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, 24 May 1973
Page: 2582


Mr SNEDDEN Mr Speaker, I wish to make a statement about this matter.


Mr SPEAKER -Order! Is leave granted?


Mr Whitlam - Oh yes!


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


Mr SNEDDEN - The honourable member for Blaxland (Mr Keating) continues to make an allegation that somebody went to him. If anybody went to him about anything they did not do it at my request or with my authority. I have no idea whom the honourable gentleman mixes with and anybody who talked to him did not talk with my authority. While the honourable member continues to make the allegation that whoever the messenger was, was there with my authority, he is lying. If he continues to do that, that is the only way it can be described.


Mr SPEAKER -Order! I think the right honourable gentleman would be aware that the word 'lying' is unparliamentary. There are other ways of expressing it.


Mr SNEDDEN - I have used the words: 'If he continues-


Mr Whitlam - Then you should withdraw.


Mr SNEDDEN - If the honourable member for Blaxland continues to do it, that is what it will be because I have said that nobody with my authority went to the honourable member as a messenger about anything. I cannot be responsible for conversations which the honourable gentleman has with any other person, whether the honourable member writes the name on a piece of paper or does not write it on a piece of paper. Nobody had a discussion with him on my behalf and he ought to know that he should not persist with that allegation.

Mir Keating - Mr Speaker, could I make a further personal explanation?


Mr SPEAKER -Order! I think we have reached a stage now-


Mr Whitlam - The word ought to be withdrawn.


Mr SPEAKER -I put to the Leader of the Opposition that there are other ways of expressing it. If he states that something is not true, I think the correct phrase to use is that it is a false statement, rather than accuse anyone of lying.


Mr SNEDDEN - Well, it is a false statement.


Mr Keating - I ask that the Leader of the Opposition withdraw that imputation because-


Mr SPEAKER - Order! The Leader of the Opposition just withdrew. He said it was a false statement. He is quite entitled to put it in that manner.


Mr Keating - No, Mr Speaker, I want him to withdraw the imputation that it was a false statement, because I want him to explain to the House, to clear my name, why you and I both withdrew our questions and why, on the next day of sitting-


Mr SPEAKER - Order! There is no substance to the point of order.


Mr Keating - May I request that the relevant documents lie on the table?


Mr SNEDDEN - Yes, you can put them on the table, by all means.


Mr SPEAKER - Order! The honourable member for Blaxland cannot table anything unless it is done by leave.


Mr Keating - Have I leave?


Mr SNEDDEN - Leave will be given him to table his grandmother, if he wants to.


Mr Keating - I seek leave to table the documents and have them incorporated in Hansard.


Mr SPEAKER - Is leave granted? There being no objection, leave is granted. (The documents read as follows)

No. 166-20 April 1972

(3)   What was the (a) purpose, (b) length or visit and (c) total cost of each visit.

(4)   On how many occasions was the wife of the Minister or office holder included in the delegation and what were the names of the persons concerned.

(5)   What was the cost for the wife of those concerned on each occasion.

(6)   What is the total cost of all these overseas visits during the 27th Parliament to date. 4941 Mr Daly: To ask the Prime Minister-

(1)   How many visits abroad have been made by departmental officials in each year since the commencement of the 27th Parliament.

(2)   What was the (a) purpose of each visit, (b) name and department of the officer concerned, (c) destination,

(d)   countries visited and (e) total cost in each case.

(3)   On how many occasions has the wife of an official accompan ed the delegation and what were (a) the names of those concerned and (b) the separate costs to the Government in each case

(4)   What is the total cost of all these overseas visits during the 27th Parliament to date. 4944 Mr Keating: To ask the Prime Minister - What payments, other than salary, were made to each Minister during 1970-71, and what do these payments represent. 4946 Mr Keogh: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Health-

(1)   What amount was paid by the Commonwealth to Queensland (a) under the National Health Act as subsidies for both insured and uninsured occupied beds in public wards in Queensland public hospitals during 1969-70 and (A) under the amended National Health Act as a result of the requirement to pay a full $2 subsidy on all occupied beds during 1970-71.

