Permalink
Switch branches/tags
Nothing to show
Find file Copy path
Fetching contributors…
Cannot retrieve contributors at this time
8977 lines (8976 sloc) 750 KB
<?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>1976-09-23</date>
<parliament.no>30</parliament.no>
<session.no>1</session.no>
<period.no>2</period.no>
<chamber>REPS</chamber>
<page.no>1351</page.no>
<proof>0</proof>
</session.header>
<chamber.xscript>
<business.start>
<day.start>1976-09-23</day.start>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr SPEAKER</inline>(Rt Hon. B. M. Snedden, Q.C.) took the chair at 10.30 a.m., and read prayers. </para>
</business.start>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>PETITIONS</title>
<page.no>1351</page.no>
<type>petition</type>
</debateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1351</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">CLERK, The</name>
<name role="display">The Clerk</name>
</talker>
<para>- Petitions have been lodged for presentation as follows and copies will be referred to the appropriate Ministers: </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Tasmanian Shipping Service</title>
<page.no>1351</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in the Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned respectfully showeth: </para>
<para>That the decision to withdraw the <inline font-style="italic">Australian Trader</inline> from the Tasmanian service: </para>
<list type="loweralpha">
<item label="(a)">
<para>is a great injustice to the State of Tasmania </para>
</item>
<item label="(b)">
<para>has delivered a severe blow to the Tasmanian Tourist Industry </para>
</item>
<item label="(c)">
<para>caused grave concern that this is the commencement of the dismantling of the Australian National Line. </para>
</item>
</list>
<para class="block">Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled will move to restore <inline font-style="italic">the Australian Traderto</inline> the Tasmanian service. </para>
<para class="block">And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Les</inline> McMahon, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Martin, Mr Morris</inline> and <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Antony</inline> Whitlam. </para>
<para>Petitions received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Australian Assistance Plan</title>
<page.no>1351</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: </para>
<para>That since the Australian Assistance Plan is making it possible for citizens to help themselves, thereby ensuring best possible use of limited Government resources, as shown by the fact that over 200 community projects have been initiated or funded through the AAP in the Outer Eastern Region </para>
<para>Your petitioners most humbly pray that the House of Representatives in Parliament will take immediate steps to continue the Australian Assistance Plan as recommended in the Report tabled by the Honourable the Minister for Social Security, <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Margaret</inline> Guilfoyle in Parliament on 4 March 1976 and your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Jarman</inline> and <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Jenkins.</inline></para>
<para>Petitions received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Australian Assistance Plan</title>
<page.no>1351</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the Speaker and the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. </para>
<para>The petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth that many Australians are concerned about the future of the Australian Assistance Plan. </para>
<para>We your petitioners do therefore humbly pray that the Commonwealth Government support the Australian Assistance Plan: </para>
<para>We believe the Australian Assistance Plan should continue because we believe the Australian Assistance Plan helps to make people self reliant and more aware of what they can do to help themselves. In this it is anti-bureaucratic and contrary to the idea of the welfare state which encourages dependence on Government. </para>
<para>We believe the Australian Assistance Plan should continue in such a way as to give all citizens the opportunity to participate through a Regional Council for Social Development in their region. </para>
<para>We believe the idea encompassed in the Australian Assistance Plan is an effective way for citizens to work cooperatively with all levels of Government. </para>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Les</inline> McMahon. </para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Australian Broadcasting Commission</title>
<page.no>1351</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. We, the undersigned citizens of the Commonwealth do humbly pray that the Commonwealth Government: </para>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>Subscribe to the view that the Australian Broadcasting Commission belongs to the people and not to the government of the day whatever political party. </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>Eschew all means, direct or indirect, of diminishing the independence of the Australian Broadcasting Commission. </para>
</item>
<item label="3.">
<para>Reject all proposals for the introduction of advertising into A.B.C. programmes. </para>
</item>
<item label="4.">
<para>Develop methods for publicly funding the Commission which will prevent the granting or withholding of funds being used as a method ofdiminishing its independence. </para>
</item>
<item label="5.">
<para>Ensure that any general enquiries into broadcasting in Australia which may seem desirable from time to time shall be conducted publicly and that strong representation of the public shall be included within the body conducting the enquiry. </para>
</item>
</list>
<para class="block">And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Klugman, Mr Morris</inline> and <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Antony</inline> Whitlam. </para>
<para>Petitions received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Medibank</title>
<page.no>1351</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. We the undersigned, citizens of the Commonwealth by this our humble petition respectfully showeth: </para>
<para>That Medibank has proved to be the cheapest and most efficient means of bringing health care to Australian citizens and that the citizens of Australia have received Medibank as a great and valued social reform. </para>
<para>That Medibank has proved itself to be a far superior system of health care than was offered by the private funds prior to July 1975. </para>
<para>Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Government will observe the promise made by the Prime Minister in his policy speech that &#39;We will maintain Medibank and ensure the standard of health care does not decline&#39;. </para>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Cass</inline> and <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Keith</inline> Johnson. </para>
<para>Petitions received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Milk Substitutes</title>
<page.no>1352</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. We, the undersigned citizens of the Commonwealth of Australia by this our humble petition respectfully showeth: </para>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>That reduction of the age limit from six years to eighteen months for patients eligible to receive cows&#39; milk substitutes as a pharmaceutical benefit under the schedules of the National Health Act will cause serious financial hardship to many families; </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>That children allergic to cows&#39; milk and other dairy products who often include asthmatics and sufferers of respiratory complaints depend on Soya Bean milk such as Isomil or Prosobee as a main source of protein; </para>
</item>
<item label="3.">
<para>That the Government&#39;s action is responsible for a 100 per cent increase in the cost of milk substitutes frequently involving parents in expenditure of $10 per week to sustain desirable protein intake for an affected child; </para>
</item>
<item label="4.">
<para>That there is an urgent, humane need to restore milk substitutes to children up to six years of age to the schedule of Pharmaceutical Benefits. </para>
</item>
</list>
<para>Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that milk substitutes be restored to the schedule of Pharmaceutical Benefits for children up to the age of six years as soon as possible. </para>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr James</inline> and <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Jenkins.</inline></para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Chiropractic Services</title>
<page.no>1352</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned electors of the Commonwealth respectfully showeth: </para>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>Whereas the West Australian State Government has seen fit to register Chiropractors licensed under the provisions of the Chiropractors Act, 1964. This unique and specific branch of the healing arts is utilised by an everincreasing cross section of the public who can neither gain compensation nor make claim for expenses so incurred under existing Income Tax provisions. </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>Whereas your petitioners respectfully request that action be taken to provide legislation to cover both of these matters in the States or Territories where Chiropractic is recognised by the administrative powers. </para>
</item>
<item label="3.">
<para>Whereas your petitioners respectfully request considertion be given to: </para>
<list type="loweralpha">
<item label="(a)">
<para>Adequate cover by Federal Health Insurance schemes. </para>
</item>
<item label="(b)">
<para>That fees payable to a Chiropractor, qualified under States or Territories Chiropractic registration acts, be made a full tax deductible item. </para>
</item>
</list>
</item>
</list>
<para>Both of the above being without prerequisite of referral by a medical practitioner. </para>
<para class="block">Therefore your petitioners pray your honourable House to legislate accommodation of these matters under the provisions of Federal law. </para>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Sinclair.</inline></para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Aurukun Community: Mining</title>
<page.no>1352</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the Honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: </para>
<para>Whereas the Aurukun Associates Agreement Act was passed in contravention of a 1968 agreement; </para>
<para>Whereas this Act conflicts seriously with Commonwealth Government policy on Aboriginal Affairs and on Australian equity in multinational corporations working in Australia; </para>
<para>Your petitioners therefore note with appreciation the statements already made on the matter by Government members but humbly pray that the Commonwealth Government will also: </para>
<list type="loweralpha">
<item label="(a)">
<para>initiate a Commission of Inquiry into the whole matter </para>
</item>
<item label="(b)">
<para>insist that no mining take place on the Aurukun Aboriginal Reserve until a full environmental impact study has been made by the Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Housing and Community Development </para>
</item>
<item label="(c)">
<para>refuse to grant an export licence to the consortium until detailed negotiations are held at Aurukun by consortium representatives with the Aurukun people, the traditional owners of the land and advisers of their choice, and an agreement satisfactory to all has been reached. </para>
</item>
</list>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Staley.</inline></para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Medibank</title>
<page.no>1352</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the Honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: The humble petition of the undersigned members of the Hospital Employees Federation respectfully showeth: </para>
<para>That we wish to protest about the Government&#39;s decision to change the Medibank system. In the interests of the community we have not taken industrial action but nevertheless we support the actions of the ACTU. </para>
<para>Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the House urge the Government not to change the Medibank scheme and to set the levy at 1 . 6 per cent of income. </para>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Bourchier.</inline></para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Income Tax: Land and Water Rates</title>
<page.no>1352</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the Honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: </para>
<para>That the undersigned persons believe that- </para>
<para>The S300 limit on income tax deductibility in respect of personal residential land and water rates is unrealistic and is a discriminatory income tax penalty. </para>
<para>Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Government will take steps to see that the aforesaid limitation is removed entirely or substantially increased. </para>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Connolly.</inline></para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Mr Ignazio Salemi</title>
<page.no>1353</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>To the Honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: </para>
<para>That whereas an amnesty was announced for all illegal migrants and that whereas <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Ignazio</inline> Salemi an applicant for amnesty has been denied amnesty. </para>
<para>Your petitioners humbly pray that the members in the House assembled, will take the most urgent steps to ensure: That as <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Salemi</inline> fulfils all the publicly announced criteria for amnesty he is permitted to remain in Australia as a resident. </para>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Innes.</inline></para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Tropical Fish</title>
<page.no>1353</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the Victorian Aquarium Traders Association respectfully showeth: </para>
