/
19640227_reps_25_hor41.xml
3482 lines (3482 loc) · 339 KB
/
19640227_reps_25_hor41.xml
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<hansard xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.1" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<session.header>
<date>1964-02-27</date>
<parliament.no>25</parliament.no>
<session.no>1</session.no>
<period.no>1</period.no>
<chamber>REPS</chamber>
<page.no>89</page.no>
<proof>0</proof>
</session.header>
<chamber.xscript>
<business.start>
<day.start>1964-02-27</day.start>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. Sir John McLeay)</inline>took the chair at 10.30 a.m., and read prayers. </para>
</business.start>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>MEMBER SWORN</title>
<page.no>89</page.no>
<type>miscellaneous</type>
</debateinfo>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Sir Wilfrid</inline>Selwyn Kent Hughes made and subscribed the oath of allegiance as member for the Division of Chisholm, Victoria. </para>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>PETITIONS</title>
<page.no>89</page.no>
<type>petition</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Aborigines</title>
<page.no>89</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. HOWSON</inline>presented a petition from certain citizens of the Commonwealth praying that the Government remove section 127, and the words discriminating against aborigines in section 51, of the Commonwealth Constitution, by the holding of a referendum at an early date. </para>
<para>Petition received and read. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Nuclear Tests</title>
<page.no>89</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. BUCHANAN</inline>presented a petition from certain electors of the Division of McMillan praying that the Government make further protests to all countries bordering the Pacific, to the United Nations and to the French Government itself to halt all preparations for nuclear tests in the Pacific by the French Government. </para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>89</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>BASIC WAGE</title>
<page.no>89</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>89</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>BV8</name.id>
<electorate>MELBOURNE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CALWELL, Arthur</name>
<name role="display">Mr CALWELL</name>
</talker>
<para>- I ask a question without notice of the Minister for Labour and National Service. In view of the statement made in this House yesterday by the Treasurer that conditions in Australia are particularly buoyant and that the community is enjoying great prosperity, will he say why the Government has adopted a neutralist attitude in the basic wage case now before the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission and why it has not supported the claim of the wage and salary earners for an increasing share in the increased productivity that the nation is supposed to be enjoying? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>89</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MA</name.id>
<electorate>LOWE, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for Labour and National Service</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCMAHON, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr McMAHON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I gave the answer to this question in reply to a question asked yesterday. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>89</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>BV8</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CALWELL, Arthur</name>
<name role="display">Mr Calwell</name>
</talker>
<para>- Answer my question. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>89</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MA</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCMAHON, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr McMAHON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Yes, I will answer your question. The answer is that in this particular case - that is the metal trades case - the parties to the dispute are the metal trades unions and the employers, including the primary producers of this country. The Government itself is not a party. But we have intervened in the nation's interest to put, in the broad perspective and as clearly as we can, the economic and financial position of the country and the general trends. Not being a party to the dispute, we do not think we should be partisan. Other than in very exceptional circumstances that is the attitude that has been taken more or less consistently by the Government since 1949. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>89</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>BV8</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CALWELL, Arthur</name>
<name role="display">Mr Calwell</name>
</talker>
<para>- You opposed an increase in 1960. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>89</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MA</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCMAHON, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr McMAHON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Opposed once only. I said "more or less". On only one occasion did we depart from that attitude. What we propose to do on this occasion is this: In order to permit the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission, which we want to remain independent, not only to be independent but to appear independent, we will put before it all the information on which it can come to a conclusion on whether any change should be made in the basic wage. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>89</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>FIGHTER AIRCRAFT</title>
<page.no>89</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>89</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>L0N</name.id>
<electorate>BALACLAVA, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITTORN, Raymond</name>
<name role="display">Mr WHITTORN</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is addressed to the Minister for Air. In view of the fact that the economy of France has inflated at the rate of 7 per cent, per annum, I ask the Minister whether that inflation has affected the price that we will pay for the Mirage aircraft purchased from that country. Will the last batch of Mirages delivered to Australia cost a good deal more than the initial supplies? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>89</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDT</name.id>
<electorate>FARRER, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for Air</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FAIRBAIRN, David</name>
