity. (Opposition laughter.)

The TE~JPO RARY CHAIRJIAN: Order!

Mr. EV ANS: The story I heard was that he won it and he disagreed with the amount he received, that he said there could not be any second or third horses and that he wanted the lot. (Opposition laughter.)

The TE)JPORARY CHAIR~! AN: I ask the hon. member for Mirani to accept the assurance of the hou. member for Kelvin Grove that he is not guilty of the act attributed to him by the hon. member for Mirani. I suggest that he accept the denial of the hon. member for Kelvin Grove.

)Jr. EV ANS: I accept what he says, that he was put in the sweep by someone, that he won it, and that he gave the money to charity. He requested those people not to tell anybody that he was in it.

)fr. Paters on: What was the sweep?

)Jr. EV ANS: It was a sweep on the Melbourne Cup.

Mr. Paters on: Conducted in Parliament?

)Jr. EVANS: Yes.

The CHAIR)IAN (Mr. Mann): I ask the hon. member for Mirani to refrain from imputing improper motives to another hon. member of the Assembly and to get on with the debate on the question before the Committee.

)Jr. EV ANS: The hon. member was not concerned with the morals of gambling but was more concerned about being found out. That is the position.


nr. EV ANS: This mealy-mouthed prude would have us believe--

)fr. TURNER: Mr. Mann, I rise to a point of order. Is the hon. member in order in referring to me as a mealy-mouthed prnde ~

'l'he CHAIR:tiAN: Order! I ask the hon. member to withdraw that remark. It is not Parliamentary.

1\'fr. EVANS: I put it this way-

The CHAIR)IAN: Order!

)fr. EVANS: I withdraw the statement. I suggest that the hon. member would have us believe that he puts out the lights before he turns down the blankets to go to bed.

I want now to deal with the sugar industry. The Secretary for Agriculture and Stock suggested during this session tha.t consideration be given to increasing the aggregate of the mill peaks to 1,000,000 tons. He also said that Britain had agreed to give us a five-year contract, but that that contract >Yould include a year-to-year fixation of price. A five-year contract with a year-to-year fixation of price is very little security for the sugar industry if it embarks on this great expansion mentioned by the Minister, unless the Federal Government are prepared to give it consideration through the Sugar Agreement. That protection would mean the cost of production plus.

The Minister further said that we should receive a price based on Australian economy for our sugar. ~What is Australian economy~ The actual price of sugar that the industry receives is £24 a ton. When you take the exportable surplus, which is sold at £29 5s. a ton, and is about 259,000 tons in No. 1 pool, in conjunction with the local price, it gives you about £25 1 6s. or £26 a ton for sugar within the peak, the balance of roughly 47,000 tons is No. 2 pool and we expect the price to be £29 5s. Is that the Australian economy price or is the £24 the Anstralian economy price·? The hon. member for Herbert told us how this Government, and how these other socialistic Governments, helped us. vV e know that when the price of sugar in England and the world was low the industry almost went bankrupt. We were told we should have to carry the exportable surplus.

lUr. Theodore: You are not blaming this Government for that~

)lr. EV ANS: I am blaming this Government, and I am blaming the hon. member as a member of the Government. The hon. member will find that Clause 9 of the Sugar Agreement provides that the industry must carry all responsibility for the exportable surplus. The price of our export sugar fell to £12 or £13 a ton and as low as £7 a ton. The industry got into such a difficult condition that in 1946 its representatives approached the State Government and asked that they make representations to the Federal Government to subsidise the indnstn, the subsidy to be based on the rise or fall of the index figures. The hon. memher for Herbert was a supporter of that Federal Government. When that application was made and the industry's case was presented, what happened~ They had previouslv called in the Tariff Board.

lUr. Theodore: You know you asked for that.

1\'Ir. EV ANS: We never asked that our case be submitted to the Tariff Board.

We waited on the Federal Government and pleaded with them to help us to get back into production. \Ve told them that we were prodncing sugar cheaper than anywhere elsA in the world and that we were the only


industry restored. the hon. said, no.

that had not had the cut in price What did they say~ What did

member's Government say~ They

lUr. Theodore: What did they do?

lUr. EVANS: They did not have the guts to do anything.

l\lr. Theodore: It was the Commonwealth Government who had to decide the question.

l\Ir. EV ANS: The industry would not accept the Commonwealth Government's deQision. The Premier was approached through the Sugar Board and asked not to sign the Sugar Agreement, but his Government let us down and signed the agreement against the unanimous wish of the industry. The hon. member for Herbert cannot deny that.

There can be no dispute about it. Yet today and for the last two years, because the export price is high, the Commonwealth Government have been bulking the export price with the Australian price. Immediately it falls-and fall it will-we shall be asked to carry it again unless there are stronger men in this Government than there were on that occasion-and I do not think there will be.

I believe that before any expansion takes place there should be a thorough investigation, and that it should be carried out by a Royal Commission. I believe that the Central Sugar-Cane Prices Board should be the body, with other rural representatives, that should make that investigation. I believe the chairman of the central board has a great knowledge of the industry and its ramifications, and I believe no one would be more suitable to carry out an investigation as to the expansion of the industry and how that expansion should be brought about. We read in the Press that our Premier has stated that they have another big scheme for growing sugar. ·

l\Ir. Tlteodore: We have big ideas.

l\lr. EVANS: Yes, but you cannot execute them. It is no good having big ideas unless you can apply them. The hon. member has no application and his Government have not, so what is the good of having big ideas~ Let us get down to tin-tacks and see what can be done and what should be done. The Premier said in England that there was further big expansion to take place. I assume it will be another Emerald scheme. I assume it will be another million of Britain's monev. We were told of £1,500,000 in connection with the other scheme and we find that it is only £1,000,000 and we are putting in £500,000. I assume it will be another joint State and British Government socialistic enterprise.

lUr. Theodore: You are drawing on your imagination.

l\Ir. EV ANS: The Premier may have been drawing on his own. He published it; I am reading it and trying to interpret it. I am endowed with a little bit of common sense. You cannot come to any other conclusion, when he links it up with the Emerald

undertaking, but that it is another State enterprise. I say that is the wrong way to approach the matter. I believe there is only one way to approach expansion in the sugar industry and that is by an investigation. I should say that the only immediate way you could have expansion is by using the present milling power to its economic capacity or to what it could be built up to in Queensland and New South Wales. If that is done there could be an allocation of the increased tonnages to the various mills to be treated over an economic period. There are also to be considered the people in the industry who have producell the tonnage or who could produce the tonnage.

A new mill is out of the question because you cannot build it in five years. It is a five-year contract and there is no protection as to price, and the period is far too short. In my own mill during the last few years we have spent £70,000. We have agreed upon a five-year delivery for some of the equipment. What chance have the Government of building a mill within the fiveyear period that the British Government have under the contract.

Jir. Theodore: The Government do not need to have you to tell them that.

l\Ir. EV ANS: If the Government had been guided by the industry and by persons, like myself, who have the confidence of the people in the industry, they would not be in the position they are in today. I have told hon. members what happened to the railways and I have told them about their Emerald scheme. I told them on many occasions 'what happened to their State enterprises, but they have not enough brains to wake up to it and to see that they are pushing this State down the hill and with it the men who have made a success of their affairs. They have made a success of Tully, notwithstanding the fact that the hon. member for Herbert \Yas there. They should be guided by those people who have proved their efficiency and their ability.

K on· let us see what is to happen in regard to Britain. We should do everything possible to produce the quantity of sugar required for Great Britain, bnt we must realise that Britain must consider her own people. Although today we have a contract with Britain and although Britain has renewed prt>ference until 1952, we must not forget that preference does not apply whilst we are ou contract with Britain. Immediately we go back onto the free markets of the world preference applies-that is, if Britain cont'inues to give us preference. We know also that the price to be paid will be fixed from ~·ear to year. Britain will consider her own consumers and people, and immediately the world's free market is open and she can go back onto that market she will do so. Australia will benefit bv the contract for five years by being allo~ed to consolidate our position in increasing export, and when we haYe to go on the free market we should have a high export tonnage to bargain with other countries Hwt are signatories of the International Agreement. We shall have to carry

Supply. (21 OCTOBER.] Supply. 875

all the responsibility under clause 9 of the Sugar Agreement. When the commission I have suggested had completed its inquiries and made its report to the Government, it would be the duty of the industry and the Government to approach the Commonwealth Government and put forward to that Government our case for security as• to price-and not only for Australian consumption. The peaks aggregate is 759,000 tons and with the increases that could be made in the various mill units I assume we can produce and treat 900,000 tons in an economic period. The peaks' aggregate will have increased to 900,000, and when the rommission has reported on the distribution of the increased amount the State Government and the industry should immediately approach the Federal Government and point out to them that the industry played a great part in the development of Queensland and the defence of Auetralia. In the 1914-18 war it supplied sugar for Australia. at a price lower than in any part of the world, and in the 1var of 1939-1945 we continued to supply our country with the cheapest sugar in the world. Today no country is selling sugar, retail or whol<>salc, at a price lower than that in Queensland.

Mr. H. B. Taylor: You say the existing mills could produce 900,000 tons 1

Mr. EV ANS: Over an economic period. By doing that we should be building up many of the small grmvers in the Yarious mill areas-giving them a living tonnage to liv' ilecently like human beings. The Cummo:lwealth Government must help us. They mus• give us protection as to priee. It is no uoo the Commonwealth Go;-ernment 's lmlking home consumption price and export price when it sTiits them and when the export price is low the industry has to carry it. There must be a price for Australian consumption and export all the time or they must be divided all the time. As I have told the Committee, at the present time we are building up our home-consumption price hy a high export price, otherwise the inc1u8try would not be able to carry on.

I believe the Commonwealth Government can rem:'Onably tell the people of Australia that the sugar industry is efficient. No sugar industry in the world is more efficient than that of Queensland and New South Wales. It has played its part in the developmenu of the Australian coastline, in defence, by providing all these facilities. In addition, up to as late as last year there was no increase in the retail price of sugar, and here I repeat t·hat today sugar is sold in Australia at a price cheaper than that of any country in the world. Australian consumers over the years have benefited hy the efficiency of this great industry and the sacrifices made by it.

At the present time the industry employs roughly 90,000 people, directly and indirectly, ancl any hurt to it would affect the population of North Queensland very seriously indeed.

I am sorry that the Secretary for Agriculture and Stock is not here today, because I should have liked him to hear the following

important statement from the Farleigh mill about the handling of the sugar we make:-

''At Farleigh mill the total storage available for sugar is 11,700 tons, of which 6,120 tons have already been stored, leaving room for a further 5,600 tons approximately. The present manufacture is between 1,500 and 1,600 tons per week and our average deliveries to the wharf have been 700 to 800 tons per week.

''If this situation continues it can be seen that at the very least 700 tons will remain to be stacked at the mill each week. Consequently the mill storage will be filled in eight weeks, which would necessitate a closure.

''If the port is covered by boats during that period, there is insufficient labour to also handle into sheds and it could so happen that this mill would have to close because it was jammed with sugar at the mill and have storage at the wharf that could not be used.

''The position has been brought about by the slow turn round of ships and can be improved by increasing the labour strength at the port which is recognised as too low, and also an increase in the present low handling rate. Some relief could also be obtained if the present small number of men would work longer hours for which they would receive penalty rates.

''However, if none of these reasonable req nests be agreed to we think it will be necessary to obtain outside labour to handle sugar into sheils whilst ships are covering this port during the next eight weeks.

''Even if this storage is filled, indications at the moment are that there will still be a possibility of a closure with the large amount of sugar that will be manufactured this season. ' '

Virtually all other mills in Queensland will be in a similar position. When all is said and clone, it is only a question of law and order and of controlling the people on the waterfront. If the people on the waterfront do not desire to do a reasonable day's work and turn these ships round quickly, then the Waterside Workers' Union should open their books and admit more men. In our district they have deliberately refused to do that. How can we have further expansion when the country is run by the waterside workers~ We must have law and order and we must have Governments who will enforce it, and I know there are men on the Government side who agree with every word I have said. '

I wish now to refer to soldier settlement in Queensland and to consider whether it is likely to be a success or failure and to quote from the soldiers' paper in which some pertinent facts are given. The following article, from ''The Legionnaire,'' gives the service men's view of soldier settlement in Queensland:-

'' 2,000 Queensland ex-service men, who. helped save Australia's 3,000,000 square miles from the Japanese, have now found they can't get an acre of land for themselves.


''This is the number of ex-service men approved under the War Service Land Settlement Scheme and still awaiting farms. They have been waiting for three, four, and five years. For all they know they might have to wait another 10 years.

''They think, and 'Legionnaire ' thinks, they have waited long enough. It's just about time that the State Minister for Lands (Mr. Foley) tells them frankly exactly ·what the Queensland Government is doing for them.

"There have been plenty of vague promises, plenty of nebulous plans, plenty of fine sounding optimistic Press statements by responsible Ministers during and since the war. But there have been very few farms.

"Glowing statement two and a-half years ago.

''In March, 1946, two and a-half years ago, the then Minister for Lands (Mr. Jones) gave a glowing statement to 'Legionnaire' about the prospects for soldier settlement.

''These were some of the assurances Mr. Jones gave-

Seven and a-half million acres, spread over m::~ny parts of the State, were involved in land settlement proposals.

Inspection and subdivision of 5,700,000 acres of pastoral Janus throughout Queensland's sheep uistricts was progressing. Half of the land selected would be available for ex-service men.

Agricultural and dairy farm land totalling nearly 1,600,000 acres were under expert scrutiny for submission for approval and inclusion in the Commonwealth-State Settlement Scheme. ''Innumerable public statements since

then by Government spokesmen have assured ex-service men that everything was going along fine, that the job was being tackled earnestly.

''Three months ago Mr. Foley came out with another grand sounding statement. Under a Brisbane 'Telegraph' three-column heading, 'Government Plans New Land Settlement Approach,' Mr. Foley was reported as claiming 'a new approach to soldier settlement was envisaged in a scheme to open up millions of more acres of land in Central Queensland.' The scheme would open up a new field altogether at a much reduced cost. It would enable greater work to be done in a shorter time because of the vast area of land available.

Queensland Failure Exposed. ''In Canberra a few weeks ago, the Min

ister for Post--War Reconstruction (Mr. Dedman) revealed how little had really been achieved. His statement exposed, beyond doubt, the abject failure of the Queensland Government to settle ex-service men on the land.

''Mr. Dedman disclosed that, of 1,427 ex-service men given farms throughout Australia under the War Service Land Settlement Scheme only 64 had been helped by the Queensland Government.

''In other words Queensland, a leading agricultural State with more than one-fifth of the land area in the Commonwealth and one-seventh of the population, had provided farms for less than one-twentieth of the Australian total.

" 'Legionnaire' can tell Mr. Foley that a big percentage of ex-service men now believe that they will never get farms. They believe that the Government was never serious in its promises to find farms for all who wanted them. Thev believe the Government has adopted a long range plan of fobbing them off with vague promises for so long that eventually they \Yill 'give the game away' in disgust.

''Overseas Interest Helped. ' 'The action of the Government in

springing into action to find land for overseas interests has strengthened this belief. The 250,000 acres it found for the British Overseas Food Corporation (plus a grant of £500,000) could have been used to settle hundreds of Queensland ex-service men on farms if the GoYernment had been concerned about their rehabilitation.

''The recent statement of Premier Hanlon, sojourning in England, that 'millions of acres of land are available in Queensland for intensive cultivation' has further strengthened this belief. Needless to say, Mr. Hanlon was not promising this land to Queensland ex-service men.

''Even at this stage the Government can show its sincerity, if it is sincere, by telling ex-service men just where they stand.

''What they want to know is how much land is actually being investigated-where is it-what stage have investigations and preparations reached-how many will be given farms this year-next year-approximately how long will it be before all are given farms~

''If Mr. Foley gives this information then the Government is in the clear. If not, there is only one conclusion to be drawn, the Government is not 'fair dinkum.'

"What about it, Mr. Foley~" That is a statement by the ex-service men themselves in their own paper.

JUr. Foley: You do not want us to rush in, as was done at Beerbunum.

1\Ir. EVANS: It is not a matter of rushing in, but one of exercising ordinary business acumen. It is simply a matter of application. I know that in the past the sugar industry had its problems, and I speak now only of the sugar industry, but investigations and reports have since been made and it is up to the Minister to give a lead, to take a stand and make a decision. We know that when it is left to public servants and the Minister sits back waiting for them to advise him, we wait in vain, because public servants do not like to make mistakes. The Minister must take a stand; he must make a decision.

I mentioned before in this Chamber that when I toured North Queensland I \YaS approached in Babinda about the Woopen Creek area where the land had been frozen


for some vears. It is some of the best canegrowing hnd in Babimla and if I was offered an assignment on it I shouhl not hesitate to pay £30 to £50 an acre, and I know what I am talking about. It is cleared land, grubbed and ready for the plough. If you want to help the soldier-settler, then put him on lancl from which he will get a return immediately. If you put him on scrub land, even though the actual cost of the land may be low, heavy costs are involved in clearing it. The hon. member for Herbert will know what it costs to clear scrub land for cane-growing, for logging, cane holing, planting, and chipping. 'l'hen we must take into account the lm\· c.c.s., the high wages, and the high cutting costs-not that I think they are too high-and we realise that it is very difficult for the ex-soldier under present conditions to make good on ne\Y land. I know that when the Babinda mul 'l'ully areas \Yere opened for cane-growing man~· of the new settlers who were not financially strong ·went broke on account of the low sugar content and the high costs involYed.

3Ir. Foley: Some of the prices asked by existing land-holclers preclude the possibility of making cane-growing a payable concern.

JUr. EV ANS: I know that some of the lancl on the Woopen Creek area is valued at £30 an acre, that valuators have been in, hut you cannot clear that land for £30 an acre. Let us dismiss the matter of price at the moment and deal with the matter as it should be dealt with. We have the Land Court and the Land Administration Board. I have always found these officers fair m~d just. The president of the Land Court 1s a man of great knowledge and one who always endeavours to be fair and just to both the landowner antl thE' Government. I mge the Minister to get on ':·ith the job at once to make a recommenclatwn, to make a deci~ion and thus allow the soldier-settlers t0 g0 o~ the land. If there is a d_ispu~e as to price, let the Land Court determme 1t.

The Minister has been on this job for two and a-half years and made little p~ogress. There is a cry for sugar. The Prenuer has been telling the people of Britain what. he is going to do. If we are t? have new m1ll?, if we are to have new ass1gnments and 1f we are to have service men placed on sugar lands, let us act immediately. In two and a-half years very few ex-service men have been settled on sugar lands. The position has not been handled in a businesslike way. I do not expect the Minister to be a farmer. I do not expect the Minister to have the same knowledge of cane-farming as many of us who have spent a lifetime in the industry, but I do expect him to come along to us, have a talk about the matter, and be guided by the recommendations we make.

·The mill I am connected with is anxious to have our approved service men given the o.k. to proceed with production. We have a 3-per-cent. increase on our 23,000 tons of sugar peak. The Government should not break the hearts of men who are waiting to go on the land and do the job. I know the Minister means well but he has too much work to do.

lUr. }'oley: I can do it all.

JUr. EY ANS: The Minister's position is akin to that of the Commissioner of Main Roads-the more he does the more they think he can do.

This matter is important. The land is lying idle, the equipment is there, and the men have their savings to enable them to go on to it and work it. As I mentioned, the Minister should be guided by people who have a thorough knowledge of the industry. I have been in it all my life. I started on scrub land. If I had the choice of placing any boys of mine on scrub land or on land ready for cultivation, good sweet land on which they could go tomorrow with their tractors and start planting, I should not hesitate to take the cleared land.

I appeal to the Minister to give considerati n to the recommendations I have made. I have made them in good faith. They are based on very long experience. I can be pardoned for saying that they have been made by someone who has been a success in the industry.

I have a statement here showing the value of the concessions made by the sugar industry to the Fruit Processing Committee, which was established in 1931. The industry has contributed in subsidies nearly £4,000,000 to its funds. Do not forget that in all those years when we carried the burden of the exportable surplus in our industry many sugar-producers in Java went insolvent because they could not produce sugar at £7 a ton and that 80 per cent. of the mills went out of production. Notwithstanding the low export price of sugar, we produced sugar and held the people on our coastline and at the same time made our contribution by way of subsidy to the Fruit Processing Committee. Today we pay £216,000 per annum to that committee, notwithstanding that it has bnilt up a reserve fund of £700,000. That subsidy has always been insisted on by the Commonwealth Government as part and parcel of the Sugar Agreement. Is that not one reason why the people of Australia should not hesitate to give help to our industry by at least giving ns the cost of production plus a reasonable profit for our sugar, especially when it is known that we have the cheapest sugar in the world~ For many years Austra· lia has had the cheapest sugar in the world. We have the most efficient sugar industry in the world. While we were contributing this subsidy to the Fruit Processing Committee other industries-I am not attacking any other industry, the wheat industry in particular-were subsidised in the purchase of bags, but the sugar industry never received euch a subsidy. All through the troublesome and low-price years we carried the burden ourselves.

Mr. Foley: If you can pay £80 and up to £100 an acre for your caneland the industry cannot be too badly off.

JUr. EV ANS: I do not know any sugargrower who has done that. The Minister is merely showing a lack of knowledge of sugarland values.


~fr. Foley interjected.

~Ir. EV ANS: I said I should be prepared to, because, Mr. Mann, you cannot clear that land under £50 an acre.

Mr. Foley: What did you mean when you said it was worth it?

~Ir. EV ANS: With a crop on it.

JUr. Foley: You are making all kinds of stipulations now.

Mr. EV ANS: I am not making any stipulation. A Royal Commission reported on the industry in 1912, and it is just as well to read an extract from that report. It reads as follows-

'' The Commonwealth today is brought face to face with one of the gravest problems which has ever taxed the ingenuity of statesmanship-that of the settlement of tropical and semi-tropical areas by a white population living under standard conditions of life. And, intimately associated with this problem is the question of national defence. If the ideal of a 'White' Australia is to become an enduring actuality, some means must be discovered of establishing industries within the tropical regions. So long as these regions are unoccupied they are an invitation to invasion as well as a source of strategic weakness. Granted so much, it follows that the supreme justification for the protection of the sugar industry is the part that the industry has contributed, and will, as we hope, continue to contribute to the problems of the settlement and defence of the Northern portion of the Australian continent. The recognition of the nature of this supreme justification is the first condition of a sound policy in relation to the sugar industry.''

The hopes expressed by the Commission, in the passage I have read, have been amply fulfilled, and the industry feels it has manfully contributed to the settlement and defence of a very vulnerable part of the Australian continent.

1Ur. ROUERTS (Nundah) (2.33 p.m.): Like other hon. members I join in a compliment to the hon. the Treasurer and to the members of his staff for being able to present, not only to this Parliament but also to the people of Queensland, a Budget of the kind we have before us. The only regrettable feature in that Budget is, of course, that as a result of the tragic railway strike thnt occurrerl early this year the whole of the State's transactions resulted in a deficit of some £94,000.

Dealing with the Budget itself I note that during the year no Queensland loans in Loni!on haYe matured but that on the other hand the Commonwealth exercised certain option rights it had in respect of loans that were maturing in the United States of America. This policy of the Commonwealth Government in liquidating Australian loan moneys abroad should be brought before the notice of the people of this State. T!•n

result of the Commonwealth Government's policy in this respect is briefly this: that the percentage of Queensland loans domiciled in Australia was 60.35 per cent. in 1947-48 compared with 37.96 per cent. in 1937-38.

In addition to that we note from the Budget that the percentage of loans domiciled in America, the country that is at ~he present time endeavouring, with the active support of people of the same political colour as hon. members opposite, to impose a dollar dictl_ltorship on the world, has been reduced thls year to 3.82 per cent. That is quite an achievement. To me it makes no difference if I take 2s. out of my right-hand trousers pocket and put it in my left.

If I am to owe anybody any money I prefer to owe the money to myself, and in short that is the Commonwealth Government's policy at the present time. These loans are being gradually domiciled in Australia and no longer shall we be subjected to the same financial dictatorship as, unfortunately, we were subjected to in the past.

It is well to remember that in the years from 1939 to 1945 Australia borrowed approximately £1,300,000,000 to prosecute the war; and the important thing is that not one penny of those loans was raised outside the shores of Australia.-every penny was raised within the Commonwealth. It is necessa.ry for the Commonwealth Government today to find approximately £50,000,000 annually to meet interest ancl sinking-fund payments on the debt incurred during those years, but all tha.t money goes to people in Australia.