<para>We are opposed to the recommendation of the Advisory Committee on Imports of Live Aquarium Fish regarding the proposed ban on goldfish and tropical marines and the limitation of importing tropical fish species below those already allowed. </para>
<para>Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the House urge the Government not to further ban the import of tropical fish. </para>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Jarman.</inline></para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Uranium</title>
<page.no>1353</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: </para>
<para>That whereas uranium found in vast quantities in Australia is the raw material for the nuclear fission reaction, </para>
<para>And whereas presently assured reserves of uranium in Australia represent a potential production of over540 000 kilograms of Plutonium 239 if utilised in light water reactors overseas, </para>
<para>And whereas the maximum permissible inhalation of Plutonium 239 is 0.000 000 25 gram, </para>
<para>And whereas Plutonium 239 is one of the most dangerous substances human society has ever created, causing mutations and cancers, </para>
<para>And whereas there are no methods of safely and absolutely confining Plutonium from the biosphere for the requisite quarter of a million years, </para>
<para>And whereas Plutonium coming in contact with the air forms an aerosol cloud of micron-sized particles, its most dangerous form, </para>
<para>And whereas the export of uranium may return to us an import of Plutonium particles dispersed in the global environment via the circulation of the atmosphere, </para>
<para>And whereas there are no sure safeguards against the military use of nuclear fission, and the nuclear proliferation represents a prime environmental threat to all forms of life on the only earth available to us, </para>
<para>And that it is therefore an act of self-preservation to demand a halt to all exports of uranium except for bio-medical uses. </para>
<para>Your petitioners humbly pray that the members, in the House assembled, will take the most urgent steps to ensure: </para>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>That further mining and export of uranium from Australia except for bio-medical purposes be banned, </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>That the Australian Atomic Energy Commission be transformed by the rewriting of its charter into an Australian Energy Commission to further the understanding of energy flows through our society and to promote nationalecomomic independence and self-sufficiency. </para>
</item>
</list>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Jarman.</inline></para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Medibank</title>
<page.no>1353</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: </para>
<para>That the decision of the Government to introduce a 2.5 per cent levy on incomes to finance Medibank and to offer private health insurance as an alternative to Medibank. </para>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>Constitutes a repudiation of an election promise to retain Medibank. </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>Will place an unjust financial burden upon low and middle income earners. </para>
</item>
<item label="3.">
<para>Will force many people out of Medibank and create a double standard of health care in Australia. </para>
</item>
<item label="4.">
<para>Will destroy the principle of a comprehensive compulsory health insurance scheme for all Australians. </para>
</item>
</list>
<para>Your petitioners call upon the Australian Government: </para>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>To strengthen and extend the principles of Medibank as a comprehensive compulsory health insurance scheme covering all Australians, from General Revenue. </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>Provide equitable health care for all members of Australian society. </para>
</item>
</list>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Jenkins.</inline></para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Shipbuilding Industry</title>
<page.no>1353</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens respectfully showeth: </para>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>That a viable shipbuilding industry, we believe, has to be retained in the national interest. </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>That the Australian Government instead of destroying our shipbuilding industry should assist the industry by bringing the technology of the present yards up to date. </para>
</item>
<item label="3.">
<para>That Australia&#39;s defence capacity is partially related to our industrial strength, particularly our ability to build and repair ships. </para>
</item>
<item label="4.">
<para>That shipbuilding and repairs play a vital role in the economic stability of Newcastle and Whyalla. </para>
</item>
<item label="5.">
<para>Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Government place immediate orders with the Australian shipbuilding industry. </para>
</item>
</list>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Klugman.</inline></para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Thalidomide Foundation</title>
<page.no>1354</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives, in Parliament assembled. We, the undersigned citizens of the Commonwealth do humbly pray that the Commonwealth Government; </para>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>Honour the undertaking of the previous Government with regard to taxation of the monies due to the Thalidomide Foundation Limited, and the income therefrom. </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>That this action be taken with the utmost dispatch. </para>
</item>
</list>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Les</inline> McMahon. </para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
<para class="block">Dockyards at Newcastle </para>
<para class="block">To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Newcastle respectfully showeth: </para>
<para>That shipbuilding and repairs play a vital role in the economic stability of the Newcastle region. </para>
<para>That a recent study by the Hunter Valley Research Foundation showed that50 000 people were partially or wholly maintained by the State Dockyard. </para>
<para>That stability is at present in jeopardy, as a new ship order is required within the next few weeks if serious unemployment and hardship is to be avoided. </para>
<para>That the previous Government&#39;s plan for the building of a graving dock in Newcastle should be continued as proper ship repair facilities are a vital factor in the maintenance of a viable shipbuilding industry. </para>
<para>That the Government&#39;s election pledge to restore business and employment can be implemented in Newcastle if new orders and a graving dock are granted. </para>
<para>Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Government place immediate orders with the Newcastle State Dockyard and implement the previous Government&#39;s plan to build a graving dock in Newcastle. </para>
<para>And your petitioners as in d uty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Morris.</inline></para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Budget 1976-77</title>
<page.no>1354</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the Honourable Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth that; the Budget will increase unemployment to unprecedented and crisis proportions at a time when hundreds of thousands of Australians, especially school-leavers, young workers and apprentices, are without work; the Budget completes the dismantling of Medibank as a simple, effective universal health insurance scheme, providing basic coverage for the total community; the Budget, by its heavy cuts in urban and transport programs, will worsen the quality of life available to many Australians; the Budget will compel State governments to reduce their services and increase charges; the Budget reduces spending on Aboriginal affairs by 30 per cent and returns expenditure on Aborigines to pre- 1972 days; the Budget seriously disadvantages migrant groups, most notably in employment and health, and leaves room for concern over the future of ethnic radio; the Budget, despite the Government&#39;s earlier rhetoric about defence threats to Australia, continues to hold the size of the armed services at present levels; and the Budget, despite all the above, still cannot be expected to reduce Australia&#39;s annual inflation rate below twelve per cent. Your petitioners therefore humble pray that the 1976 Budget be redrafted to provide for economic recovery within the guide-lines laid down by the Australian Labor Government&#39;s 1975 Budget. </para>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Morris.</inline></para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Governor-General</title>
<page.no>1354</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para class="block">To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: </para>
<para>That, although we accept the verdict of the Australian people in the 1975 election, we do not accept the right of a Governor-General to dismiss a Prime Minister who maintains the confidence of the House of Representatives. </para>
<para>We believe that the continued presence of <inline font-weight="bold">Sir John</inline> Kerr as Governor-General is a cause of division among the Australian people. </para>
<para>Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that your honourable House will call on <inline font-weight="bold">Sir John</inline> Kerr to resign as Australian Governor-General. </para>
<para>And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Wallis.</inline></para>
<para>Petition received. </para>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>NOTICES OF MOTION</title>
<page.no>1354</page.no>
<type>miscellaneous</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Unemployment</title>
<page.no>1354</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1354</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>L1V</name.id>
<electorate>Holt</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">YATES, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr YATES</name>
</talker>
<para>-I give notice that on General Business Thursday No. 9,I shall move: </para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>That this House recalls with regret that those who became unemployed between 1972 and 1975 rose from 136 769 to 328 705, and believes that the Labor Government stands condemned for failing to provide special help for the young school leaver; but now notes with approval that the Liberal Government has taken the initiatives and has extended the National Employment and Training scheme, offered special help for in-plant training, as well as a relocation allowance for those moving to a new job, and therefore expresses its confidence in these policies and those contained in the Budget; and therefore expects there will be a reduction in the numbers of those unemployed during the course of 1977, as well as a general reduction in direct and indirect taxation on the people. </para>
</quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Governor-General</title>
<page.no>1354</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1354</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>DB6</name.id>
<electorate>Mackellar</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 give notice that on the next day of sitting I shall move: </para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>That in the opinion of this House the proper adviser of the Governor-General in relation to the discharge of his duties under section 56 of the Constitution insofar as they relate to the appropriation of revenue or moneys for the services of this House is not a Minister but <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker.</inline></para>
<para>That <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker</inline> should wait upon the Governor-General to acquaint him with this resolution. </para>
</quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1355</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
<page.no>1355</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1355</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>UNEMPLOYMENT</title>
<page.no>1355</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1355</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>- I ask the Acting Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations a question. Will the Minister confirm, reject or correct the confident assertion made by a former Liberal Minister for Labour, Treasurer and Prime Minister that by February next it is expected that registered unemployment will be more that 375 000? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1355</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>ZD4</name.id>
<electorate>BENNELONG, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HOWARD, John</name>
<name role="display">Mr HOWARD</name>
</talker>
<para>- In replying to the Leader of the Opposition I shall confirm in very emphatic terms the strategy for economic recovery outlined in the Budget introduced by the Treasurer in August. The Government believes that the long term solution of Australia&#39;s unemployment problems is increased revival of economic activity, particularly in the private sector. We recognise that this is the solution in the long term to the unemployment situation. We recognise that there are within the unemployment problem certain special areas of disadvantage, such as those alluded to in the initiatives announced by the Government yesterday. We believe that they deserve special treatment. We are giving them special treatment. But in the long run there is no avoiding the fact that we will not have revived employment prospects in this country unless the private sector is able to make profits and unless there are incentives to invest. I am very pleased to mention to the House, as all honourable gentlemen would be aware, the announcement of the $600m investment project in Western Australia, which shows that investment is on the move again in Australia as a result of the conditions of confidence created by the responsible economic management that this Government has brought to the affairs of the country. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1355</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>EMPLOYMENT OF SCHOOL LEAVERS</title>