<name role="display">Mr FAIRBAIRN</name>
</talker>
<para>- No. When we were making the second purchase of Mirage aircraft - purchasing the second 30 - the business adviser to the Department of Air advised that if we were considering a further purchase we would be well advised to take up an option on these aircraft. We took an option on 40, and the price for those 40 was related to the price structure in France in 1962, plus a small, limited escalation. When we finally took up the option in the following year, the cost of manufacture in France actually had risen by between 8 and 9 per cent.: but we have to pay only the limited escalation. As a result of that, we have saved about £1,250,000. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>BANKING</title>
<page.no>90</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K8B</name.id>
<electorate>KINGSFORD-SMITH, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CURTIN, Daniel</name>
<name role="display">Mr CURTIN</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is directed to the Treasurer. In view of the heavy congestion caused by the remarkable increase in savings bank depositors at the Maroubra Junction, New South Wales, branch of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, will the Treasurer investigate the possibility of extending further the present structure back to the lane at the rear and also adding another story to it? That would allow all the banking equipment to be removed from the ground floor and make the extra space available to the longsuffering customers. Will the Treasurer direct that the present primitive fibro structure called the mess room be demolished and that a modern brick structure with all modern conveniences be constructed in its place? That would add to the comfort and welfare of the very efficient and courteous staff. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MC</name.id>
<electorate>HIGGINS, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Treasurer</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HOLT, Harold</name>
<name role="display">Mr HAROLD HOLT</name>
</talker>
<para>- It is a well known fact that in the lifetime of this Government there has been a remarkable growth in the number of savings bank accounts and in the size of savings bank deposits. I think I am right in saying that there are more than 10,000,000 operative accounts in a population of about 11,000,000. Last year deposits reached a record level. Possibly that has produced congestion in some sections of savings bank administration. I will examine the case referred to by the honorable gentleman and see whether I can let him have an answer to his question. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>DISALLOWED QUESTION</title>
<page.no>90</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">(Mr. Jeff</inline>Bate having commenced to ask a question addressed to the Leader of the Opposition, and <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker</inline> having disallowed the question) - </para>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JOE</name.id>
<electorate>Macarthur</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BATE, Henry</name>
<name role="display">Mr JEFF BATE</name>
</talker>
<para>- I move </para>
</talk.start>
<para>That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would prevent the honorable member for Macarthur addressing a question to the Leader of the Opposition. </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Order! The honorable member will not state the question. </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JOE</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BATE, Henry</name>
<name role="display">Mr JEFF BATE</name>
</talker>
<para>- Then I will submit the motion in writing. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>DB6</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WENTWORTH, William Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Wentworth</name>
</talker>
<para>- I rise to order, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker.</inline> How can we debate this motion if we do not know its substance? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Order! There is no substance in the point of order. Is the honorable member for Macarthur persevering with his motion? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JOE</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BATE, Henry</name>
<name role="display">Mr JEFF BATE</name>
</talker>
<para>- Yes. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- It will be necessary for the motion to be seconded. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>DB6</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WENTWORTH, William Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Wentworth</name>
</talker>
<para>- I second the motion. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Order! The question is, " That the motion be agreed to ". </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>DB6</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WENTWORTH, William Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Wentworth</name>
</talker>
<para>- <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker,</inline> may I speak to this motion? The honorable member for Macarthur has raised the question of whether the present honorable member for Cunningham <inline font-weight="bold">(Mr. Connor)</inline> is identical- </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Order! The honorable member is out of order. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>DB6</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WENTWORTH, William Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Wentworth</name>
</talker>
<para>- I think not. Why am I out of order? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Order! The honorable member is out of order. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>DB6</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WENTWORTH, William Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Wentworth</name>
</talker>
<para>- On a point of order, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker,</inline> I submit that I am entitled to speak to the urgency or otherwise of the motion. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Order! The honorable member for Mackellar will resume his seat. I call the honorable member for Macarthur. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JOE</name.id>
<electorate>Macarthur</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BATE, Henry</name>
<name role="display">Mr JEFF BATE</name>
</talker>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">.- Mr. Speaker-</inline>