Those who complain of inflated Fedeml finances apparently choose to disregard completely three things in particular. Firstly, they ignore the fact that the Commonwealth Government have an obligation to the Australians who answered the national call for personal service during. the war years. Th~y conveniently overlook, In the course of thmr argument, that today post-war and rehabilitation charges are costing the Commonwealth Government £50,000,000 per annum. Secondly, the Commonwealth Government have an obligation-nmYhere near as great, I will admit, but nevertheless an obligation-to those people in Australia who answered the na.tional tall for financial assistance between 1939 and 1945. As I have said, that is a charge of approximately £50,000,000 a year on the Commonwealth finances. Thirdly, they ignore the fact that the Commonwealth Government have an obligation to the people of Australia generally to provide them with th:o l.ibe.ral social-service benefits that we are en;1oymg today. These benefits cost the people of Australia approximately £78,000,000 a yeaT.

The other day the hon. member for Windsor commented unfavoura.bly on the fact tha.t whereas the Commonwealth had collected in the past year approximately £32,000,000 from the State of Queensland, the Queensland Government were able to receive a hand-out of only £9,000,000. The hen. member overlooked completely, or would have us misunderstanc1 the position because he would not face up to the fact, that the Commonwealth Government


are spending millions of pounds every year in this State on items which are not included in the £9,000,000 the Queensland Government received from the Commonwealth Government. He overlooked the fact that the Commonwealth are paying out millions of pounds every year to Queenslanders in social-service benefits, apart from the £9,000,000. He also overlooked the fact that millions of pounds a year are paid to the young men of Queensland who answered the call in the form of financial assistance in rehabilitation and re-establishment. Another fact the hon. member overlooked is the millions of pounds paid annually to Queenslanders in interest and redemption on the moneys advanced to the Commonwealth Government to enable them to prosecute the war.

Mr. Pie: The Commonwealth Government get £32,000,000 a year and we are getting only £9,000,000 back.

Mr. ROBERTS: We can all make bald statements like that, but we should be fair and place the facts before not only this Committee but, because the reports of these debates go out to the people, before the people.

I, like many others, have listened from time to time to hon. members of the Opposition and their supporters in the Press and over the air declaiming that there are too many Commonwealth public servants. In round figures I have heard and read time and time again that there are 167,000 Commonwealth public servants in Australia. That is not correct, but a mere 114,200 employees is neither here nor there to people who manufacture such propaganda.

The true position is that including those persons employed in the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, including those employed in the Department of "'i\7" orks and Housing, including the employees of the War Service Homes Commission, including the employees of the Department of External Affairs, the total number of men and women employed in all Commonwealth departments is only 52,000.

In order to discover where they get this figure of 167,000, we have to lump in ·with these public servants people engaged in governmental industrial Anterprises such as mines and quarries, munitions factories and workshops, transport undertakings, reforestation schemes, all the workers emploYed in Commonwealth hospitals, such me~1 as telegraph linesmen, employees of the Amtralian Broadcasting Commission and teachers of the Commonwealth Education Service.

Mr. Aikens: Do not forget the tremendous amount of money they have spent on aerodromes and aerodrome equipment.

lUr. ROBERTS: Yes, for the benefit of those who decry the activities of the Federal Labour Goverm;wnt. . I sincerely hope hon. members oppos1te w1ll appreciate the fact that Australia is growing up quickly and developing at a tremendous rate.

To point out how fallacious are their ideas concerning the functions and purposes of government, let me remind the Committee

that here during this week both the hon. member for Hamilton and the hon. member for Windsor likened governmental activities to those of a commercial company. We heard them speaking of Ministers as being in the same position as directors of a company and the public of the State as being so many shareholders in the company. Nothing was ever further from the truth. I make bold to say that it is because commercial men in general cannot get away from their ideas of pounds, shillings and pence, and profits, that very few of them indeed, no matter how successful they may be in private business, make even reasonably good legislators and Parliamentarians.

Mr. Aikens: One is profit before service and the other is service before profit.

lUr. ROBERTS: I thank the hon. member. He took the \YOrds out of my mouth. The purpose of government is to provide the people governed with service.

The purpose of a private business or company such as those referred to by the hon. members for Hamilton and Windsor is to make profit for the shareholders and to pay the biggest dividend possible on its undertaking. 'rhose functions are absolutely incompatible with those of a State and there is no analogy whatever, despite what the hon. members said, between the functions of governments and the functions of a commercial company.

In case I might miss the opportunity, I want now to accept the challenge issued yesterday by the hon. member for Bundaberg when discussing the Bill then before the Chamber. The hon. member's words were to this effect: that in 1832 £150,000 was spent in England on education; in 1932 £55,000,000 was so spent. I interjected to this effect: ''They spent only £20,000 in 1832. '' The hon. member came back and said, ''If I am not right I will give £10 to the hon. member 's hospital. '' There are a number of hospitals in my electorate, and I am sure any of them would be happy indeed to receive a cheque for £10. As a matter of fact, Sister Kirby of the Nundah Private Hospital is a contestant in the Centaur Queen competition, and if when l read a little passage I have here the hon. member for Bundaberg feels that he should honour that challenge, I should be happy indeed to hear of his forwarding his cheque to Sister Kirby.

At one stage in his speech the hon. member quoted from the Encyclopaedia Britannica and 'I take that publication as my authoritv also. Before, however, citing this passage; I agree that the sum of £55,000,000 mentioned yesterday as being the sum expended in 1932 is approximately correct so far as State education is concerned, and consequently he cannot very well say either of those figures included money expended by denominational or private schools. In the 14th edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, Vol. VII, page 980, the hon. member for Bundaberg will read-

"In 1832, the Whig Government placed on the Estimates a sum of £20,000 for


public education, thus initiating the system of the annual grant voted by Parliament.''

I hope the hon. member for Bundaberg will accept that as being sufficient authority to explode the figure he quoted in this Chamber yesterday.

In this Chamber on Tuesday, the hon. member for Hamilton-I was not present at the time, but I understood this from colleagues-took me to task over something I had said a week or two ago concerning Australia's war effort. I have no apologies to make for the statement I made a couple of weeks ago, and the position is-and I said it during the war years and still say itthat Australia was not participating 100 per cent. in the war effort so long as those soldiers who were in the front line and protecting not only the lives but the property of all of us who for va.riom; reasons were unable to go, were receiving only a few shillings a day for their services, whilst there were business people and others in the community who were prepared to make every penny they could out of the situation.

The position was this: that the common danger that we felt united, as it were, Lazarus and Dives, united them to the extent that the necessaries of life were rationed; and while they were rationed and while they were so united they vied with each other in producing a plan of the new Utopia, the new order of things. We heard much of the New Order during the latter part of the war years, but no sooner was the war over than Dives discarded his penitence and became once more eager to restore the condition of affairs that operated in 1939. He did not want to lose the opportunity that he had in 1939 of exploiting this country and exploiting his fellow-man to make his own life more comfortable and more profitable.

And so far as the rationing of goods was concerned, what was the position~ I am not unmindful of the fact that I was one of the fortunate ones during the war years when butter and meat and sugar and so forth were rationed. I lived then, as I still do, next door to a man who swings a pick and shovel for the Brisbane City Council working on the roads. Every week day that man's wife had to get up awl out of the household ration cut his lmu:h, which included butter and meat. Because I was one of the more fortunate ones, one of those, as it were, on the fringe of the more privileged class, I could, at lunch-time, go down to my cafe in Queen Street and have a good meal, which included all the butter, meat and sugar I required, without having to hand over one ration coupon. So long as those circumstances operated how could anyone say it was an all-in war effort~

Much has been said in this Chamber about coal but I do not propose to set myself up as an authority on coal. However, while the subjrd is in the air an-d while we have the Powell Duffryn technicians here exploring our mineral resources, perhaps some consideration shonld be given to the exploration of the coal depo~its in the Greater Brisbane area. I know that there are three separate coal

deposits in that area. I ;have gone to the trouble to learn what I could about the coal deposits in my own electorate and I found on turning up the Votes and Proceedings of this House for 1896, in Vol. IV. at page 169, that on 22 March, 1895, a report was submitted by the Government Geologist, Mr. Jack, who mentioned that a bore had been put down for water on Eagle Farm racecourse in 1889 which disclose-d a seam of coal between 5 feet and 6 feet thick. That report is available for perusal by any hon. member. Mr. Jack went on to say that he could not understand why these prospects had not been properly developed.

The Queensland Parliamentary Papers, Vol. III. at page 843, for the year 1913, ment~on the faet that another Government geologist, Mr. Dunstan, made very favourable mention of the Nundah coal-mine at Kedron. The seam that was being worked at that time was 3 feet 6 inches thick. He mentions also the Gardiner seams at Nundah, which according to the report were over 4 feet thick. In volume 3, page 467, of the 1911 Queensland Parliamentary Papers, I find that meanwhile, in 1911, geologist E. 0. Marks reported that a bore put down on the Nundah coal measures disclosed at 145 feet a seam 4 feet 9 inches thick, and between 154 feet and 164 feet there was a further coal seam mixed with :fireclav. In that report Mr. Marks states that he was amazed that nothing further had been done to develop those coal deposits.

It remains of course, for proper technicians to make th~ necessary examination before anyone can say whether these deposits are worth developing, but I do suggest that those reports disclose that further investigation of them would be well justified. There is no need for me to sav that we all realise what a wonderful asset it would be to this city if we had seams of good coal, such as I have outlined within two miles of the main railway jm~ction. The seam goes right round to Pinkenba on the Brisbane River. It would be a wonderful asset to have coal-mines within such close proximity to the port of Brisbane.

lUr. Luckins: Are you advocating the opening up of those coal seams for the city of Brisbane~

lUr. ROBERTS: For the city of Brisbane and for shipping and railway requirements. If a coal seam runs right through that locality, as these reports suggest, perhaps the C.M.O. of the Brisbane City Council might do something for that forgotten corner of Brisbane. Pinkenba is the doorway, not only to Brisbane but to 1Queensland, yet not one chain of water-channelling has been laid in its area. During wet weather residents of Pinkenba are in danger of flooding, as the area is a sea of water. As a result of a considerable outcry, the Brisbane City Council recently has made an open drain right down the centre of the footpath alongside the Pinkcnba State school. I commend it to hon. members who want to look at something that will amaze them. This drain is 4 feet wide and 4 feet deep, with steep sides that


are not even concreted. ~Where the school children cross the foot-path to enter the school gates, the only provision made for them is a fiat platfonn about 5 feet wide, without even a guard rail. It will be a miracle if some poor unfortunate child is not d•rowned there in the first wet season we get. I mention that to illustrate what the C.M.O. council is doing for this neglected part of Brisbane.

~Ir. Luckins: You know that a Labour council sold the park down there.

Jlr. ROBERTS: I did not know that. The hon. member may have something to say on the matter later on. While on the subject of parks, I want to take this opportunity of expressing the gratitude of the people in the Hamilton-Ascot-Eagle Farm area to the Secretary for Public Lands, and the Treasurer, who administers the Harbours and Marine Department, for having in recent months made available some park lands there that will be of inestimable value to the young people for recreation purposes. I just mention that in passing.

Another matter that has been mentioned time and time again by hon. members opposite is income tax. We hear it said day after day that some relaxing of income tax would give business people and the producers a greater incentive to produce the manufactured commodities we require. I said something on this the other day. I do not want to go into it again, but I have taken th~ trouble of looking up the latest Commonwealth Budget and for the information of hon. members and others who care to read '' Hansard'' I propose to give the exact position so far as the incidence of income tax is concerned, as provided for in the 1948-49 Commonwealth Budget. First there is the figure of exemption for the payment of contributions towards social services and then there is the figure in regard to income tax.

lUr. Wanstall: Give the totals; they are all that matters.

~Ir. ROBERTS: This is what matters: what is the incidence of taxation on the ordinary people, not only of Queensland but of Australia~ The single man does not have to contribute to social services unless he earns at least £105 and he has to pay no income tax unless he earns £351 a year.

A married man with a dependent wife has to pay no social-service tax unless he earns at least £201, and he pays no income ta.x unless he earns £501; and the basic wage is approximately £300 a year.

A married man with a dependent wife and one child has not to pay any social-service tax unless he earns at least £284, and he has to pay no income tax unless he earns £614.

A married man with a dependent wife and two children has not to pay any social-service tax unless he earns £318, and he pays no income tax unless he earns in excess of £669.

A married man with a dependent wife and three children-and that is the base family for my purposes-has not to pay any socialservice tax unless he earns in excess of £351 a year, and he has not to pay any income tax unless he earns at least £726 a year.

A married man with a wife and four children does not pay any social-service tax unless he earns £401, and he does not pay •my income tax unless he earns £783 a year.

And, finally, the married man with a dependent wife and five children ~does not pay any social-service tax unless he earns at least £451, and he does not pay any income tax unless he earns at least £839.

That should be a sufficient answer to those people who are always crying about the incidence of income tax. The only people who are afflicted by the incidence of taxation today are those who are in !receipt of thousands of pounds a year.

I wculd point· out too that those who have t1Yo or more children under the age of 16 are entitled to child endowment, and child endowment has been increaE·ed in this Commonwealth Budget from 7s. 6d. to 10s. a week.

Take the married man with a. dependent wife and three children. He pays no socialservice tax unless he earns £351 a year. ::'\either does he pay income tax until he earns £126 a year, but on account of the three children under 16 yerus he is entitled to child endo\vment for two of them at 10s. a week or £52 a year. 'l'his means an additional £1 a week to him, without any obligation whatever to pay either s·ocial-service or iucom2 tax.

I endorse wholeheartedly, and I read it for the enlightenment of hon. members opposite, the policy enunciated by Senator McKenna in the 8enate on 16 September-

'' Two classes of people now contribute largely to income tax. 'l'hose two classes eomprise taxpayers without family dependents and taxpayers in receipt of reasonably substantial incomes and it is a matter uf deliberate design and intent on the part of the Government· that they should make the greatest contribution. I am prepared to say that only selfish, unthinking members of the community will deny that that is a proper policy."

So far as the masses in our communit-y are concerned today income tax is a negligible consideration.

There are one or two ma.tters that I shall not have time to deal with on this occasion, but listening in this Chamber over the months to the lying scurrilous propaganda manufactured by hon. members opposite in attempting to associate the 11arty, to which I am pleased to belong, with the Communist Party, it is only pTOper to remind them of the resolutim1 carried by the Federal Executive of the Australian Labour Party in April, 1937-

,' The AustTalian Labour Party hereby refuses affiliation with t·he Communist Party and dissociates itself from the policy,


methods, and propaganda of the Communist Party and all its auxiliary organisations. It declares the Communist Party to be an anti-Labour political organisation. It declares, furthermore, that the Communist Party is in direct conflict with the policy, platform, and constitution of the Australian Labour Party. Membership of the Australian Labour Party is obtainable by every person who supports its principles and policy and who is not a member of any other political party or any subsidiary body connected therewith.

''It is by membership of the Australian Labom Part·y alone that a united front can he presented by the workers of the Commonwealth to\Yards the forces of war, Fascism, and reaction generally.''

That resolution has been reaffirmed on a number of occasions and the important thing to be remembered by those hon. members who have been continually interjcct·ing is that the Liberal Party of Australia has never made any such declaration. The Australian Labour Party i~ the only political party in Australia today that bars Communists from its mnks. On the other hand, it is common knowledge that in one of the bmnches of the Queensland People's Party they have a Communist occupying the position of seeretar:•

Before referring to education, it is just as well for us to look for a moment or two at the historical background of the secular educational system as we enjoy it today. It was as the result of glaring moral depravity in England, produced by the pitiably long hours of work and the abominable sweating of child labour, by the shocking housing eonditions, and the almost universal illiteracy that a few humane people, at the beginning of the last century, began to give some consideration to the need for the State to assist nnd direct the education of the masses.

The first factory Act, the Health and Morals Act of 1802, which limited the working hours of children to 12 a day and abolished night-work, was an absolute farce, because the policing of it was left to the local magistrates, who more often than not were factory-owners, and the factory-owners of that clay were little different from the factory-owners of this, in that they were prepared to exploit not only the adults but the children, if possible, in order to make profit.

Not long afterwards-it was in 1807-Whitebreacl in England, by considerable diligence and after much :fighting, managed to get what is known as the "five bob a nob" Bill through the House of Commons. That Bni provided for a two-year course in the elements of education at a cost of 10s. a head. He got it through the House of Commons, but what happened where the reactionary forces were truly in the saddle in the House of Lords~ The House of Lords, fearing that an intelligent working class would be both seditious and dangerous, rejected the Bill with two dissentients.

A few years later, in 1822, the Revel. J. 'rwist, in a book he wrote entitled ''The Policy of Educating the Poor'' said thisand despite all their lip-service, I really feel this is still the policy of hon. members opposite-

'' Education would give the lower classes the absurd notion that they were on a footing with their superiors in respect of their rights to mental improvement; it would be dangerous to the public peace as the projects of certain revolutionary maniacs who teach the people that the convenience of man and not the will of God has consigned them to labour and privation.' '

The position was, and it still is so far as our big industrialists and big business people are concerned, that they feared that the education of the masses would enable the ordinary working man to stand on the heels of the rich.

Mr. Wanstall interjected.

lUr. ROBERTS: I mentioned that in 1832 the first State grant for education was made in England, but it was not until 1902, when the Balfour Education Act became law, that every child in England, irrespective of his social position, was afforded some semblance of free, primary education.

The attitude of the hon. member for Windsor, who keeps on interjecting, and that of vested interests, which have never been adverse to exploiting the nimble fingers of children for personal profit, was manifested as recently as 1918 when they opposed the Fisher Education Bill in 1918 in England. Because of that opposition England was not able to adopt what I term an excellent system of education until it was able to pass its very modern Act in 1944-. In Australia, and in Queensland too, we have of course been more fortunate, thanks to the enlightened outlook of men like Sir Henry Parkes.

I do not think we should let the occasion pass when discussing education without making favourable comment upon the work of Charles Lilley. Because of such men as he Australian and Queensland Parliaments were never concerned so much with the question of free education as they were about two other matters, namely, the question of State aid to denominational schools and the principle of compulsory education.

As to compulsory education, in the debates of 1860 and particularly 1875, the outlook towards education generally of the more fortunate people was manifested and I want particularly to refer to a statement made by Mr. Morehead reported in "Hansard" of 1875 at p. 799 in these words-

'' Let them take the case of a poor widow who was dependent on her own labour for bread for her family, the eldest of which might be 13 or 14 years of age; whilst the elder ones attended to the younger ones, the mother went out to work, the children going to school when they could. If the Bill became law, the very


children whom that woman left at home to look after the young ones would have to go to school, or the mother, not being able to pay the fine, would herself be sent to gaol."

We have gone a long way since then. When the principle of compulsory education in this State was first implemented in 1910 and 1911, the expenditure per head of population on education was lls. 1d. but in 1946-47 it was £2 a head. Despite anything hon. members opposite might say about education we cannot disregard that improvement.

I want to deal with a few further points and the first concerns the under-fives. The builder of a house regards the foundations to be of greater importance than the roof, however important the roof might be. I think we appreciate the fact that children between 3 and 5 years are passing through the crucial age, both psychologically and physically. It is absolutely necessary, therefore, that we establish some form of nursery schooling for those young people in conditions that will enable them to have a healthy and a proper development of the mind. I see, according to the Estimates for the ensuing year, that it is expected that £4,139 will be expended on salaries and contingencies for pre-school activities.

I do not say for a moment that it is enough, but in considering that amount and this subject of pre-school activity, we should bear in mind that nothing was spent under this head in 1938-39. So we have gone a good way in those few years. The position today, even in the metropolitan area, is that there are hundreds of children under the age of five who receive no pre-school education at all. That is bad enough, but it is far worse when there are so many children in the metropolitan area, and probably in other parts of the State as well, attending the socalled kindergartens, which are doing the children great harm and great injury.

ilir. Pie: This is a criticism of the Department for Public Instruction now?

1\'Ir. ROBERTS: I am making a constructive suggestion. My point is that anyone, regardless of qualifications, can open up a barn and call it a kindergarten, or can go to a church and perhaps hire an adjoining hall, call it a kindergarten for these young children, and in general conduct kindergartens although he has absolutely no training in teaching at all.

JUr. Kerr: You are making a general charge to that effect~

:ur. ROBERTS: Yes, absolutely no training whatever.

iUr. Pie: What about the kindergarten in Ithaca ~

lUr. ROBERTS: That is a Government concern, and I should like a few of them in Nundah. I know that one hon. member opposite said that there was one in the electorate of Ithaca, but I know that there a~·e at least three ir Brisbane. The point

is that these kindergartens are being opened by people who ha,·e absolutely no a~ility to conduct such institutions and In manv cases the children are being gi,·en training that is most unsuitable for them. As a matter of fact, very often they are established by old maids who have never had anything to do with children whatsoever. Many teachers at primary schools have complained to me that when these children go to the primary schools it is difficult to teach them because of their training-I use that word for want of a better one-by the people who had not qualifications for that calling.

l\Ir. Pie: Have you any of them in your elector ate~

.i\Ir. ROBERTS: Yes. My own children have gone to kindergartens and generally speaking, we have been more or less satisfied, but it was more for convenience than for anything else that they went, because we realised "-hat the teachers told me--how difficult it was to teach these children that had attended the unorthodox kindergarten schools.

lUr. Pie: It is only cramming the brains to try to teach children under five.

lUr. ROBERTS: Yes, it is criminal. While we must do more from the State point of view to establish and develop kindergartens and pre-school activities, it is essential if we cannot do that, to have some form of licence or registration of the kindergartens that have sprung up like mushrooms, in order that a proper inspection of them may be made to see that they are being properly conducted. If they are not being properly conducted, the Department for Public Instruction shonlcl have the power to close them down.

The hon. member for Enoggera said that the money spent by school committees and parents on State schools was in the nature of a tax upon the parent. I can remember, and people much older than I can remember far more vividly, the conditions of our State schools and State school grounds only a few vears ago. There were then no playing fields such as we see now round the schools in the metropolitan area. Many of them have been provided by the activitil;s of scho?l committees. I have taken an active part m school-committee work. While a few parents may have the interests of the _school a~ hear~, generally speaking they are qmte loud m theu criticism when at the end of the three-year period difficulty is found in getting a sufficient number of parents to form a new committee. There is always grouching and complaining that the department. is not taking a sufficient interest in the children and the school, but they likf> it. As far as they are concerned, it is not a penalty at all.

lUr .i\Iorris: You agree with the present method~

l\Ir. ROBERTS: I believe that the school-committee system as operating now is a wonderful incentive to parents and the resident~ of the district to take an active interest in the activities of their school. That is quite


proper. Genemlly speaking, school committees m·e sincere in their efforts and the suggestions they make to the depa'rtment quite sound. Very seldom have I heard what I could term ridiculous suggestions emanating from school committees. I have seen school-committee working bees in ope<ration. Nundah has perhaps the largest school in the metropolitan area. There are 1,100 children attending it. If 11 call is made for a working bee all that turn up are the members of the school committee and two or three friends. They do good work, and are delighted to do it. That is the point I make.

My only regret is that we could not be a little more liberal to these committees. Today they are limited to a subsidy of £250 a year. That is, if a committee raises £250-and most committees can easily do that in 12 months-they receive a subsidy of £250 from the department, which they can expend in school-ground improvements and making provision for better amenities for the children. Now and again, it is desirable that that sum be made elastic in order that in individual cases an amount in excess of £500 per annum can be expended in these directions.

We should recognise that school committees are doing a wonderful job. They are not, as one might infer from the remarks the other day of the hon. member for Enoggera, grouchers. As parents they are public· spirited and take a delight in doing the work they are doing.

I see in the report by the Director-General of Education that the Government are committed to increasing the school-leaving age[ think we all are in favour of it; certainly members on this side are-to something over 14 years. Bnt there is another important matter, and I think it is something to which the department may well give consideration, that is, the desirability of making provision for children in State schools to pass on from what we may term the elementary school at the age of 11 or 12 into a post-primary or a secondary school automatically, without the need for passing any scholarship qualification. I say that because of the experience m England and in Scotland, where this system now operates. A child in Scotland automatically passes from the elementary to the secondary school at the age of 12. I think many of us completely forget that girls and boys between 12 and 14 who attend our primary schools are very often young men and young women, completely out of accord and out of spirit-if you can put it that way -with the infants with whom they have to associate in our primary schools. I do suggest that the Department of Public Instruction may well investigate the position in Scotland and in England where this system is in operation and devise, if possible, ways and means of initiating the same practice, particularly in the more densely l'opulated parts of the State of Queensland.

1\Ir. WAN STALL (Toowong) (3.32 p.m.): Before attending to the points on which I propose to speak on the Financial Statement I want to take the opportunity of

passing one or two comments on the large amount of drivel that has just been uttered in this Chamber.