<page.no>1355</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1355</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>LLN</name.id>
<electorate>BEROWRA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">EDWARDS, Harold Raymond</name>
<name role="display">Dr EDWARDS</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is addressed to the Prime Minister. What steps will the Government take to publicise the Government&#39;s important proposal for a significant subsidy to employers to take on and train unemployed school leavers as part of the National Employment and Training scheme and thus encourage employers to avail themselves of it? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1355</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate>WANNON, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Prime Minister</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>-The Government, as the Acting Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations has indicated, has taken a considerable initiative in assisting those who left school at the end of last year and who, unfortunately, are still without jobs. But it depends, of course, upon the co-operation of employers. The Government urges employers, especially larger employers who have a greater capacity and therefore a greater responsibility, to take advantage of the Government proposal. It urges them actively to seek additional employees and take advantage of the subsidies they will thereby get. I think it needs to be emphasised that it is not only Government that must play its role in the private enterprise system. Employers, management and business also have a responsible role to play. They can work constructively in partnership with the Government and assist many school leavers from last year by taking advantage of the Government&#39;s new policy. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1355</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>SHIPBUILDING INDUSTRY</title>
<page.no>1355</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1355</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>EE4</name.id>
<electorate>REID, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">UREN, Tom</name>
<name role="display">Mr UREN</name>
</talker>
<para>-The Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs will be aware that the Industries Assistance Commission in its report on shipbuilding admits it is recommending the sacking of 26 per cent of the work force of Whyalla and 2.5 per cent of the work force of Newcastle. It further admits there are no alternative jobs in either region, especially for young apprentices. I ask the Minister what measures the Government will take to maintain the economies of these 2 important decentralised regions. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1355</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>ZD4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HOWARD, John</name>
<name role="display">Mr HOWARD</name>
</talker>
<para>-The Prime Minister indicated yesterday the timetable, in general terms, for the Government&#39;s consideration of the recommendations of the Industries Assistance Commission. The honourable gentleman will be aware that we await a submission from the Australian Council of Trade Unions on the subject. I understand, as a result of a discussion with the President of the ACTU yesterday, that that submission will in fact be delivered to the Government shortly. In the light of that submission and any further submission that the governments of New South Wales and South Australia care to make on the subject the Government will take decisions. I do not intend to speculate about those decisions or to anticipate those decisions in answer to questions similar to that asked by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. Naturally the Government will take into account the social and employment consequences related to the shipbuilding industry. It was because of that that the Government included in the reference to the Industries Assistance Commission a specific injunction that the Commission in its report deal with the locational and employment consequences. All those matters will be taken into account when the Government makes its decision. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>MOUNT ISA-WESTERN AUSTRALIA RAIL LINK</title>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>00ATA</name.id>
<electorate>PETRIE, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HODGES, John</name>
<name role="display">Mr HODGES</name>
</talker>
<para>-My question is directed to the Prime Minister. Recent reports attributed to Queensland Premier Bjelke-Petersen and Western Australian mining magnate Lang Hancock outline proposals for a rail link from Mount Isa to Western Australia. As such a rail link would traverse Commonwealth territory, has the Government been informed officially of the proposal? If so, have any detailed discussions taken place with the Government and has any request been made for the Commonwealth Government&#39;s financial participation in the scheme? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>-This is an interesting proposal. I have heard reports about it. I know that Lang Hancock has visited the Premier of Queensland on a number of occasions at his farm, and I understand they both went overseas together for certain purposes. I am not aware of those particular purposes. We have not been informed officially of this proposal. As the honourable gentleman pointed out, the railway would have to go through Commonwealth territory and therefore the Commonwealth clearly would have an interest in it. But no basis for the proposal or supporting arguments have been put to us. We really know nothing about it. I would be slightly sceptical whether the proposal would stand a cost-benefit analysis. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>EAST TIMOR</title>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JAG</name.id>
<electorate>MELBOURNE PORTS, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CREAN, Frank</name>
<name role="display">Mr CREAN</name>
</talker>
<para>- I address a question to the Prime Minister. Is it a fact that the Foreign Minister visited Jakarta in April 1976? During that visit did he hold discussions with the Foreign Minister of Indonesia, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Malik?</inline> Will the Prime Minister confirm, as <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Malik</inline> has now stated publicly, that the Foreign Minister told <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Malik</inline> that the Australian Government understands that East Timor should be incorporated into Indonesia? Finally, is that the basis on which the Prime Minister&#39;s talks will be held in Indonesia in October? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>-The Foreign Minister&#39;s visits to Indonesia are on public record, and the honourable gentleman can determine the dates for himself by looking up that public record. There has been no secret about it. The Foreign Minister has had discussions with Indonesian leaders on more than one occasion throughout the course of this year. He has stated the views and the policy of this Government in clear and unequivocal terms. He has not sought to depict to Indonesia a different policy internally, as the present Leader of the Opposition did on an earlier occasion. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">-Mr Speaker,</inline>I find that reference offensive and I ask that it be withdrawn. It is inaccurate, and the right honourable gentleman should know it. It is offensive and I ask that it be withdrawn. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</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 may be offensive in the sense that the honourable gentleman protests the accuracy of it but it is not unparliamentary and therefore would not be required to be withdrawn. If the honourable gentleman wishes to make a personal explanation after question time then I shall call him. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>- That is not good enough, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker.</inline> I put it to you seriously that the Prime Minister has volunteered a reflection. It was an inaccuracy and it was not required in any sense by the question that was asked. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>EE4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">UREN, Tom</name>
<name role="display">Mr Uren</name>
</talker>
<para>- It is untrue. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>- Moreover it is untrue. It is no satisfactory solution to say that if reflections are cast during question time a member can always make an explanation afterwards. That just protracts and disrupts the proceedings of the House. This situation would not happen if Ministers were to confine their answers to the relevant matters. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>5E4</name.id>
<electorate />
<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>- I rise on a point of order, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker.</inline></para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</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 point of order. I ask the Leader of the House to resume his seat. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>5E4</name.id>
<electorate />
<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>- I am raising a point of order, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker.</inline></para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</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 call the Leader of the House. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>5E4</name.id>
<electorate />
<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>- There is a procedure whereby a personal explanation can be made at the conclusion of question time. I suggest that the Leader of the Opposition is abusing the liberties of this House by intruding in the way he is and in seeking a withdrawal of the statement made by the Prime Minister. I suggest that a personal explanation is the correct procedure, and I therefore ask that the Leader of the Opposition be requested to make his personal explanation at the appropriate time and in the appropriate place in the procedures. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1356</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 am not prepared to allow this matter to proceed any further. I have ruled that what the Prime Minister said was not in terms which I would require to be withdrawn. I will give the Leader of the Opposition adequate opportunity to make it clear by way of personal explanation that he contests the accuracy of the statement. It is not practicable in any circumstances for the Chair continually to make judgments as to whether a statement is true or untrue. Therefore the Chair cannot enter into the matter. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1357</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">- Mr Speaker,</inline>I submit that it is possible for you to determine whether something is offensive or disorderly. I quote standing order 76: </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<quote>
<para class="block">AU imputations of improper motives . . . shall be considered highly disorderly. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">The Prime Minister deliberately and voluntarily made an imputation of an improper motive against me and I think it should be withdrawn. It is disorderly. </para>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1357</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>-According to the way I heard the Prime Minister, he indicated that on an earlier occasion the Leader of the Opposition had stated 2 aspects of policy, one for internal consumption and one for external consumption. As I understood it, that was the meat of what the Prime Minister alleged against the Leader of the Opposition, who found it offensive. I am saying to the Leader of the Opposition that if he contests the truth of that statement he can do so by way of personal explanation. I might point out that the question asked of the Prime Minister contained exactly the same imputation and the response by the Prime Minister was that the implication in the question was not true. In a political sense, he turned the barb the other way and responded. This House is a place in which politics actually do occur. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1357</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>MEDIBANK</title>
<page.no>1357</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1357</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>CI4</name.id>
<electorate>WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MILLAR, Clarrie</name>
<name role="display">Mr MILLAR</name>
</talker>
<para>- I direct my question to the Minister for Health. Is it a fact that under the new health insurance arrangements a wife who has sufficient income to prevent her husband from claiming any tax rebate but insufficient income to make her subject to the Medibank levy will not be entitled to Medibank benefits? Is it also true that under the tax rules a husband who cannot claim his wife as a dependant is forced to pay health insurance for her if he takes out private insurance? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1357</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>GH4</name.id>
<electorate>GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>NCP/NP</party>
<role>Minister for Health</role>
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HUNT, Ralph</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUNT</name>
</talker>
