Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Thursday, 19 November 1959


Mr TURNBULL (Mallee) .- The honorable member for Lalor (Mr. Pollard) has said that I and the honorable member for Hume (Mr. Anderson) will be tested. One would think that the honorable member for Lalor was the only honest man in this Parliament. The honorable member for Lalor has been tested to-night-


Mr Bird - And not found wanting.


Mr TURNBULL - He has been found wanting - not in honesty, because I appreciate his honesty; but he has been tested and found wanting in knowledge. His whole case is destroyed by his lack of knowledge. If he would read the second-reading speech of the Minister for Primary Industry (Mr. Adermann) he would see that the money to be collected by levy from the growers is expected to provide £50,000 annually to extend in a rational manner the promotion work already being undertaken. We have said that the canners are contributing, and the honorable member for Lalor has said that they are not contributing under this bill. But if the canners are contributing towards sales promotion of canned fruit, it does not matter whether they are contributing under this bill or in some other way. If I wanted to use the word " honesty ", I would have an excellent opportunity to do so now. One canning organization already contributes £100,000, but the honorable member for Lalor has said that the canners are contributing nothing.


Mr Pollard - I said that they are contributing nothing under the terms of this bill.


Mr TURNBULL - That is only begging the point. They are contributing and, because they are contributing, they have the right to be represented on the committee so that they can see how the money will be spent. It will be used in the best interests of the canning industry and of the men who grow the fruit.

I regard the honorable member for Darebin (Mr. Courtnay) as a very friendly man who has created a good impression since he has been in this place. I understand that he also is a good union advocate. In this chamber we have the democratic socialist policy of the Australian Labour Party and the liberal policy of the Australian Country Party and the Liberal Party of Australia. The difference of policies is the basis of the position that now confronts us. Apart from the Government's representative on the sales promotion committee, the members are from employer organizations. The honorable member for Lalor and the honorable member for Darebin want to have a representative of the employees on the committee to have a say in how the money that is provided by the employers and by the men who grow the fruit shall be spent. On that basis, why should not the employer organizations have some say in the management of the unions? That suggestion has as much logic as has the suggestion of the honorable member's. What about the mert who pick the fruit? What about the men who work in the cannery? Who represents them? The unions represent them, and they do a very good job, too, as every member of the Opposition knows. If the employers do something that does not meet with the approval of the unions, they are very soon told about it. Having begged from the employers to a certain extent, the unions then try to obtain increasing advantages from them. Of course they are quite entitled to do that because they represent the workers.

This whole problem may be regarded as a difference of opinion between the parties in this chamber - a difference of opinion between what is called a democratic socialist policy and a policy of free enterprise which Australia enjoys and which we hope to advance.

I commend the Minister for the action that he has taken and for the action that he has foreshadowed.







Suggest corrections