The hon. member for Nundah first of all made the charge that one of the branches of the Queensland People's Party has for its secretary a member of the Communist Party. I want to challenge him, and I do challenge him, to give me or to state publicly the name of any secretary and the name of the Queensland People's Party branch to which he alleges he belongs, because I want to tell him that it is in keeping with a great many other completely irresponsible statements that fall from the hon. member's lips. It is a figment of his imagination; and it is a statement that would only be made by an hon. member who is totally devoid of scruple. If the hon. member continues to make this sort of charge he leaves himself open to the rejoinder, if it is so, that he is working in league with the Communist Party and this man is his spy in our organisation. That is one way-that he is a Communist spy with whom he is in close liaison in our organisation. I challenge the hon. member to make the name public, and I defy him to do so.

.Mr. 1\Iorris: He will not be game.

3Ir. W ANSTALL: Of course he will not. The hon. member, in the course of his

remarks, made a completely irresponsible and sweeping condemnation of a very fine body of women who run kindergartens in the city of Brisbane. He was asked specifically by interjection from this side whether his remarks were of general application, and he avowed that they were. Let me tell the hon. member that I have in my electorate at least two kindergartens, which are run by highly trained women. There is a kindergarten at St. Lucia with three trained personnel on its staff; and there is one at Toowong, which is run by a lady named Miss Brown; and it has been running very successfully for the past 20 years, and is an outstanding example of the proper conduct of such a kindergarten. The hon. member should take his duty in this Parliament a little more seriously than to make such completely unfounded and baseless accusations against a very useful form of activity carried on in our city. If the hon. member had not such a vicious

hatred of any form of individual and free enterprise, except that practising at the Bar. he would· not fall into such obvious errors. He put forward a policy whereby the State would regiment and control kindergartens. Of course, that is entirely consistent with his outlook. The speeches that have fallen from his lips in this Chamber are based directly upon and derive. directly from the doctrines of Karl Marx. Reading his speeches, one can see running through them nn unbroken thrcnd of Marxian doctrine. One sees it in every utterance he makes. I venture to suggest that there is no member of the Socialist Party in Queensland who is more deeply steeped in the doctrine of Karl Maroc than the hon. member for Nundah.

I now wish to refer to one or two particular remarks he made on taxation. Strangely


enough, that is one subject on 1vhich I propose to speak. The Treasurer, on the last paper of his Budget, states-

'' 'rhe economy of the nation is sound financially and economically, and our living conditions are high compared with those of other nations.''

The hon. gentleman is entitled to his opinion that the economy of om nation is sound financially and economically, although he has wasted a word in stating it. ln my opinion the economy of our nation is rotten with inflation, and the working people of this nation know only too well just how bad is the degree of inflation throughout our economy. And no country under the stress of such ghastly inflation as is Australia today coulu possibly be sound, no people living in a nation whose economy is so inflated coul~ yossibly have a really high stamlard of hvmg.

The reason why there is such inflation in our economy is to be found in the present l<'ederal Government's fiscal policy. There is no need for me to elaborate on the effects of inflation, but let me state a simple ueflnition of inflation, one readily understood without the need for recourse to textbooks on economics. My definition of inflation is the state of affairs in which there is a greater amount of currency circulating in the community than there are goods available to be purchased with that currency. That is a simple, elementary definition of inflation.

jUr. Aikens: In plainer words, more currency than goods.

Jir. WAN STALL: That is cutting out a word or two, but meaning the same. Nobody can deny that that is the economic situation in Australia today. ThP Treasurer's Budget lays clown that condition of affairs in i"irtually every page. The Treasurer points out that whereas we are budgeting for large expenditure, in other words that whereas we have plenty of money, the hon. gentleman does not think we can ea rry out the full programme because we cannot buy the necessary goods with that money, and he apologises for the state of affairs that occurred in our last financial year, when, owing to the lack of goods and materials, we were unable to carry out the full programme of works budgeted for. In other words, the Treasurer's Budget confirms the state of inflation that is implicit in my definition.

The whole Budget shows that there is inflation abroau in our land. N obocly can deny it. What is the reason~ The;e are four basic reasons and they are all part of the policy of the present Commonwealth Government. The first and bY far the most overpowering or dominant ';.eason is the Chifley Government's policy on taxation. Here again I cross swords 1vith the hon. member for Nundah. I deplore that an hon. member of his ability should descend to the tactics of special pleading, which he did in the course of his speech when he referred to individual rates of taxation on particular income groups and put them forward as evidence that taxation in Australia today was

not unduly heavy. That is a most specious argument in its application to economics. The only aspect of taxation that matters economically is the weight of taxation generally on the productive resources of tlw nation. That is the only test by which you can measure whether taxation, considered as a whole, is beyond the resources of the country. To put up an argument such as that used by the hon. member for Nundah, whilst it might be popular on the election platform, is a completely invalid type of reasoning in an intelligent debate such as this.

By the test 1vhich l suggest is the only reliable test of the justification for any Government's taxation policy, there can be no doubt that the Commonwealth Government's taxation policy is a crushing burden on the productive resources of our country. Its immediate effect is to give a tremendous fillip to the inflation that is abroad in our community, to give a tremendous kick to the upward spiralling prices of goods and services.

~Ir. Bruce: But that taxation is spent.

Mr. WANSTALL: It is drawn off from industry and it is diverted to a large extent 1nto payment ior unproductivE' services, and therefore it gii·es the inflationary circle a more vigorous spin. The more taxntion you take ont of industry the weaker you leave industry to meet the expanding i!emands of the community for goods. The more of taxation you spend on unproductive services Lhe less staff can be employed in productive industry and the greater is the wages bill of tltc,se employed in unproductive industry. So thal· the hc:tYy cost of the ComrPonwealtll Gm·ernment 's unproductive services----

j}Ir. Burrows: Such as the rehabilitation of returned soldiers, I presume you mean.

~Ir. WAN STALL: I will not have anything presumed against me by the hon. mPmber for Port Curtis. I am quite capable of making my own speech. If he wants to describe his policy I have no doubt he will have an equal opportunity of doing so.

The point I wish to make in answer to the Minister's interjection is that the tremendous expenditure by the present Commonwealth Government on unproductive service has a twofold effect on inflation. It has a detrimental effect on the economy of the country because the wherewithal for keeping that vast number of employees employed is withdrawn from the production of our economy. It is then used to withdraw, in other words to make opportunities of employment available for, ever-increasing numbers of Government employees, anu you get a snow-balling effect so far as the economics of our industries are concerned.

I notice that the hon. member for Nundah very carefully avoided any reference to indirect taxation. No matter how hon. members on this side endeavoured to get him to express his views on indirect taxation, he very carefully refrained from doing so, and I do not blame him. After all, if I belonged


to a pm·ty that maintained as its policy such a vicious system of indirect taxation as the policy of the party to which he belongs, I should adopt the same attitude as the hon. member for Nundah-the less said about it the better.

Mr. Aikens: Silence is golden.

Mr. WAN STALL: Silence is golden, because there is no political party that can, on principle, support indirect taxation. Indirect taxation is, from its very nature, a vicious discriminationary taxation against certain sections of the community.

Unfortunately, the sections of our community most seriously affected by indirect taxation are those with the bigger families and the greatest number of dependents, and as my friend the hon. member for Windsor says, the bigger the family the heavier the total bill of indirect taxation.

}Ir. Aikens: Those who buy the greatest quantity of consumer goods.

Mr. WANSTALL: Yes, those with others depending upon them. It is discriminatory taxation. If a family requires only three pairs of shoes to be bought for it during the year, it does not pay as much sales tax or indirect taxation as the family requiring six or seven pairs of shoes. The same applies to toilet soap, washing soap and the requirements for the kitchen cupboard, the linen cupboard, and particularly the clothing wardrobe, and those things that are indispensable-the sort of articles no family can help but buy. They are the unfortunate people ·most affected by the Chifiey Government's policy of indirect taxation.

It is not as though there were any need for the Commonwealth Government to keep such a wide range of articles subject to indirect taxation, or maintain such exorbitant rates on many of the articles, nor can it be said that the Government are unaware of the public protests and the rising wave of public resentment against the effects of indirect taxation, because such matters have been amply canvassed, particularly over the last three or four years. Notwithstanding that the Commonwealth Government have presented a Budget for each financial year during that period, there has been no really worth-while reduction in the incidence of indirect taxation upon the less financially fortunate families in our community. I use that expression advisedly because I know there are many big families that think the members of their families their greatest source of happiness; I mean the less fortunate from the financial point of view.

In the era of paper-money prosperity the l.Jlame must be laid at the door of the Commonwealth Government, which are so invariably supported by hon. members opposite. In fact, they are part of the same organisation, part of one and the same thing. When the Treasurer speaks of the Budget and the sound finances of our nation and the sound economy of the nation, he is directly connecting himself with the fiscal policy enforced by the Federal Government and applauding and supporting it. 'Ne have shown, in relation to not

only direct but also indirect taxation, that the policy of that Government who are supported by hon. members opposite, is having a deleterious effect upon the national life of our community.

I am glad to have the assurance of the hon. member for Nundah that that policy is no mere accident but on the contrary is one that has been adopted by deliberate design and intent. To repeat the words of Senator McKenna, it is a policy that has been persisted in by design and intent. The Australian people should know that the Commonwealth Government's policy of penalising them by indirect taxation is to be persisted in.

Mr Aikens: The Robin Hood policyto rob from the rich to give to the poor.

}lr: WANSTALL.: It is the Karl Marx doctrine so beloved by the hon. member for Nundah.

The next respect in which the Commonwealth Government's present policy is having such a bad effect on the economy of our nation is in relation to the withdrawal of the subsidies on articles that are part of the cost of living. Textiles, milk, and potatoes in particular are only a few of the items I mention in order to bring this problem home to hon. members opposite in a very vivid way. Their sudden and uncushioned withdrawal has had a very bad effect on the cost of living and hurts most the section of the community that hon. members opposite always protest very volubly they are here to serve. We do not hear them raising their voices in protest no"'' although the Acting Premier, I will admit, did criticise the Commonwealth Government for their utterly unjustifiable withdrawal of the subsidies but the hon. gentleman does not go very far when he leaves it at that and I suggest that hon. members opposite are directly responsible and are parties to Mr. Chifiey 's sudden withdrawal of these subsidies because they are inseparable units in the same political machine.

Mr. Bruce interjected.

~[r. WANSTALL: There is no use in the Minister's sitting there on the front bench and dissociating himself from that policy.

Mr. Bruce: I said the Manila girls-I did not want them back.

}Ir. WANSTALL: The hon. gentleman did noU I shall tell the hon. gentleman about the Manila girls in a minute. I am glad to know that he is one member of the Labour Party who does not applaud the Fascistminded tactics of Mr. Calwell.

Let me get back to my original point. T ~~v ;n all seriousness to hon. members opposite that they are now implicated in the Commonwealth Government's unjustifiable withdrawal of the subsidies and tn show how utterly unnecessary it was and how utterly invalif1 was the reason given by the Commonwealth Government I refer to the case of milk. The Right Honourable the Prime Minister and Treasurer could advance only one reason to justify his withdrawal of the subsidy and that was that it would be

Supply. [21 OcTOBER.] Stbpply. 887

improper and unsafe for the Commonwealth Government to be responsible for finding the fund for the subsidy whilst at the same time losing control of the payment of this sub-sidy. He said it was impracticable.

lUr. Aikens: That was not sound in principle~

lUr WANSTALL: No, and I will tell the hon. member why. The subsidy that had been paid on milk for years past had never been paid in any other way than through the State Government. The very subsidy that has been withdrawn by the Chifley Government has always been handled by our State Government, whilst the money has been supplied by the Federal Government. The Secretary for Agriculture and Stock nods agreement with me. He knows that what I sav is correct. While the Prime Minister said that he could no longer do it, he knew also that he did not have to make any change. He was simply asked to continue what he had been doing for years.

llir. Comns: He lost the power to fix the price.

lUr. WANSTALL: Yes, but what difference does it make~ It is a distinction without a difference. I know that the Secretary for Agriculture and Stock will say that there was not the slightest difficulty in continuing the milk subsidy under the present system of State control of prices. There was no justification for the Commonwealth Government's action, the effect of which on the cost of living, was very serious, especially to the wage-earner. The sudden withdrawal of the subsidy has had a bad effect because it has put up the cost of living. These subsidies were being paid from taxation revenue and revenue generally to provide the basic needs of the people of the community and suddenly cutting them off had serious consequences. It resulted in a sudden jump in the cost of production and thus in the price of these indispensable commodities. So that the Commonwealth Government, aided and abetted by the Queensland Government politically and as far as policy is concerned-I do not mean bv individual administrative acts-have made" a very important contribution to inflation in this country.

Fourthly, the Commonwealth Govern-ment's record in the management of our country's international money affairs leaves very much to be desired. Only in the last couple of weeks the Commonwealth Government converted one of the Au&tralian loans that matured in London at a satisfactory figure from the London investor's point of view. Let us see what might have been done. When that London loan matured Australian funds in London were banked up to flood height. They had reached a height that had never been attained before. To a large extent they were useless to Australia because they represented far more goods than we could buy on the English market. In other words, they were just dammed up there in London and useless so far as buying goods is concerned.

It would have been quite within the realms of international finance to pay off that debt, drawing on Australia's London funds for the purpose. Why that was not done is completely beyond my comprehension. Money could have been replaced by raising a loan on the local market. Had the loan been raised in Australia it would have drawn off from the London market some of the clogging finance of ours that is there and it would also have drawn off from the Australian market some of the purchasing power that is a vital factor contributing to inflation. But for some unexplained reason the Commonwealth Government did not do that. That is only a typical example of how the Commonwealth Government have mismanaged our financial affairs from the international aspect.

Then look at the Government's refusal to adopt the expedient of raising a dollar loan It is abundantly clear that the American market would gladly invest dollars in Australia. Australian primary industries particularly are suffering through shortages of essential plant, equipment and machinery, all of which are needed for the stepping up of our primary production to meet the demand. vV e could get machinery very readily and quickly in America. If we accepted a dollar loan we could have got dollars to pay for that plant equipment and machinery. The Minister for Transport this morning explained what is happening in relation to the building of huge steel roller mills at Port Kembla. I agree entirely with his approach to that question. He approved of the withdrawal of steel from essential needs in order to put it into the building of that mill because, as he pointed out, in very quick time it would return dividends in goods that would more than offset the temporary immediate loss to industry.

Is that not the situation in relation to dollar loans 'I Is that not the principle that makes it desirable for Australia to borrow dollars now so that we can import the machinery so urgently needed to step up production in all our industries~ Would it not be just as advantageous as the diversion of steel for the new steel roller mill in order to increase potential supplies~ But our Commonwealth Government refused to adopt that ,-cry sound policy, for no apparent reason.

I replied to the interjections of the Secretarv for Public Instruction who interjected, ''I. did not want them back,'' that I should be dealing with the subject of the Manila girls. I propose to say something now about the Federal Minister for Immigration, Mr. Calwell but I gather from the Minister's interje~tion that Mr. Calwell is no friend of his in relation to his present policy. The incident in which the Minister for Immigration has been concerned in recent weeks is one of the darkest blots on the political history of Australia. It is one of her most disgraceful incidents. It is an incident that has done more harm to Australia's prestige than any other single political act within my memorJ , It is so bad that it has earned


the approbation of Moscow, and that is the most damning condemnation I could make of it.

I want to say nothing about· the general problem, because it has been very adequately canvassed in the National Parliament, but I chaw hon. members' attention to a. report that appeared in this morning's "Courier· Mail'' under the heading '' Calwell Fears White Slavery." It reads-

'' Canberra, \V edncsday.-'l'he stand of the Immigration Minister (Mr. Calwell) m the Manila girls' case was to ensure that the girls• were kept out of the white slave traffic, Senator 0 'Flaherty (Labom, South Australia) said in the Senate tonight."

Senator 0 'Flaherty is a colleague Of 1Ir. Cahrell 's and no doubt he was expressing Mr. Calwell 's own views in making that statement. As far as I know, there has been no denial. Every statement from Mr. Calwell himself in his attempt to bring these girls back from the United States is a gross insult. It is a malicious slander of the individual girls concerned. It is ·worse than that: it is a gratuitous and contemptible lncult to decent Am-tralian womanhood. MT. Cal well will be arriving in Brisbane tomorrow and L hope the women of Brisbane will show sufficient spirit to meet Mr. Calwell with a very angry protest and demonstration against this gross insult against the moralitv of Aus-tralian women. "

Mr. Aikens: Will you say to him in public what you are sayi.1g uow~

Mr. WANSTALL: I look forward to seeing the >vomen 's organisation in Brisbane taking up this gratuitous insult to their Eex which has fallen from Mr. Calwell 's spokesman in the Federal House, and in which hon. members opposite are implicated as long as they continue to support Mr. Calwell and his Government.

There has been no stand by Mr. Chifley, who is Prime Minister. There has been no direct repudiation of Mr. Calwell 's policy on this maHer: there has been some watering clown on that policy.

Mr. Jones: You would think you were speaking in the Federal Parliament; you have not touched the Budget.

Mr. WANSTALL: I have shown the hon. gentleman how completely erroneous is the Treasurer's statement that· the economy of the nation is sound financially by dealing with the economy of the nation. As far as this subject is concerned, it is not a matter which is the peculiar province of the Federal Parliament, as the Secretary for Health and Home Affairs would have us believe, but it is a matter that touches the basic libertiPs of every Australian citizen. It is not a matter to be left to the Federal Parliament; it· is a matter that concerns me and every other citizen in Queensland and which should be the concern of every member of this Committee.

Mr. Aikens: It is a mountain made out of a molehill.

}fr. W ANS'l'ALL: It is no mountain made out of a molehill to the individual who can see behind a particular incident and detect the principle involved. 'l'hc principle involved, according to the Minister for Migration, is that· he must have an agreement, which he alleges his department made 1vith a member of the American Legation staff to return these girls to Australia, enforced. What justification is• there in this allegedly free country for any Government department to make an agreement about the disposal of its citizens~ What colossal effrontery on his part to suggest that his department has the right to make a bargain about these girls! They are free citizens; the State does not own them; t·he State cannot sell them and cannot make them into something with which to bargain with another State. That is sheer Fa.scism. That is all I want to say about it.

}fr. Aikens: Why don't you challenge Calwell to a public debate~ I will take the chair.

:ilfr. WAN STALL: My purpose was to make an immediate protest about this stat·ement made in the Federal House attributing to Calwell a desire to keep these girls out of the white-s·lave traffic in America and to point out that it carries with it an unmistakable implication that these girls a re girls whose morals are weak.

I protest strongly against that and I repeat that I hope the women of Brisbane, Queensland and Australia generally will regard this as a direct insult to themselves, each and every one of them.

Mr. DUNSTAN (Gympie) (4.5 p.m.): Mr. Manu, I confess that I derived a glow of satisfaction from the Budget submitted this session and the Financial Statement so well prepared and delivered by the Treasurer.

That glow of satisfaction arose from the fact that the Budget and Statement appealed to me as an authentic chapter of history, a genuine testimonial to Labour government and an assured forecast of things to come. And my inward glow is sustained b;v the fact that ever;' Budget since Labour came into office has been disparaged and assailed by Opposition critics, whose contentlons have been confuted and refuted by Labour TreHsurers year after year, which supplies the reason why the Opposition Party still aTe where they are.

In the chronicle of Queensland history there is the fact that, with the exception of the lamentable three-year anti-Labour interlude of 1929-32, which serves now as a painful memory and a warning to the electors the Queensland Labour Govermnent have b~en in office since 1915 and in public estimation of performance are stronger today than 33 years ago, because of their re~ord of statesmanship, achievement, and sustamed policy of progTess and reform.

Supply. [21 OCTOBER.] 8•.tpply. 889

In that long period of Labour unity and steadfast endeavour there has been compiled, in Queensland's statute books, Parliamentary debates, and political and industrial campaigns nnd struggles, a Labour record unequalled in the annals of the State since Separation and the establishment of selfgovemment in Queensland in 1859.

What is even more significant and enlightening, Mr. Speaker, is the fact that this record term of Labour government, democratic reform, political, industrial, and financial progress, and development and expansion of the State's resources, has been pioneered and attained bv men who were scorned and derickd hy Toi·y opponents as a rabble of agitators, devoid of governmental capacity, business training, political experience, or position in the sphere of wealth and social exclusiveness. Such was the stigma rancorous!~- ay1plicd to Labour pioneers, before and after 1915, by the stubborn, bitter, tyrannical and heavily-entrenched anti-Labour forces of those davs. Fattened in the realm of class privilege; these people hated and opposed the very idea of Labour reform and democratic freedom of thought, speeelt and action. And their lineal descend:mts of todav, in subtle propaganda, still carry on the ·Tory crusade, changed only in new dm·icP~, IJolitical cloaks, and party labels.

Now, however, the true testimonial, the convincing credential for the Labour Movements comes from a lustrous document of history, engrossed by Labour, attested by Labour, and sealed with the approval of the people of the State. It is the history written in many outstanding Bills of Rights resolved into Acts of Parliament, devised and established by Labour leaders, Ministers, members, and resolute men of the shearing sheds, mines, factories, fields, ancl all forms of industry by the men who, with their womenfolk, strove and suffered for what has been achieved today.

The great philosopher Plato is reputed to have said that man could only judge by comparisons, as, for instance, the big with the little, the tall with the short, tlw good with the bacl; so I propose to furnish some very good comparisons.

Had the first Labour Treasurer of this State, Mr. E. G. Theodore, in presenting his Budget in 1916-17, the first full financial year of Labour Government, then been able to foresee anc1 make the comparison, he coulcl reasonablv have described the facts and figures ~f Labour Treasurer Larcombe 's Budget of 1948-49 as astonishing.

First of all, I submit as Exhibit 1 in the case for Labour this comparison: in 1916-17 Treasurer Theodore budgeted for a revenue of £7,876,548. Now, for 1948-49, Treasurer Larcombe estimates the State's revenue at £31,457,235. In 1916-17 the estimated expenditure >~·as £8,034,624; no,,-, for 1948-49, it is £31,442,430.

The respective items of estimated expenditure furnish another comparison that also illustrates the volume of growth and expansion in the State:-

1916-17.

£ Department of Home

Secretary . . . . 912,991 Department of Health and

Home Affairs Department of Pubiic

Works 206,665 Department of Pubiic

Lands . . . . . . 236,401 Department of Agriculture

and Stock 77,667 Department of Pubiic

Instruction . . . . 64R, 723 Department of Railways . . 2,837,560

1948-49.

£

4, 743,346

414,810

540,240

374,958

3,609,293 12,708,600

In addition, there are the increases in estimated expenditure from Trust and Special Funds and Loan Funds from £3,669,301 in 1916-17 to £15,022,521 in 1948-49.

The comparative tables of production are likewise impressive:-

Railway earnings (£) .. Sugar, raw (tons) Sugar cane (tons) Butter (lbs.) .. Wool (lb.) .. Wheat (bushels) .. Agriculture, area under

crops (acres) Factories, outp;1t

value(£)

(a) Subject to revision.

1917. 1!l47-48.

3,874,536 307,714

2,704,211 38,930,690 76,138,789

l ,035,268

727,958

31,969,302

11,532,011 la) 571,455

4,152,456 105,382,527

(b) 144,819,591 10,684,563

1,848,539

(b)100,099,090

(b) 1946-47.

Apart from figures, Treasurer Larcombe 's 1948-49 Financinl Statement mentions other matters that are in the realm of big things, big achievements and projects, and a programme planned for a bigger future for Queensland. The Government's objective embraced in the co-ordinated plan of works now prepared and operating, and to be implemented to the full extent of the materials available, totals over £15,000,000. This programme, planned and projected for big things in public works and services and for progressive and expanding production and development, is further evidence of the Labour Government's financial capacity, and cannot be effectively decried.

A sum of £1,450,000 has been provided for advances to borrowers from the Agricultural Bank and the rate of interest on all advances from that hank has been reduced from £3 15s. to £3 12s. tid. per cent. per annum.

Tllustratiw of the sen-iee and assistance given l>y the Government to primary producers oYer the vears is the fact that un·iler the Primary Products Pools Acts and similar legislation the amounts paid through these boards to the primary producers from the time of inception to 30 .Tune, 1948, have exceeded the huge total of £450,000,000.


Consider also these big conceptions and projects: the provision of half a million pounds, in conjunction with the British Overseas Food Corporation, which is im-esting £1,000,000, in the Central District scheme to produce cereals that ,-ill be turned into foodstuffs for Great Britain. Here we have the beginning of an era of large-scale cultivation, with powerful bulldozers and gang ploughs providing a new dimension in farming operations not previously undertaken in this State.