<para>- The first thing I want to make clear to the honourable member for Wide Bay, and to the House, is that universal insurance will remain after 1 October so that every person in Australia will be covered by one means or another for medical and hospital care. The Government has taken decisions to modify Medibank because of the very high incidence of increases in health costs in this country. We anticipate that health costs in Australia in this year will be of the order of $5,400m. Quite clearly the health costs in this country have to be paid for by the community by one means or another- either by taxation or by distributing the costs by some means. The modifications to Medibank, as I said earlier, have retained the universal insurance concept but they have spread the costs, in our view, in a more equitable manner. Pensioners and people on the lowest incomes will be able to receive standard Medibank benefits free of any cost to them, and the chronically ill people who privately insure will benefit from the $50m subsidy that we have made available to health insurance. </para>
</talk.start>
<para>Under our proposals, estimated hospital and medical benefit costs in Australia are expected to be $3, 320m, and it is expected that the cost will be met in the following manner: Firstly, Consolidated Revenue will provide $1,1 20m, the States will meet about $840m by way of contributing towards hospital costs, and those people who we anticipate will privately insure will, through their premiums, contribute about $985m, whilst levy payers will contribute about $375m. That means that people who pay the levy will on average be contributing about 1 8 per cent towards meeting the total health care cost in that group. Those who pay the levy and take out private insurance for hospital cover only will be contributing about 40 per cent towards the cost of their health care, whilst those in the higher income level who might choose to insure privately for medical and hospital cover, with the right to choose their own doctor, will be meeting somewhere near 70 per cent of their total health care costs. I give that information as an introduction to the other matters to which the honourable member has referred. </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1357</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 suggest to the Minister that if what he has said up to now is an introduction to his answer then the answer is going to take the Minister an immense amount of time and will thus reduce the opportunity for further questions. </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1357</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>GH4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HUNT, Ralph</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUNT</name>
</talker>
<para>- The Government has decided to use the family situation in applying a ceiling levy amount payable in an effort to protect family incomes from excessive levy payments. That applies to those people who choose to pay the 2.5 per cent levy. The Government has also decided that exemption from the levy will be available in the family situation only if the whole family is privately insured for medical cover. The honourable member puts the case of a married couple where the wife&#39;s income debars her husband from receiving a tax rebate for her but is not enough to bring her within the levy provisions; the husband insures himself privately but not his wife. The consequence is that he must pay the levy as a family man. It is said that his action infringes his wife&#39;s right to free Medibank treatment. If she were single earning the same income, standard Medibank for her would be free. The intention of the legislation is that for a family - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>EV4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">YOUNG, Mick</name>
<name role="display">Mr Young</name>
</talker>
<para>- I rise to order. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</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 Minister for Health will resume his seat. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>EV4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">YOUNG, Mick</name>
<name role="display">Mr Young</name>
</talker>
<para>- My point of order is that if it takes the Minister for Health so much time explaining the health scheme - </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</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 point of order. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>EV4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">YOUNG, Mick</name>
<name role="display">Mr Young</name>
</talker>
<para>- He ought to defer the introduction of Medibank. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</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! If the honourable member for Port Adelaide persists in continuing to speak after I ask him to resume his seat, I will have to deal with him. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>EE4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">UREN, Tom</name>
<name role="display">Mr Uren</name>
</talker>
<para>- My point of order is that the Minister is disobeying a direction from the Chair. You have already indicated to the Minister that his reply is too long and he is continuing to disobey your ruling. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</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 call on the Minister for Health. I draw his attention to the fact that the purpose of question time is not for the making of a ministerial statement. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>GH4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HUNT, Ralph</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUNT</name>
</talker>
<para>- In fairness to the House and to the honourable member for Wide Bay I must conclude by answering the point that he raised in his question. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JSU</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRYANT, Gordon</name>
<name role="display">Mr Bryant</name>
</talker>
<para>- I rise on a point of order. I put the point that the Minister has admitted that his answer has been out of order because he has been speaking not relevantly to the question and is only now going to address himself to the point. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</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>-There is no point of order. The honourable gentleman will resume his seat. The Minister has been relevant at all times. He has not, however, answered the question as yet. I hope he will do so forthwith. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>GH4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HUNT, Ralph</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUNT</name>
</talker>
<para>- In answer to the question, the intention of the legislation is that for a family person to be exempt from levy and outside standard Medibank, the whole family must be privately insured. So a man who takes out basic private cover for himself but not for his wife, whatever the level of her income, and not for his children if he has any, has to pay the levy. It seems appropriate in this context that there be such a family rule. On the other side of the coin, a wife who has a more substantial income may, unlike a single woman, with the same income - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</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 ask the Minister to conclude. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>GH4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HUNT, Ralph</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUNT</name>
</talker>
<para>-be free from the levy. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>MEDIBANK LEVY EXEMPTION</title>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>- I refer to the Medibank question asked of the Treasurer yesterday by the honourable member for Scullin, to which the Treasurer answered: &#39;If honourable gentlemen do not wish to listen, I will put the answer in writing. &#39; Since he has not sent the letter and has, in fact, changed the <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> I ask him - </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</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! Perhaps I did not hear correctly what the honourable gentleman said. </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>- I said: Since the Treasurer has not sent the letter he promised, and has, in fact, changed the <inline font-style="italic">Hansard -</inline></para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</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>-That is a statement which I would require the honourable gentleman to withdraw. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>- Will you let me substantiate it? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</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 will not allow you to do it at question time. I ask you to withdraw. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>-And substantiate it afterwards? </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</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>- Proceed with the question without the allegation. Afterwards, I would be very glad if you would make such substantiation as you choose. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1358</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>- I will do that immediately I can get your attention. I ask the Treasurer why the Medibank levy exemption forms make provision for exemption from the Medibank levy for a working wife whose husband purchases private health insurance at the family rate but make no provision for exemption from the levy if her husband pays the Medibank levy at the family rate. Is it a fact that where a working wife&#39;s income is too great for her husband to claim her as a dependant, but too small to make her subject to the Medibank levy, he is forced to pay health insurance for her as if she were a dependant? Will the Treasurer suggest to the Commissioner of Taxation that the levy exemption forms be amended to remove anomalies which are causing distress and confusion to tens of thousands of working wives. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1359</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIM</name.id>
<electorate>FLINDERS, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Treasurer</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNCH, Phillip</name>
<name role="display">Mr LYNCH</name>
</talker>
<para>- This matter was subject to a detailed letter which I sent to the Editor of the <inline font-style="italic">Sydney Morning Herald</inline> on 20 September. It was published by the <inline font-style="italic">Sydney Morning Herald the</inline> following day. I believe that the letter in fact answers the questions posed by the honourable member. I will look at the letter in the context of the details which he has sought and, having regard to your earlier ruling, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker,</inline> if there are other matters which I need to add to that I will certainly do so, and I will do so in writing. Apart from that, I mention to the House that a leaflet concerning the question of taxation and Medibank will be the subject of a publication by the Government in the course of the next 7 days. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1359</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>TRADE UNION SECRET POSTAL BALLOTS</title>
<page.no>1359</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1359</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K9L</name.id>
<electorate>CURTIN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GARLAND, Ransley</name>
<name role="display">Mr GARLAND</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister say whether the Government&#39;s secret postal ballot legislation for trade union elections, proclaimed in August, has gained acceptance by the trade union movement as a whole or by sections of it? Can he advise how the implementation of the new procedures has been carried out? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1359</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am advised that the new procedures are being carried out in conformity with the legislation which, as honourable gentlemen will recall, requires unions to conduct secret postal ballots. They may do so either on their own account, in which case they pay for them themselves, or alternatively they can ask the Australian Electoral Office to conduct the ballot for them, in which case the Commonwealth conducts the ballot and pays for it. The information I have is that in 1 974 only 20 unions availed themselves of the provision that was then in the Act, but not as a mandatory requirement, which allowed the Electoral Office to conduct secret postal ballots on their behalf. In 1976, 39 ballots have already been held and 77 ballots are already scheduled and in the pipeline- 1 16 so far this year. That shows quite clearly that the rank and file members of the trade union movement are moving towards the Electoral Office conducting secret postal ballots; that they are in favour of the system and obviously believe it gives them a fairer go in determining who should run their union affairs. </para>
</talk.start>
<para>I have in fact had requests from unionists the the dates of forthcoming ballots for trade unions be notified publicly as far as possible in advance of the elections actually being held. Therefore the Government will be putting down a regulation which will enable the Industrial Registrar to require trade unions to notify the Registrar of their next forthcoming ballot. Under those provisions there would be a continuing record held by the Industrial Registrar of ballots for all union elections and, therefore, anyone would be able to find out what ballots were to be held in the next few months. I believe this would achieve greater publicity for the Commonwealth&#39;s proposals and for the general purposes of the legislation, which is being implemented successfully. </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1359</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>NUCLEAR WEAPONS FOR AUSTRALIAN SERVICES</title>
<page.no>1359</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1359</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K9M</name.id>
<electorate>HUGHES, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Leslie</name>
<name role="display">Mr Les Johnson</name>
</talker>
