/
19670822_reps_26_hor56.xml
3812 lines (3812 loc) · 421 KB
/
19670822_reps_26_hor56.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>1967-08-22</date>
<parliament.no>26</parliament.no>
<session.no>1</session.no>
<period.no>2</period.no>
<chamber>REPS</chamber>
<page.no>259</page.no>
<proof>0</proof>
</session.header>
<chamber.xscript>
<business.start>
<day.start>1967-08-22</day.start>
<para class="block">
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr SPEAKER (Hon. W. J. Aston)</inline>took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers. </para>
</business.start>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>CAPRICORNIA ELECTORAL DIVISION</title>
<page.no>259</page.no>
<type>miscellaneous</type>
</debateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>259</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 is my intention to Issue a writ tomorrow for the election of a member to serve for the electoral division of Capricornia in the State of Queensland to fill the vacancy caused by the death of <inline font-weight="bold">Mr George</inline> Henry Gray. The dates in connection with the election will be fixed as follows: Date of nomination, Friday, 8th September 1967; date of polling, Saturday, 30th September 1967; and date of return of writ, on or before Friday, 3rd November 1967. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>PETITIONS</title>
<page.no>259</page.no>
<type>petition</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Constitution Alteration</title>
<page.no>259</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr CALDER</inline>presented a petition from certain residents and electors of the Alice Springs district in the Northern Territory praying that the Parliament give consideration to having section 128 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act amended as provided by that section to the intent that electors and residents in the Northern Territory of Australia may vote on questions brought forward in a referendum to amend the said Constitution. </para>
<para>Petition received and read. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Social Services</title>
<page.no>259</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr MINOGUE</inline>presented a petition from certain electors of the Commonwealth praying that the Government implement Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by providing increased social service and housing benefits for the aged, the invalid, the widowed and their dependants. </para>
<para>A similar petition was presented by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Bridges-Maxwell.</inline></para>
<para>Petitions severally received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Aid to Developing Countries</title>
<page.no>259</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr PETTITT</inline>presented a petition from certain citizens of Australia praying that the Australian Government set 1% of the gross national product as the target for the annual allocation of aid to the developing countries. </para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>259</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>VOYAGER' ROYAL COMMISSION</title>
<page.no>259</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>259</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr WHITLAM</name>
</talker>
<para>- 1 ask the Prime Minister a question. In the light of evidence given yesterday and last Friday before the Voyager' Royal Commission by the Secretary of the Department of the Navy regarding the loss, destruction, substitution, shelving and misplacement of documents which appear to corroborate the statement of Lieutenant-Commander Cabban and which appear to have been withheld in the debate in the House last May, has the right honourable gentleman considered the propriety of the Minister for the Navy stepping down until the Royal Commissioners make their report and it is debated in the House? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>259</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MC</name.id>
<electorate>HIGGINS, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Prime Minister</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>- The Leader of the Opposition was in touch with my office yesterday. He indicated that he would raise this matter with me and would put the very grave request to me that I should stand down one of my ministerial colleagues. I took the first opportunity this morning to discuss the matter with my colleague, the Attorney-General and other members of the Cabinet. I make this comment at the outset: Throughout this business it has been the desire of this Government, and that' includes my colleague the Minister for the Navy, to see that the House, the country and the commission of inquiry had available to them all the information which would enable a proper judgment to be given on these matters. Having discussed this matter in detail with my colleague I remain convinced that that is still the position as far as he is concerned. It was because he wanted to get this information to the Parliament and to the public that my colleague got in touch, through his Department, with those persons who had been mentioned directly or whose names could be read into the statement made by Cabban. <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Tiller</inline> was one of those persons. He was not specifically mentioned by name but it could be read into the document that he was the medical man referred to. He was contacted in London. </para>
</talk.start>
<para>I do not need to go into the matter in ali its detail because it has been fully examined by counsel in evidence in chief and in cross examination before the Royal Commission and no doubt in due course the Royal Commissioners will make their comment on these matters. The fact of the matter is that the request having been put to <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Tiller,</inline> he was asked to give a brief account. I think the word 'signalese' was used; in other words, language that could be signalled. It was a brief account. Later my colleague asked the Secretary of the Department of the Navy whether the statements, not only from <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Tiller</inline> but also from other people, could be used publicly as he thought there would be discussion on them and he wanted to be in a position to use them. When he came to confirm this through his Department with <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Tiller, Dr Tiller</inline> expressed the view that the account he had given, being necessarily brief - it had been done very hurriedly - was not a full and faithful account of what he felt and believed about these matters or what he recollected about them. He was not willing to have a statement in that form publicly disclosed. So arrangements were made for the same extracts from Cabban's letter to go to him to enable him to make a full statement on the matter. He has since made a full statement before the Royal Commission. </para>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr Landau,</inline>who was involved in these developments as Secretary of the Department of the Navy, also has made a full statement on these matters before the Royal Commission. Knowing that the Leader of the Opposition had displayed this interest in this matter and that he was likely to raise it in the House, I obtained portion of the transcript of the proceedings before the Royal Commission. It is appropriate and relevant to inform the House of a comment made by the Chairman on 21st August. It is reported at page 1712 of the transcript. The Chairman said: </para>