(2)   What is the estimated difference between the amount paid under the amended Act during 1970-71 and the amount which would have been paid if the amendment had not been made. 22 February 1972 4956 Mr Grassby: To ask the Prime Minister-

(1)   Is it a fact that the plan which he announced in early December 1971 to remove 14,000 woolgrowers from the countryside involves families exceeding 40,000 people.

(2)   Is it also a fact that the established ratio of producers to other rural residents is one to four so that the evacuation of about 100,000 people is involved in the plan.

(3)   Is it the intention of the Government to establish refugee camps for the dispossessed within the capital cities.

(   4) Will steps be taken to provide transport for these people, preferably not in sheep trucks, as the $1,000 loan to be provided by the Government to those dispossessed will hardly cover the costs of moving 4957 Mr Klugman: To ask the Treasurer-

(1)   What is the amount of Commonwealth estate duty payable in cases where an estate passes to a widow, widower, children or grandchildren, and where the dutiable value of the estate is (a) $19,999 or less, (b) $25,000, (c) $30,000,(d) $40,000, (e) $50,000 and (f) $100,000.

(2)   On how many estates was probate granted during each of the years 1967-68. 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71.

(3)   How many of the estates referred to in part (2) were assessed for Commonwealth estate duty in each of those years. 4959 Mr Klugman: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Health - What was the saving to (a) the Department of Health, (ft) hospital funds and (c) medical funds by treating psychiatric hospitals and their patients differently to other public hospitals in (i) non-payment to patients and (ii) non-payment to hospitals, in each of the last 10 years. 13398 No. 167-26 April 1972

(3)   What was the (a) purpose, (ft) length of visit and (c) total cost of each visit.

(4)   On how many occasions was the wife of the Minister or office holder included in the delegation and what were the names of the persons concerned.

(5)   What was the cost for the wife of those concerned on each occasion.

(6)   What is the total cost of all these overseas visits during the 27th Parliament to date. 4941 Mr Daly: To ask the Prime Minister -

(1)   How many visits abroad have been made by departmental officials in each year since the commencement of the 27th Parliament.

(2)   What was the (a) purpose of each visit, (ft) name and department of the officer concerned, (c) destination, 00 countries visited and (e) total cost in each case.

(3)   On how many occasions has the wife of an official accompanied the delegation and what were (a) the names of those concerned and (ft) the separate costs to the Government in each case.

(4)   What is the total cost of all these overseas visits during the 27th Parliament to date. 4946 Mr Keogh: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Health -

(1)   What amount was paid by the Commonwealth to Queensland (a) under the National Health Act as subsidies for both insured and uninsured occupied beds in public wards in Queensland public hospitals during 1969-70 and (6) under the amended National Health Act as a result of the requirement to pay a full $2 subsidy on all occupied beds during 1970-71.

(2)   What is the estimated difference between the amount paid under the amended Act during 1970-71 and the amount which would have been paid if the amendment had not been made. 22 February 1972 4956 Mr Grassby: To ask the Prime Minister -

(1)   ls it a fact that the plan which he announced in early December 1971 to remove 14,000 woolgrowers from the countryside involves families exceeding 40,000 people.

(2)   ls it also a fact that the established ratio of producers to other rural residents is one to four so that the evacuation of about 100,000 people is involved in the plan.

(9)   Is it the intention of the Government to establish refugee camps for the dispossessed within the capital cities.

(4)   Will steps be taken to provide transport for these people, preferably not in sheep trucks, as the $1,000 loan to be provided by the Government to those disposessed will hardly cover the costs of moving. 4957 Mr Klugman: To ask the Treasurer -

(1)   What is the amount of Commonwealth estate duty payable in cases where an estate passes to a widow, widower, children or grandchildren, and where the dutiable value of the estate is (a) $19,999 or less, (ft) $25,000, (c) $30,000, (d) $40,000, (e) $50,000 and (/) $100,000.

(2)   On how many estates was probate granted during each of the years 1967-68, 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71.