<para>-I direct my question to the Minister for Defence. Is the Minister aware that yesterday the National Congress of the Returned Services League adopted unanimously a resolution advocating nuclear weapons for the Australian defence forces? Does the Minister support such a policy? Further, does he consider that statements he has been making around the country depicting Australia as the potential victim of Soviet aggression have caused considerable alarm and near hysteria in sections of the community? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1359</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>4U4</name.id>
<electorate>MORETON, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for Defence</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KILLEN, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr KILLEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- Yes, I am aware of the decision made by the National Congress of the RSL. This country is a signatory to the Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty. As a consequence of that, clear obligations flow. The Government proposes to respect those obligations immaculately. As to the third question put by the honourable member, I congratulate him on his sense of hysteria. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1359</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>WHEAT</title>
<page.no>1359</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1359</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JUS</name.id>
<electorate>DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCVEIGH, Tom</name>
<name role="display">Mr McVEIGH</name>
</talker>
<para>- I direct my question to the Minister for Primary Industry. I ask: How much is this year&#39;s total Australian wheat crop estimated to be down on crops of recent years? Are some growers in areas of Australia suffering from cash-flow problems following a purchase of equipment, which has stimulated business and employment opportunities throughout Australia? If so, is the cash flow problem likely to be accentuated by loss of income through strikes, estimated average rail freight increases of 15 per cent to 20 per cent and provisional tax payments in a drought year, all matters over which the farmer has no control? Would an increase in the first payment of $66 per tonne to growers for wheat produced this year, as submitted by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr D.</inline> R. Eather of the Australian Wheatgrowers Federation to the Government, stimulate the private sector during the traditional slack afterChristmas period? Finally, will the Minister advise whether a first payment of $66 per tonne can be made? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1360</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>5E4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>NCP/NP</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>- There is no doubt that the cash flow from the first payment in past years has made a tremendous difference to the general affluence, not just of the wheat grower but of whole sectors of the rural community. Indeed, it is only because of relatively high cash payments for grains that many of our rural communities have survived. The Government is aware of the tragic reduction in the overall expectation of the wheat crop this year which, at the moment, may well not exceed 8 500 000 tonnes. If that should take place and we find that the size of the crop is down to that degree, there will be many communities, irrespective of the amount of the first payment, that will not be able to benefit from the grain income. </para>
</talk.start>
<para>The Government has before it a submission from the Australian Wheatgrowers Federation. That submission is now under examination. In due and proper time an announcement will be made. However, I can assure the honourable member that all those factors that he mentioned- - significantly those relating to stimulus to communities which flow from a high first paymentwill be taken into account by the Government. At the same time it is necessary also to consider that unfortunately world prices for wheat have been declining in recent weeks. I do not believe that that will be a long term trend. The overall expectation of Northern Hemisphere wheat crops is better than had been originally expected. Overall, we would think that grain prices might still recover in spite of the present downturn in the market. These factors will be taken into account most sympathetically in consideration of the Australian Wheatgrowers Federation submission. </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1360</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>AUSTRALIAN ECONOMY</title>
<page.no>1360</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1360</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>ZJ4</name.id>
<electorate>GELLIBRAND, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WILLIS, Ralph</name>
<name role="display">Mr WILLIS</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question, which is directed to the Treasurer, concerns his claim in answer to questions last week and this week that the national accounts for the June quarter demonstrate that economic recovery is under way. Is he aware that those accounts show that the real rate of growth of gross domestic product, seasonally adjusted, was only 0.6 per cent in the June quarter compared with a growth of 3.6 per cent in the March quarter? Similarly, is he aware that the real rate of growth of non-farm gross product, seasonally adjusted, was only 0.5 per cent in the June quarter compared with a growth of 3.2 per cent in the March quarter? In view of these figures, will he now admit that the latest national accounts, contrary to demonstrating economic recovery, in fact display an alarming deterioration in the state of the economy. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1360</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIM</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNCH, Phillip</name>
<name role="display">Mr LYNCH</name>
</talker>
<para>- I regret to say that, in fact, that is exactly what the honourable gentleman would like to see. </para>
</talk.start>
<para class="italic">
<inline font-style="italic">Opposition members interjecting-</inline>
</para>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1360</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIM</name.id>
<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>- Honourable members opposite can laugh at that if they like. The leaders of the doomsday group are certainly in this Parliament. So far as the national account figures are concerned, let me illustrate the point that I have been making in the House in recent days. Gross domestic product, at constant prices and seasonally adjusted, rose by 3.4 per cent in the half year to June after a fall of 1.4 per cent in the December half year. If the honourable gentleman wants to make a general judgment about what is happening in the economy in relation to those national accounts, I believe that it can be sustained that the recovery has been consolidating. So far as non-farm product is concerned, whereas in the March quarter increase in nonfarm product stemmed largely from a turnabout in stocks, the June quarter increase reflected strengthening private final demand. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<para>Let me go further because the honourable gentleman ought to be interested in this. Company profits increased by 1 8.9 per cent in the half year to June after a small decline in the previous half year. No one could say that that very significant increase in company profits augurs badly for the economy during the period ahead. I have mentioned before in this House that the profit share is up and the savings ratio is down, that exports are strong, that lending by finance companies has been strong and that new capital raisings of companies, especially mining companies, showed a substantial uplift during the June quarter. </para>
<para>I have said before and I say here again that of course the indicators are mixed. If one wants to assert some proposition that gloom is before us, one could find an indicator which is not moving in a way which would be consistent with an overall judgment of economic recovery. My colleague, the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, this morning correctly drew attention to the fact that the Premier of Western Australia has just announced a major investment program of $600m. The number of announcements of major expansion and new investment programs at the present time run into billions of dollars. I instance these as areas of confidence. The Government&#39;s view is that its strategy is right and it is determined to stick to it. </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1361</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>SHIPPING</title>
<page.no>1361</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1361</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KJU</name.id>
<electorate>DEAKIN, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JARMAN, Alan</name>
<name role="display">Mr JARMAN</name>
</talker>
<para>-Has the Minister for Transport seen a report claiming that the Prime Minister of Bahrain has stated that his Government would examine the possibility of a joint shipping company involving Bahrain, Australia and New Zealand? Was the question of a joint shipping company raised during the Minister&#39;s talks with the Prime Minister of Bahrain yesterday? If so, what is the Government&#39;s view on this matter? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1361</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009OD</name.id>
<electorate>GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for Transport</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">NIXON, Peter</name>
<name role="display">Mr NIXON</name>
</talker>
<para>- During the course of discussions with the Prime Minister of Bahrain yesterday he indicated an interest in the operations of the roll on-roll off ships that operate on the Australian coast and also internationally. He pointed out to me the difficulties that Bahrain has in providing shipping facilities for conventional ships or the liner trade. He went on to say that the difficulty extended not only to Bahrain but to a number of other Gulf countries. During the course of the discussion it emerged that he was interested in more than the ro-ro ships; he was interested in providing a shipping service to Bahrain and into the Gulf countries to try to take up some of the prospective trade that could develop between the Gulf countries and Australia. I agreed with him to join with New Zealand in looking at a feasibility study to see whether a shipping service could be started in that area. I think it is a development that ought to be welcomed. There have long been difficulties in servicing the trade between the Gulf countries and Australia. During the visit of the Prime Minister of Bahrain to New Zealand in the next couple of days, he will be putting this matter to the New Zealand Government. Hopefully, something will come out of that. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1361</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>CURRENCY DEVALUATION</title>
<page.no>1361</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1361</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>- I ask the Treasurer: Is it a fact that <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Neville</inline> Norman whom he appointed on the twelfth of this month as a member of the panel of economists to advise him is the author of the case for devaluation which the Australian Mining Industry Council has been circulating? If so, did the Treasurer know of this document and its authorship when he appointed <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Norman</inline> as one of his advisers? Since <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Norman&#39;s</inline> views may be given added weight by the Treasurer&#39;s appointing him to his advisory panel, will the Treasurer consider relieving him of his duties, or will he at least take this opportunity - </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1361</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>5E4</name.id>
<electorate />
<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>
<inline font-weight="bold">- Mr Speaker,</inline>I rise to order. While the Leader of the Opposition was Prime Minister, he drew attention to a practice in this </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<para>House that where the name of an individual was mentioned in a question, the question should be put on notice. I suggest that the name of an individual has been included in this question. The proper procedure by which the matter should be submitted to the House is by a question on notice rather than a question without notice. </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1361</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 reject the point of order. If the name of a person is included in a question and it casts aspersions or inferences or is opprobrious of the person, then it most certainly should go on notice. But if a question contains a name for the purposes of identification, then it need not go on notice. I do not hold that the reference to <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Norman</inline> so far used would be discourteous or opprobrious to that gentleman. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1361</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>5E4</name.id>
<electorate />
<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>