<quote>
<para class="block">The word destroy on its own perhaps carries with it a miasma of suspicion but to destroy something because the author is desirous of withdrawing it might be a different thing. That is why I wanted to ask you whether your understanding was that <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Tiller</inline> wanted his original comments withdrawn because he didn't feel that they exactly represented what be wanted to say? </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr Landau</inline>replied: </para>
<quote>
<para class="block">Your Honour, that is my very clear and distinct impression of the outcome of the talk with <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Tiller.</inline> The comments, the original set of comments, were destroyed in the expectation and on the' understanding that a fresh set of extracts would be sent back to London for him, and in the expectation that he would get those and study them further and complete comments on them. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">That is a very significant extract, but honourable members who want to study it in all its detail can do so through the transcript. 1 would hope that this House would be willing to await the full report and comment of the Royal Commissioners themselves. The House has, I believe, kept the matter on a high political plane and I hope that no-one will be tempted for his own political purposes to remove it from that plane. There w »l be ample opportunity to discuss all aspects when we have the report of the Royal Commissioners before us and debate on it can then ensue. In the meantime, I can say that nothing has come to my notice - 1 have probed the matter as thoroughly as I can - that would justify me in. asking my colleague to stand down. 1 repeat that I am convinced that from the outset it has been his determination to provide alf the information he can secure that would help an honest judgment of these matters. </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>260</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>CITRUS INDUSTRY</title>
<page.no>260</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>260</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KJG</name.id>
<electorate>MITCHELL, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">IRWIN, Leslie</name>
<name role="display">Mr IRWIN</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is directed to the Minister for Social Services who is acting for the Minister for Trade and Industry. Is the Minister aware that the citrus industry is facing a crisis, that a large portion of this year's crop will be dumped, that approximately 150,000 gallons of single strength juice were imported from Brazil and Italy for the year ended 30th June 1967 and that certain processors are using the importation of citrus juice as a means to keep local prices depressed? Will the Minister consider asking the Tariff Board to apply anti-dumping regulations immediately as a matter of extreme urgency? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>260</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>5E4</name.id>
<electorate>NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>CP</party>
<role>Minister Assisting the Minister for Trade and Industry</role>
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SINCLAIR, Ian</name>
<name role="display">Mr SINCLAIR</name>
</talker>
<para>- It is true that earlier this year the citrus industry made representations to the Government about the state of the industry. I understand that early in the year it seemed as though there would be some shortage of oranges, in particular, but as the season developed the production of oranges increased and at this stage appears to benormal. I understand there was a double crop of lemons and consequently there will be some surplus of production of this fruit. The processors have intimated at this stage that they will not be importing nor will they be asking to import any quantities of Oranges or lemons. They are in the normal course of business using the quantity of fruit that they would normally use. It is true that a small quantity of juice was imported earlier this year. This was orange juice and I understand it represented only a minute percentage of the total needs of the industry. Consequently, the imported juice has in no way affected the processors' demand for oranges. The honourable member asked that antidumping action be taken by the Government. The problem with dumping is that it is necessary to establish that the goods are being introduced into this country at a price that is below the cost of production in the country of origin. This means that it would be very difficult in the instance of imported citrus juice to establish that this situation existed. It is true, as the honourable member has suggested, that overseas prices have a general bearing on local prices in this industry. However, at this stage I do not think that anti-dumping action would be appropriate. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>261</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>AUSTRALIAN FORCES IN VIETNAM</title>
<page.no>261</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>261</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JO8</name.id>
<electorate>BASS, TASMANIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BARNARD, Lance</name>
<name role="display">Mr BARNARD</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is directed to the Prime Minister. Last weekend, 'Four Corners' telecast an interview with General Maxwell Taylor and <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Clark</inline> Clifford on their return to America from Australia and several other countries. Asked about the possibility of the allies sending more troops to South Vietnam, General Maxwell Taylor said: </para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para class="block">Certainly the impression I received was that they are willing and they recognise the need to do more in South Vietnam. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr Clark</inline>Clifford, discussing the present commitment of South Korea, Australia and New Zealand, said: </para>
<quote>
