/
19690326_senate_26_s40.xml
4721 lines (4721 loc) · 425 KB
/
19690326_senate_26_s40.xml
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<hansard xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.1" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<session.header>
<date>1969-03-26</date>
<parliament.no>26</parliament.no>
<session.no>2</session.no>
<period.no>3</period.no>
<chamber>SENATE</chamber>
<page.no>605</page.no>
<proof>0</proof>
</session.header>
<chamber.xscript>
<business.start>
<day.start>1969-03-26</day.start>
<para>The <inline font-weight="bold">PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Sir Alister</inline> McMillin) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers. </para>
</business.start>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>PETITIONS</title>
<page.no>605</page.no>
<type>petition</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>National Service</title>
<page.no>605</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Senator O'Byrne</inline>presented a petition from 1,200 persons showing that the National Service Act 1968 is unduly harsh in that it (i) makes provision for the use of conscripted young men for overseas service, (ii) makes no allowance for conscientious objection to a particular war, and (iii) provides an unduly harsh penalty of 2 years gaol for those young men whose conscience compels them not to comply with the Act. The petitioners pray that the Senate should respond to their plea for the early repeal of the Act, and the immediate release of any young men who are now in prison as a result of their conscientious refusal to comply with the Act. </para>
<para>Petition received and read. </para>
</subdebate.1>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Copeton Dam</title>
<page.no>605</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Senator McClelland</inline>presented a petition from 611 citizens of New South Wales showing that the Copeton Dam is of major importance to Australia's national development, and the Federal Government is causing unnecessary delay in the carrying out of the project. The petitioners pray that the Senate in Parliament assembled should strongly urge the Commonwealth Government to make sufficient funds available for the construction and early completion of the Copeton Dam. </para>
<para>Petition received and read. </para>
<para class="block">Fill AIRCRAFT </para>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>605</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>1L5</name.id>
<electorate>NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MURPHY, Lionel</name>
<name role="display">Senator MURPHY</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is directed to the Leader of the Government in the. Senate. <inline font-style="italic">I</inline> refer to the FI 1 1 aircraft. ls it correct that it is now 6 years since the planes were ordered, that Australia has actually paid out more than $l50m for them, that we have received no planes and that even if some are received in a flyable condition they will not be what were originally ordered? Is it correct also that the United States has greatly altered its plans for the use of such a limited number as it may possibly take? In these circumstances, can the Senate be assured that the Prime Minister, on his forthcoming visit to the United States, will take steps to get out of the bungle that has been created and that is hanging like a cloud over Australia's defence arrangements? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>605</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JZQ</name.id>
<electorate>NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for Supply</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">ANDERSON, Kenneth</name>
<name role="display">Senator ANDERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- The Leader of the Opposition has made a series of statements rather than asked a question. They are not original. He has made them before. The fact is that some little time ago, in answer to a question by, I think, <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Cohen,</inline> 1 gave some information as to what amount had been paid already for the acquisition of the Fill aircraft. 1 also indicated that the Minister for Defence had stated that delivery of this aircraft, which is an operational aircraft, could be expected during the early part of this year. I have nothing to add to that statement. As to the broad sweeping statements by the Leader of the Opposition as to what he thinks about the aircraft, I still maintain that in these matters one relies upon one's advisers and experts rather than upon the opinion of parliamentarians. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>605</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>EDUCATION</title>
<page.no>605</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>605</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>CAK</name.id>
<electorate>TASMANIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">RAE, Peter</name>
<name role="display">Senator RAE</name>
</talker>
<para>- I address a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Science. The Minister will recall that in this chamber last night it was alleged that the Commonwealth Minister for Education and Science has not indicated whether the Commonwealth is backing the national survey of educational needs which has been undertaken by the Australian Education Council. Will the Minister indicate whether this allegation is correct, and will he explain the Commonwealth's attitude towards the survey? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>605</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KBW</name.id>
<electorate>TASMANIA</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for Works</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WRIGHT, Reginald</name>
<name role="display">Senator WRIGHT</name>
</talker>
<para>- I wish to make it quite clear that the Minister has offered his full co-operation to the Australian Education Council in the inquiry that it has undertaken. That indication of co-operation is consistent with the whole operation between the Commonwealth Minister for Education and Science and the State Ministers for Education in their joint consultations over the last 4 or 5 years. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>HANSARD</title>