<inline font-weight="bold">- Mr Speaker,</inline>again speaking on the point of order, there is a suggestion that this individual should be removed from office. There are obviously overtones in this question, and it was for that reason that I raised the point of order. It is that aspect of the question which concerns me. There are imputations in the question which I know nothing about but which it seemed to me might more appropriately be considered if the question were on notice. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1361</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>-As I interpret the question, it is suggested that <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Norman</inline> has certain views. The question asks whether it is appropriate for him, while having those publicised views, to serve as an adviser. I do not regard that as being in any way opprobrious of the person mentioned. I call the Leader of the Opposition. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1361</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">-Since Dr Norman&#39;s</inline>views may be given added weight by the Treasurer&#39;s having appointed him as an adviser, will the Treasurer at least take this opportunity to repudiate <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Norman</inline> &#39;s views? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1361</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIM</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNCH, Phillip</name>
<name role="display">Mr LYNCH</name>
</talker>
<para>- The question is quite disgraceful. I say quite frankly to the honourable gentleman that it is typical of the standards of his behaviour and of that of some of his colleagues. If we are speaking about the removal of people from offices to which they have been appointed by various governments, I remind the honourable gentleman of his extreme reluctance to remove from office two of his most senior colleagues following last year&#39;s loans scandal. The honourable gentleman ought to look at the standards of his own conduct during his period of office as Prime Minister. I have known <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Neville</inline> Norman over a long period. I have respect for his general economic views. That does not mean that I agree with his views on this subject or other subjects. The honourable gentleman ought to be very much aware that the members of the panel were chosen for their capacity to contribute in matters economic. This does not relate, of course, to a specific matter upon which any member of the panel might be said to hold a particular view. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1362</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>HI4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MORRIS, Peter</name>
<name role="display">Mr Morris</name>
</talker>
<para>- Just tell us who paid your fares overseas? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1362</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIM</name.id>
<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>-That interjection is absolutely typical of the standards of conduct of the honourable member for Shortland. With regard to the question which has been raised, I am aware of <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Norman&#39;s</inline> views on the matter mentioned in the question, the same way as I am aware of the views of other members of the panel. As for the subject matter to which the honourable gentleman seeks to advert in a very curious and inferential way, he ought to be the first to know that the Government&#39;s views on that matter have been made perfectly clear. He ought equally to know that, as I have said in this House before and as the Prime Minster has said, it is not a matter which should be the subject of argument or dialogue in the House or outside it. The Government&#39;s views have been made quite clear and it adheres to them. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1362</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>TELEVISION: UNITED STATES PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS</title>
<page.no>1362</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1362</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JLN</name.id>
<electorate>EVANS, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">ABEL, John</name>
<name role="display">Mr ABEL</name>
</talker>
<para>- I ask my question of the Minister for Post and Telecommunications. I refer the Minister to a statement he made in the House yesterday that he would bring to the attention of the Australian Broadcasting Commission the desire of the Australian people to view the forthcoming debates between President Ford and <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Carter</inline> in the United States. I ask: Has the Minister communicated the wishes of this House and of the Australian people to the ABC? If so, has any decision been made as to whether these debates will be telecast? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1362</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KZL</name.id>
<electorate>MCPHERSON, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">ROBINSON, Eric</name>
<name role="display">Mr Eric Robinson</name>
</talker>
<para>- My information is that the Australian Broadcasting Commission, prior to the question being asked yesterday, had commenced negotiations to ensure that these debates will be shown to Australians. I am further informed that without any prompting at least two of the commercial television networks are making similar arrangements. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1362</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>DUMPING</title>
<page.no>1362</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1362</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>ZE4</name.id>
<electorate>KINGSFORD-SMITH, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BOWEN, Lionel</name>
<name role="display">Mr LIONEL BOWEN</name>
</talker>
<para>-I direct my question to the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs. I refer to legislation passed earlier this year titled the Customs Amendment Bill, which adopted the Brussels definition of value, following High Court decisions which the Minister said eroded values. Is the Minister aware that a number of chemical plants have closed because of dumping? I think that six plants have closed in the last few months. Accordingly, will he take a look at this situation on the basis that where the value under the Brussels definition is in excess of the value in the country of origin, anti-dumping legislation should be implemented forthwith? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1362</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>ZD4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HOWARD, John</name>
<name role="display">Mr HOWARD</name>
</talker>
<para>- I will investigate the complaints made by the honourable member for Kingsford-Smith about chemical factories allegedly having closed as a result of dumping. He mentioned the period of the last 6 months. The new Brussels definition has been in operation only since 1 July. So it is not immediately apparent from the honourable gentleman&#39;s allegations that the legislation and the new definition are responsible. The Government is concerned and made it clear at the time the new valuation system was introduced that there should be no effects upon existing protection arrangements so far as Australian industry is concerned. I understand the concern of the honourable gentleman in this matter. I will have it investigated. I will let him know the results of my investigations and further advise the House. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1362</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>RHODESIA: BISHOP LAMONT</title>
<page.no>1362</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1362</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6I4</name.id>
<electorate>BALACLAVA, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for Productivity</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MACPHEE, Ian</name>
<name role="display">Mr MACPHEE</name>
</talker>
<para>-Has the Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs noted the predicament of Bishop Lamont in Rhodesia? Is the Australian Government in a position to express a view on the circumstances leading to his predicament, especially in view of <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Kissinger&#39;s</inline> current initiatives regarding Rhodesia? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1362</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>5E4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>NCP/NP</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>-Bishop Lamont &#39;s current trial was a matter of some comment on the <inline font-style="italic">AM</inline> program this morning. I think all of us would be appalled by the circumstances that were outlined by Hamish Robertson in the course of that program. I shall quote what was said during that program, which emphasises the plight in which the Bishop now finds himself. Speaking of Bishop Lamont, Hamish Robertson said: </para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>He has explained the dilemma of the missionaries in remote areas near the Mozambique border with no help from anyone, no telephone lines to the outside world and the difficulties they face if the guerillas come and ask for medicine, because should they say &#39;no you can&#39;t have anything&#39;, then they - </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">The missionaries- are liable to be shot or mutilated by the guerillas and if they say &#39;yes&#39; and then fail to inform the authorities they could be gaoled for up to 1 5 years for this offence. </para>
<para class="block">Tragically, the circumstances in Rhodesia are such that a good deal of trauma is being experienced. One can but feel most sympathetic for the plight in which Bishop Lamont now finds himself. At the same time, I think there is hope for a settlement of the conflict in southern Africa at this time. Indeed, Secretary of State Kissinger deserves to be complimented by the world for the efforts he is making to resolve what seems to be an intractable situation. There are many within this House who have friends, associates and connections in southern Africa. We are all concerned about the relationship between the blacks and the whites in both South Africa and Rhodesia. If, as a result of the initiatives now being taken by <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Kissinger,</inline> there can be some resolution of the difficulties, then one would hope that, other than by a bloodbath, there may be a resolution of what seem to be circumstances in which individuals such as Bishop Lamont are forced into the position of being martyrs in a cause in relation to which they are so obviously in an impossible quandary. One can only hope in relation to Bishop Lamont &#39;s present circumstances that some added weight may be given to the initiatives now being taken by <inline font-weight="bold">Dr Kissinger</inline> that could lead ultimately to some resolution of this appalling problem. </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1363</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>TRADE UNION ELECTIONS</title>
<page.no>1363</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1363</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>EV4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">YOUNG, Mick</name>
<name role="display">Mr YOUNG</name>
</talker>
<para>- I direct a question to the Prime Minister. Is it true that the Government dropped its proposal to have union elections conducted by compulsion by the Commonwealth Electoral Office as a result of being warned that it would be reported in accordance with the Freedom of Association Convention operating under the International Labour Organisation, thus provoking massive international labour retaliation? Irrespective of whether it is true, in future will the Government submit, in accordance with the Freedom of Association Convention operating under the ILO, all proposals it has in regard to trade unions in order to ensure that such a conflict is avoided? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1363</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>- The proposals as finally enacted were enacted after proper consultation by the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations with the trade union movement. The proposals as enacted have enabled secret ballot legislation to be introduced more quickly and to be accepted widely by the great bulk of the trade union movement. Therefore the modifications were sensible and wise on that account. I think this House should be prepared to make up its own mind about what is just and what is fair. It does so in a proper manner, certainly while this Government is in power, and it will conduct its business accordingly. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1363</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>LOANS TO BEEF PRODUCERS</title>
<page.no>1363</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1363</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>0F4</name.id>
<electorate>DAWSON, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRAITHWAITE, Ray</name>
<name role="display">Mr BRAITHWAITE</name>
</talker>
<para>- The Minister for Primary Industry would be aware that one of the beef industry&#39;s most disturbing problems is the increasing debt burden brought about by high interest rates on loans. This specifically applies where interest rates were low at the time the debts were incurred but have significantly increased in the subsequent years. Many of these commitments are with the Commonwealth Development Bank. Can the Minister say whether the Government has any plans to assist graziers by reducing interest rates on their loans? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1363</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>5E4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>NCP/NP</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>- I know that the honourable gentleman&#39;s concern is both general and specific. He has spoken to me on a number of occasions about the appalling plight in which many of the producers in the brigalow development regions of Central Queensland now find themselves. As I think all of us realise, interest rates have been one of the reasons for many people finding it impossible to operate profitably with rural investments today. Indeed, the returns from most rural investments, given the present level of interest rates, are unprofitable. If one were to look at rural investment in only an ordinary commercial sense, it would be more reasonable and rational to withdraw that investment and place it in almost any other form of investment. But of course that would not be the answer either to Australia&#39;s problem or to the recovery of the rural sector. The Government feels quite strongly that inflation must be brought under control before interest rates generally can be reduced. We see that the economic measures that we have undertaken in the Budget and in the 2 economic statements before then- the one in February and the other in May- are directed towards that end. There are currently in the economy quite marked signs that inflation is being controlled. As a result we believe that interest rates in general will soon begin to go down. Of course, with that there will be a beneficial flow on to people in the rural sector. </para>