Tn the vital problem of ,yatcr conservation and irrign·cion also, the Department of Irrigation and \Vater Supply, 'vith the Bureau of Investigation, has done great ,1-ork, and :further comprehensive plans include a sum of £636,176 provided 011 the Estimates for weir construction, purchase of plant, provision of water facilities and investigations, with seven weirs no"· under construction in addition to the five already completed. In this programme are the Burdeldn River dam scheme of great magnitude and possibilities, the Bor1rr RiYers scheme of water conservation, in which Queensland and New South Wales are co-operating in an expenditure of over £1,250,000, ~11d the damming of t,he Fitzroy River for i1'l'igation purposes and increased water supply for Rockhampton.

For the :VIain Roads Commission, which OYer t:Ie years has an outstanding record of main-roads and bridge conotruction for Queensland, an aggregate amount of £3,963,000 is being made available, including £1,019,000 supplied by the Commonwealth under the Fe1eral Aid Roads and Works Act, with an increase in the special Commonwealth grant, from £191,000 to £383,000 for roads through sparsely settled areas and districts not served by adequate transport facilities. The commission's operations will include the continuance of work on the new rail and traffic bridge across the Burdekin River, on which £373,000 has been already expended. On permanent works and the maintenance of main roads, the commission last year expended £3,746,000 ~nd in that period the expenditure on the mamtenance of roads alone was £1,066,543, co:rstituting a record. All this has been of m:.mense benefit to the State, extending the radius of transport of trading supplies and increasing land settlement and production.

Important also is the agreement entered into by the Electric Supply Corporation (Overseas) Ltd. with the Queensland Government by which the corporation intends to expe1;d the enormous sum of £18,000,000 in developing the Blair Athol coal-mines, building a railway, and providing port and harbour facilities.

In the bigness of the public-works programme, visioned and accomplished, ean also be included the Labour Government's bui1ding of the railway to Mt. Isa, which enabled the company to develop a mountain of wealth and a production last year exceeding £4,500,000 and the extension of the North Coast Railway to Cairns, despite the opposition of the shipping companies.

To the fact that two-thirds of the loans and subsidies advanced by the Labour Government since 1937-38 have been to local authorities and local bodies in the country, and to the Labour policy of land settlement and developiuent, country public works and aforestation, there is the significant corollary that the percentage of population in the metropolitan area in Queensland is the lowest of the metropolitan populations of the mainland States of the Commonwealth.

Still another significant comparison prrgents itself. Vivid in my memory is the story of the establishment of the State Government Insurance Office, the opposition it had to meet, and the spectacle of the lobbies of this House being crammed by agents of private insurance companies briefing and urging- the Opposition to protest against the Bill glving that office control of workers' compensation. Today, the Financial Statement discloses these impressive figures: since its inception until 30 June, 1948, the aggregate results of the State Government Insurance Office are-

Total income £38,615,104 Claims paid 20,654,390 Bonuses paid 1,294,495 Total profits 3,267,280 Aggregate workers'

compensation claim payments

Total investments 13,685,209 10,544,983

In the Workers' Compensation Section the amount of compensation paid and estimated for all claims intimated, for the first year and last year respectively, provide another progressive comparison-

1916-1917 1947-1948

£177,425 £1,061,899

A further heartening illustration of social benefits under Labour Government is in the progressively increased compensation payments for sufferers from miners' phthisisthe victims of industry under the bad conditions of private mining enterprise.

In the Fire Insurance Section :.done, the estimated aggregate savings to the insuring public are-

Reduction in premiums Distribution of profits

Total

£8,870,000 2,280,000

£11,150,000

These figures include the estimated savings to policy-holders of private insurance offices as a result of the reduction in standard fireinsurance premium rates and the profit-distribution policy of the State office. As a striking example of the reduction in fire rates, it is a notable fact that fire cover, which cost £1 in 1917, today costs the State office policy-holder only 5s. 4d.

I repeat and emphasise these facts and observations relative to the Financial Statement, because they need and are worth repetition and emphasis, and because they provide convincing comparisons. It has been said. Mr. Speaker, that there are two main classes in every community-the boosters. !'nd the knockers; and in the realm of pohbcal and


industrial reform the public can easily judge as to the category to which the Opposition critics belong.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I come to a stronger and conclusive comparison. Recently, in antiLabour propaganda, of weird and woeful redundancy and extravagance, we have heard an amazing misuse and prostitution of the majestic words, ''Freedom,'' ''Democracy' ' and ' 'The Liberty of the Sub-ject.'' These Tory mouthings, Mr. Speaker, fill me with abhorrence. It was a French woman, Madame Roland who cried, "0 Liberty! What crimes are' committed in thy name! '' To which, in Tory propaganda, can be added the words ''To what base uses political pretenders 'apply good words! ''

The allsm•r to that stultification of good words, Mr. Speaker, I find in a good memory. vVith many other men and women, I have experienced and seen unforgettable instances of 'rory forms of freedom and democracy. I have seen their translation into Tory tyranny of the worst kind. I have seen the Tory system of boycott ruthlessly applied to Labour men and women who dared to think there was such a thing as freedom of speech and political thought and action. I have seen a man, who was to become a Prime Minister of the Commonwealth, and with whom I was intimately associated, absolutely boycotted from a .iob by the Gympie mine-owners. I remember a Labour candidate for Parliament who addressed a meeting on a Saturday night and was sacked from work on the following Monday. I recollect that scores of other men were marked and sacked for expressing Labour opinions or because they were thought to have cast a Labour vote at the polls. I have known the time when miners were clocked 2d. a shift to pay for their own workers' compensation insurance. I remember when widows of fatally-injured miners vvere denied compensation by private insurance companies. I re~all the Tory fights against the abolition of the property franchise, against the abolition of coloured labour in the canefields against the granting of the Parliamentarf franchise in local-authority elections against the abolition of the Tory-encrusted Upper House-in short, against every major Labour reform. The pages of history, M~. Speaker, are black with those examples of Tory freedom, demo:racy, and ~iberty of the subject. The mouthmgs of anti-Labour propagandists and Press of those words today, Mr. Speaker, could be calculated to make even that redoubtable infant, Baby Johnson, gurgle louder but not with glee, if he were able to u~derstancl. . So, Mr. Speaker, I conclude my observa

twns on the Budget and Financial Statement by quoting that famous Latin phrase ''Lab or omnia vineit,' which in English and in politics can be taken to mean, ''Labour conquers everything.'' For whatever the representatives of vested interests and the Tory brand of _freedom ancl democracy may do and are trymg to do today, the Labour Movement which has the living virtue of democTacy will continue ancl conquer in the fight for progress ancl reform.

lllr. MAHER (West Moreton) (4.35 p.m.) : ~ ~ealt with some phases of the budgetary positron on. an earlier Appropriation Bill, and today I Wish to make reference to some passing phases of current political happenings. 1n particular I express regret that the hon. ,nember for Bremer, by some of his speeches in this Chamber, is beginning to give evidence that he has cultivated some of the tricks of demagoguery that are often employed by several members of the Socialist Partv in the State. •

The hon. member conveyed an entirely false impression of the conditions that faced the Government of the dav between 1929-32. He gave, of course, factual figures in relation to the deficits incurred at that time, but he avoided anv reference to the tremendous events that caused them to occur. The Leader of the Opposition reminds me that he made no reference to the continuance of deficits after 1932, when Mr. Forgan Smith became Premier, and these figures were much higher than those he quoted for 1929-32. The story is an old one, and I do not propose to go over the ground, but content myself with saying that the gentlemen who occupy the Treasury benches today might yet live to see a repetition of the condition that swept over this country and engulfed our economy, in common with that of other countries, in 1930-31.

Today we are living in a completely different set of circumstances. The history of the economy of our country is one of ups and downs: we have a period of ~·ears in which prosperous conditions rule, but inevitably this is followed by a break in the prices obtainable for the products we export to other countries of the world. ·when we have to face up to competition ancl lower prices, obviouslv that affects the whole of our economy, a~d I would remind the hon. member for Bremer and others that in 1931-32, when the deficits occurred to which he referred, the price of wool fell to an average of somewhere about 9d. per lb. It is frequently said, and very truly, that Australia rides to prosperity on the sheep's back. Tinder the conditions ruling now the average price of wool throughout Australia is round about 4s. per lb. Although that price is high, it is offset very greatly by the high price of materials and labour and rising costs, with which unfortunately we are all familiar. There is the comparative position: the price of wool down to 9d. per lb. on the average in 1932, and up to 4s. per lb. in Australia today .

That makes a mighty difference. The level of exportable values in most directions is on an up\\ ard curve today and this all helps to bring a great measure of prosperity to this country. But there are signs-! hope they do not mature-with warnings from men highly placed in Great Britain and the United States of America that next year may hot be so good; therefore, it is not outside the bounds of possibility that hon. members of the Government, the hon. member for

892 S'tpply. [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

Bremer in particular, may live long enough in politics to have to face the set of conditions with which the Govemment of 1929 to 1932 had to contend.

Despite the high level of prosperity, the full employment that the hon. member for Bremer and other speakers on the Government side have pointed to with pride, despite the golden age described by Mr. Chifiey, the strange and disturbing paradox remains that never \vas there so much unrest, so many industrial upsets, so many shortages of essen· tial commodities or such a welter of discontent as exist in Australia today. There is the interesting phenomenon that despite the abounding prosperity on all sides today to which hon. members point and which the Treasurer acclaims in his Financial Statement, never was there so much distrust, so much upset, so many dislocations of industry or so much dissatisfaction amongst the people of our country. There must be something radically wrong at the core of our country's affairs when this is so; and that there is something radically wrong I propose to show.

The hon. member for Bremer tried to delude the Committee and the people into believing that all is well in Australia under the Socialist Government of the Commonwealth and the Socialist Government he supports in the State Parliament. I propose to quote some figures to show what is wrong with our country, why things are not running to the general satisfaction of Governments and the right-thinking people of the country.

The core of our trouble is the great decline in production, and I put this point to the Committee for the serious consideration of every hon. member who seeks the truth today. We are producing less gold in Australia today than we did in 1903; we are producing less silver and lead than in 1918, less tin and tin ore than in 1907, less copper than in 1917 and less zinc and zinc concentrates than in 1912. In 1939-40 we produced 212,000 tons of butter. This >vas reduced to 143,000 tons in 1946-47. In 1943-44 we produced 522,000 tons of greasy wool but in 1946-47 only 435,000 tons. There were 125,000,000 sheep in Australia in 1942 but this figure dwindled to 96,000,000 in 1947. In 1936, 1937, 1938, and 1939 the average production of beef and veal was 569,000 tons. The output of these products for 1946-4 7 dropped to 488,000 tons. Horses dwindled from 1,700,000 in 1940 to 1,200,000 in 1947, and cattle from 14,441,000 in 1921 to 13,400,000 in 1947.

The average production of raw sugar for the years 1936-37, 1937-38, and 1938-39 was 780,000 tons against 521,000 tons in 1946-47. The output of our dried fruits for the year 1943-44 was 103,000 tons and by 1946-47 it had d winclled to 7 4,000 tons.

That is a coverage of the position in respect to primary production. \V e could look over the field of secondary industries but I do not propose to cover it' this afternoon. Everybody is painfully aware of the grave shortages of essential commodities that are evident

in every section of primary industry today, almost without exception. The story has been told in this Chamber time and time again of how hard it is to get roofing material, galvanised iron, tiles, fencing wire, barbed wire, windmills, and the hundred and one other things needed to repair the capital assets on farms and stations and to help builders and contractors and those who want to catch up >Yith the >vastage brought about by six years of war. All these things should be coming up in buoyant supplies because the war is over some three or four years and the whole of our armies and services have been demobilised. Despite that, the loss of production is causing serious concern.

I should like to ask hon. members of this Committee: could anything be more fantastic than asking war-racked Britain to supply us with coal when this country, untouched by the realities of war, possesses coal in rich deposits that vYe are too tired to mine~ \Ve cannot by our own efforts raise sufficient coal for our own requirements. The Victorian Government have been forced, through shortages of coal in that State and because they cannot buy it in sufficient quantities from New South \Vales and Queensland, to place an order for 220,000 tons of coal outside this country. Of this tonnage 120,000 tons is on order from Britain and 100,000 tons from India. We have the position of Britain, battered, torn, and weakened economically, exporting coal to Victoria. Why~ Because the direction and organisation of the coal industry by the socialistic Government of the Commonwealth, allied with the socialistic Governments of the different States, is so terribly weak and ineffective.

Here is a country rich beyond compare in raw materials. We have had debate after debate in which Ministers and hon. members of the Govrnment Party and Opposition have expressed amazement and wonder concerning Blair Athol and the marvellous quantity of coal to be won. Boring has indicated a depth of 102 feet of coal against tests some years ago of 94 feet, revealing untold wealth that could be mined bv open-cut methods. But because of the poorness of the organisation, direction, and leadership of socialistic Governments we are not able to tap it in sufficient quantities to supply the sister State of Victoria with her coal requirements.

Of course, the sad story has been told by the hon. member for Port Curtis of the failme of the negotiations on the part of the Victorian Government through one of their Ministers to get a flow of coal from the Callide Valley, where the·re are great riches waiting development.

Here we are calling upon Great Britnin, who needs the coal, to send coal to Victoria, while we have it in rich abundance in our own country, and we need only the IH'cessary direction, leadership, and organisation on the part of the Government to see that all the othc.r Australian States are properly supplied ,,-ith coal from the rich resources that we possess.


Another matter upon which I wish to touch just briefly is in relation to our hospitals. Today I asked a question of the Secretary for Health and Home Affairs and I elicited from him the fact that of 113 hospitals in the State 95 were only partially staffed, and that the hospital managements hacl to depend on the esprit de corps loyalty, and willingness of the nursing staff to carry tluough the >York that is being undertaken within the hospitals in the interests of humanity. The Minister said also that one hospital had closed, and that was at Blair Athol. Other hospitals had to close in the past but I suppose the position has been met in the meantime. That inc1icates that clespite full employment and the golden-ago conditions things are not right, eYcn with our hospital system.

:E'ree medicine and all the other social services made available by the Federal Government have not had the effect of providing in the inland parts of the State the conditions that would attract nursing staffs to hospitals there. That did not apply in the days prior to the advent of socialist governments in this country, and it is one fact that emerges from such a turn in political events. Although we have the hospitals we have not been able to staff them so as to give the inland areas of the State a proper measure of help in the nursing of patients and that we must depend on overworking those nurses who go there to care for the sick and suffering in those hospitals.

The hon. member for Bremer said also something about the grand part played by the Socialist Government of the Commonwealth in the prosecution of the war. There is just one phase that it will not hurt to resurrect in replying to him on that point. When Mr. .John Curt in was Prime :Minister of the Commonwealth he experienced the humiliation of having to go on his bended knee to a few union no bodies, extreme Left Wingers and Communists, to ascertain what measure of support he could give to General MacArthur, who wanted one division of the A.I.F. to march with the United States Army to the Philippines and ultimately to .Japan. Mr. Curtin was told by these union leaders in conference that he could not send the division with General l\IIacArthur, that a geographical line must be drawn, and that no Australian troops must go beyond that line.

::IIr. Aikens: Pure bunk!

3Ir. ::IIAHER: That no Australian troops should go beyond that line, unless voluntarily. The result >Yas that General :MacArthur did not get the support of the two armies which had marehecl together in comradeship over many battlefronts in the islands to the north of Australia. They had to dissolve partnership at that particular point where the line was drawn, and the result was that General :MacArthur hall to go to the Philippines and to .Japan without the backing of the A.I.F. and Australia. Nothing more humiliating has ever happened in our history than that.

What happened~ .For 12 or 18 months our armies lay idle on the A therton 'ra bleland \Yhilst the "Cnitcd States Army proceeded to, the Philippines. :Finally, to save face, the AJ .F. was put into the i::lolomon Islands, but only after the .Japanese were already cut off !Jy the air and llaYal forces of the United i::ltates of America and could get, no help from their homeland. V:1 hw ble liYes were lost. In order to save the face of the Australian Government thev had to use the Australian soldierc,, and th;t is where they used them, Every Australian life lost in the Solomon Islands \Yas a sat·rifice to this Labonr Government and those 11"110 advised them. the unions.

T nO\Y want to refer to the proposal to amalgmna tc eertain lot'nl authorities. I do not know hO\Y far the Secretary for Public Works, Housing and Local Government is committed to the policy of amalgamation, !Jut I should like to make one or two suggestions for his consideration. Firstly, whatever is done in regard to amalgamation I hope the Minister will preserve the system of didsional representation, which has given gencml satisfaction, in whatever new amalgamated local-gowrnment bodies may be created.

l\Ir. Power: We are willing to listen to any sugges,tions you may have and give them favourable consideration.

JUr. JUAHER: Thank you. I submit for the Minister's consideration that no alteration be made in any local-authority boundaries without first ascertaining the feeling of the electors concerned. That is a ,·ital principle in om democracy-that no action be t'aken without the will of those concerned. In other words, I suggest that a poll be conducted at the next local-authority election. After all, this amalgamation is not so violently mgent that it must be done at once. No cost would result if it was left to the poll to be taken at the time of the next local-authority elections held, I think, sometime after the Royal visit next year.

lUr. Power: Who is going to state the case in fa Your of it?

lUr. lUAHER: That could be left to the diYided feeling in the area of the local goYerning body. There would be those who fnYoured the amalgamation and there would be those who opposed it. \Yhat I want to establish is the right of the people affected b~- thes'e projected changes to be able to 1·oice their own feelings. If they decide in fa,·our of the Minister's proposals, well and good. That is the voice of democracy. If, on the other hand, they decide that they would like to Tetain the present local governing boundari<>s which they have become used to, and which they think serve their needs, th<>n let the public in those arens hm-e what theY \Yant. That is \Yhat I submit to the J\1i1\ister-not to allow himself to be forced into any system of pushing these boundaries al1out iu the style of the bureaucrats whom we got to knm,: so unfavourably during the war years. 'We do not want to feel that lmreaucracy is deciding those things. Let the people who are going to be affected have the final voice in the matter.

894 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.J Supply.

Mr. Power: There will be no pushing of them about. Consideration will be given to every angle of the matter.

Mr. ltiAHER: That is good. Another point· is that in some districts,

to my knowledge, the smaller shire councib are looked upon as a decentralised form of local government.

It has been submitted to me that much useful work is achieved in the smaller shires, because it is contended that they are efficient Hnd economical in their working and enable close contact to exist between the councillors >lm1 their constituents, and give scope for a greater concentration of effort in meeting the problems that come up for detennination.

ltlr. Power: What amenities could a local authority give with an income of £4,000 .a year~

3Ir. ltiAHER: I am willing to consider every case on its merits and to say that maybe there are cases where there is room for amalgamation; but I should like the Minister to consider each on its merits.

iUr. Power: That is what we are doing. iUr. ltiAHER: I am following up what

I say here today by seeking the ear of the Minister, probably next week, for a deputation-~

iUr. Power: That will be all right. lllr. lUAHER: -~from some of my

·councillors who will be affected by this proposal, so that they can state the case. Even though the Minister tells me that he has an open mind on the subject, and he is not going by any set policy that they have to be merged or amalgamated whether they like it or not, if he tells me today that 'he is willing to listen to reason-- ·

ltlr. Power: I am always reasonable and I will meet a deputation any time Y01; bring them along. • •

lUr. ltiAHER: I will arrange that subsequently with the Minister. I think, in view of what ~he ~inister has said in that respect, and havmg JUSt stated one or two points leading up to it, and believing that he will meet us with an open mind on the matter .and that he will listen to reason, I may drop any further reference to the subject now and discuss the matter >vith him.

3fr. Power: Let us hear more about it· it may be helpful. '

1Ur. JIAHER: I will discuss the matter with the hon. gentleman next week. The ren:ainin(i ~atters are largely detail, but the mam prmcrple I wanted to have accepted "as the right of those 1vlw are going to be affected by the changes to have a voice in it now. However, we will have that out later.

I want to make reference to an unfortunate happening here on Tuesday, when the hon. member for Kelvin Grove saw fit to launch a very bitter attack upon the character of one of the leading citizens of the Australian Commonwealth in the person of Mr. Arthur Fadden, Leader of the Federal Country Party. I was hopeful that the hon. member for Kelvin

Grove would have come forward either yester· day morning or this morning, under cover of a personal explanation, and admitted error and offered his apology for his defamatory attack on Mr. Fadden. It is regrettable that he has not been sufficiently manly to make such an apology. If he had made the apology I should not have made any further reference to the matter. However, I should like to say, with regard to the story related by Mr. Fadden at the Diploma Day gathering at Gatton College, that I was present on that occasion and that the hon. member for Kelvin Grove's version of what happened does not accord with the facts.

Firstly, the story told by Mr. Fadden was not dirty and filthy, as stated by the hon. member. It was not even mildly risque. I have heard this same story told time and again at public meetings and soc~al ~ather· ings. As a matter of fact, I notice m Old Bill's column in this afternoon's issue of the Brisbane '' Telegraph'' the following-

'' This will interest the member for Kelvin Grove (Mr. Turner) and others; the 'dirty, filthy yarn' which Mr. Turner complained about ·Mr. Fadden telling at a Gatton College function was used by a church leader to preface his remarks on speech day at one of the State's leading boys ' colleges. ' '

I have made the point that the story quoted in the Brisbane ''Courier-Mail,'' which was used by Mr. Fadden on that occasion, was not dirty and filthy and it was scarcely mildly risque.

Secondly, Sir Leslie Wilson, then the Governor, did not show any resentment of what the hon. member for Kelvin Grove called a dirty filthy tale; indeed, Mr. Manu, Sir Leslie appeared to enjoy the jocular reference to the brevity of speeches.

Jir. J ones: I was chairman of that meeting.

Jlr. :i1IAHER: The Minister can give his own version of what happened; I am giving mine. As a matter of fact, Sir Leslie Wilson, with his brilliant background of political, military and social activities liked a story with a kick in it.

lllr. Aikens: He does not tell them to women and kiddies.

lUr. JIAHER: Let me say that there were no kiddies there at all. The audience of the hall comprised adults and big husky boys of from 16 to 25 years of age. There were no little children there; if there were they would not have understood, because there is a certain measure of subtlety in the story and it would not be observable to young children. Most men enjoy a good story and they are none the worse for that. I will be perfectly frank-I do not want to give any false impression-and admit that I like a story well told: clever, subtle and possibly one 'that might make the mercury rise a little. Good stories are told wherever men foregather, in clubs, hotels, railway trains and other places. However, there is a vast dif· ference, a great gulf, between a somewluJ;t

Su,pply. (21 OCTOBER.] Supply. 895

risque story and a filthy story. As soon as anybody proceeds to tell a filthy story, most men of my acquaintance, like myself, walk away from the group. Filthy stories are taboo.

The hon. member for Kelvin Grove endeavoured to damage Mr. Fadden by asserting that he told a dirty filthy story. I ask the reasonable-minded members of this Committee, is there not a distinction between what might be called a risque story and a dirty filthy story~ A dirty filthy story is repugnant to us all and Mr. Fadden did not tell that kind of story. The hon. member for Kelvin Grove stated that Mr .. Fadden related a dirty filthy story to parents and their children. There will be general agrecmf'nt, I am sure, that he grossly exaggerated his charge.

But the hon. member went beyond that. Kot content with saying that the mildly risque story related by Mr. Fadden was dirty and filthy, he went further in his desire to defame the Leader of the Federal Countrv Party by charging him with having a vile and filthy tongue. That is a disgraceful thing for the hon. member to say here under cover of Parliamentary privilege. I want to brand that statement as a coldblooded and deliberate untruth. It is not so at all. Mr. Fadden and I have been good friends for nearly 20 years and I have never heard him relate in any company or in any set of conditions a filthy story. I have never heard him tell a filthy story. He is a delightful raconteur, he is a prince of good fellows, he moves amongst men, he has a wealth of good stories to tell, a fine repertoire of stories that you could classify as being of the drawing-room variety. I have never heard Mr. Fadden relate what I call a filthy story.

That was bad enough, but the hon. member for Kelvin Grove followed up his splenetic and malignant attack by advising the hon. member for East Toowoomba to model himself on someone of much better character than Mr. Fadden. That is the most serious thing of all. That is an attempt to undermine the general character of the member for Darling Downs, Mr. Fadden. He makes an attack upon Mr. Fad den's character. The hon. member for Kelvin Grove poses before this Assembly as a good Christian gentleman. I do not want to detract from him in any good Christian work with which he may be associated, but I ask the Committee: does this attack on the personal character of Mr. Fadden, unwarranted and venomous as it was, square up with a Christian act~ I remind the hon. member for Kelvin Grove of the words of Shakespeare-

'' Good nan1e in 111an or "Tonutn, dear n1y lord,

Is the immediate jewel of their souls: Who steals my purse steals trash; 'tis something, nothing; 'Twas mine, 'tis his and has been slave

to thousands; But he that filches from me my good

name Robs me of that >vhich not enriches

him, And makes me poor indeed.''