<para class="block">It is my opinion in each instance that they are going to increase. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">Why was this increase not announced by the Prime Minister? When does he propose to give details of the increased commitment that the Government has so clearly promised to the presidential envoys who visited Australia? </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>261</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MC</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<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>- The Government has given no undertaking of any kind to anybody in relation to this matter. What we made clear to the emissaries from President Johnson who came to see us was that we, as well as our other allies, would consider the needs of the military, civil and political situations in South Vietnam. The Government has made no decision on the matter. Indeed, we made it clear at the time that we were going through a period in which we had to assess the signifiance of the implications of the British decision to withdraw east of Suez and that we had to review our own situation in the light of the provision made in the Budget for defence, but that we would consider this matter further when the opportunity arose. I have arranged for that consideration to be given, not just in respect of Vietnam but also in respect of these other matters which 1 have mentioned. I have arranged for the Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee of Cabinet to meet at the end of this week for such further consideration as we can then give to these matters. Whether we shall be in a position to announce decisions arising from that consideration remains to be seen. But the matter is well before us and a great deal of work is being done departmentally on all these aspects that I have mentioned. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>261</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>DEFENCE FORCES RETIREMENT BENEFITS FUND</title>
<page.no>261</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>261</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KVG</name.id>
<electorate>MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">STOKES, Philip</name>
<name role="display">Mr STOKES</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question, which is addressed to the Treasurer, relates to the current quinquennial report of the Commonwealth Actuary on the Defence Forces Retirement Benefits Fund and the consequential departmental investigation of the Fund. I ask: Can the Treasurer now tell the House how far this departmental investigation has progressed and when we may expect to learn its result? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>261</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MA</name.id>
<electorate>LOWE, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Treasurer</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>- The report to which the honourable gentleman has referred is now in the hands of the Treasury officials. However, it is a very complicated document and will require not only detailed but also lengthy Treasury examination before I am able to submit concrete recommendations to the Cabinet. I am constantly pressing the officials to prepare a submission with recommendations that I can submit, but I am unable to tell the honourable gentleman at present when I shall be able to refer the matter to the Cabinet. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>262</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>FISHERIES</title>
<page.no>262</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>262</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, which is directed to the Minister for Primary Industry, concerns fishing in the Gulf of Carpentaria. I ask: Is the Minister able to inform the House whether any arrangements have been made for Japanese or other non-Australian fishermen to operate in Australian waters? Is it the Government's intention to allow fishing boats other than Australian vessels to operate out of Australian ports? Has any permission been given to Japanese or other foreign interests to catch prawns and fish in the Gulf of Carpentaria? Finally, if no arrangements of this kind have been made or concessions given, will the Government take steps to protect this industry for the benefit of Australian fishermen and fish processors, taking into consideration the fact that it is a great dollar earner? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>262</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JLR</name.id>
<electorate>FISHER, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>CP</party>
<role>Minister for Primary Industry</role>
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">ADERMANN, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr ADERMANN</name>
</talker>
<para>- No permission has been given for Japanese fishermen to fish in Australian waters. However, they or fishermen from any other nation can fish beyond the territorial limits. I announced in the House in March last that it was the intention of this Government to bring in legislation extending those limits from 3 to 12 miles. That legislation is now being drafted. We propose discussing all these aspects at a fisheries conference between myself and State Ministers in Perth on 8th September next. The honourable member asked whether we have given permission for Japanese to fish for prawns within the Gulf of Carpentaria. The answer is No; but I point out that a large area of the waters of the Gulf of Carpentaria is beyond the territorial limits and as a consequence we cannot stop people from fishing there. All these matters are under consideration and on the agenda for the forthcoming fisheries conference. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>262</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>SOCIAL SERVICES</title>
<page.no>262</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>262</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JMA</name.id>
<electorate>RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">ARMSTRONG, Adam</name>
<name role="display">Mr ARMSTRONG</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is directed to the Minister for Social Services. Can the Minister advise the nature of the extension of entitlement to pensioners and in particular the position regarding moderately retarded persons in State institutions? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>262</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>5E4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>CP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SINCLAIR, Ian</name>
<name role="display">Mr SINCLAIR</name>
</talker>
<para>- The Treasurer last week announced in the Budget Speech that the Government intended to extend the benefit of social services to moderately mentally retarded persons who are in State institutions. The intention of this extension is to provide pension benefits to those moderately retarded persons who are capable of receiving training which will enable them to return to normal life in the community. Were suitable accommodation available, many of these persons would be able to move out of State institutions and lead a normal life. Consequently, it was felt that these people should now receive social service benefits. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>262</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>CIVIL AVIATION</title>