<page.no>606</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K2I</name.id>
<electorate>WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRANSON, George</name>
<name role="display">Senator BRANSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question without notice, I am sorry to say, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr President,</inline> is directed to you. Would you consider discussing with the Principal Parliamentary Reporter the recording in Hansard, when quorums are called in this place, of the name of the person responsible for calling the quorum? I think it is most unfair that if 1 call a quorum and the Opposition wants to challenge me on it the next day, the name of the person responsible for calling the quorum is not reported in Hansard. Also, where there is comment with respect to a quorum being called, I think that comment should be recorded as should be recorded the reasons that may be given by the person responsible for calling the quorum. Will you give consideration to discussing this matter with the Principal Parliamentary Reporter? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>606</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">PRESIDENT, The</name>
<name role="display">The PRESIDENT</name>
</talker>
<para>- Yes, I shall look into the matter and advise the honourable senator at a later date. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>HEALTH</title>
<page.no>606</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K8Y</name.id>
<electorate>TASMANIA</electorate>
<party>IND; AP from Aug. 1969; IND from Jan. 1970</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">TURNBULL, Reginald</name>
<name role="display">Senator TURNBULL</name>
</talker>
<para>- I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Health: Has the Government accepted the Nimmo modification of the Whitlam plan as its policy in regard to health insurance? </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K28</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">RANKIN, Annabelle</name>
<name role="display">Senator Dame ANNABELLE RANKIN</name>
</talker>
<para>- That is a most extraordinary question, if I may say so. I think the Minister made it very clear yesterday that the report is being looked at. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>POSTAL DEPARTMENT</title>
<page.no>606</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KAS</name.id>
<electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WEBSTER, James</name>
<name role="display">Senator WEBSTER</name>
</talker>
<para>- ls the Minister representing the Postmaster-General fully aware of the dissatisfaction with the decision to curtail mail deliveries to one a day in some very important country centres? Is this treatment being meted out to all clients of the Postmaster-General's Department or only to people in rural areas? If a once a day service is to be introduced is the Department alert to the importance to business of an early morning delivery? </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K28</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">RANKIN, Annabelle</name>
<name role="display">Senator Dame ANNABELLE RANKIN</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honourable senator asked me a question, I think last week, about deliveries and ] am getting an answer for him from the Postmaster-General. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>VIETNAM</title>
<page.no>606</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JZU</name.id>
<electorate>NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">ORMONDE, James</name>
<name role="display">Senator ORMONDE</name>
</talker>
<para>- Did the Leader of the Government in the Senate hear the radio announcement by the Australian Broadcasting Commission this morning that President Thieu of South Vietnam was prepared to talk with representatives of the National Liberation Front about a united government for South Vietnam? Has the Minister any comment to make? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JZQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">ANDERSON, Kenneth</name>
<name role="display">Senator ANDERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I did hear the comment on the ABC radio this morning but as yet I have not been given any official information on the broadcast. Therefore I am not in a position to comment. The honourable senator will appreciate that it would be very unwise to comment without being in possession of the precise text of what was said. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>SOCIAL SERVICES</title>
<page.no>606</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KAW</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WEDGWOOD, Ivy</name>
<name role="display">Senator Dame IVY WEDGWOOD</name>
</talker>
<para>- I direct my question to the Minister representing the Prime Minister. Has the Prime Minister's attention been directed to a statement that pensioners were stranded in hospitals during the recent ambulance strike in Victoria? Will the Prime Minister have the accuracy of this statement investigated with a view to the practice of the Repatriation Department being followed in making Commonwealth transport available in such circumstances to pensioners who are not well enough to travel by public transport? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JZQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">ANDERSON, Kenneth</name>
<name role="display">Senator ANDERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Yes, I will refer the honourable senator's question to the Prime Minister. There is an aspect of the proposition to which I am sure we all would have regard, namely, that advance knowledge may well make emergency arrangements possible. If a stoppage occurred and there was not sufficient advance knowledge, it could well be that emergency arrangements could not be made. However, as I have said, I will direct the question to tha Prime Minister for reply. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS</title>