</para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I point out that the honorable member will close the debate. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>90</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JOE</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BATE, Henry</name>
<name role="display">Mr JEFF BATE</name>
</talker>
<para>- in reply - This is a matter of urgent public importance. An honorable member may use the forms of the House in any way that he can to bring forward a matter of urgent public importance. The subject which I am seeking to raise has exercised the minds of the people in Australia in such a way that it ha§ become of paramount importance. The House and the people of Australia are entitled to know the answer to the question that I am seeking to ask. I have moved that the Standing Orders be suspended so that I may ask this important question. I persevere with my motion, and 1 ask those honorable members who are concerned about the matter of Communist-Australian Labour Party unity to vote to give me the opportunity to put my question. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Order! The question is, "That the motion be agreed to". All those who are of that opinion say " Aye ", to the contrary " No ". I think the " Noes " have it. I call the honorable member for Gellibrand. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>BV8</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CALWELL, Arthur</name>
<name role="display">Mr Calwell</name>
</talker>
<para>- Now have the backbone to call a division. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JOE</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BATE, Henry</name>
<name role="display">Mr Jeff Bate</name>
</talker>
<para>- Yes. <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker,</inline> I call for a division. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Order! I have already called the honorable member for Gellibrand. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>PHARMACEUTICAL BENEFITS</title>
<page.no>91</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KRK</name.id>
<electorate>GELLIBRAND, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCIVOR, Hector</name>
<name role="display">Mr McIVOR</name>
</talker>
<para>- I preface a question to the Prime Minister by stating that in 1962-63 the cost of pharmaceutical benefits exceeded the cost of medical and hospital benefits. In view of this, in view of the fact that questions have been asked in this House and also in another place relating to the ramifications of the drug industry in Australia and in view of the fact that as a result of those questions there was an immediate drastic reduction in the prices of drugs, does the Prime Minister now consider that the necessity exists to accede to the request for a royal commission into the drug industry in Australia?. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>N76</name.id>
<electorate>KOOYONG, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Prime Minister</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MENZIES, Robert</name>
<name role="display">Sir ROBERT MENZIES</name>
</talker>
<para>- This is a matter on which I would need to have some discussion with my colleague, the Minister for Health, as I am not quite in touch with later developments. I will have a word with him and then advise the honorable member. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>FREIGHT RATES</title>
<page.no>91</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KHS</name.id>
<electorate>INDI, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HOLTEN, Rendle</name>
<name role="display">Mr HOLTEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question to the Prime Minister relates to the request of the Associated Chambers of Manufactures of Australia for an inquiry into the high freight costs in Australia. I strongly support this request because freight costs are perhaps the principal factor in increasing the cost of production in our great export industries and the cost of living in the inland areas of Australia. Will the Government, in view of the report by the chamber on the problems of freight in Australia, undertake a complete investigation of this problem, which is the major disability in the establishment of industry outside the capital cities? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>N76</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MENZIES, Robert</name>
<name role="display">Sir ROBERT MENZIES</name>
</talker>
<para>- The proposal made by the Associated Chambers of Manufactures has yet to be dealt with by the Cabinet. When it has been considered by the Cabinet I will be in a position to answer the question. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT</title>
<page.no>91</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JVU</name.id>
<electorate>NORTHERN TERRITORY, NORTHERN TERRITORY</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">NELSON, John</name>
<name role="display">Mr NELSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is directed to the Prime Minister. On Tuesday last the honorable member for Kennedy asked the Prime Minister whether the Governments of Queensland and Western Australia had placed before him proposals for the creation of a developmental authority for northern Australia, to which the right honorable gentleman replied that no such request had been received. In view of the establishment of a northern division within the Department of National Development, will the Prime Minister say what the functions of this division will be, and whether any body will be established, composed of some representatives of the new division and also representatives of the two State Governments mentioned and of the Northern Territory, to work out and implement plans for the development of that part of Australia? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>N76</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MENZIES, Robert</name>
<name role="display">Sir ROBERT MENZIES</name>
</talker>
<para>- The Administration orders which allocate to each department its functions have been published, or should have been by now. I will take steps to see that the honorable member receives them. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>TIBET</title>
<page.no>91</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>91</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>4U4</name.id>
<electorate>MORETON, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KILLEN, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr KILLEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- I address a question to the Minister for External Affairs. It relates to reports of atrocities in Tibet. Can the Minister confirm a charge made in Vienna by the brother of the exiled Dalai Lama that Communist Chinese authorities have sterilized more than 6,000 Tibetan families since 1961? If the honorable gentleman can confirm this report, can he say whether a suitable protest was made to the Communist Chinese authorities through the channels that are available? If the Minister cannot confirm the report will he please make such inquiries as may seem appropriate? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>92</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>126</name.id>