</talk.start>
<para>There are for certain areas in the rural sector financial assistance measures available through rural reconstruction. Rural reconstruction provides concessional interest rates. Concessional rates apply also to funds provided by way of carry on loans for the beef industry, dairy adjustment and so on. Of course, the specific areas about which the honourable gentleman talks are not necessarily only those within rural reconstruction. I understand his concern. I recognise that if assistance could be provided to lessen the cost of money to those involved, for example, in the brigalow areas it would be of significant help and might stop some farmers going into rural reconstruction. The Government is aware of the problem. It is concerned to reduce interest rates generally, but at this stage, other than perhaps in the development of a rural bank, there is no specific proposal immediately before us to alleviate the plight of farmers. Nonetheless I am confident that with the general reduction in inflation interest rates will go down and the plight of those with whom the honourable gentleman is concerned will be reduced. </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1364</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>SHIPBUILDING INDUSTRY</title>
<page.no>1364</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDV</name.id>
<electorate>NEWCASTLE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JONES, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr CHARLES JONES</name>
</talker>
<para>-I direct a question to the Prime Minister. Yesterday the right honourable gentleman, in reply to a question by the honourable member for Higgins, gave a most provocative answer. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</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 honourable member will not make that comment in the course of a question. I ask him to pursue his question. </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JONES, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr CHARLES JONES</name>
</talker>
<para>-Thank you, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker.</inline> I ask the right honourable gentleman: Is it true that the Commonwealth-State working party on the shipbuilding industry had a meeting on 15 September at which the New South Wales and South Australian governments were represented? Was it decided by that group that it should await the outcome of the Industries Assistance Commission report on the industry on 20 September, 5 days later? Further, did the right honourable gentleman send a copy of that report together with a telex to the Premier of New South Wales, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Wran,</inline> on 2 1 September? Did the Premier reply that day by telex, indicating to the right honourable gentleman that he was prepared to meet him and his government at any time at the Prime Minister&#39;s convenience? Did he also ask the Prime Minister to clarify his Government&#39;s attitude towards the offer of the New South Wales State Government to meet the difference between the Australian price and the Japanese price on a dollar for dollar basis? I further ask the right honourable gentleman: On the question of the calling of tenders for a new floating dock for Newcastle - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</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 honourable gentleman is now making a statement. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JONES, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr CHARLES JONES</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am asking a question, <inline font-weight="bold">Sir.</inline></para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</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>-No, the honourable gentleman is dressing up a statement as a question. I have allowed a series of at least 8 individual questions up until now. The honourable member is now changing the subject, and I call the Prime Minister to answer the first part of the question. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JONES, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr CHARLES JONES</name>
</talker>
<para>-I beg your pardon, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker,</inline> but this is all related to the question of shipbuilding, ship repair and the dockyard. I want to ask the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the State Dockyard has prepared estimates and that, in reality, the inquiries made in Germany and Japan were to compare the Australian price with the world price. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</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 honourable gentleman will resume his seat. I call the Prime Minister to answer the first part of the question which I have ruled to be in order. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am advised that the working party did meet on 15 December and that, basically, it agreed to wait until the Industries Assistance Commission report had been published. Of course I sent a copy of the IAC report to the 2 Premiers concerned as soon as it was available. I have not received replies on some aspects of that matter. However, that does not explain the situation in which both Premiers indicated that they did not want the working party to visit Newcastle on the one hand and Whyalla on the other hand. It does not explain the circumstances in which - </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JONES, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Charles Jones</name>
</talker>
<para>- Why don&#39;t you tell the truth? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>-The Premier of New South - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JONES, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Charles Jones</name>
</talker>
<para>- Why don&#39;t you tell the truth? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>- called tenders in Germany and Japan for a floating dock and was unwilling to call tenders from his own State dockyard. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JONES, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Charles Jones</name>
</talker>
<para>- I raise a point of order, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker.</inline> It was the Liberal-Country Party Government which made inquiries for prices in Germany and Japan. Why does the Prime Minister not tell the truth? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1364</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! On 3 separate occasions the honourable member for Newcastle has pursued a line of unparliamentary conduct and I have had to persuade him to withdraw. I warn the honourable member for Newcastle that I will not permit him to abuse the procedures of the House on this issue in the way that he seems determined to do. I will not warn him again; I will have to deal with him. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1365</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>BREACHES OF AIR NAVIGATION REGULATIONS</title>
<page.no>1365</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1365</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>MH4</name.id>
<electorate>BOWMAN, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JULL, David</name>
<name role="display">Mr JULL</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is directed to the Minister for Transport. Has the Minister received reports of alleged breaches of the new Air Navigation Regulations and, if so, has any legal action been taken by the Department? Was Qantas Airways Ltd named in any of the alleged breaches? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1365</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009OD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">NIXON, Peter</name>
<name role="display">Mr NIXON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Yes, the Department has received allegations of breaches under the Air Navigation Regulations and the reports have been referred to the industry committee for study. One allegation is of a breach by Pakistan International Airlines in regard to fare conditions on the Australian-Europe routes- a matter which also involves a travel agency called the Golemif agency. That matter is currently being investigated by the Commonwealth Police. The second allegation involves Thai International Airways and the Australian Union of Students, and the normal preliminary departmental inquiry has been directed to Thai Airways International, from whom information is expected shortly. The inquiries are at a very early stage and the alleged breaches will be investigated thoroughly. I will be in a better position to give further information to the honourable member when the results of the inquiries come to hand. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1365</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>EAST TIMOR</title>
<page.no>1365</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1365</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JSU</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRYANT, Gordon</name>
<name role="display">Mr BRYANT</name>
</talker>
<para>- I address my question to the Prime Minister. Does he agree that there was an Indonesian invasion of East Timor and that Indonesians killed and wounded thousands of the population of that area? Does he agree that there cannot be any self-determination in East Timor without Fretilin and its supporters taking part? If he agrees with that, will he clearly say so to General Suharto when he is in Indonesia shortly? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1365</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I have no wish to add to the firm and clear policy statements made on this particular matter by the Minister for Foreign Affairs over a long period of time. I should say that the Government parties, and I believe all Australians, are concerned for humanitarian reasons at what has happened. That is a significant reason- the major reason- why the Government has made what I believe to be a wise decision to enable aid to people in East Timor to go through the Indonesian Red Cross. The Foreign Minister announced that particular decision some weeks ago. I should like to thank the honourable gentleman for his question and take this opportunity to remind the House that it was advice given by the previous Administration, which cannot be absolved entirely from responsibility in these matters. <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Gregory</inline> Clark, who was a consultant to the Government at one time and an ambassador under the previous administration, has indicated - </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1365</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>- I take a point of order, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker. Mr Gregory</inline> Clark has never been an ambassador under any Australian government, and, as I understand it, he has not been an adviser to any government in Australia either. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1365</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 honourable gentleman does not raise a point of order. It is an issue of fact, and the point that the honourable gentleman wants to make has now been made. There is no point of order. </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1365</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>-The honourable gentleman should not be so quick to come in. But it does underline the important point that the gentleman was a consultant - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1365</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JSU</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRYANT, Gordon</name>
<name role="display">Mr Bryant</name>
</talker>
<para>- I raise a point of order, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker.</inline> The question asked of the Prime Minister was this: Does he agree that there cannot be any self-determination - </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1365</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 honourable gentleman will resume his seat. There is no point of order. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1365</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>-The important point is that he was a consultant. I accept the point made by the Leader of the Opposition in relation to the question of ambassador. The Leader of the Opposition, of course, is right, and when he is right I will always freely admit it. When he is wrong, I will continue to assert it. <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Gregory</inline> Clark, in writing on 1 9 March, made it plain that at meetings the previous Prime Minister had had with Indonesian leaders- and as I understand it he mentioned President Suharto- he said that he believed it would be best for all concerned if East Timor were incorporated in Indonesia. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1365</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>- I rise to a point of order, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker.</inline> I want to make it plain that <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Gregory</inline> Clark was never at any consultations which I or my Ministers had with any Indonesian Ministers or officials. <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Gregory</inline> Clark was not a consultant to me or any of my Ministers and he never accompanied us. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1365</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 honourable gentleman has not raised a point of order at all. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1365</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JSU</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRYANT, Gordon</name>
<name role="display">Mr Bryant</name>
</talker>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">- Mr Speaker,</inline>I recognise that this has been a long problem in the Parliament, but standing order 145 states: </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<quote>
<para>An answer shall be relevant to the question. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">The question asked for 3 precise points to be answered. Firstly: Does the Prime Minister agree that there was an invasion of East Timor? </para>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</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 honourable gentleman is now repeating the question he has already asked. The House is very well aware of the question that was asked. The House is also very well aware that under the Standing Orders a Minister is entitled to answer a question as he chooses, provided his answer is relevant. The Prime Minister&#39;s answer to the question is relevant. The honourable member for Wills will resume his seat. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>1V5</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KATTER, Bob</name>
<name role="display">Mr Katter</name>
</talker>
<para>- I do have a genuine point of order, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker.</inline></para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</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 will judge whether it is a genuine point of order. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>1V5</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KATTER, Bob</name>
<name role="display">Mr Katter</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am sure you will judge my way, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker.</inline> On at least 4 occasions this morning the Leader of the Opposition has risen and claimed a point of order when there was no point of order whatsoever. He was putting an argument contrary to what the Prime Minister had put. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</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 point of order in what the honourable gentleman is raising either. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>
<inline font-style="italic">-The Canberra Times</inline>of 19 March claimed- this is my authority in relation to this matter- that that person was a former consultant to the Prime Minister&#39;s Department and a former Australian diplomat. If that is wrong, then the <inline font-style="italic">Canberra Times</inline> is wrong. But that gentleman does claim - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">-Mr Speaker</inline>- </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</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 will stand and both you gentlemen will sit. I am not prepared to allow so much parliamentary time to be occupied on the issue whether <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Gregory</inline> Clark was or was not an adviser to the Opposition. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>-Or a diplomat. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</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>-Or a diplomat. I call upon the right honourable gentleman to answer the question and leave to the Leader of the Opposition as a matter of personal explanation the question whether or not Gregory Clark was whatever he was at any given time. I call the Prime Minister. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>-The substantive point, of course, is that <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Clark</inline> had claimed that- there is a good deal of evidence to this effect- the former Prime Minister had made it plain that he believed that it would be best for all concerned if East Timor were incorporated with Indonesia. That view is supported by a report in the <inline font-style="italic">National Times</inline> of 19 July by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Michael</inline> Richardson writing from Singapore. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>EE4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">UREN, Tom</name>
<name role="display">Mr Uren</name>
</talker>
<para>- I rise on a point of order. My point of order is that the Prime Minister is aware that when 2 heads of state meet there is an agreed notes of conversation on the discussions which transpire between those 2 heads of state. The Prime Minister knows that what he is saying is false. I have seen the agreed notes of conversation, and I can assure the House that what the Prime Minister is saying is a deliberate lie. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</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 honourable gentleman is not making a point of order. The honourable member will resume his seat. I call the Prime Minister. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>-Knowing the honourable member as I do, in spite of what he said, it is not worth asking him to withdraw it. I would like to read to the House what <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Michael</inline> Richardson has written in a most authoritative fashion. He wrote: </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<quote>
<para>On September 6, 1974, the then Prime Minister Gough Whitlam - </para>
</quote>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>- I rise on a point of order. I make the point - </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JSU</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRYANT, Gordon</name>
<name role="display">Mr Bryant</name>
</talker>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">- Mr Speaker</inline>- </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</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>- The honourable member for Wills will sit down. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JSU</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRYANT, Gordon</name>
<name role="display">Mr Bryant</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am just practising. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">- Mr Michael</inline>Richardson is not a consultant; he has not even been a diplomat. The Prime Minister said last week that he would - </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>5E4</name.id>
<electorate />
<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>
<inline font-weight="bold">- Mr Speaker,</inline>as the honourable gentleman is not raising a point of order, I raise the point of order that he is not in a position in which he can constantly interrupt the procedures of this House. I suggest that the Prime Minister has the call and he should be allowed to proceed. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</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 call the Leader of the Opposition. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>6U4</name.id>
<electorate>WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHITLAM, Gough</name>
<name role="display">Mr E G Whitlam</name>
</talker>
<para>- I take this point of order, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker,</inline> because earlier today you admonished a Minister by saying that he was not entitled to make a ministerial statement in the course of answering a question without notice. Last week the Prime Minister refused to make a ministerial statement before he went to Indonesia. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1366</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 point of order, and the honourable gentleman knows that there is no point of order. I call the Prime Minister. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JSU</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRYANT, Gordon</name>
<name role="display">Mr Bryant</name>
</talker>
<para>- I wish to move dissent from <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker&#39;s</inline> ruling. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</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 have not given the honourable member the call. I call the Prime Minister. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>-As reported in the <inline font-style="italic">National Times</inline> on 19 July, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Michael</inline> Richardson writes: </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<quote>
<para>On September 6, 1974, the then Prime Minister Gough Whitlam - </para>
</quote>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>EE4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">UREN, Tom</name>
<name role="display">Mr Uren</name>
</talker>
<para>- I rise on a point of order, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker.</inline> I again ask you to rule on whether or not the Prime Minister can use as evidence in this Parliament that which transpired at that conference between 2 heads of state when in fact the Prime Minister is aware that there are agreed notes of conversation by the 2 governments - </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</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 honourable gentleman is not raising a point of order; he is raising a point of argument, and he is not entitled to the call to raise a point of argument. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>EE4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">UREN, Tom</name>
<name role="display">Mr Uren</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am genuinely not trying to make it a point of argument. What I am asking you to do is to rule that the Prime Minister has no right to bring into this House evidence that is supposed to appear in a newspaper when he knows that there is true evidence on the file about what really transpired between the 2 heads of state. He knows that what he said is false. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</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>-There is no point of order involved. The honourable member will resume his seat. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JSU</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRYANT, Gordon</name>
<name role="display">Mr Bryant</name>
</talker>
<para>- I rise on a point of order, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker.</inline></para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</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>-The honourable member for Wills will cease practising standing up for points of order. The honourable member will resume his seat. The mere fact that he has had a haircut does not mean that he is entitled to take liberties. The ruling I give to the point of order taken by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is that the Prime Minister, or any other honourable member, can introduce into the House any argument he wishes provided it is within the Standing Orders. It is not for the Chair to judge whether the argument is correct or incorrect. That is for the House itself and it is for the <inline font-style="italic">rapporteurs</inline> of the Parliament to make their own comments. The Prime Minister is entitled to proceed in the course in which he has been proceeding. I call upon the Prime Minister to complete his answer, and I ask the House not to continue with points of order which have no foundation, because it does no good for the status of the House. I call the Prime Minister. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>-Before continuing with - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JSU</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRYANT, Gordon</name>
<name role="display">Mr Bryant</name>
</talker>
<para>- I draw your attention to standing order 145, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Speaker.</inline></para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</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>-The honourable member will resume his seat. I call the Prime Minister. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>-Before continuing with <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Richardson&#39;s</inline> report, I point out that <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Gregory</inline> Clark was employed on a basis equivalent to a level 1 in the policy co-ordination unit of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. That was when the Leader of the Opposition happened to be Prime Minister. He was a consultant. <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Richardson</inline> writes: </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<quote>
<para>On September 6, 1974, the then Prime Minister Gough Whitlam arrived in Central Java to talk with President Soeharto of Indonesia. It was at these talks that Whitlam made his first and most fundamental mistake in dealing with the Indonesians on the critical matter of Portuguese East Timor. </para>
<para>The meeting was secret, but a record of conversation taken by the Australian side at the time quotes Whitlam as opening his comments on Timor by saying that, in his opinion, the territory should become part of Indonesia. </para>
</quote>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JSU</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRYANT, Gordon</name>
<name role="display">Mr Bryant</name>
</talker>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">- Mr Speaker,</inline>I claim the right - </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>QS4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Mr MALCOLM FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I ask that further questions be placed on notice. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>EE4</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">UREN, Tom</name>
<name role="display">Mr Uren</name>
</talker>
<para>- I rise on a point of order. The statement by the Prime Minister is completely false. I have seen the notes of conversation between the 2 heads of state. What the Prime Minister has said is completely false. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1367</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>