<page.no>262</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>262</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KCI</name.id>
<electorate>EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">DEVINE, Leonard</name>
<name role="display">Mr DEVINE</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is directed to the Minister for Civil Aviation. I preface it by stating that the Minister will recall that he was asked a question last week concerning allegations about costs incurred by Trans-Australia Airlines on Viscount aircraft TVE and TVF when they were returned from Ansett-ANA. I now ask the Minister: Is it a fact that TAA spent $40,000 each on these aircraft and, except for some money spent on cabin modification, the rest of the money was spent on neglected maintenance to bring the aircraft up to the high maintenance standard required by TAA before it permits its aircraft to carry passengers? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>262</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KVR</name.id>
<electorate>DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for Civil Aviation</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SWARTZ, Reginald</name>
<name role="display">Mr SWARTZ</name>
</talker>
<para>- I can merely repeat what I said last week in answer to a question from another honourable member. The standard of maintenance which has been maintained by both operators during the leasing of the two types of aircraft had been up to the standard required by my Department. In both cases when the aircraft were returned normal maintenance was continued and the only additional expenditure at that time was the conversion of the flight deck configuration for both the Viscounts that were returned to TAA by Ansett-ANA. This applied also to the two DC6B aircraft returned from TAA to Ansett-ANA. In other words, the expenditure at that time was principally concerned with the conversion of the flight deck and was not related to maintenance, as has been suggested. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>263</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>ELECTORAL</title>
<page.no>263</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>263</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JWV</name.id>
<electorate>PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHANEY, Fred+D3309</name>
<name role="display">Mr CHANEY</name>
</talker>
<para>- I ask the Minister for the Interior whether he is in a position to give the House the timetable for the projected redistribution of seats in the House of Representatives. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>263</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>BU4</name.id>
<electorate>RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>CP</party>
<role>Minister for the Interior</role>
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">ANTHONY, Doug</name>
<name role="display">Mr ANTHONY</name>
</talker>
<para>- The Prime Minister has already announced that it is the Government's intention to hold a redistribution in the life of this Parliament. Approximately twenty months up to the point of holding an election is required to carry out a redistribution. It would take approximately nine to ten months for the Commissioners to seek evidence, prepare maps and submit them to the Parliament, and for the printing of the rolls it would take six to eight months. At a conservative estimate, therefore, about twenty months in all would be required. This being the case, it is the Government's intention to commence a redistribution within the next six months. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>263</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>HALLUCINATORY DRUGS</title>
<page.no>263</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>263</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JF7</name.id>
<electorate>FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BEAZLEY, Kim</name>
<name role="display">Mr BEAZLEY</name>
</talker>
<para>- Has the attention of the Minister for Health been directed to statements by qualified medical practitioners abroad that the hallucinatory drug known as LSD produces chromosone changes which may lead to the birth of children suffering defects similar to those found in thalidomide babies? If this matter has not been investigated will steps be taken to do so? If the statement is correct can warnings be issued? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>263</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFH</name.id>
<electorate>BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for Health</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>- My attention has not been directed to the statement referred to by the honourable member. I will be glad to consider what he has had to say and take whatever action is appropriate and necessary. I do not need to remind the honourable member that provision has been made for very strict controls on the import' of this drug and its distribution in Australia. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>263</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>SNOWY MOUNTAINS AUTHORITY</title>
<page.no>263</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>263</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JVO</name.id>
<electorate>EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MUNRO, Dugald</name>
<name role="display">Mr MUNRO</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is addressed to the Minister for National Development and has to do with the future headquarters of the Snowy Mountains Authority. As the decision has been announced to retain the hydraulic laboratory, the major contracts section and the investigation, research and design sections of the Snowy Mountains </para>
</talk.start>
<para class="block">Authority for water conservation and civil engineering works throughout Australia and overseas, does the Government consider that a permanent headquarters will be needed? If so. can the Minister now tell us whether or not the present well located headquarters will be retained at Cooma, where the investment in buildings alone is in the neighbourhood of SI 2m? </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>263</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDT</name.id>
<electorate>FARRER, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for National Development</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>- 1 am afraid that I cannot at present give the honourable member any further details about this matter. An inter-departmental committee is at present acquiring as much evidence as it can on the subject. This will be put before Cabinet and a decision will bs made, but I do not hold out to the honourable member any hope that the final decision on the future location of the headquarters of the Snowy Mountains Authority will be taken for some months. I point out to him also that the Snowy Mountains Council is another organisation which will be permanent. At present this Council has its headquarters in Cooma and is expected to remain there. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>263</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>NATIONAL LIBERATION FRONT</title>
<page.no>263</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>263</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KJO</name.id>
<electorate>HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JAMES, Albert</name>
<name role="display">Mr JAMES</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is directed to the Attorney-General. I preface it by saying that he will recall the Prime Minister telling the House last week that he had requested the Attorney-General to study the legal aspects of the contribution by Australians of money to the National Liberation Front. What action has the Attorney-General taken to investigate a donation of $10 to the National Liberation Front by one of his parliamentary colleagues in the Liberal Party? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>263</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JRN</name.id>
<electorate>PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Attorney-General</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BOWEN, Nigel</name>
<name role="display">Mr BOWEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- I have been giving consideration to the broader aspects of this problem. I can only say that if the honourable member can substantiate what he has implied in his question I will investigate the matter. No facts have been put before me that would suggest that what the honourable member implies is true. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>263</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>CHEQUES</title>
<page.no>263</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>263</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIM</name.id>
<electorate>FLINDERS, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNCH, Phillip</name>
<name role="display">Mr LYNCH</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is addressed to the Attorney-General. I refer to the fact that some one million cheques are dishonoured each year in Australia for lack of endorsement or for irregular endorsement and to the consequent need for more simple rules for cheque endorsement. Will the honourable gentleman tell the House whether this matter is being considered by the Government and whether it is the intention of the Government to implement the recommendation in the report of the Manning Committee which reviewed the Bills of Exchange Act 1909-58? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>264</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JRN</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BOWEN, Nigel</name>
<name role="display">Mr BOWEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- The question of a new Cheques Act for Australia is currently under consideration and the draft Bill which is attached as a schedule to the Committee's report has been taken as a basis. I have recently received very substantial representations on this matter. Last Monday week, I received a deputation from the Australian Bankers Association, making representations on a number of quite technical matters involved in this draft. Those representations are presently under consideration and the progress of the preparation of the Bill depends on our assessment of these matters. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>264</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>CIVIL AVIATION</title>
<page.no>264</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>264</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JWX</name.id>
<electorate></electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Jim</name>
<name role="display">Mr J R Fraser</name>
</talker>
<para>- I ask the Minister for Civil Aviation: Since he was enabled on 16th August to give a full and detailed reply to a question by the honourable member for Isaacs about the Government's rejection of proposals by British charter airlines to arrange cheap flights to and from Australia, can he explain why he has not been able to provide me with the answer he promised to the quite detailed letter on this subject that I submitted to him on 13th July? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>264</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KVR</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SWARTZ, Reginald</name>
<name role="display">Mr SWARTZ</name>
</talker>
<para>- I just cannot recall the details of the particular letter but I shall certainly see that a full reply is furnished to the honourable member at a very early date. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>264</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>OIL</title>
<page.no>264</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>264</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009OD</name.id>
<electorate>GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">NIXON, Peter</name>
<name role="display">Mr NIXON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I ask the Acting Minister for Trade and Industry whether he can inform the House whether permission is required from the Australian Government to export unrefined oil from Barrow Island to Singapore? Can he say whether there is enough refining capacity in Australia to handle this oil? Is he able to state whether it is intended that the refined products will be returned to Australia? How does this act stand in relation to Australia's expressed desire to become self-sufficient in oil? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>264</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>5E4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>CP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SINCLAIR, Ian</name>
<name role="display">Mr SINCLAIR</name>
</talker>
<para>- It is true that it is necessary for a company to gel a licence to export crude oil. lt is also true, as the honourable member has suggested, that one company has found that it is more economic in its budgeting to send oil from Barrow Island to Singapore to be refined and to bring oil from the Middle East to its own refinery in the south of Victoria. 1 understand that the difficulty lies in the fact that all the companies having a share in the disposal of the Barrow Island oil have not yet been able to secure a satisfactory price from the nearest refinery. But I am assured that, in terms of net gain and loss, there will be no addition to the amount of oil that will be required to be imported into Australia as a result of this export of crude oil to Singapore. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>264</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>NATIONAL SERVICE TRAINING</title>
<page.no>264</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>264</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KUX</name.id>
<electorate>LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">STEWART, Francis</name>
<name role="display">Mr STEWART</name>
</talker>