<page.no>606</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>CJO</name.id>
<electorate>WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHEELDON, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator WHEELDON</name>
</talker>
<para>- By way of explanation of my question, which is addressed to the Minister representing the Minister for Labour and National Service, I mention that the subject of the question was discussed at a meeting of the Trades and Labour Council of Western Australia held in Perth last night, and that it has been referred to me by the Secretary of the Council, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr Coleman,</inline> as a matter of some urgency. Is the Minister informed on the present serious industrial dispute in Port Hedland? Is he aware that Bell Bros Pty Ltd, which is not a registered stevedoring company, has arbitrarily dispensed with the services of the registered stevedores, Robert Laurie Pty Ltd, whom it previously employed, and is now itself engaged in the loading at the wharfside of manganese ore, thereby excluding the employment of registered waterfront labour? fs the Minister aware that when a picket line was formed by members of the Port Hedland branch of the Waterside Workers Federation the management of Bell Bros Pty Ltd summoned the police who arrested seven members of the Federation who were demonstrating in opposition to the loss of their livelihood because of the action of Bell Bros Pty Ltd? fs it not a fact that the arrested workers had done nothing other than form a picket line on the road adjacent to the wharf? In view of the seriousness and urgency of the present situation will the Minister intervene in an attempt to find a settlement of the dispute? Will he find out why the local stevedoring authority failed to take effective control of the situation in order to prevent the present crisis developing? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>607</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KBW</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WRIGHT, Reginald</name>
<name role="display">Senator WRIGHT</name>
</talker>
<para>- I wish to inform the honourable senator that the existence of this dispute and the issues contained in it have not come to my knowledge. I shall convey what the honourable senator has said as a matter of urgency to the Minister whom I would not expect to intervene but whose Department will use all its good offices to resolve the dispute. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>607</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>AUSTRALIAN ARMY</title>
<page.no>607</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>607</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JXR</name.id>
<electorate>WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">DRAKE-BROCKMAN, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN</name>
</talker>
<para>- I ask the Minister representing the Minister for the Army: Is it a fact that Australian troops in Malaysia are being supplied with New Zealand lamb? Will the Minister explain how this situation is brought about? Will he make every effort to see that Australian troops are supplied with Australian meat after the withdrawal of British troops from this area? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>607</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KTL</name.id>
<electorate>NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>CP</party>
<role>Minister for Repatriation</role>
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCKELLAR, Gerald</name>
<name role="display">Senator MCKELLAR</name>
</talker>
<para>- The Australian force in Malaysia is dependent logistically on the British Army for its support. As a consequence, the provision of all foodstuffs and their origin is not influenced by the Australian Army. However, the Australians are rationed in accordance with the ration scale consistent with the Australian feeding pattern. Following the withdrawal of British troops from the area, the Australian and New Zealand force will be maintained logistically jointly by the two countries concerned. It can be anticipated that the meat for the force will be supplied by those two countries. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>607</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>CIVIL AVIATION</title>
<page.no>607</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>607</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JUH</name.id>
<electorate>TASMANIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">DEVITT, Donald</name>
<name role="display">Senator DEVITT</name>
</talker>
<para>- I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Civil Aviation. Is the Minister aware that Australia's two major domestic airlines are operating on a load factor of approximately 75%? Is not this load figure substantially higher than that of any other airline in the worl'd? Is the Minister aware further of the serious deficiencies in regard to the service now provided by the airlines, such as was raised in Hobart some days ago and is known to exist in other centres? In these circumstances, is he unable to take such action as would ensure that having been guaranteed a market the airlines keep faith with the travelling public of Australia by providing the sort of service that the public has demonstrated clearly it is willing to pay for? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>607</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K5K</name.id>
<electorate>WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>LP</party>
<role>Minister for Customs and Excise</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SCOTT, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Senator SCOTT</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honourable senator asks me a question as to the payload factor of our airline operating companies in Australia. He asked: Is it a fact that they have a load factor of 75%? Then he went on to say: Is it a fact that this percentage is higher than that in any other country in the world? His claim of course is that it is too low. 1 suggest that the honourable senator frame his question in such a way that it can be answered by the Minister concerned because he is not indicating, by the question that he has asked, the type of answer that he wants. I therefore ask the honourable senator to put his question on notice and 1 will gel a reply from the Minister. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>608</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>DRIED VINE FRUITS</title>