The hon. member for Kelvin Grove stands before the fair-minded and decent hon. members of this Parliament like the Pharisee in the temple in the story related by St. Luke, and I consider it fitting here to read from Chapter 18, Verses 9 to 14, for the benefit of the hon. member-

'' An cl he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that the7 were righteous and despised others:

''Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee and the other a publican.

''The Pharisee stood and prayed thus >Yith himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men nre, extortioners, unjust, at'lultcrers or eyen as this publican.

''I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

''And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.

''I tell you, this man went clown to his house justified rather than the other: for everyone that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.''

Hon. members will see that the Great Master rebuked the Pharisee as related by St. Luke. The hon. member for Kelvin Grove assumes an air of righteousness and proceeds to destroy the character of his neighbour, Mr. Fadden. The Pharisee on this occasion stood not in the temple but in Parliament House.

I "·ish to read to the Committee what the late John Curtin, who was Federal Opposition Leader, had to say on 19 May, 1941, about the charnder of Mr. ]'addeu. There is no need for hon. members on this side or· hon. members 011 the Government side of the Committee who know ivir. Fadclen personally, and fa\·ourablv, to praise the character of this gentlemari who has been so maligned. We know and appreciate him. I am now about to give hon. members the late Mr. .r ohn Curtin 's assessment of the character of :Mr. Fadden. He is reported in a Press statement-

'' A high tribute to the work of Mr. ]'aclclen as Acting Prime Minister >vas paid by the Opposition Leader, Mr. Curtin, at the conclusion of the last meeting of Advisory War Council at which Mr. Faclden is likely to preside before the return of the Prime Minister, Mr. Menzies.

'' 'On behalf of myself and my colleagues I salute Mr. Fadden for the very great service he has rendered Australia,' Mr. Cmtin said. 'The admiration we hold for him as a man has been enhanced by doser association with his personality. We greatly admire his character; he has played the game as a leader, a member of Parliament, and a member of the ·war Council.' '' Am1 again, ::\Ir. ::\fann, I wish to quote :m

extract from the'' Conrier-:Nlail'' of 20 August, 1942, in reporting th<' giving of n State Parliamentary luncheon in this Parliament House to Mr. Curtin when he came here as

896 [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

Australia's Prime Minis•ter. Mr. Curtin proposed the health of Mr. Cooper, State Treasurer at the time, who occupied the chair, .and the ''Courier-Mail'' said-

'' Mr. Curtin also paid a tribute to the Federa.! Opposition Leader, Mr. Fadden, who, he said, had maintained the highest traditions of Parliament and who had accorded him valuable help.''

Onee more I refer to an extract from Federal '' Hansard,'' page 25, under date '28 May, 1941, where the late Mr. John Curtin said-

'' During the absence of the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) abroad the Hon. Treassurcr, Mr. Fadden, who served as· Acting Prime Minister, set a standard of service to Australia and of association wit·h Parliament which I greatly admire.''

It was the late Mr. .John Cm·tin who ·nominated Mr. Fadden for appointment as 11 Privy Councillor of the Empire, a further recognition of t·hc sterling character Mr. Fadden possesses.

In conclusion, let me say that Australia is the richer for having had a man of Mr. Fadden 's groat ability, energy, honesty of purpose and straightforwardness in the Federal Parliament during the war years and since. He has co-operated generously and freely with successive Labour Governments and his valuable advice on financial and taxation problems has been acknowledged by the late John Curtin and Mr. Chifiey on vdriuus occasions. I can say that no more popular, friendly, and kindly-hearted fellow ever entered an Australian Parliament than Mr. Arthur Fadden. He has been Prime Minister of the Commonwealth, Federal Treasurer, Opposition Leader in the Federal Parliament, :and at one time a member of this Assembly, and ranks amongst the really great Auetralians of our time.

I conclude by quoting the words of ThomaR Bracken-

'' Poor souls with stunted vision Oft measure giants by their narrow

gauge. The poisoned shafts of falsehood and

derision Are oft impelled against those who

mould the age. '' Let ns fight on the floor of the House on

political principles, not on mean and petty personalities. There are none of us so good who can afford to defame his neighbonr.

I have here too a quotation from Mr. Arthur Bryant, the famous English historian, who wrote-

" The world would be a heaven of happiness if man would do what lies within his power; Love his neighbour. The world is a hell of jealousy, hatred, fear and distress because man does not.'' I commend the hon. member for Kelvin

Grove in his quiet moments carefully to study the moral contained in the parable related in St. Luke.

IUr. P ATEHSON (Bowenl (5.21 p.m.): This debate offers an opportunity to hon.

members to discuss the Financial Statement, which sets out first of all the receipts and expenditure for the 12 months ended June last, and then the programme of work envisaged by the Government for the ensuing 12 months. It is obvious that the matters contained in the Budget are so varied and so important that it is impossible for any hon. member to deal with every one of them.

Before I deal with some aspects of the Budget that I consider are important I want to say that during the four years I have been in Parliament I have read carefully each year the Financial Statement, containing glowing promises and glowing statements of what the Government intended to do in the ensuing 12 months, but at the end of each period I found that the Treasurer, the prese~t one or his predecessor, was compelled to admit that the reality was not as bright as the promise.

To give a broad illustration of what I mean, let me point out that during those four years in the four Financial Statements the Government promised a programme amounting to over £39 000,000, or just under £40,000,000, whereas the actual expenditure in the four years was just under £22,000,000. These figures show that the reality was only slightly more than half of the promise. While we can understand why the reality was not as bright as the promise, during the first two years, we must not be blinded by the glowing promises made from time to time. On the contrary we should try to keep our feet firmly on the ground in order to see clearly the exact situation.

In this connection I shall speak briefly about the position in the Railway Department. I listened with great attention to the speech delivered by the Minister for Transport today and I agree with much of what he said. I feel, however, that he did not go far enough in his analysis of the basic causes of the shortages in the department today. The Financial Statement says-

'' Particular attention is being paid to the needs of the railways for 1948-49, and for subsequent years.

''In the Estimates, an amount of £1,832,571 is provided from the Lo_an Fund for the construction of locomotives and other rolling stock, and for other capital works, and the Estimates of the Post-War Reconstruction and Development Fund include £1,450,000 to meet the cost of deferred maintenance, renewals of rolling stock and other works." I agree that the whole blame for the

present position in the Railway Department cannot be laid on the Government because during the war years we had a situation in which the department was called upon to clo work unparalleled in the history of this State. Let me say right now that the Railway Department during that period did a very good job. The railway employees in particular did an extraordinarily good job. But that should not blind us to the situation that exists, because I believe it is the duty of every hon. member to point out weaknesses so that they can be remedied.


Notwithstanding all that has been said of what is being done, we must admit that the situation in regard to rolling stock today is deplorable. Let me deal with this as it affects the position in the sugar industry, and particularly as it affects the delay in the loading of sugar in the various ports of Queensland. It is essential to do this, because there has been a tendency during the past eight or nine months, on the part of the daily Press, and particularly on the part of the enemies of the working class, to blame the waterside workers for the delay in the loading and unloading of ships. I realise that there is delay in the loading of sugar, and that there is delay in the unloading of ships, but I deny this is due to the waterside ·workers.

I can speak particularly of the port of Bowen, which is the port in my electorate. I propose to give the facts of what actually happened in the port of Bowen during one week, to give a typical illustration of just what is happening in this port and to show who is responsible. On Tuesday, 21 September, a boat called the '' Dundoola'' arrived in Bowen. If everything had been ready for work on her arrival, four gangs of waterside workers would have been employed. Those four gangs could have worked during that day during their working hours, and again on the succeeding days until the boat was unloaded. The "Dundoola" was carrying general cargo for Bowen, but because there were insufficient railway trucks available, the four gangs could not be employed. In fact, instead of four gangs only two were employed on that day.

Next day again there was a shortage of railway trucks and, as a result, instead of four gangs only one gang was employed. That is two instead of four on the first day, and one instead of four on the second day.

On the third day, for the first time, the full four gangs were employed, because for the first time the full number of railway trucks was available. If the full numbe•r of railway trucks had been available, right from the time of the arrival of the '' Dundoola,'' she could have finished unloading and got away on the second day, that is on 22 September. Instead, she did not get away until after 6 o'clock on the third day, 23 September.

On 23 September a sugar boat arrived called the "Ruysdael." Again, on account of the shortage of railway trucks, there was no sugar on the wharf to be loaded that day. As there was no sugar to be loaded, no men were engaged that day. The men did not begin to load sugar until the next day, 24 September.

Thus on four days during which ships were in the port of Bowen, there was a delay in the loading of sugar, and there was a delay in the unloading of general cargo, but the waterside workers were not to blame. The Railway Department, and the Railway Department alone, was to blame because the trucks were not on the wharf for the unloading of

1948-2F (a.)

the general cargo and the trucks were not available to bring sugar to the wharf for the men to load.

In order that hon. members may understand the position, let me give a brief outline of the port work in connection with the loading of sugar. The port of Bowen serves two sugar mills, the Inkerman mill at Home Hill and the Proserpine mill at Proserpine. Sugar is drawn on the main line from Inkerman to Bowen and from Proserpine to Bowen. On arrival in Bowen it is shunted on to the wharf. No sugar can be loaded on to a ship unless the sugar is brought from either of these two mills and shunted on to the wharf.

Then, after it is shunted onto the wharf, in order that work may be continued without unnecessary delay, it is essential that a shuntengine should be available at all times so that when trucks are unloaded they can be taken away ancl other truch with sugar brought up to replace them. Thus the delay occurs not only because there is a shortage of trucks to haul the sugar on the main linP but on some occasions also because, even after those trucks arrive, no shunt-engine is available either to shunt the trucks onto the wharf or to shunt the empty trucks off the wharf to make room for the new trucks.

Let me make it perfectly clPnr that the lack of a shunt-engine is not due to the railway employees of Bowen; the lack of a shunt-engine i~ due either to inefficient railway administration or to a shortage of shuntengines. It is essential to point out these farts and anybody who likes to take the trouble can ascertain that a similar state of affairs exists in many other port~. But the unfortunate waterside workers are wrongly blamed for such delay.

I listened with interest to the speech of the hon. member for West Moreton; in his conclusion he was very perturbed because, as he alleged, the hon. member for Kelvin Grove was supposed to have taken away or attempted to have taken away the character of Mr. Fadden. I leave out for the moment the question whose version of what happened is right, but my point is that the hon. member for vV est Moreton was very concerned b~cause Mr. Fad den's character was being taken away. By way of comment, let me say this: the hon .. nwmber for 'jV est ~?reton's political fnencls and Ins pohtlcal mouthpieces, the Tory Press, try to blacken the character of the watersiders almost every day although, the waterside workers are hon~st hard-working men. I clo not claim they ;,re saints any more than I claim I _am a saint but they are honest, hard-workmg men. Instead of ascertaining the facts, the Press and the political representatives of vested interests attack the waterside workers and blame them for delays on the wharf.

But it is not sufficient for us merely to point out the fact that there is a shortage of railway trucks or shunt-engine.s be~ause, as the Minister for Transport qmte nghtly and fairly pointed out this morning, that is partly caused today by the shortage of .iron and steel, We all agree that there 1s a


shortage of iron and steel in this country, but we disagree as to the cause of the shortage. Again the Tory newspapers which represent the wealthy classes of this country and their political representatives would have one believe that the coal-miners are to blame for this shortage and that the coal-miners are lazy men, who will not do the work and who will not produce sufficient coal to produce sufficient iron and steel.

Mr. Mann, let me quote a few figures. I do not think any hon. member will suggest that there is a shortage of coal in this State to meet our present requirements. Last year the coal-miners in this State produced 1,883,414 tons of coal. That is the highest 't-onnage ever produced in this State. In fact, 1t exceeded the production for 1946 by 315,894 tons and even exceeded the previous -..ecord made in 1943 when a special war effort was made, by 183,893 tons. Thus I think it will be generally conceded that at least the coal-miners in this State have played t11eir part.

But frequently attempts are made to blame the New South Wales coal-miners; partly because of a desire to try to turn the Queens-1and coal-miners against the New South Wales coal-miners and partly to blame the coal-miners because they are members of the working claes.

If we examine the facts, we find that the miners of New South Wales have been grossly misrepresented. I read recently in the Brisbane ' ' Courier-Mail' ' an article by Mr. Casey, the president of the Australian Liberal Party, in which he stated that though there were more miners now than there were in previous years they were producing a smaller quantity of coal. I have before me the official figures issued by the Department of Mines, New South Wales, and according to these figures Mr. Casey 's statement is completely false. Let me quote the figures and I ask hon. members to bear with me while I do so. They are-

Number of Average per Persons Person

Total Employed Above and -- Tonnage. Above and Below Below Ground.

Ground.

---Tons. Tons.

1926 .. 10,885,766 24,781 439 1927 .. 11,126,114 24,494 454 1938 .. 9,570,930 15,815 605 1942 .. 12,236,219 17,101 716 1943 .. 11,528,893 17,496 642 1944 .. 11,102,138 17,468 635 1945 .. 10,237,886 17,427 588 1946 .. 11,216,535 17,448 619 1947 .. 11,683,123 17,400 663

Hon. members will note that 1938 was the last full year before the war. These figures show that last year the miners of New South Wales produced the second highest tonnag~ and their average was the second highest average in the history of coal-mining in that State. The :figures for 1947 were exceeded on only one previous occasion, in the year 1942. It is therefore obvious, Mr. Mann. that the coal-miner is not to blame. '

It is true that more coal could be produced if more miners were engaged in New South Wales but the miners there do not employ themselves; they are employed primarily by private companies and if these companies will not employ more miners the miners cannot compel them to employ more. It is obvious that the miner, at any rate, is not responsible for the position in New South Wales.

But it must be admitted that there is a shortage if iron and steel not only in this State but in every part of the Commonwealth, because there is a shortage of coal in New South Wales. It must be said in fairness to New South Wales and particularly to the coal-miners there that in Australia the New South Wales coal-miners are expected to produce virtually the whole of the coal used for the production of iron and steel in Australia and we in Queensland certainly have no right to blame New South Wales o•r point the :finger of scorn at the coal-miner there when we claim to have a superabundance of coal in this State but do not produce one ounce of iron or steel. If we want to increase supplies of iron and steel, not only in this State but in the Commonwealth, it is up to us in Queensland to see that an iron and steel industry is established in this State and until that is done and we begin to produce our own supplies, at least we have no right whatever to blame New South Wales or to point the finger of scorn at the New South Wales coal-miners.

Mr. Foley: Where would you get the iron-ore~

Jir. P ATERSON: In stating this, I am not stating something new. As a matter of fact only today I read up the relevant parts of "Hansards" for 1917 and 1918 and I found that on one occasion, when the then Premier, the late Hon. T. J. Ryan, was speaking in support of the Bill to establish an iron and steel works, he told the hon. members assembled in this Chamber at the time that there were ample supplies in this State of all the necessary material for the establishment in Queensland of an iron and steel industry.

Mr. Foley: Most of our iron ore is out at Cloncurry. How are you going to get that carried economically/¥

Mr. PATERSON: Broken Hill Pty. is building ships to bring iron-ore from the north-western part of Western Australia. The same iron-ore could be brought by a much shorter route to Bowen, the port of Collinsville, where there are ample supplies of some of the best coking coal in the Commonwealth for the production of iron and steel. If Broken Hill Pty. can do it, then this State Government can do it.

It is not a matter of bringing iron ore from Cloncurry, although in 1917 and 1918 the Government suggested that it could be brought from Cloncurry, because today there have been discovered huge iron-ore deposits at Yampi Sound on the north-western shores of Western Australia. That could be brought

Supply. (21 OCTOBER.] Supply. 899

by boat to the port of Bowen, which is within 50 miles of the Bowen coalfields that can produce unlimited supplies of good coking coal.

I do not think any hon. member will dispute my statement when I say that the Bowen coalfield, which is at present being worked partly by the State mine at Collinsville and partly by a private mine at Scottville, can supply ample quantities of the best coking coal in the Commonwealth. A.s a matter of fact, it was told to me here in reply to a question that the coking coal there is second only to the coking coal of the Maitlancl field in the northern coalfield district of New South Wales where the coking coal is produced for Broken Hill Pty. Thus, we have ample supplies of excellent coking coal. The supplies of iron ore are unlimited and are just as available to us as they are to New South Wales.

Mr. Foley: No. I think they are owned by private enterprise in New South Wale!!. The only iron ore we have is on the Iron Range.

lUr. P ATERSON: Even if it is on Iron Range, that is not far from the coast. We are able to overcome such difficulties.

One of the early iron and steel works in New South Wales was built at Lithgow on the other side of the Blue Mountains, not on a port, and apparently the owners were able to overcome the difficulty during the period they were carrying on. Finally, the works were transferred from there to Port Kembla where the iron and steel industry is now being run by the Australian Iron and Steel Company, which is a subsidiary of Broken Hill Pty.

I do not want hon. members to accept my word because I admit that in these matters I am an amateur, but I am prepared to be guided by the official reports presented to this Parliament. I have before me a copy of the report issued by the Royal Commission on the State Iron and Steel Works, which was appointed by the Labour Government in the year 1917.

This commission furnished its first report on 21 June, 1918, and for the information of hon. members I propose to read some of the relevant portions. They are as follows:-

"We, the Commissioners appointed by His Majesty's Commission, bearing date the eighth day of June, 1917, to inquire into the advisableness of establishing State Iron and Steel Works in the State of Queensland, beg now to report.

'Your Commissioners were asked to inquire more particularly into the following matters, namely:-

(1) Location, quantities, and suitability of iron ore deposits;

(2) Location, quantities, and suitability of fuel supplies;

(3) Most suitable site or sites for central works;

( 4) Primary cost of erecting and equipping such works.

"Your Commissioners, however, had gathered sufficient data to enable us to come to the conclusion that all the essentials for the successful manufacture of pig iron were to be found in Queensland.

"Your Commissioners are in a position to state that we have collected sufficient data to justify us in recommending that the Government establish an up-to-daw plant for the manufacture of commercial pig iron, at a cost approximating £100,000. For this sum a modern blast furnace with a capacity of 100 tons of iron ore per day can be established, and it can be kept fully employed for 20 years in the smelting of ore from one mineral area alone. ' '

The report then deals with the question of the nationalisation of the iron industry and after referring to several reports made on this matter states-

'' Your Commissioners, from the outset, considered the question merely from the point of view of the nationalisation of the iron industry, holding that the State was such a large consumer of the manufactureii. article that it would be of greater benefit to the people if the State undertook the development of the iron resources and established the necessary plant to produce a commercial article rather than allow it to revert to private enterprise. With this object numerous inquiries were made by correspondence through the Mines Department, and all the available reports were searched in order to gather sufficient material to enable the Commission to come to a definite conclusion. Various circumstances have delayed the preparation of an extended report, and even now we are without the necessary information to answer all the questions submitted to us. We are firmly of the opinion, however, that the evidence collected indicates definitely that Queensland possesses all the essentials, including both the raw material and fuel, for the successful manufacture of this particular commodity as a national industrial undertaking.''

After dealing with the supply and suitability of iron ore, the quantity and suitability of fuel, the proposed site, and the cost of iron and steel works, the report proceeds:-

''Queensland is a vast State of magnificent distances, and although we have a greater mileage of railways than any other State (5,287 miles of Government lines opened for traffic, and 428 miles under construction), there are still many districts crying aloud for railways and tramways. If it is found that the State can do it not a day should be lost in making our own steel rails, and in supplying the people of Queensland with all the requirements in iron and steel. ' '

The commissioners unanimously recommended, inter alia-

'' That the State proceed immediately with the erection of a furnace having a capacity of, say, 150 tons of iron ore per day, together with extensive by-product recovery, coke ovens, and mine equipment.


The initial cost not to exceed £150,000; further sums to be expended if circumstances warrant an extension of the works.''

The report is signed by the five commissioners-James Stopford (chairman), J. T. Gilday, J. Payne, C. Collins, and H. J. Ryan.

This is the report furnished by a commission appointed by the Government of the day and it sets out clearly that the scheme was practicable. It is true that the value of money has depreciated since then and that therefore there would have to be alterations in the estimated costs. It is true, also, that the demand for iron and steel has increased since those days and therefore the Government would have to consider establishing a much larger works than that which was proposed at that time.

As the Minister for Transport said today, we need iron and steel for our railways-for our rails, for our_ engines, our repair work, for the constructiOn of trucks and other rolling-stock. Not only do we need iron and steel for the railways, but we need it for many other industries, and many other undertakings. At the present moment the Townsville City Council is unable to proceed with the construction of a pipe-line from Mt. Spec to provide the much-needed water for the people of Townsville because there is insufficient iron and steel for the manufacture of concrete-lined iron and steel pipes. Further, farmers and others are short of barbed wire, fencing wire and numerous other products, an essential constituent of which is either iron or steel.

Today the need for iron and steel is more urgent than it was in 1917 and 1918, yet the Government of 1917 thought so much of the report and thought so much of the necessity for building iron and steel works that they actually introduced a Bill into Parliament to establish State iron and steel works and that Bill passed through all its stages in this House. Unfortunately it was finally defeated, or scrapped or dropped, because the then Legislative Council wanted to insert amendments that were not acceptable to the Government of the day. Whatever justification there may have been for dropping the Bill on those grounds, there has been no such justification since 1922 because in 1922 the Legislative Council was abolished and since then there has been nothing to prevent the passing of such legislation. From 1922 until n~w there has been a golden opportunity for the Establishment of an iron and steel industry in this State. If it had only been established in those days, or even soon after 1922 when the Legislative Council was abolished, we today should not be worrying about the shortage of iron and steel or about sending coal to the other States in order to produce the iron and steel products that are required. We should be able to use our own coal in our own State iron and steel works.

That brings me to my concluding remarks on the necessity for decentralisation, to which the Financial Statement refers. If we are to have genuine decentralisation in this State, it is essential that we have highly developed

secondary industries in North Queensland, and in particular an iron and steel industry, because an iron and steel industry is a basic industry from which fiow numerous subsidiary industries. If we had an iron an<l steel industry established in the North today, it is obvious that we should haYe decentralisation on a sound, economic basis and we should have a genuine decentralisation of population in Northern Queensland.

I my this not simply because I am the hon. member for Bowen, but because the economic facts warrant my saying it, and I say it without fear of contradiction, that Bowen is the logical place for the estabment of an iron and steel industry, first because it has a harbour, a splendid natural harbour. No money need be spent in building an artificial port, because there is a natural port there, a port provided by nature for the use and benefit of the people of this country. And at the back door, within some 50 miles of Bowen, is the Bowen coal-field, capable of supplying an unlimited quantity of at least the second-best coking coal in the Commonwealth.

What more clo we want~ Shall we be able to blame posterity if later on the people should rise and condemn us because we did not take full advantage of the opportunities at our disposal at the moment~ Some may say, ''Leave it to private enterprise.'' But I say no, because I believe that national or State enterprise is the best, and above all private profit-making enterprise had its opportunities in years gone by to expand its plant and its industry in this State and it failed to do so. They can make all the money they require by building their huge monopolies down in the southern States.

My final remark is this: let us seize the opportunity now. It is a golden opportunity. We have the supplies of coal at our disposal: we have the port at our disposal; we have all the raw material at our disposal; and the country is crying out for the manufactured good11-the goods that are manufactured on the basis of the iron and steel industry. Let us therefore give effect to the recommendations of the Royal Commission appointed in 1917, modifying them to meet the changes that have taken place in the intervening years. If we do that we can at least say we have clone one good thing to develop the economic life of this State and, in addition, we have taken a long step towards genuine decentralisation.

Jtlr. MORRIS (Enoggera) (5.56 p.m.): In this Budget debate, as in all others I haYe had the opportunity of listening to since I have been in this Parliament, I have heard a mixture of speeches. Unfortunately, many of them consist of empty, useless platitudes from hon. members opposite dripping with honeyed phrases in praise of the Government. OccaS>ionally they have merit but most of them have no merit at all and the time of this Committee has not been used to good advantage.

Mr. Aikens interjected.


The CHAIRThiAN: Order! I should like to say to the hon. member for Mundingburra that interjections at any time are highly disorderly. If a hon. member wishes to ask another hon. member a question while he is speaking he can do so from the seat he usually occupies in the Chamber. I would ask the hon. member to bear that in mind.

lUr. JIORRIS: We have heard in this debate speeches of great value, including good sound critical speeches from members on the Government benches, but unfortunately we have heard speeches of no value. I exclude from that class of speech the one made by the Secretary for Public Works, Housing and Local Government. He came out into the open and revealed something that was definitely wrong in his department. Although I have differed from him on many occasions-no-one knows that better than he doe&--nevertheless on this occasion he was prepared to face the issue and place it before hon. members. I admire him for doing so. In addition to the speeches from the Government side of the Chamber, we have heard some speeches from this side, practically all of which have been good, sound speeches.