<para>- I ask the Prime Minister whether it is a fact that his Government,, which is prepared to spend millions of dollars a year in keeping our armed forces in Vietnam as part of the policy of 'All the way with LBJ', is not prepared to make up the salary of the few unlucky Commonwealth public servants who are conscripted to perform national service training. If so, will he assure the House that this paltry policy will be changed and so bring the Commonwealth attitude into line with the more generous attitude followed by some of the States? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>264</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MC</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<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>- Dealing with the introductory comment first, the Australian forces are in South Vietnam aiding that country to resist terrorism, subversion and the other acts of aggression either in a direct or indirect form which are levelled against it. They are also there for the greater security of South East Asia as a whole and, eventually, the security of Australia itself. On the particular point that the honourable member raises, this matter has had consideration and I shall be glad to supply the honourable member with a full statement setting out the reasons for the policy which the Commonwealth Government follows in relation to it. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>265</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>NUCLEAR TEST BAN</title>
<page.no>265</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>265</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. Since a thermo-nuclear weapon was exploded by the Communist Chinese has there been any expression of willingness on their part to join in the partial nuclear test ban treaty and in the move to restrict the proliferation of nuclear weapons? If the answer is no, can the Minister say whether any particular initiative is being taken by Western powers to modify the Communist Chinese attitude? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>265</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>ZL6</name.id>
<electorate>CURTIN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for External Affairs</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>- In answer to the honourable member, up to the present time Mainland China has certainly shown no disposition to join any other countries either regarding a nuclear test ban- </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>265</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXI</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WEBB, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Webb</name>
</talker>
<para>- The Government does not recognise Communist China. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>265</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>ZL6</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HASLUCK, Paul</name>
<name role="display">Mr HASLUCK</name>
</talker>
<para>- It is not a question between Australia and Communist China; it is between Communist China and the rest of the world, including the Soviet Union and all the other powers that are engaging in nuclear testing. Communist China has hitherto refused to join in any discussions either aimed at a nuclear test ban or at the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. Of course, this constitutes a threat and a cause of anxiety both to the other great nuclear powers of the world and to all of China's immediate neighbours. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>265</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>THE BUDGET</title>
<page.no>265</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>265</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXZ</name.id>
<electorate>SCULLIN, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PETERS, Edward</name>
<name role="display">Mr PETERS</name>
</talker>
<para>- I desire to ask the Treasurer a question. During the weekend he was particularly emphatic that the present Budget is a Budget for investors and, above all, for businessmen. As he has previously stated that business and economic growth in the community during the last twelve months has been greater than ever before in Australia's history, and as many investors are receiving 10% or more for their money, does he claim that their plight now is more serious than the plight of the average worker and the age pensioner? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>265</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MA</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<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>- <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker,</inline> it would have been wise for the honourable gentleman to listen attentively and to have placed what I said i.i context. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>265</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXZ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PETERS, Edward</name>
<name role="display">Mr Peters</name>
</talker>
<para>- I listened to it. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>265</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>- Then the honourable member did not understand. What T did say was that the major objective in this Budget was to ensure that our productive capacity continued to increase. If the honourable member will read my speech he will see that what I said was not that our performance last year had been greater than that of any other year in our history but that it had been at least up to the best performances of recent years. I believe that we have remarkable opportunities for expansion in Australia today. The opportunities are there and the Government has done nothing to impede the private sector of the community in taking advantage of them. I am glad the honourable member has given me the chance to repeat this. I said that if businessmen were aware of the opportunities and grasped them they would make certain that production this year was at least as good as it was last year, and that is the context in which I made my statement on Sunday night. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>265</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>POST OFFICE DISPUTE</title>
<page.no>265</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>265</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KCQ</name.id>
<electorate>NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GRAHAM, Bruce</name>
<name role="display">Mr GRAHAM</name>
</talker>
<para>- *I address my question to the Minister for Labour and National Service. Has the Minister been advised formally and officially of a work to regulations strike in Sydney post offices over the five-day week dispute? Can the Minister say whether this action represents a deliberate defiance of the Government's decision that the public should continue to have on Saturdays the Post Office services that they require? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>265</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JTP</name.id>
<electorate>WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>