<page.no>608</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>608</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQN</name.id>
<electorate>SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LAUCKE, Condor</name>
<name role="display">Senator LAUCKE</name>
</talker>
<para>- 1 ask the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry: Has there been a request to the Minister from growers in the dried vine fruits industry to have a statutory marketing authority established? If so, what is the position in respect of such request? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>608</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KTL</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>CP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCKELLAR, Gerald</name>
<name role="display">Senator MCKELLAR</name>
</talker>
<para>- The Minister for Primary Industry made a statement the other day - this was in response to the request mentioned by the honourable senator - in which he said that: </para>
</talk.start>
<list type="lowerroman-dotted">
<item label=".">
<para>the Council had noted thai the recognised industry authority- </para>
</item>
</list>
<para class="block">That is the Australian Dried Fruits </para>
<para class="block">Association: </para>
<list type="lowerroman-dotted">
<item label=".">
<para>did not support the proposal following ils rejection by the district councils and die State conference of the organisation. </para>
</item>
</list>
<para class="block">He said that in the circumstances, the Council could not see its way clear to support a request for a poll of growers on the scheme; nor for a royal commission as some growers had suggested. However, a poll of growers was desirable to ascertain the views of the industry on any proposal for the continuation of a dried fruits stabilisation scheme. </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>608</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>DARTMOUTH DAM</title>
<page.no>608</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>608</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQQ</name.id>
<electorate>SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LAUGHT, Keith</name>
<name role="display">Senator LAUGHT</name>
</talker>
<para>- Has the attention of the Minister representing the Minister for National Development been drawn to a statement by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr G.</inline> V. Lawrence, Organising Secretary of the Murray Valley Development League, that the executive of the League on 15th March had agreed that the decision for the proposed dam at Dartmouth was the right decision for the next major conservation work of the River Murray Commission? Could the Minister offer a comment on the statement, and particularly on the last paragraph of it as to the need to reduce the salinity level and so make it unnecessary, or less necessary, to provide dilution flows in the River Murray? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>608</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K5K</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SCOTT, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Senator SCOTT</name>
</talker>
<para>- I have seen the statement outlined by the honourable senator and I would like to congratulate that organisation for its forward thinking in supporting the River Murray Commission's decision that the first dam to be built should be the dam at Dartmouth. The reason, of course, that it is supporting this project is that it will guarantee South Australia an extra 0.246 million acre feet of water per year. This is quite different from the recommendations that have been made in this place by members of the Opposition, in which they have said that they want Chowilla. Chowilla can never, under any circumstances, provide this additional amount of water for South Australia. Therefore, I can understand people living in the valley of the River Murray congratulating the authorities concerned on their decision to build the Dartmouth Dam as the first stage in providing extra water for South Australia. The authorities go on to say that in their belief consideration should be given, when this is completed, to the next stage, and when that comes about serious consideration could be given to the building of the Chowilla project. ] know that this Government: and other governments will be looking at this site in the years ahead. </para>
</talk.start>
<para>In relation to the latter part of the question as to what is being done in regard to reducing salinity in the River Murray, two projects have already been approved by this Government and finance has been made available to, 1 think, Victoria, for the expenditure of about $3m to reduce salinity in the River Murray, and no doubt the Minister for National Development, together with other members of the River Murray Commission, will be looking at other ways of keeping the salinity of the River Murray to a minimum. </para>
<para class="block">Fill AIRCRAFT </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>608</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6R</name.id>
<electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COHEN, Samuel</name>
<name role="display">Senator COHEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- I direct to the Minister representing the Minister for Defence a question which is consequential upon the question asked by the Leader of the Opposition about the calamitous financial arrangements for the Fill aircraft. How much is the Australian Government paying each month by way of interest on money borrowed in the United States to pay for the enormous cost of the FI 1 1 purchase, over and above the original contract price? If the Minister has not the information ready, will he please undertake to get it for us? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>608</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JZQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">ANDERSON, Kenneth</name>
<name role="display">Senator ANDERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Yes. I shall refer the question to the Minister for Defence and I hope to produce an answer that will give the information which the honourable senator seeks. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>609</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>HOUSING</title>
<page.no>609</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>609</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KAS</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WEBSTER, James</name>
<name role="display">Senator WEBSTER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I direct a question to the Minister for Housing. Was the Federal Treasurer, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr McMahon,</inline> correctly reported as saying that home building in Australia at the beginning of this year had reached record proportions? Was he further correctly reported as saying that in the 3 months to January dwelling approvals, seasonally adjusted, were at the record annual rate of more than 150,000? If this is so, does the Minister feel that the housing industry in general can look forward to a calendar year of very sound business? </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>609</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K28</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">RANKIN, Annabelle</name>
<name role="display">Senator Dame ANNABELLE RANKIN</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honourable senator is quite correct in his reference to the remarks of the Treasurer concerning the record housing figures. As I said in this chamber either last week or the week before, the last year has been a record one, with 130,000 commencements. Also we have the record figures of approvals which have been stated by the Treasurer. As I said on that occasion, this all points to the very healthy condition of the home building industry. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>609</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>TULLAMAKINE AIRPORT</title>
<page.no>609</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>609</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KAS</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WEBSTER, James</name>
<name role="display">Senator WEBSTER</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question is directed to the Minister for Works. Was he correctly reported in Hansard in his answer to my question relating to the readiness for operation of the Tullamarine Airport? In fact, will not the Tullamarine international terminal, be ready for use prior to the domestic terminal? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>609</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KBW</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WRIGHT, Reginald</name>
<name role="display">Senator WRIGHT</name>
</talker>
<para>- The actual position is that the completion date for the international terminal is in the first half of J 970 and the completion date for the domestic terminal is in the first half of 1971. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>609</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>AIRCRAFT INDUSTRY</title>
<page.no>609</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>609</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K1F</name.id>
<electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">POYSER, Arthur</name>
<name role="display">Senator POYSER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Can the Minister for Supply advise the Senate whether it is a fact that the Macchi construction programme is to be curtailed or phased out? If that is so, will it mean further dismissals in the aircraft industry in Victoria? Would the purchase of trainer aircraft in Japan, as referred to in a previous question, further aggravate the crisis that the aircraft industry is now facing? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>609</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JZQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">ANDERSON, Kenneth</name>
<name role="display">Senator ANDERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Let me deal with the second part of the question first. I noted the earlier question, which was directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Air. The situation would be that any number of overseas companies in the aircraft industry would attempt to offer types of aircraft to the various Services. I do not think there is anything unique in that, lt is quite clear that one should not draw conclusions from that. In other words, if there was an aircraft industry in Japan and it was producing a small aircraft, it would be quite competent for its representatives to come to Australia and to offer to sell their aircraft to the Services. I do not attach any great importance to that at this stage because, as I have said here several times recently, the whole question of Australia's requirements for the Services is currently under examination. </para>
</talk.start>
<para>Let me deal now with the first part of the question. The Macchi programme has about 2 or 3 years - I think 3 years - to go. The aircraft will be provided to the Royal Australian Air Force as it requires the replacements. It is my understanding that the programme will go on until 1972. It is true to say that the present figure in relation to the Macchi requirement is under consideration. However, it is equally true to say that there are other considerations and other prospects which possibly will increase the figures in relation to the Macchi programme. To sum up, present requirements of the Services arc currently under very immediate examination. That examination, which is proceeding at the present time, involves myself and the Department of Supply, the Service departments and the Minister for Defence. </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>609</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>CHOWILLA DAM</title>
<page.no>609</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>609</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K1Y</name.id>
<electorate>SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BISHOP, Reginald</name>
<name role="display">Senator BISHOP</name>
</talker>
<para>- Is the Minister representing the Minister for National Development aware that last Sunday in Adelaide the Minister for National Development in an address to a Methodist Church congregation said that if salinity in the Murray River could be controlled it would put up the value of Chowilla? As this statement claims to represent the real cause for the rejection of the Chowilla project, I ask what the Minister is doing in relation to the control of salinity in the upper regions of the Murray River. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>610</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K5K</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>LP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SCOTT, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Senator SCOTT</name>
</talker>
<para>- I think I answered a question on similar lines a little earlier today when I said that the Government had made about $3m available for two projects to reduce the salinity of the Murray River. As to the part of the honourable senator's question in which he said that Chowilla Dam should be considered as an alternative to the Dartmouth project. I might say that whatever is done at Chowilla it will give the South Australian people less water than will be available from the Dartmouth project. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>610</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>RIVER MURRAY</title>
<page.no>610</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>610</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K2N</name.id>
<electorate>SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">RIDLEY, Clement</name>
<name role="display">Senator RIDLEY</name>
</talker>
<para>- I direct my question to the Minister representing the Minister for National Development. On 25th February of this yearI asked of the Minister a question arising out of a nebulous answer he gave asto the amountof money being spent by the Commonwealth Government on the salinity problem in the River Murray. My question has two parts each requiring a simple answer. In view of the answer that the Minister just gave to <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Bishop,</inline> I will now repeat my question. I asked: </para>
</talk.start>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>Whatare the details of the two projectsto combat salinity in the River Murray instituted by the Commonwealth Government at its own expense? </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>What will be the effect of this expenditure on the quality of water of the River Murray reaching South Australia? </para>
</item>
</list>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>610</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K1Y</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BISHOP, Reginald</name>
<name role="display">Senator Bishop</name>
</talker>
<para>- On what date was that asked? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>610</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K2N</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">RIDLEY, Clement</name>
<name role="display">Senator RIDLEY</name>
</talker>
<para>- That was one month ago. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>610</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K5K</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SCOTT, Malcolm</name>
<name role="display">Senator Scott</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am sorry, but I do not get the honourable senator's question. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>610</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K2N</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">RIDLEY, Clement</name>
<name role="display">Senator RIDLEY</name>
</talker>
<para>- The Minister has replied twice in vague terms, but I asked a specific question. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<para>Question not answered. </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>610</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>TELEPHONE SERVICES</title>
<page.no>610</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>610</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>CJO</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WHEELDON, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator WHEELDON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Is the Minister representing the PostmasterGeneral aware of the serious difficulties being experienced by telephone users in Perth owing to the overloading of switches at the old Perth telephone exchange, which apparently is still being used? Is it a fact that there will be no improvement in the position until the new exchange in Pier Street. Perth is completed? Is the exchange yet completed? If not, as it was anticipated that the new exchange would be completed by about August of last year will the Minister indicate what stage the erection of the exchange has reached and when the people of Perth can expect to have a satisfactory telephone service? </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>610</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K28</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">RANKIN, Annabelle</name>
<name role="display">Senator Dame ANNA BELLE RANKIN</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honourable senator has drawn the PostmasterGeneral's attention to the difficulties of the telephone service in the city of Perth. He has asked when the new exchange may be in operation. I will endeavour to get that information for him from the PostmasterGeneral. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>610</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>MALTA</title>
<page.no>610</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>610</page.no>