Mr. Power: The one from Cooroora was a bit on the nose.

Mr. Low: You are on the nose. You are the Minister for Sewerage; that is what you are.

The CHAIRMAX: Order!

Mr. MORRIS: I am satisfied from the speech of the hon. member for Cooroora that he brought into this Chamber the sins of omission of the Government, which could and should have been rectified. He did his duty as I know he will do it again, irrespective of what the subject matter is.

I was particularly struck by the speech of the hon. member for Wide Bay, particularly the part dealing with the production of food for Britain in the Central-West.

When the House adjourned I was remarking on the various speeches we had the pleasure of hearing. I commendecl the Secretary for Public Works for courageously revealing the things that were happening in his department that this Committee should know. I say, however, that I believe the reason why that speech was made was that the speech made b:' the hon. member for East Toowoomba introduced the subject and gave the Minister RH opportunity of coming in. Nevertheless I clo commend his speech; and I think it is a very valuable one.

I was very disappointed to hear the speech by the hon. member for Nunclah. The hon. member took us right back to 1807 in an effort to show that the only political party interested in the education of the people or the benefit of the people generally was the Labour Party. Of course, that is a lot of nonsense and a lot of hooey. He quite overlooked the fact when he was speaking that practically all the benefits we have today on the statute books have been placed there by parties opposed to Labour. But the hon. member wants to overlook it. The speech

made by the hon. member is the type of speech that I think is an absolute disgrace to this Chamber in this respect, that it consists of so many half-truths and so much that is less than half-truths that it is designeddeliberately, I believe-to mislead the people and make them think that the only Government worth while are the Government of Labour.

That is all nonsense. I should like to remind the hon. member that Workers' Compensation was introduced into the legislation of Queensland not by a Labour Government but by a Government opposed to Labour. I should like to remind the hon. member also that the first University of l,lueenslancl Bill was introduced, not by a Labour Government, but hy a Government opposed to Labour. I should also like to remind the hon. member that the Workers' Dwelling Act was introduced, not by a Labour Government, but by a Government opposed to Labour. (Government interjections.) I know some of the back benchers do not even know this and I know that they do not want the people of Queensland to know it. They know it all right; we will see that they know it well.

When the hon. memlDer for Nundah was speaking he tried to lead the people who read '' Hansarcl'' to believe also that free education was introduced by the Labour Party.

Mr. Aikens: There is not free education yet.

Mr. MORRIS:. Nothing is further from the truth. I agree for once with the hon. member for Mundingburra that we have not got free education. I have stated that time and time again in this Chamber and I shall continue saying it, I believe, as long as the Labour Government are in power; incidentally, let me say that I do not think that will be much longer.

However, free education as it is known today was introduced by a Government who were opposed to Labour. As a matter of fact, it was introduced in 1875, if I remember rightly. I am open to correction on that point, but it was certainly introduced before a Labour Government were even thought of and certainly long before the Labour Government in 1921 changed to the socialistic policy they have today.

I would also remind the hon. member that child endowment, which is a great blessing to the people of this State and country, was introduced long before a Labour Government were in power and was introduced by a Government opposed to Labour. If the hon. member wants further informa

tion, I would remind him that old-age pensions were introduced not by a Labour Government but by a Government opposed to Labour. And so I could go on and take up the whole of the time at my disposal to show some of the honourable members on the back benches that they do not know what they are talking about when they say that Labour has clone everything for the people. Labour is merely following, frequently very badly, the path set for them by Governments opposed to Labour. When the remainder of Australia


follows the lead set in Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia, the Acts introduced by Governments opposed to Labour will be cleaned up and made workable again.

As I said earlier, I was very impressed by certain speeches made by members on this side. I suppose there was not a more reasoned or logical speech made than that made by the hon. member for Wide Bay when speaking on the Food for Britain scheme. He, a practical farmer, was pointing out the difficulties that exist in the operation of that scheme.

JUr. Roberts: Are you the editor?

Mr. MORRIS: Am I the editor?

The CHAIRMAN: Order! The hon. member will address his remarks to the Chair.

Mr. lliORRIS: Whenever an hon. member on this side makes any reference to the Food for Britain scheme, many Labour members immediately fire the question, "What, are you against it~" They want us to say that we are against it. That is what they are wanting, but that is not true.

A Government Member: Are you?

Mr. MORRIS: No. I have been angling for that question. Of course I am not against it. I do not suppose there is any member in this Parliament who has had such a long and complete experience of the shortage of food in Queensland since the outbreak of war than I. I know of it because I have experienced it. I saw what the people of Britain were suffering and I want them to get more food and the best of food possible, but I do not say that this Food for Britain scheme being established in Central Queensland will provide the extra amount of food that is needed. I think the scheme proposed by the hon. member for Wide Bay is the more practicable and would provide the food much more quickly than the scheme embarked upon in Central Queensland.

Mr. Sparkes: We want more beef, too.

Mr. MORRIS: Of course we do. It was the duty of the Government to make

every possible investigation as to the practicability or non-practicability of the Central Queensland scheme. The Government had at their disposal all the experts available in Queensland. However, they have made their decision and I can say very definitely that every hon. member on this side now hopes that the scheme, now that it has been started, will be a success. But whether it is a success or not is on the heads of the Premier and his Ministers, because it is their duty to weigh the pros and cons and ascertain whether the scheme would be practicable or not. We must now wait and see whether it is practical or whether the scheme proposed by the hon. member would have been the better scheme.

Another speech to which I listened with great interest was that made by the hon. member for Windsor.

Mr. Aikens: You are not game to say otherwise.

Mr. lliORRIS: Do not make any mistake about that.

The CHAIRMAN: Order!

Mr. MORRIS: We on this side at least have the opportunity of saying what we think; we are not forced to say what some· body else would have us say.

According to the Budget, Queensland received less than £9,000,000 from the Federal Treasurer as her share of the taxation raised. The total amount raised in Queensland is approximately £32,000,000. This means that we get approximately 25 per cent. of the revenue, but in 1938-39, before the war, Queensland taxation provided the Queensland Government with approximately 60 per cent. of the taxation collected from the people of Queensland. That is the difference. That is how the Federal Government are robbing the people of Queensland.

Mr. J ones: What about social services?

1\Ir. MORRIS: I expected that question, and as a result of that expectation I consulted the Year Book and found that taking all the moneys that come to us from the Federal Government we are getting less than pound for pound by way of refund of taxation, which means in any case that we are getting millions of pounds less than we were in 1939.

There are many ways in which £2,000,000 or £3,000,000 could be spent with very great advantage to Queensland. Having been in this Assembly for four and a-half years--

Mr. Brown: It was far too long.

Mr. MORRIS: The people of Enoggera do not think so. I am satisfied that the people of Enoggera will not think I have been here long enough, even when I have been here f0r 14~ years. In that four and a-half years I have heard many speeches from hon. members on the Government side about the sacrifices that have been made during the war years, sacrifices made by the coal-miners, by the railway workers, and all the various sections of the community, and from this side of the Committee I have heard much of the sacrifices that have been made by the service men. Unfortunately, that is a point that is overlooked somewhat by the Government side, but I should say that of all the sacrifices made by the people of Australia, the people of Queensland in particular, I do not think any section has made as great a sacrifice as have the mothers of the community. Irrespective of the strata of society from which they come, irrespective of whether they live in the country or in the tswn, they are the ones who have, overall, made the greatest sacrifices in the years following 1939.

:Mr. Aikens: Why during the war years? They always make the greatest sacrifices.

Mr. MORRIS: The hon. member can enlarge on his subject later. During the war years people talked, and rightly so, of the sacrifices made by the service men. I know some service men did go through very difficult periods during the war. No-one in this Committee knows it better than I do, but

Supply. (21 OCTOBER.) Supply. 903

irrespective of that the mothers and wives of the men who were away suffered exceed· ingly, more even than the service men because they had the constant anxiety of not knowing what was going to happen and still having to carry on with their job during all that period. They did not have the excitement of the constant work that service men had, nor did they have the interest that men working in jobs in Australia had; they had the worry and nothing else. In addition to clothing their children they had to feed them; it was their job to provide for their children and their households. Today they are still the section who are suffering more than any other. Even today, when we see the danger of war that is worrying us all, which must worry any thinking man, the ones who are called upon to worry most, the ones who are worrying most, are the mothers and wives of the community. In all the industrial life of this country the men work 40 hours a week. They finish their job and they are done, but what about the mothers of our future generation~ Do they have a 40, a 44, _ or even a 48-hour week~

Mr. Roberts: What about wiping up after tea at night~

)fr. MORRIS: If the hon. member for Nundah wishes to be facetious about what I regard as a serious and important question he is quite entitled to do so. The hon. member is not going to entice me to be facetious on a subject of great importance to the community.

We know the womenfolk are called upon to make sacrifices day in and day out, right through their lives, but very little is said in this Chamber about the sacrifices they make, and very few constructive suggestions are put forward-! do not know that I have ever heard one put forward by a Government member-as to the way mothers in the community can be helped in their difficulties.

What is being done for this section of our people~ First of all, we have the contribution made by the State Government, and a very valuable one it is at that. I do not want to be misunderstood, because the State Maternal and Child Welfare Association has provided clinics throughout Queensland and is doing valuable work, that is appreciated everywhere. By reference to the Budget I see there was an allocation of £101,274 for the year 1947-48 for the maternal and child welfare. In addition to the clinics there is a home at Sandgate, where there are 35 people, as I gathered from a reply to a question I asked recently. There is another home at Clayfield that cares for seven mothers and 18 children. Another home is at St. Paul's Terrace, where specialised attention is given to children, and where six mothers and 10 children can be catered for. The Toowoomba home can cater for two mothers and six children. In all 14 mothers and 69 children can be catered for in the various homes other than the child welfare clinics. The point I make is that these homes and clinics cater for only a small section of the community, and cannot do what is necessary for those I am speaking about.

There has been established, too, what is known as the Mothercraft Association, and it has hostels where seven mothers and 40 children are catered for. The Mothercraft Association is supported mainly by donations from people who realise its value and this association caters for more than half the number of people catered for by Government homes.

Mr. Jones: We have just over lOO baby clinics throughout the State.

Mr. MORRIS: I do not want to be misunderstood, as I am not trying to belittle the work done by the State maternal and childwelfare organisation, because I know from personal experience what a great job it is doing. My point is that not enough people are being catered for, and I was proceeding to show what other associations are doing for the people. I have mentioned the Mothercraft Association, and I have said that that association receives its money from public donations and gets help from various public bodies, as well as being subsidised £ for £ by the Government. In answer to a question I asked the other day, I was informed that the Government expect to subsidise that association to the extent of £2,200 during the ensuing year. There was a letter in today's "Courier-Mail" about the work done by the Mothercraft Association, reading as follows-

'' Aid for Mothers. ''For the last five years, the Mothercraft

Association of Queensland has been training girls on the lines suggested by Senator 0 'Sullivan (Lib., Q.), Acting Leader of the Opposition (C.-M., 15/10/48).

''Girls receive both theoretical and excellent practical training in mothercraft, child management, cooking, nutrition, housecraft, first aid, and home nursing of children during a 12 months' residential course at the Lady Cilento Mothercraft and After-Care Hospital, Bonney Avenue, Clayfield. Trainees receive an allowance and are provided with uniforms, board, and lodging during their training period.

"When their training is completed, they become members of the Mothercraft Association Home Assistants' Bureau which endeavours to provide mothers with trained help during times of need or emergency.''

It proceeds to say-'' Our difficulty has been to secure young

women to undertake this training and to retain their services when trained. That a great need for such assistance exists is proved by the fact that during the last year 539 requests- for home assistants have been received by the association.''

It goes on to say, and here is the tragedy'' Unfortunately, approximately only one-

quarter of the~e requests could be met.'' Only one-quarter could be met and that is the point to which we in this Chamber should give serious consideration, because thiS' service is a very valuable one.

Mr. Jones: We are training girls in these centres and they are going to all pa1'ts of the State.


Mr. MORRIS: I am aware of that. My remarks are not a criticism of the Government's sclwmc. I propose to make a suggestion later on, one that I hope wlll be acceptable to the Government and be talzen up enthusiastically by them. However, before I make the suggestion I want to elaborate on the schemes in operation at the moment.

JUr. Aikens: What are these homes for?

Mr. MORRIS: They are to provide care for the mothers before confinement, care for the children >Yhile the mother is in hospital, and care for the mother for a certain time after she returns home from the hospital.

'l'he Red Cross Society has a scheme for the training of housekeepers to give help wheTe a mother is sick and unable to carry on. It is an excellent scheme. In addition the Red Cross Society can cater for 40 children. That is worthy of note. If a mother is ill and requires help at home the Red Cnss Society >Yill send a housekeeper to help her and if the mother is unable to pay for her scnicc the cost is borne by the Red Cross Society its·clf. Unfortunately, this scheme is not subsidised by the Government to the extent of one penny piece. I believe it should be and it is a tragedy that it is not.

l!r. Jones: The Government give £20,000 a year to the Red Cross Society which can use it as it likes.

Mr. MORRIS: I propose to quote from a circular giving details of the Red Cross Society's housekeeper scheme. It says-

'' On 20 February, 1945, there appeared in a Queensland newspaper an urgent call fm- help on behalf of the mothers and exncctant mothers of the community who, through the difficulty in obtaining help in the home, had to often endanger their health in an effort to carry out their home duties. As a result, Queensland Red Cross accepted the responsibility, receiving the names of those willing to help and allocating assistance where it was genuinely required.

'' 'l'he se1Tice was given a month's trial and it· was decided that the scheme could not be carried out effectively by voluntary helpers• alone so permission wns asked of National Headquarters to engage paid staff.

''A survey of the 12 months 1946-47 show that-·

800 appeals for assistance were received and 600 of them assisted.

292 homes had help from our emergency housekeepers.

243 families were found assistnnco hY Red Cross.

65 homes were assisted by having 160 children at the Junior Red Cross Home at Ma1·gate. ''

There is much more about it but it points out that during the year 1947-48 the Red Cross Societ:-· received 1,130 appeals for urgent help in cases in which mothers were unable to get assistance, but through lack of funds and personnel the society was unable to answer a great many of these calls.

It was able to help in only 670 cases. That was because of shortage of finance and staff. I could quote much more from the article but I do not propose to do so at the present time.

I should like to tell the Committee the conditions of the schemes that are in operation. The Country ·women's Association has a very good housekeeper service. It has 24 capable housekeepers who go out to homes right throughout the country. The association does not provide assistance in town areas; it confines its activities to the country. It cannot get more than 24 housekeepers but it is doing an excellent service. The women in the country probably suffer considerably more than those in the towns. Again the association receives no assistance from the Gov<;rnment for this service.

::ur. Power: The hon. member for Stanley said that it should stand on its own feet.

llir. ]}I ORRIS: The hon. member can make his remarks in his own time.

The Government give no subsidy whatsoever to the Country Women's Association for the great work it is doing in this respect. They do help in another way, and that help is appreciated. They provide free travel for these housekeepers from one centre to another. That really is not aiel to the association; it is aid to the person who is being assisted by this service.

l'iir. Jones: The Country Women's Association gets thousands of pounds subsidy each year from the Government, and you know that.

llir. MORRIS: I differ from the Minister. I see no evidence that it is getting any assistance for the schemes I am talking about. Who helps in these schemes~ They are helped by public-minded people who provide the money for their upkeep. I have frequently seen in the ''Courier-Mail'' appeals for financial assistance for various organisations, such as the Mothercraft Association, Country Women's Association, &c.

Mr. Jones: Most of the Country Women's Association housekeepers are sent out to graziers, not into the homes of the workers in the cities.

Itir. j}JORRIS: The Country Women's Association send its housekeepers out into the country. The Red Cross Society sends its trained housekeepers into homes in the metropolitan area. The Country Women's Association does not cater for any homes in the towns or cities. Their housekeepers do not go to wealthy homes. They go to homes where they are needed most.

Mr. Jones: They go to the wealthy homes.

)Jr. JUORRIS: They do not. That is a shocking thing for the Minister to say.

~Ir. Jones: They do not go out into the shearers' homes; they go out to the homes of the wealthy.

Supply. [21 OCTOBER.] Suppl'!J. 905

ltir. MORRIS: They go out into the homes where the mother cannot look after her children and they are doing great service. Anyone would think from the Minister 'll remarks that the Red Cross Society, Mothercraft Association and Country Women's Association help only the wealthy.

Mr. Jones: I am talking about the Country Women's Association only-what you are talking about.

~Ir. MORRIS: And not the Mother craft Association and Red Cross Society.

Mr. Jones: I am talking about the Country Women's Association-what you are talking about.

Mr. MORRIS: I know from my own per· sonal experience that what the Minister says is not true. I have relatives who certainly are not wealthy people. They are probably a darned sight less wealthy than anyone in this Chamber. The point is that they have received help from this housekeeper scheme of the Country Women's Association. At times they have had difficulty in meeting the cost. Had they not done so the Country Women's Association would have done so, but recognising this fact the people who are helped make every effort to meet the expense. I do not care what the Minister says; I say these organisations are doing a valuable work.

lUr. Jones: Do not try to twist what I said. Do not make out that I attacked the Red Cross.

Mr. MORRIS: Is the Minister quite finished f I say that these schemes are schemes that should be supported by any loyal and right-thinking person in this community. I make the appeal that they be supportell and I most certainly hope they will.

I saw in the paper recently that the Pederal Government were providing £15,000 for a scheme similar to this throughout Australia. £15,000! If we get an even share with all the other States we shall get the miserable sum of £2,500 for Queensland. How far is that going to go in a scheme like this r The subsidy to the Mothercraft Association is £2,200; that will eat up virtually the whole of the subsidy that we expect to get from the Federal Government.

This is what they saicl about the £15,000 scheme that is suggested by Senator McKenna-

' 'Although women's organisations welcome the Commonwealth Government's £15,000 plan to assist housekeeper services they believe the amount is hopelessly inadequate. In Brisbane the Red Cross alone are spending £3,500 to provide home help for sick ancl nursing mothers. In the last 12 months the Red Cross hacl 1,330 appeals for help in homes where the mother had gone to hospital to have a baby. Assistance was given in 670 of those cases.''

Imagine, only 670 cases out of 1,330 applications received! That is how urgent this question is.

The comment by the Mothercraft Association's president is as follows:-

"It is an excellent idea, but £15,000 will not be enough for the whole of Australia, even if sufficient people can be found to do the work.''

This scheme is a very necessary one; it is a scheme that should be helped by the Government. I am going to suggest two ways in which it can be helped. The first problem is one of finance. The Red Cross Society, the Country Women's Association, and the Mothercraft Association cannot pay any more because of lack of finance; therefore I say it is the responsibility of the Government to allocate an amount to all those associations for this purpose.

lUr. Collins: Give away more money and reduce taxation; that is your idea.

lllr. MORRIS: That argument is the stupidist I ever heard advanced; and it would not come from any of the Ministers except the Minister from whom it came, the Secretary for Agriculture and Stock, who has no interest in helping these people who are suffering. Where is the money coming from~ That is always his cry. If only they had enough courage to go down to the Federal Government and fight them for what we should be getting, they would be getting the money needed for the scheme. If the three of these organisations were assisted with £10,000 a year each, that would merely represent £30,000; ancl if the Government cannot get £30,000 by going to the Fecleral Government and putting their case there is something wrong with them. If they had enough fight in them they would get another two or three million from the Federal Government. The Minister knows as well as I do that after next September, when there is a decent Government in Canberra, we shall be getting the extra money in Queensland. The hon. gentleman is rubbing his hands, thinking about the extra money we are going to get.

Mr. Collins: When do we laugh?

Mr. JUORRIS: The Secretary for Agriculture and Stock would laugh when anybody else was suffering. The only time he does not laugh is when he does not worry about anybody else.

That is my first suggestion-that the Government by subsidy, provide up to £10,000 to the Cou'ntry Women's Association, the R.ed Cross Society, and the Mothercraft Association for the provision of a housekeeper service throughout Queensland. That is a very sound suggestion but I have another. The secon? of their problems is personnel. These orgamsations will tell you that they cannot get enough young women to take on the duties of housekeeper in homes; there are too many jobs and too few to take them. We know that is so-that it is impossible to get the housekeeper anywhere today. In that regard I read in the Brisbane ''Telegraph'' of 18 October this article-

'' Keep Immigrants Coming. ''Drive for Sponsors. ''Help Committees.

906 Supply. [ASSEMBL Y.J S•tpply.

''Canberra: State Immigration Ministers today are being asked by the Commonwealth to organise a nation-wide drive for migrant nominators in order to keep up the flow of British migrants to Australia.

''Recent figures disclose that although 47,000 berths will be open to British migrants next year under official migration schemes only 41,000 nominations can be expected at the present rate.

''Australian nominators are required to guarantee accommodation for the migrants they nominate.

''The Commonwealth Immigration Minister (Mr. Calwell) is urging that an intensive publicity drive in which the assistance and support of the metropolitan, provincial, country, and specialist Press would be sought, should be conducted.

''Help Committees. "Mr. Calwell also is proposing that State

and district committees be formed to interest prospective nominators to accommodate and employ British migrants.

''These committees could assist in the reception of the new settlers and their assimilation as Australians.''

It appears to me that there is no sound, logical reason whatever why the call made in that article, which we know to be true, cannot be linked with the scheme I have suggested. I believe that if the Government would subsidise these three organisations and assist them, they would, in turn, bring out sufficient migrants to wipe out the second worry they have.

The first worry was finance: that is the Government's job. The second problem is personnel and I believe that in that paragraph is the right answer. I put that forward to one of the associations about which I have been speaking. I said, "Would you not through some agents in England do something to select suitable migrants to take on this housekeeper scheme-when they arrive here accommodate them in hostels, train them and then send them out to the homes where they are urgently needed~'' The reply was, ''Give us the chance and we shall be glad to do it.'' They said that there are thousands of homes where these people would be of great value. I do not see any reason in the world why a sympathetic Government cannot do something about it along the lines I have mentioned to try to overcome some of the difficulties that are being faced by the people here today. It would be a simple matter for this organisation to provide hostels in which the migrants could be accommodated until they were fully trained and then sent to the homes. The help that would be given would be of tremendous value to the people who are suffering most.

A little time ago, when I was speaking on the Red Cross Society and the valuable work it was doing in this sphere, I think the Secretary for Health and Home Affairs interjected that subsidy was being paid to the Red Cross Society to the amount of £20,000.

If that money can be used for the housekeeping service I shall be very surprised. My recollection of the matter is that that money was paid to the Red Cross Society for a bloodtransfusion service.

Mr. Jones: And towards a building fund.

lUr. MORRIS: But not a housekeeping service.

Mr. Jones: No, but your implication was that the Government were giving nothing to the Red Cross Society.

Mr. MORRIS: I had no intention of mentioning this, but the Red Cross Society established a blood-transfusion service and carried it on at its own expense for a considerable time before the Government gave any help. It is not right that the work being done by the Red Cross Society should be cried down by anybody. It made a contribution during the war and in peace unequalled by that of any other organisation in Queensland.

I commend the scheme I have suggested to the Government, and hope that they will sympathetically consider it because I believe it will be of great assistance to the people of Queensland.

When speaking in this Chamber a few days ago I attacked Communism. I attacked it because I believe there is no greater menace to the peace of this country or of the world than Communism. I am sure I proved that Communism and Labour, as it is today, are at least bedfellows walking hand in hand towards the same objective. The proof I gave on that occasion was conclusive and absolute, but I did not expect that some of the Labour back-benchers would come in so quickly and make my proof doubly sure, as they did. Only the other day we had the hon. member for Herbert, the hon. member for Nundah, the hon. member for Mackay, and that hon. member who is here by the grace of the Communists, the hon. member for Port Curtis, all telling us how proud they were of their ideal of Socialism·. There are a great many hon. members on the Government side, however, who are not game to come out and say they believe in Socialism, but the people of Queensland know they do.

Mr. Lnckins: They are not all Communists.

Mr. MORRIS: No. I do not believe the Secretary for Public Works has any communistic ideals, but he is one of the few who have not. In a debate some days ago a newspaper known as the "News Weekly" was quoted as carrying the story of the Labour Conference in 1921 when the Labour Party threw away its old objectives and allied itself with Marx and Marx 's followers. I went to the trouble of getting that issue, and I propose quoting one or two paragraphs from it.

Mr. Aikens: What is the name of the paper~

Mr. MORRIS:, The "News Weekly," published on 15 September, 1948.


Mr. Aikens: That is a paper that I know as just a sectarian rag.

Mr. MORRIS: It was quoted by the hon. member for Kennedy and two or three others, and I am going to quote it. If it is reliable enough for them to quote, surely it is reliable enough for them to believe. It publishes the story of Labour's 1921 conference. That is the time when Labour adopted Socialism and adopted a clause providing that a Supreme Economic Council be chosen to nationalise industries in Queensland, ~_hich is something they have still got and which many of them tried to throw over a few weeks ago in Canberra, but without success.

Mr. Aikens: They adopted the socialistic plank and conveniently forgot it.

Mr. MORRIS: They are remembering it now. In this article I read that one of the things adopted by the Labour Party Conference-and it is still part of the platformis that banks and all principal industries be nationalised.

Mr. Aikens: What is the matter with thaU

Mr. MORRIS: I think that the people of Queensland have shown what they think of it. What will the people of Queensland say at the next election when they have the opportunity of choosing between a Government who talk of the nationalisation of banks and another party~ We know what the people of Queensland will say.

That plank-that banks and all principal industries be nationalised-is part of Labour's policy. Now let me read the statement of somebody else-

'' The socialism for which I stand is socialisation of the banks and the great industrial concerns and the abolition of the right to anybody to live by profit or by exploitation.'' Mr. Devries: What are you quoting

from~

Mr. MORRIS: I will tell the hon. member shortly. I give the Committee another quotation-

'' The party does not seek to abolish private property, even of any instrument of production, where such instrument is utilised by its owner in a socially useful manner without exploitation.'' Here is another quotation from an entirely

different source which reads-'' I do not stand for the abolition of all

forms of private property because there are two forms of property; there is the private property that exists for the use ~f the individual or of groups and there 1s the private property that exists primarily for the purpose of exploiting human labour. The private property that exists for the use and enjoyment of mankind is what the Communist Party stands for ... ''

I have given two quotations, one from the Labour Party's platform and another from a statement made by the self-confessed Communist member for Bowen. There is no difference in them.

Mr. Devries: What is your authority?

Mr. MORRIS: For the last, I quoted from ' ' Hansard. ' '

On the one hand we have a statement by someone who is a Communist and who expounds the Communist doctrine, believes in it and is honest about it. I believe he is honest about it. There are his ideas and in virtually exactly the same words we have what has been adopted by the socialistic conference of the Labour Party. No further proof is needed that the aims and ideals of the Labour Party and the Communist Party are identical and the two parties travel along slightly different roads to the same final objective. There is no difference in the objective and the people are beginning to wake up to the fact. Let me tell hon. members opposite what some of the real stalwarts of the Labour Party have to say-

Mr. Devries: Are you quoting from the ' ' Guardian' ' ~

Mr. MORRIS: The "News Weekly," the paper quoted by an hon. member opposite. This is regarded as being a true report of the Labour Convention and it was quoted as being so by the hon. member for Kennedy and two or three other hon. members on that side of the Chamber.

I am using the same issue, the same paper, and the same page from which they quoted. Let me read what Mr. Blackburn, who wa& a Labour representative at this conference, had to say-

'' To give effect to it would require a complete transformation of society. Unless better reasons for a change were offered, it was better to keep the old objective. It had its faults, but at least was understandable.''

Despite what he said the motion was carried and today it is part of the Labour Party's socialistic policy.

Mr. Aikens: The Labour Party expelled Blackburn because he was too dinkum.

Mr. MORRIS: Did they expel Theodore? Mr. Aikens: He emancipated himself.

Mr. MORRIS: This is the report of what Mr. Theodore said-

" Mr. Theodore declared he resented Labour being made a catspaw by revolutionary elements outside.''

That is what he thought of what is now a fundamental plank of the Labour Party's platform. Having heard what I have said and quoted, will anyone say that there is any difference between Labour and the Communists 1 They are so very close that they are virtually twins. There is little difference between them.'

Mr. DAVIS (Barcoo) (8.7 p.m.): In rising to speak on the Financial Statement I am not going to join with the hon. member for Enoggera in forecasting the doom of this Parliament, but I do wish wholeheartedly to commend the Treasurer, with certain reservations with which I shall deal later, on the


presentation of his Financial Statement. As it appears to me, the Treasurer has made provision for certain expenditure to ensure employment for the people of Queensland in the years that lie ahead. The Treasurer is a wily bird and in saying that I have no wish to be disrespectful to him. In setting out his various items of expenditure he has no intentions of being drawn into a position that operated some few years ago when a promise was made to the people of Queensland of the expenditure of £2,000,000 for 10,000 jobs.

An Opposition Member: Living in the past!

Mr. DA VIS: We are living in the present. If the Treasurer had not made such a provision the exchequer would have to run the gauntlet because there was means of giving the people employment.

I was rather impressed by the furore that occurred in this Chamber because of a statement made by the hon. member for Kelvin Grove.

The merits or demerits of any statement made by the hon. member is no concern of mine but it is some concern of mine that the Opposition should take exception to the remarks made by the hon. member for Kelvin Grove and immediately afterwards hurl across the floor of the Chamber invectives that I think are not in the best interests of the decorum of any Parliament. They prac· tically accuse our Treasurer of being a mountebank, a charlatan, a confidence trickster, and use similar terms in order to discredit him in his presentation of the Financial Statement. I have no need to defend the Treasurer, because I am of the opinion that he can well defend himself.

Government Members: Hear, hear!

~'fr. DA VIS: It has been said, and I ask hon. members to try to remember this, even though I may be charged with being parochial, but the graziers should make some attempt to help themselves. The Secretary for Health and Home Affairs made a very apt interjection to that effect. I am quite in agreement with it, but I am going to enlarge on it. Every section of industry also should make some attempt to help itself. Today we find that almost every section of industry has become a mendicant and is asking for help from this Government. I have formed the opinion that if we should make contributions from the Treasury to help other sections of industry the Treasurer would be wise, in the interests of this State, to afford some assistance to the grazing industry. After all, it is a section of our primary industry from which a great proportion of the wealth of this State is drawn. The Government are committed to a certain expenditure in the Lockyer Valley irrigation scheme. They have made possible the production of fodder that finds its way to the drought-stricken areas. But here is the lamentably sad aspect of the whole thing: the primary producers who have become eAtablished under the Lockyer Valley scheme !'re exploiting their fellow producers in their

dire extremity. This fact cannot be refuted, as I know it to be true. Those who are forced to feed their stock in the droughtstricken areas of the State are paying in the vicinity of £24 a ton for feed landed on their properties.

Mr. Maher: You do not charge that against the farmers~

Mr. DA VIS: They are getting more for their feed at the present time than usually. In ordinary circumstances farmers producing fodder in the Lockyer Valley obtain £18 a ton for their feed, but now, as I have said, they are obtaining £24 and £26 for it.

Mr. Maher: You have to take the market value.

Mr. DA VIS: Do you have to exploit the other follow's dire extremity~

Mr. Manu, I said I complimented the Treasurer on his Budget, with certain reservations. I am about to speak of the reservations. I feel that the Government have not taken cognisance of the fact that the coastal belt of the State of Queenland is not the solo producer of the wealth of this State. The consen-ation of water in the western parts of the State, with experiments in the possibility of irrigation, should be undertaken. We have spoken much of the possibilities of the Cooper basin in supplying our exp01·t trade and the Australian trade, too, including our own state. It is a fattening area unequalled within the Commonwealth of Anstralin. I make n suggestion to the Government, but I am not criticising them. I think that if I cnn remain in this' Parliament long enough I can impress upon the Government the desirability of what I am now going to suggest. I believe that in the Barcoo, the 'l'homson, and Alice Rivers there are waterholes that, in the known history d the white man's occupation of that territory, have never had the quantity of water they hold reduced to any great extent. Many of them are 16 miles long. All of them have natural banks that lend themselves to locking. I mention the Cooper, Trafalgar, Hammond Downs, Avington, Retreat, Oma, Emu Huts, and Longreach. I believe that if the Government, instead of going in for grandiose schemes such as the Burdekin delta sche•re and others costing millions of pounds spent a million, one-tenth of a million in this way, they could make the Cooper basin a useful fattening basis for stock in every year. It is a fact that almost every season the Thomson, the }dice, and the Barcoo Rivers will run nt least two or three times a year, and I believe that we could conserve those waters within the locks on those waterholes that I speak of, and that by releasing the floodgates we could make possible the flooding of an area within the Cooper basin whenever we desired to do so.

Unfortunately most of our scheme9 are within an area that the things produced mttst be subsidised at the expense of the peopl>-.

Tobacco, peanuts, and the other things used i'> he ordinary way of living, must all be

Supply. [21 OCTOBER.) Supply. 909

subsidised from the pockets of the people, but the grazing section of our community, which has battled through the good and bad times, has never received the assistance to which it is entitled. In fact, it has received no assistance from this Government; it is required to depend on itself. Certainly money has been expended by the Government of the State on the stock routes, but when one views the stock routes one must admit that the expenditure has been almost abortive. What the devil is the use of placing water facilities on a stock route a chain widef How are stock to be got to any given point if there is no grass upon which they can travel~

I have no cause to doubt there was considerable merit in the statement made by the hon. member for Aubigny in this Chamber yesterday afternoon, and if there is even a measure of truth in his statement the time has arrived when this Government must surely review their antiquated land laws. If we find that possibly by hard work someone improves the property on which he lives, and another has depended on the good God to do the work that he should carry out himself, who is the one who should get preference or consideration from the GovernmenU

lUr. Sparkes: The one who does the work.

JUr. DA VIS: Of course he should, and I do not think there is an hon. member on my side of the Chamber who would deny that fact.

3Ir. Sparkes: But they do not always get it, unfortunately.

3Ir. D A VIS: That may be so, but I believe that if these things are brought before the Secretary for Public Lands every consideration will be extended to the facts such as were related by the hon. member for Anbigny yesterday. I think every hon. member on my side of the Chamber will agree that we must have a revision of the land laws of this State. We talk glibly of closer settlement, and the closer settlement of the areas in our State that are due for resumption, areas where it would be completely impossible to make closer settlement a success.

What about the areas in the far western parts of the State where only big companies ean operate, where such companies often can derive only very small interest from their investmenU I believe the time has arrived when this Government must take into consideration the fact that no longer can we consider resumptions in certain areas of our State. We must review our policy. It is not an unchangeable policy; it is not sacrosanct; it is something we must review in the interests of the State.

It is my opinion that there are areas which, if they become the property <>f the Crown in the very near future that is, if we continue our policy of resumption, will be a liability as they were in the past. What is the use of talking of resuming areas where the carrying capacity is one sheep to 18 acres~ You would need 1,000,000 acres

for the settler who went onto it. How could you carry out a policy of closer settlement under those conditions~

Mr. Maher: You would also break up the western community life.

Mr. DAVIS: Yes. I shall have something to say about that later.

How can you carry out a policy of closer settlement in the far western areas where the country held by the individual at present is not measured in acres but in thousands of square miles~ Even where one holding measures 3,000 or 4,000 square miles, it would be necessary to give the incoming settler at least 1,500 square miles of country.

JUr. Sparkes: And if you cut up the 4,000 square miles you will start a drift to the cities.

Mr. DA VIS: I have had considerable experience in the pastoral industry during the whole of my life and as a union official and I must lay a measure of blame upon the graziers themselves for the drift to the city. When I look back through the years when I was an official of the Australian Workers' Union-and here I am making not a general but a specific statement-I experienced conditions in the pastoral industry that were not altogether to the credit of the grazier. I ceased to wonder why many of those who followed occupations in shearing sheds on station properties drifted to the city. I look back to the bountiful years of 1926, 1927 and 1928, when wool prices were good.

I saw graziers at their amateur balls and race meetings having a complete Roman holiday but making no attempt to better the living conditions of their employees. I still saw the old tin hut. I remember the fight made by the graziers in the change-over from the wooden bunk to the cyclone gate. I saw the fight waged by the graziers not in giving refrigeration to their employees but the darned old cooler, which at that time cost about £4. I saw the graziers waging a fight whereby they refused to give their employees a decent mattress upon which to lie on the cyclone gate.

J'\Ir. Sparkes: It does not apply to me.

Mr. DAVIS ~ No, and probably not to any hon. member on that side who has a grazing property.

J'\Ir. Maher: And not to me either.

Mr. DA VIS: I said it was not a general statement. As against all that, during my 15 years as an official of the Australian Workers' Union I visited many properties and it was a cause of compensation to me to see the living conditions got as a result of th@ fights waged by the hon. member for Gregory, who was my district secre•o~v at that time.

I was saying that I continuously ,.,.,,led many properties in the course of my work as an official but never once did I receive a complaint with regard to wages earned on those properties, no complaint L;Jvut the

910 Suppl'b. [ASSEMBLY.]

living conditions provided on those properties. That was some compensation to me although some did endeavour to dodge the conditions laid down by the court. 'l'here were amongst the grazing fraternity many who were decent in their outlook. I visited one place where there was not one change made in the employees, with the exception of those who died and had been replaced. The gentleman who managed that property is now dead, the late Sam Blackstock, one of the finest gentlemen I was ever privileged to meet.

Again, and this is not a general statement, we have heard accusations thrown across the Chamber about the working class.

I must give a little whacking not to any hon. member in this Chamber but undoubtedly to some of the people they represent. It is amazing to have such a furore because of the fact that an employee fails to comply with an order of the court. We find, perhaps by chance or because someone has complained to me or the hon. member for Gregory, or to an inspector of the Labour Department, that a man has not been paid the wages to which he is entitled. I could ask the hon. member for Gregory and he would tell me truthfully, I know, that as district secretary of the A.W.U. in Longreach, the amount he had claimed through the court for employees who had failed to get the wages laid down for them by the court had run into many pounds. Apparently what is good for the goose is not good for the gander.

I am concerned about a report that appeared in the ''Telegraph'' yesterday in which it was stated that the Commissioner for Railways had recommended an expenditure of £12,000,000 to £14,000,000, and, amazing it is that the expenditure did not reach beyond the precincts of the city of. Brisbane. That was a recommendation, mind you, and I am not going to say that it is going to be accepted by this Government-not by me, anyway. I feel that too little consideration has been given to those parts of the State that do not lie round Toowong or somewhere else. It may be said that a connecting link between Blackall and Charleville, or elsewhere, would not pay axle grease. Only those who have seen the tragic happenings I have seen could realise the necessity for such a link.

Mr. Sparkes: What does the hon. member for Gregory say about thaU

Mr. DAVIS: I have seen it as an actual fact. The hon. member for Gregory would eonfirm what I say, and would confirm anything progressive in the interests of this State. I have seen tragic happenings -200,000 sheep on the track between Longreach and Tambo, trave.Uing from Aramac to Muttaburra, to Barcaldine, Blackall and Tambo, and returning on their tracks trying t~ catch a scrap of grass.

It was impossible to travel beyond Tambo because of the bottleneck in the stock route, which was one chain wide, in an endeavour to get through to where grass might possibly be. The other day I heard the hon. member

for Fassifern ably defending members of local authorities but I know of a local authority through which these droughtstricken sheep travel that prosecuted the owners indiscriminately because they were compelled to turn back in an endeavour to get a blade of grass ~omewhere. That is an attitude that is not peculiar to any particular local authorities; it is the outlook of every local authority.

The link between the central and southwestern railways, from Blackall to Charleville, or Morven, is not a matter to be considered in terms of whether it would return axle grease, or whether it would give an immediate return to the department, but must be considered from the viewpoint of what this State has lost in its best assets over the years that have gone past and what will be lost in the years that lie ahead when droughts must inevitably strike our pastoral areas. What has been the national loss in those areas because of this missing rail link~ I must take that fact into consideration and I think my party does take it into consideration.

The hon. member for W arrego said a few days ago that it would be an impossibility at present to build this railway owing to the lack of steel, but I believe every consideration must be given by the Government to the construction of a rail link between the central and south-western railways. Every part of the State is not stricken with drought at the same time. That is to say, when a drought strikes our northern pastoral areas it does not follow that a drought is raging at the same time in the south-western areas. It is in the interests of the assets of the State and nation that every consideration be given in the future to the construction of the link between the northern and southern railways.

In conclusion I desire to clear the minds of hon. members on a certain statement that appeared in the "Telegraph" yesterday. After hearing what I have to say, I am sure it will have the decency to correct this misstatement and rectify a wrong. I believe that the statement was made in this Chamber with an eye to political propaganda.

A statement has appeared in the '' Telegraph'' to the effect that the hon. member for Kelvin Grove had won a sweep in the House. I have somewhat of a grudge about it too, if the hon. member for Kelvin Grove has not. When the sweep was closed-and we must admit that we infringe the law by holding a sweep-the hon. member for Kelvin Grove was not present, so I put the 2s. in for him. He said to me later, "Will you take the prize" 1 and I said that I would not, and he said, "Well, I will give it to charity." And he gave it to charity; and he gave my 2s. with it. (Laughter.)

Mr. BARNES (Bundaberg) (8.46 p.m.) : It is very appropriate that I should be the last speaker in this debate.

A Government Member: You do not know that.

Supp{;y. (21 OCTOBER.] Supply. 911

Mr. BARNES: I am led to believe that I am, and if I am not it makes no difference. If I am the last speaker or the second-last speaker, it is still appropriate that I should be in that place, because by the time I am finished I shall have solved all your troubles. And I might mention I have no set programme to speak to so if you want to interject you can interject as much as you like; normally I have to get my 10,000 words in an hour, which I have done repeatedly, and therefore I cannot afford the time to reply to interjectors, but tonight you will have a remedy if you accept what I suggest here again. I realise that it is a waste of my time talking to members of Parliament, but there are 2,000 '' Hansards'' that go to the country, and I am hoping that some of the people will read what I say and benefit from the information. I. know that the International No. 1 Agency, the Tory Press, will not say anything about my policy. It never has in eight years.

Mr. Smith: Pay the man the £10.

Mr. BARNES: You can interject as much as you like tonight provided it is relevant. By the time I have finished, all the troubles you have spoken about on the Address in Reply and on the Financial Statement will be solved, if you adopt my method of solving them.

To start off with, I am broke. As you know, the last election campaign cost me £650 and I owed £350 of that. I am still paying it off, so I cannot afford to lose any money. I made a statement yesterday that I would give £10 to a hospital named by the hon. member for Nundah if what I said was incorrect. I am told that during my absence today he brought evidence to this Committee in an endeavour to prove that what I said was incorrect. I repeat that I will give £10 to his hospital if what I said is incorrect. I have had the experience of 72 law cases. Having the experience of 72 law cases, I know the ways of barristers and solicitors in twisting a statement to suit themselves.

Mr. Aikens: How many did you win?

Mr. BARNES: I won about six out of 40 in the lower court. I won 30 out of 31 in the Supreme Court, and I wori four out of four in the Full Court. But, whacko, in the yesman Magistrates Court-you have no idea of the people in the yes-man Magistrates Court-! showed them the law; I drove horses and carts through their laws, as I did in the Supreme Court and in the Full Court. One thing I did do in the Magistrates Court, I mixed it with them on Rafferty 's rules. For the first time in their lives I gave them Rafferty 's rules surpassed by no other man. When you are in Rome you have to do as the Romans do. Those courts were filthy; and, boy, was I at home~ (Laughter). Because I have had so much experience with filthiness it was simplicity for me to mix it with those courts.

We have in this Committee a legal advocate in the form of a barrister of the Supreme Court of Queensland, the hon. member for Nundah. Today he made a statement. I do not know what the hon. member said today because I was not present, therefore I am going on hearsay and am open to correction.

Mr. Smith: Pay the man the £10 you owe him.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! I hope hon. members on my right will allow the hon. member for Bundaberg to make his speech without interruption.

Mr. BARNES: Yesterday, Mr. Mann, I made this statement, that in England in 1832 £150,000 was spent on education. Remember that to start off with. In 1932 £55,000,000 was expended on education. The hon. member for Nundah interjected and said only £20,000 was spent in 1832 and I replied that if I was incorrect I would give £10 to his hospitals. There is one thing c.ertain, and that is that when I leave this desk no hon. member will be able to contradict me. That is how sure I am of my facts·.

lllr. Smith: Why do you not pay it to the sick and be decent~

Mr. BARNES: If in 20 years' time the hon. member has as much brains as he thinks he has now he will be a smart man. The position is that the hon. member for Carpentaria and others like him are play-boys. The hon. member is a wealthy man. He is not a Labour member of Parliament; he is a Tory playboy. I repeat that if he has as much intelligence in 20 years' time as he thinks he has now he will be a smart man; if he shuts up and listens he should give the hospital £10. I will bet him £10, too, if he likes to take up the bet, and this will take some of his riches from him. The position is that I said, "£150 ,000" was spent in England; he said £20,000. The hon. member for Nundah allows my figure of £55,000,000 in 1932 to be approximately correct. It suited him in his cunningness, being a legal advocate, to allow that, because it is a very simple matter to prove. The former stated amount was the much harder to prove. The hon. member quoted the Encyclopaedia Britannica. It suited him to quote it. I quoted it in this Chamber on many occasions, particularly in connection with the practice of bankers manufacturing money out of nothing. I hope the hon. member in his advocacy of the Encyclopaedia Britannica will be consistent and agree to its opinion on banking.

The Encyclopaedia Britannica points out that in 1832 the British Government for the first time subsidised private schools to the extent of £20,000. I stated that £150,000 was spent in England in 1832 when the population was approximately 26,000,000. Today the population is 40,000,000-odd. If anybody knows anything about the educational system of the British Isles he will know that there was no such thing as a public school until about 1902. Before they had actually


become public schools they had been subsidised and the subsidy increased as the years went by. The hon. member agreed that £55,000,005 was the right amount for 1932 because he wanted to convince the Committee that was the amount paid by the Government. I was speaking about the educational system of England in 1832.

According to Whitaker 's Almanac the amount spent in 1932-33 in England by the Govemment was £42,892,676. The hon. member for Nundah conveniently allowed the Committee to believe that I wa& approximately correct when I said it was £55,000,000. The point is that the difference between £42,000,000 and £55,000,000 was the amount spent on private schools in England. The total figure for public and private schools together, with other things that come under the heading of education in England, aueh as museums, technical colleges and libraries, wa& £82,890,000, which proves that my figure of £55,000,000 is correct. I took the 100-year period between 1832 an·d 1932 purposely, because the year 1832 was the first occasion upon which the Government paid any subsidy towards education in England. The total amount paid on private education in England at that time, according to an English paper which I read years ago, 'Yhich I quoted years ago and now memorise, was £150,000. Now let the hon. member give £10 to my hospital.

The next consolation I derived from the debate was the interjections coming from the Government side of the Chamber when the hon. member for West Moreton quoted from the Bible when referring to the statement by the hon. member for Kelvin Grove about Mr. Fadden. The way in which the interjections were made when the Bible was being quoted was sacrilege, but I gained consolation from them because those interjections displayed that they were as ignorant about the Bible as they are about the Protocols.

I excuse the Secretary for Health and Home Affairs from this charge because when the hon. member for .'West Moreton had finished quoting what the Pharisee said he, in his usual s·tyle, dramatically waved his hnnrl and said, ''What did the publican say~" the Minister interjected, "The beer 's off.'' I am sure the Good Lord would not mind t·hat intcrjcdion. I refer in pfnticnlnr to the interjccti<>ns b;v other hon. memlJers OJI the Go,,ernnwnt side.

I come now to an important point that has been discussed hotly in the Press in the last few weeks and in this Chamber in the last fmy days. I refer to the information l\fr. radden disclosed in connection 1vith the atomic bomb. He said that the American Government would not give the Australian Government the atomic-bomb secrets for certain Tcnsons. They put the Security police onto him when they had no right to do so, just as they put the police onto me in the MaTjOTy Norval case when they had no right to do so, but on that occasion it suited me to let them take me to the court. The point is not what Mr. Fadden had to say about

the atomic bomb but the fact that nothing has been said about the people who control the atomic bomb.

Mr. Aikens: Who controls it-the international Jews~

Mr. BARNES: You're telling me they control it! I will give the names of those people who control the atomic bomb in America.

The Atomic Energy Commission in America set up by President Truman was composed of David E. Lilienthal, a Jew (Chairman), Lewis E. Strauss (Jew), Robert K Baeher (Jew), William W. Wymack and Summer T. Pike. The commission that controlled atomic energy in America comprised three Jews and two others, whose nationality is questionable. When Congress asked to have David E. Lilienthal put on the mat because of his record, President Truman refused Congress the right of examining his record. The chairman of that commission has a daughter by the name of Nancy. She was a public servant in America, a very prominent public servant, and a very prominent unionist.

The following statement was made in "Plain Talk" for February, 1947, concerning Nancy Lilienthal-

' 'His daughter, N ancy, an employee of the Department of Labour and a member of the United Public Workers, a Communist-dominated Union, only recently displayed her strong pro-Soviet attitude. At the beginning of December, 1946, at a meeting of her local, a proposal had been made to endorse the resolution of the Atlantic City C.I.O. convention condemning Communism. The fight against the endorsement was led, with success, by N ancy Lilienthal. It may be that Nancy's outlook has been conditioned, not by her father but by her mother. For Mrs. Lilienthal is reliably reported to have belonged in the middle '30s to several 'front' organisations.''

Republican Representative Fred E. Busby, of Chicago, addressing the House of RepTesentatives on 15 April, 1947, said-

" I wish to call attention to a brief but important fact. Nancy Lilienthal, an active and sympathetic pTo-communist leader of the United States Workers' Local 10 in the Department of Labor, which Local has been actively opposing the President's loyalty programme, is about to leave the DepaTtment of Labor, to work privately on confidential matters with her father. David Lilienthal. the newlvappointed 'head of the At~mic Energy Commission. ' '

This chap \Vvmack is reported by the F.B.I. to be" pro-Russian. These are established world facts, but here we in Australin are worrying about whether Artie Fadden has some secret information. It counts for naught compared with the real issue. Th<:ir association with Communism gives you something real to worry about, and


when you see the word ''Communism'' you cannot dissociate it from international Jewism. They are one and the same organisation. I told hon. members of this Committee in 1942, when Russia came into the war on our side, that Russian embassies would spend money here like water-£75,000 for this building, £25,000 for that one and so on, because behind them was the international Jewish banking system. I am not condemning the Jewish race as a whole, but those who knock their lesser brothers from pillar to post. Somebody just handed me a booklet entitled "Mugs, Wake Up." It is one I read two or three years ago. It was printed by a Social Crediter in Victoria and most of its contents were quoted by me in 1942, when I quoted that speech setting out that how the Russian revolution was financed by the Jewish :financial houses of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., &c., &c.-how out of the 550 Bolshevik officials in 1917, 450 were Jewshow 56 out of 59 on the Communist Central Party were Jews. I pointed out in that speech that Max Warburg represented Germany at a League of Nations -peace conference at Geneva after the :first World War and Paul Warburg, head of the Federal Reserve Bank of America, his brother, represented America at the same conferencetwo brothers, both Jews, representing two different countries.

Neither of them had a country of his own and yet the two brothers represented two different countries. In the same speech I pointed out that the most of the Russian Ambassadors were Jews and I specifically pointed out that when an ambassador left Russia to go to another country, he was a Jew or had a complete Jewish staff or a .] ewish wife, just as you have Dr. Evatt with a Jewish wife and, as I said before at the time he left the Court to go in politics that he was a Communist; now he is Communist Xo. 1 in Australia.

I am glad of this little book that has been handed to me. Its title is "Mugs, ~Wake Up,'' ''It is made for you people who think you are on the right track.' ' Some of you think you are on the right track but you are not on the right track. The first page I open it at gives the names of all the Bolshevik leaders, Lenin and so on, and it gives their real names. I haven't time to quote them. This book does, however, prove it is impossible to dissociate Communism from international J ewism. The atomic secret is not supposed to be given to Russia, but there is nothing more certain in this world than that Russia has the complete atomic secret.

A number of us saw that picture ''The Iron Curtain.'' If you read the report of the Canadian Royal Commission on the Communist embassy's activities in Canada you will see that their objective is not the embassy but to get the embassy to perpetuate Communism through the nationals in that country. Knowing so much about the habits and the technique of the Communists I was a~ a loss to know how it ever was reprof1uced in picture form. I had the knowledge of these things and the way in which

the Communists worked and I still cannot understand how the Jews did not use their influence to stop this picture.

It reminded me of the book " Smoke to Smother,'' by Douglas Reed. It would pay hon. members to read that book if for no other reason than to see how he associated with people in Europe before the war, apart altogether from his political opinions. You will remember that he left the "London Times'' in 1938 because it would not print his warnings about the coming German war and he then wrote the book ''Insanity Fair'' which in short warned England how to avoid the last war. This book "Smoke to Smother" warns England and the rest of the world how to avoid the next war, a Civil war. It is a sequel to "Insanity Fair." In it he tells you that there is an International Jewish Force at work to control the world through Communism as I have warned hon. members on so many occasions in my eight years in Parliament. Their object is to cause confusion through the whole world in as many ways as possible. One of them is to cause wars so that the world will be short of food, knowing that hungry bellies will help their objects greatly, another war causes loose moral&, the people give up religion, wh~ch further helps confusion, and finally they. glVe up in despair and submit to the international super-government (Communism).

Thev inaugurated Communism to absorb the ilicreased education of the people of the world. They had kept the people ignorant for thousands of years, but because of our greatgrandfathers, n?t Labou: governments, education had mcreased m England to the extent that in 1832 £150,000 was spent on it and by 1932 £55,000,000 was spent. Now, the International J~ew knows that by Yirtue of the enormous increase of money spent on education the peopl~ have the average education of a fifth class pnmary school and therefore can wake up to the fact that banks make money out of nothing. So there, I repeat, they have given the people a rack t~ hang their hats on. . In o~her :vo;ds the: aTe absorbing Oommumsm w1th tins mcreased education.

There is nothing more true in this world than the banks manufactured money out of nothing. The hon. member for Nundah thouaht he was clever on Tuesday in quoting the Encyclopaedia Britannica to prove that my statements on education were wrong, but he refrained from telling us that the same book tells us that the banks manufacture money out of nothing. I have given ;you authorities previously, such as Mar;mer Eccles Sir Vincent Vickers, Regmald McKe;ma, Paul Warburg, Colin Clark, &c., all these men said, under pressure, that banks made money out of nothing.

In the 1929-1932 period the banks would not manufacture money because they wanted to create a depression. There were plenty of goods but no money. Why did they. refuse to manufacture money~ I was visitmg the Eagle Street branch of the National Bank shortly before the depression, to see a cousin. He introduced me to the accountant. He


was having a swig of rum out of a coffee bottle in his room, and when I entered he hurriedly put the bottle into his inside coat pocket, forgetting to put the cork in, and consequently when he bent down the rum ran out of the bottle. Perhaps in order to allay my interest in the incident, he showed me a letter that had come from his head office in Melbourne. It instructed the branch to tighten up on all their accounts as there was going to be a depression. A friend named Oharlie Smith was with me at the time and when the depression arrived in 1929 he, being fore· warned, left Australia and went to South .Africa, where they produce a ton of gold a week.

Mr. Sparkes: You will get a bank manager's job if you don't look out.

Mr. BARNES: The position of manager of a bank means nothing, to me there are a lot more important things for me to do. In Australia there are nine bank managers; all the others are merely accountants. On the inner platform of the platform of the Frank Barnes Labour Party was a clause for the establishment of its own bank. .After the matter was considered it was decided not to tell the public of this fact as it was feared that the Tories would use it as propaganda and thus stop the Barnes Party from gaining office. The object of a Government in induc· ing people to buy Treasury bills, particularly small amounts, is to scare them with the fear of anybody interfering with banks that they would lose all their money. That is why banks want small customers with £5 or £10 in their accounts. These depositors would protect their £5 or £10 note against us. We would have started a bank and the Government of Queensland would have exercised its sovereign prerogative. Section 51 of the Federal Constitution gave the Federal Government control of banking with the excep· tion on State banking. I knew they had no control of a State bank. We intended to start our State bank.

We intended in the first three years to issue credit-two to one. The orthodox banks issue a credit of 10 to one. The Primary Producers' Bank and the Federal Deposit Bank were issuing 15 to one and that is why they were squashed out of existence by the other banks; they would not play ball. I will show you how to run a bank tomorrow and how no bank in Australia can break my bank. The moment they try to send me broke I know how to break the whole lot of them at the same time. I will back myself to run a bank and I will back myself to see that no bank will break me without breaking itself. I know how to do it. I know this banking busi· ness from start to finish.

An Opposition Member interjected. Mr. BARNES: You cannot say whether

I am right or wrong because you do not know that the banks make money out of nothing.

Mr. Rnssell interjected. Mr. BARNES: The hon. member says

that if you make money out of nothing everybody stops work. That is an honest interjection because the hon. gentleman is

thinking of orthodox banking. It is a fiveyear-old interjection when you understand ?-northodox banking. If they stop work~ng we are a crook Government. Under a sound economic system everybody works or gets nothing, except those who are cripples, and they will not get a lousy £2 but they will get the full basic wage under the Frank Barnes Government-and not the lousy £2 they get today. The basic wage was £2 Ss. in 1914 and it should be about £10 lSs. 6d. today to be on an equal basis. What you could buy for £2 Ss. in 1914 you have to pay £10 lSs. 6d. today .

Under this system of mine I will eliminate what you people worry about. If the hon. member for Barcoo wants a Bradfield irrigation scheme I will give it to him. In a ledger I will show an asset '' Bradfield Scheme, £70,000,000 and on the other side I will show a liability of £70,000,000; and I will carry out that business by issuing credit 10 to one. For me to issue £70,000,000 for the irrigation scheme it would be necessary for me to have one-tenth in cash. That is the same as the banks are doing here. If what I say is incorrect and the banks do not manufacture money, then I am wrong, and it is easy to prove but if they do make money out of nothing we as a Government can make money out of nothing.

Supposing the banks do not do it, I will tell you how to do it. We have in various countries in the world, for example Scotland, banks manufacturing their own notes. We in Australia abandoned that years ago and New Zealand abandoned it a few years ago. I remember telling you a story in my maiden speech in which I said if I was going from Melbourne to Tasmania and I had £1,000,000 bank notes in my pocket and the boat sank and the money was not recovered the Australian people would receive a profit of £1,000,000; and if I was crossing the Channel with £1,000,000 worth of English pound notes in my pocket from an English bank the private company or English bank, as it was then, would receive £1,000,000 profit because that boat was sunk. I remember saying to you eight years ago in my maiden speech, "What is money~" In case you have not seen any lately, here is a couple of quid. There are two fivers. They are the cause of all evil. I do not care who you are, you can tell me your trouble and I will trace it back to money. I do not care if the trouble concerns your grandmother or your sister or whom it concerns, it all reverts back to the money.

Mr. Aikens: How are you holding so strong so far away from pay day~ (Laughter.)

The CHAIRMAN: Order!

Mr. BARNES: I have £12 10s. or £13 in my pocket, I suppose because I have not paid my creditors-! do not know. However, that is not the point. We are talking of lousy bits of paper, which cause wars, destruction, depression, malnutrition, imbeciles, derelicts. They are responsible for the retrogression in the science of medicine, inasmuch as people are taught to think on orthodox lines

Supply. (21 OcTOBER.] Supply. 915

and they have not the capacity to think on unorthodox lines. That is because they are so steeped in orthodoxy because therein lies the bankers ' success.

When I entered Parliament eight years ago 95 per cent. of the members did not know that banks could manufacture money out of nothing, but today 100 per cent. of them know that this is true, but they have not the internal fortitude to stand up and tell the people that banks manufacture money out of nothing. They acknowledge that time and again in private conversation wi!h me outside the House. They come to me because they are worried at not knowing where they will go when this revolution occurs. The international Jewish bankers said-according to the Protocols-we shall choose from the Goyim men who are not trained in the art of government because they will be obedient to our will.

If a member of the Labour Party bucks the ticket he is not endorsed at the next election and he cannot go back to the .Australian Workers' Union because of the Queensland Central Executive. He must therefore go back to work with a pick and shovel so he therefore chooses to sit here being a ''yes man" and collecting his £16 10s. a week. If a member of the Country Party is put out of Parliament he will have been done a good turn financially, but although he loses nothing financially he loses socially, he is not invited to the various clubs or the home of T. C. Beirne or McWhirter. He is today hobnobbing with his club mates at the Queensland Club and the Johnsonian Club and with friends and acquaintances in T. C. Beirne's and McWhirter's homes, &c., so he chooses to be a ''yes man'' for social reasons. He will say, "Why John Francis Barnes, the hon. member for Bundaberg in the Parliament of Queensland, has been telling us this for years. I am sorry I did not take notice of him.''

Now, in order to hobnob with society they must be orthodox and say nothing about the banking system, which is just as the learned elders of Zion in the Protocols say they have to. .A member of the Labour Party knows that he will not get his £16 10s. a week and asks, "What is the use of bumping my head against a brick walH I will remain a member of Parliament. It is easy.'' But that lasts only a certain time. It does not last forever. For instance, it did not last in Bulgaria, Rumania, Esthonia, or Latvia &c. and it is on the verge of not lasting in F~anc~ and so many other parts of Europe. Today in France they are making a big advance by evolution, so much so that they can nearly take over France without having to resort to revolution.

The hon. members for Mundingburra and Bowen realise that the system is wrong. That is one thing I have always said in favour of Communism, they wake up to the Labour Party and become Communists, but one then is merely jumping out of the frying pan into the fire. Communists tell you the ills of the democratic system and facts prove them to be correct. The Protocols say, "The

aristocracy of the Goyim is dead (meaning Tories) but as land-holders they can be of considerable importance to us,'' so the Tories have got to decide whether they are going to continue to be "Yes" men to aristocracy or be communised. You can believe me that there will be no such thing as Tory or Labour in future politics. Future politics will be the correct use of national credit on the one hand or Communism on the other and the only time the Tories will wake up is when they are writing words similar to this, ''I, John Francis Barnes, do hand over to the Soviet State of Australia my property situated in Bourbong street, Bundaberg. '' That is correct 80 per cent. of the time. Therefore, when a Tory or Labour Party member tries to run down Communism, the Communists already know how wrong they are in advocating their own system, that their words fall on deaf ears. It is like pouring water on a duck's back because nothing they say proves the Communist system to be wrong.

What is the cause of all our troubles~ There it is-money, money. That is the cause of all our troubles. See how the Communists' propaganda protect the Jewish organisation.

You never see them go for the international Jewish banker. Their literature all protects the Jews. By means of clever propaganda originating at one time in Switzerland but now originating in Wall Street, they go to the most susceptible person, the ordinary man in the street, and lead him to believe that the fault lies with such people as the Broken Hili Company, Charlie Russell, or Jim Sparkes, the big financial people. The point is that the Charlie Russells and Jim Sparkeses are worth 2d. a million when it comes to international finance, just as the Broken Hill Company. In fact, anyone who does not manufacture money is worth about 2d. a million. Such people go broke at the wish of the learned Elders of Zion, just as thousands of Charlie Russells and Jim Sparkeses went broke in the last depression, and as they are going broke in Europe today. The learned Elders of Zion start depressions and finish them, and they start wars and finish them.

Thousands went broke throughout the world during the last depression. The international Jews forced down the shares held by big private concerns from £50 to £1, bought them in at £1, and then pushed them back to £50 after a few years. The only reason why the international Jew can do this is because we dills-and I do not apologise to anyone for saying it-sit here and continue to legislate and fight over nothing, always dodging the real issue.

Bruce Pie says the Budget is a fake. All Budgets are faked. When Sir Otto N eimeyer and party came to Australia during the last depression he told the Government what to do. They were borrowing on the open market and he told them to centralise. At that time we could go on the open market and borrow millions if we wanted to. For instance, if the scheme suggested by the hon. member for Barcoo had been urgent we could have gone

916

out in the middle of the year or even three· quarters of the way through the year and borrowed millions of pounds to start it. Today we are told it is not budgeted for. How ridiculous! When the authorities in England, when this last war started, wanted to get money to carry out any work, the answer was, ''Sorry it is not budgeted for.'' When they wanted airships the answer was, "They are not budgeted for,'' while Germany was making hay while the sun shone. All that Budgets mean is that you assume that for the year it will cost you, say, £25,000,000, and if you do not keep somewhere near that :figure you are going to have your wings clipped by the Loan Council, especially by that rotter, Sir Otto Neimeyer, who came out here. If your Budget provides for £25,000,000 this year, what is to stop you from providing for £45,000,000~ The only thing is that you get together and decide on a certain Budget. Budgets are one means of forcing you to believe that you have to do what these international bankers tell you to do. The international banker claims in the Protocols that if he says one thing today and it is necessary to say something different tomorrow, then say it.

Hon. members will remember the suggestion recently made of altering the value of the pound, which would mean that we should lose 30 per cent. on our exchange rate, and the prices for farmers' commodities would drop 30 per cent.

The Country Party kicked up a big shine about it, and rightly too. My point is that the Country Party endorses the world banking agreement and Artie Fadden, Menzies and Chifley endorsed the Bretton Woods agreement. In short, without going into details, the Bretton \Voods agreement controls our financial system. We have no power to control it as we have given away our sovereign rights. If the international Jews through the U.N.O. or because of the Bretton Woods agreement want us to lose the exchange rate we shall lose it. '

The Country Party in Canberra supported the Bretton Woods agreement, along with the Labour Party, and the only hon. member who has had the guts to oppose it is my £150 000 friend the hon. member for Nundah. If' the Bretton Woods agreement controls our internal currency we have no sovereignty and if it forces the farmers to get 30 per cent. less for their commodities it is bad.

I might go to bed tonight after making a speech to nincompoops and wake up in the morning and read in the daily paper that Chifley, Fadden and Menzies are all 100 per cent. in favour of a loan. When it comes to money the Labour Party and the Opposition have a lot in common; they have everything in common. They will both advocate subscribing to the loan. If the terrible Labour Party is so terrible, why are the Opposition backing it up~ In this respect I think all Governments are rotten and I don't exclude any. They are so rotten that the Tory bankers support Labour Government loans. Why 'L~'uld the Tories fill their loans~ Don't argue ~Hat they don't, because they do. If

Stpply.

the Country Party is so hostile towards Labour, why don't its members see that Labour's loans are a failure and then the people will put them out of power~ They are both the protectors of the money system and that is the reason why they both get on the same platform asking people to subscribe to a loan. That is the reason why the Prime Minister and representatives of the Opposition get on the same platform-to protect the money system because people think this is necessary.

Let me say something about Tories' attack on Communism. Suppose the hon. member for Dalby was in business and I went out there and started to tell him how he should raise his cattle-that he should do this and that he should do that-he would say, "What the hell do you know about iH You might be a commercial traveller, you might know something about butter factories, you might know something about running pubs, and you might know a bit about Parliament, but what do you know about the running of a grazing property~" He would laugh at me. On the other hand, if I went to his property and said, ''Look here, Mr. Russell, I think if you did this and if you did that, and gave him details of what I thought, he might say, ''There might be something in what he says." Now, the Labour Party and the Tory Party get up on the soap box and ridicule Communism without giving the solution. In the case I illustrated I would have gone into details with the hon. member for Dalhy showing him why his position would he better by adopting my methods.

An Opposition lliember: The only solution to Communism is to get rid of them.

llir. BARNES: That is absurd. It is impossible to persecute an idea, as has been proved down through the ages. The idea lives, despite all persecutions. The Frank Barnes Labour Party platform says that Communists shall not be banned, but that it will prove by education that it was the dirtiest trick ever played on the workers.

That reminds me of a motion that I wanted to move here, but the wording of it was altered because it was said. that my wording was not parliamentary. My motion was to the effect that we would by edycation teach the workers that Communism was the dirtiest trick ever played on the workers. It was altered to read ''most unclean trick.'' I said, ''Fancy using language like that''! They would not understand what it meant.

Mr. Aikens: Who altered the words? Mr. BARNES: It was altered on the

business sheet to what was considered better phraseology. I have demonstrated that I know the psychological meaning of words because I have spoken to thousands of people. I say what I mean, and I do not pull my punches. I tell a person what I think of him outside this Chamber and in it, and that is because I am sure of my facts before I start.

Communism in this country can be cured in only one way, and that is to tell them how wrong their system is and that the only effecive system is the national-credit system. That

S•~pply. [21 OCTOBER.] Supply. 917

does not mean that you would not have to work for your living. It means that you would have to work for your living, but you would get much more work out of the men than you do today. Today, if a man earns £6 a week he does not actually get £6 a week, because £4 is taken in indirect taxation. I told you in 1941 that in future politics there would be no such thing as Labour or Tory. They would go with the wind, and there would be a National Credit Government or a Communist one. The only way to defeat Communism is to prove that there must be an alteration in the breeding ground. If I could establish the Frank Barnes Party I should kill Communism in sh months, because with my party in existence Communism would be a physical impossibility. I should stop it in sh months, because thousands and thousands of people would believe the same way as I do. The new educational system would be such that Communism could not survive. Conditions would be altered.

That reminds me of a statement made by Fred Courtice, brother of Senator Courtice, a one-time great Labour man. He complained about the work on the wharf at Bundaberg and said, ''The men will not work.'' We will not argue about whether they will work or not, but ask yourselves why they will not work and you have the answer. I will tell you why they will not work. The same position obtains throughout Australia, whether it is on the wharf at Bundaberg or whether it applies to coal in New South Wales or rice in China. A man will not work because he does not get paid for his hire. No matter what you may say, he does not get paid for his hire. If he earns, say, £20 a week he gets only £6 a week an~ taxation gets the other £14. You say that pnvate enterprise can do it, but it cannot without the help of National Credit, because capital costs are so high on account of taxation. I have already pointed out that since 1914 the National Debt has doubled itself every 10 years, and that in 70 years the National Debt will reach £78,000,000,000, on which each family will have to pay £13,500 in interest alone. How can they pay £13,500 a year in interest alone~

Do not talk about redemption and sinking funds because they are just a farce. The National Debt doubled itself between 1941 [<lid 1946.

I became politically-minded on 21 October, 1925. I am 44 todav. When I first became interested in politics· I was 21. I voted Tory then because my father and mother did so. I did not know what I was doing until some little time later I was keeping company with a Sister in the Brisbane Hospital. She was a niere of the later Senator J. C. Stewart. I said to him, ''Give me a book so that I can study politics. I know nothing about it'' He gave me a book called ''Elements of Social Science'' written by an unknown doctor of medicine. My opmwn of politics altered from that very day and has remained unchanged since I was 21 except for the fact that whereas I then blamed the

international banks for the world's parlous position I have realised that it is due to the international Jewish banking system.

This banking system has for its object the bringing about of a dictatorship. It is a physical impossibility to overthrow a dictatorship from within. And they know this is the only way they can continue to control the money system. The whole fault of our present system lies in the lousy, rotten money system. The Jews have been persecuted throughout the whole world. Hitler himself was a Jew. He was the bastard son of Baron Rothschild. His real name was Schickelgruber. It was a Rothschild who said that ''Give me power to create the credit of the nation and I care not who makes its laws.'' How ridiculous!

If we are to get out of our present financial troubles we must issue national credit in substitution of the money system in circulation today. By means of national credit we can embark on such national schemes as the Burdekin Dam and the Cooper's Creek cattlefattening scheme. We can under such a system say to J ones, who may want to get married, '' Here is £1,000 to build your house, and another £500 to get your furniture, and another £500 to get your car.'' He would repay that £2,000 without interest, whereas if J ones borrowed that money today he would pay about £4,000 before he repaid the debt. The interest brings about that increase.

Mr. Russell: What about interest on the savings of the poor~ Do you not give them any interesH

lUr. BARNES: Of course I will give them interest. Why shoulcln 't they get interest~ I am talking about governmental departments.

I would go further and finance new industry-£5,000,000, or £10,000,000, or whatever is necessary to assist it interest free and I would subsidise it with debt-free money if necessary. The hon. member for Toowoomba made an excellent speech. He is the most capable man in the Chamber, and when I say that I am not throwing any bouquets; I am admitting facts. The whole of that speech suggested that the Govemment hacl no money. Well, today we are a sovereign State and we cnn start our bank tomorrow. I will show y:ou how to spend £15,000,000 in the first three years.

Mr. Aikens: A sovereign State without any sovBreigns. (Laughter.)

1Ir. BARNES: That is true. As my time is up, I will conclude by saying once again that President Truman refused to have an inquiry into the case of David Lilienthal, the head of the Atomic Energy Commission, who is a Jew and a Communist.

Hon. .J. LARCOJUBE (Rockhampton'rreasurer) (9.47 p.m.): For scveml days and nights-it seems to me to be like 40 days and 40 nights-I have sat with Job-liJce patience observing the Shakespearian dictum.

918 Questions. [ASSEMBLY.]

''Take each man's censure but reserve thy judgment.'' I have taken the censure and reserved my judgment and I hope shortly to express my judgment in reply. We have heard a very interesting debate and I thank members on this side of the Chamber for their appreciative reference to the Budget. In the party-political system that obtains one could hardly expect members opposite to be enthusiastic about the Budget; but I do say that several of them were fair and reasonable in their criticism. As t·he hour is late, I ask leave of the Committee to continue my speech tomorrow.

The CHAIRMAN: The question is" That the Treasurer be permitted to continue his speech tomorrow.''

Honourable Members: Hear, hear!

Progress reported.

The House adjourned at 9.50 p.m.

Questions.

legislative assembly thursday october · tenant act of 1948 ( 14 october). auditor-general's...

Documents