<electorate>PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for External Affairs</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BARWICK, Garfield</name>
<name role="display">Sir GARFIELD BARWICK</name>
</talker>
<para>- Neither have I seen the report nor am I able to confirm it but I shall make some appropriate inquiries. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>92</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>REPLACEMENT OF H.M.A.S. " VOYAGER</title>
<page.no>92</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>92</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JP5</name.id>
<electorate>BATMAN, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BENSON, Samuel</name>
<name role="display">Mr BENSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is directed to the Minister for Defence. It concerns naval vessel replacements and follows on the statement made by the Prime Minister to this House last Tuesday, that " Voyager " would be replaced by " Duchess " for a period of four years. Will the Minister see that an order is placed with Australian shipyards for a destroyer to be built in this country? I also ask the Minister whether high-rar.king naval officers last year recommended to the Government that Australian naval air strength be built up and that Australia should obtain an aircraft carrier? If they did, does the Government intend to implement this recommendation? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>92</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>ZL6</name.id>
<electorate>CURTIN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for Defence</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HASLUCK, Paul</name>
<name role="display">Mr HASLUCK</name>
</talker>
<para>- With regard to a replacement for " Voyager ", the position is that the question of the type of vessel or vessels required for the permanent replacement has been referred to the Chiefs of Staff Committee for examination. Until the Cabinet receives the expert opinion of the Chiefs of Staff Committee it will be impossible to express an opinion as to whether or not the permanent replacement can best be furnished by building in Australian shipyards or by acquiring from overseas. As to the other question, when the Cabinet considered the five-year defence programme it examined all aspects of the Australian defence effort and the various ways in which the interests of Australian defence could best be served. It made the decisions which were announced by the Prime Minister and my predecessor after an examination of all the alternatives. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>92</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>NAVIGATION CHARTS</title>
<page.no>92</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>92</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KWR</name.id>
<electorate>BRADFIELD, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">TURNER, Henry</name>
<name role="display">Mr TURNER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I ask the Minister for Shipping and Transport whether his attention has been drawn to the statement made by an apparently well-informed speaker at the recent symposium on defence held under the aegis of the Australian Institute of Political Science, to the effect that at the present rate of progress the charting of the Australian and New Guinea coastlines would be completed at about the middle of the next century? Is the honorable gentleman aware - I can assure him it is a fact - that merchant ships moving between Port Pirie and Hobart are compelled to use charts made by Matthew Flinders about a century and a half ago? Will the honorable gentleman infuse all his youth and energy into the administration of his new department and see whether it is possible, in collaboration with the Minister for the Navy - bearing in mind not only the length of the coastline but also the time-span of a century - to halve the estimated time for the completion of the task by getting it finished by the year 2000? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>92</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JXI</name.id>
<electorate>FORREST, WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for Shipping and Transport</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FREETH, Gordon</name>
<name role="display">Mr FREETH</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honorable gentleman is in error when he refers to a new department. It "may have a new Minister, but the department has been in existence for some time. I have not seen the statement to which the honorable member referred but I will have a look at it and also examing the question of speeding up the charting of the Australian coastline. It is a great tribute to the work of the early explorers that their charts are so accurate that they can still be used. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>92</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>THURSDAY ISLAND NAVAL INSTALLATIONS</title>
<page.no>92</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>92</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KGH</name.id>
<electorate>WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HANSEN, Brendan</name>
<name role="display">Mr HANSEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is directed to the Minister for the Navy. I ask: Why are the Navy jetty and installations at Thursday Island being scrapped? Does the Government consider that the naval installations, which are suitable for use by torpedo boats, are not required at this entrance to the Arafura Sea? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>92</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFH</name.id>
<electorate>BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister Assisting the Treasurer</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FORBES, Alexander</name>
<name role="display">Dr FORBES</name>
</talker>
<para>- I will be only too pleased to make inquiries into the matter raised by the honorable gentleman and let him have a reply as soon as possible. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>92</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>PARKES TO BROKEN HILL RAILWAY</title>
<page.no>92</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>92</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>DB6</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />