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
Wednesday, 20 April 1966

Mr SPEAKER - There being no objection, leave is granted.

Mr BURY - I point out that this list gives a complete analysis of the registrants who registered in the first registration and were subject to the first ballot referred to by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition as at 31st August 1965, before the registrants in the second registration were processed. The analysis reads as follows -


I would like also to refer to some of the reported statements of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. He suggested that my Department went through and hand picked all those who should be medically examined. Then he asked on what basis this hand picking was done, who was favoured, and who was penalised. He concluded with the charge that the Department obviously balloted in many more than were needed and arbitrarily omitted many to get down to the numbers required. This is a very serious, grave charge against - quite apart from myself: that is secondary - the Public Service generally and my Department in particular. As a previous permanent public servant, I resent this charge strongly. So, I am sure, do the overwhelming numbers of those in the Public Service itself, and particularly those concerned in my own Department.

Mr Whitlam - How many of the 8,000 have been medically examined?

Mr SPEAKER - Order! The Minister is answering the question.

Mr BURY - The Deputy Leader will have a further opportunity when he has studied the figures. 1 have asked also for a statement to be prepared bringing up to date all that has happened so far. The truth of the matter is that my Department can account for every one of those who has so far been registered-

Mr Whitlam - And examined?

Mr BURY - My Department can account for each category and what has happened in each individual case. In this process inevitably - I have already pointed this out to the House - those who were balloted in in the first, intake do represent a large proportion of those called up when compared with those who will subsequently be balloted in. This is because in the first ballot there had to be immediately available, after all the deferments and so on for all kinds of reasons which by now should be well known, enough national servicemen to march straight into camp. As successive ballots take place, when the time for marching into camp comes, there will he increasingly available those who are deferred from earlier ballots, those whose medical examination has since taken place, those who have not been granted deferments by magistrates, and so on and so forth. But what should distress everybody is the com.pletely reckless and irresponsible nature of the charge levelled by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. I can only express the hope that the pacifist clerics who follow his line will greatly admire the political morality >f this man.

Suggest corrections