(3)   How many of the estates referred to in part (2) were assessed for Commonwealth estate duty in each of those years. 4959 Mr Klugman: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Health - What was the saving to (a) the Department of Health, (b) hospital funds and (c) medical funds by treating psychiatric hospitals and their patients differently to other public hospitals in (i) non-payment to patients and (ii) non-payment to hospitals, in each of the last 10 years.

No. 166-20 April 1972 13313

(3)   What has been the (a) number and (ft) percentage of pupils at each school in each year who (i) sought and (ii) gained Commonwealth secondary scholarships.

(4)   Which of these secondary schools have received assistance under the States Grants (Science Laboratories) Act or the States Grants (Secondary School Libraries) Act and what was the (a) date and (ft) amount of assistance in each case.

(5)   What amount has been received each year by each of these schools under the States Grants (Independent Schools) Act. 5119 Mr Whitlam: To ask the Minister representing the Attorney-General - Since the Attorney-General's answer to question No. 3334 (Hansard, 6 May 1971, page 2868) on what occasions and with what results have (a) the National Labour Advisory Council, (ft) its committee and (c) its sub-committee met to examine the urgent action recommended by the Commonwealth Industrial Court in Moore v. Doyle on 25 February 1969. 3123 Mr Cope: To ask the Prime Minister-

(1)   Does the electorate allowance paid to the 125 Members of the House of Representatives and the 60 Senators comprise the following 5 cost components as determined by the Richardson Report: (a) car and other travel expenses within the electorate, (ft) postage stamps, (e) home telephone expenses, (rf) donations and (e) social activities.

(2)   Do all Ministers and those with the same entitlements as Ministers receive for themselves and wives (a) unlimited use of car travel anywhere in Australia.(b) free postage stamps and (c) a free home telephone.

(3)   If so, is there an apparent anomaly in Ministers and those with the same entitlements as Ministers receiving similar electorate allowances to private Members. 5124 Mr Cope: To ask the Prime Minister -

(1)   Do Ministers and those with the same entitlements as Ministers receive a ravelling allowance when travelling outside Australia.

(2)   Is it a fact that, if the wife of a Minister and those with the same entitlements as Ministers travels with her husband, all travel and accommodation costs of husband and wife are met by the Commonwealth. 5125 Mr Cope: To ask the Prime Minister - What sum was paid in travelling allowance, excluding the Canberra allowance, to each Minister and others with the same entitlements as Ministers in each of the financial years 1968-69. 1969-70 and 1970-71. 5126 Mr Everingham: To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry - Is he able to say what incentives Governments in Australia provide to reverse the trend towards adoption of planned accelerated obsolescence in consumer durables. 5136 Mr Wallis: To ask the Minister for the Environment, Aborigines and the Arts - What was the per capita expenditure on Aborigines for all purposes by both the Commonwealth and the States in each State in each of the last 5 years. 5138 Mr Hurford: To ask the Minister for the Interior-

(1)   On how many occasions in 1971 did public servants of (a) the Northern Territory Division of the Department of the Interior, Canberra, and (b) other Commonwealth Departments in Canberra and the Northern Territory travel on duty first class by international airline between Darwin and Sydney.

(2)   What were the main reasons for this travel by international airline instead of by internal airline.

(3)   What was the aggregate additional expense incurred in fares because of this travel by international airline. 5144 Mrender by: To ask the Minister representing the Attorney-General -

(1)   Have the Commonwealth Police completed their inquiries into the incident that was alleged to have occurred at the Prime Minister's Lodge on 23 December 1971 when several shots were alleged to have been fired and an attempt made to use a petrol bomb.

No. 167-26 April 197213409 5119 Mr Whitlam: To ask the Minister representing the Attorney-General - Since the Attorney-General's answer to question No. 3334 (Hansard, 6 May 1971, page 2868) on what occasions and with what results have (a) the National Labour Advisory Council, (6) its committee and (c) its sub-committee met to examine the urgent action recommended by the Commonwealth Industrial Court in Moore v. Doyle on 25 February 1969. 5136 Mr Wallis: To ask the Minister for the Environment. Aborigines and the Arts - What was the per capita expenditure on Aborigines for all purposes by both the Commonwealth and the States in each State in each of the last 5 years. 5138 Mr Hurford: To ask the Minister for the Interior -

(1)   On how many occasions in 1971 did public servants of (a) the Northern Territory Division of the Department of the Interior, Canberra, and (b) other Commonwealth Departments in Canberra and the Northern Territory travel on duty first class by international airline between Darwin and Sydney.

(2)   What were the main reasons for this travel by international airline instead of by internal airline.

(3)   What was the aggregate additional expense incurred in fares because of this travel by international airline. 5144 Mr Enderby: To ask the Minister representing the Attorney-General -

(1)   Have the Commonwealth Police completed their inquiries into the incident that was alleged to have occurred at the Prime Minister's Lodge on 23 December 1971 when several shots were alleged to have been fired and an attempt made to use a petrol bomb.

(2)   If so, what are the results of those inquiries.

(3)   Has anyone been apprehended arising out of the incident.

(4)   Have any charges been preferred.

(5)   Has any inquiry by the police or otherwise been conducted into the part played in the incident by the Commonwealth police officers concerned.

(6)   If so, what was the result of that inquiry.

(7)   Has any disciplinary or other punitive action been taken against any Commonwealth policemen for any part played in the incident.

(8)   Will the Attorney-General publish a full report of what happened. 5149 Mr Enderby: To ask the Minister for National Development-

(1)   Is it a fact that three Japanese Companies, Marubeni Corporation, Okura Shoii and Nipon Kohan and Kaisha (Japan Steel and Tube Corporation) have been negotiating with an Australian Company, Magellan Petroleum Australia Ltd, which owns natural gas concession rights in Palm Valley, south-west of Alice Springs, to develop the natural gas resources of the Northern Territory and export natural gas to Japan.

(2)   Is it also a fact that the Japanese firms have announced that they will invest some $1,000 million in this project.

(3)   Have the announced preliminary surveys shown deposits of between 5 and 10 million cubic feet of natural gas to exist in the area.

(4)   Does the project call for the construction of a 621 mile pipeline to carry the gas to the loading port of Carpentaria.

(5)   Does the project also provide for the Japanese Companies to receive big orders for steel pipes, gas liquefying plants, liquefied natural gas (LNG) carriers and other relevant equipment.

(6)   Can he supply details of the likely value to the Japanese Companies of the orders for this equipment.

TRAVELLING ALLOWANCES FOR MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT

Statement by the Prime Minister, the Rt Hon. William McMahon, C.H., M.P.

In response to representations from both sides of the House, the amounts of travelling allowances paid to Members of Parliament have been reviewed.

Along with his recommendations for increased salaries, Mr Justice Kerr in his report tabled in Parliament on 8 December 1971 recommended that travelling allowances payable to Members and to Ministers and Office holders be increased. The Government subsequently decided not to proceed with any of the three Bills relating to increases in parliamentary salaries and allowances. That remains the position. Travelling allowances are not covered in this legislation and can be regarded separately from salaries, electorate allowances and ministerial allowances.

The travelling allowance or Canberra Allowance, paid to Members of Parliament for living expenses and out-of-pocket expenses incurred in attending parliamentary sitting has been $15 a day since 1968. Mr Justice Kerr recommended $22 a day. In several areas of the Commonwealth Service in Canberra in the less senior grades, the travelling allowance now paid is higher than the Canberra Allowance paid to Members of Parliament. It has been put that to meet Members' increased living costs in Canberra and the increased costs of out-of-pocket expenses, the current rate of Canberra Allowance should be increased. It has been decided to accept this view and to increase the allowance to $22 a day as recommended by Mr Justice Kerr.

Mr JusticeKerr made recommendations about the payment of Canberra Allowance for party and committee meetings held when the Parliament is not sitting. These recommendations will be accepted.

It was also recommended that the conditions of payment of travelling allowance be clarified. With this objective, a review of the conditions of payment will be undertaken.

As part of his general review, Mr Justice Kerr recommended that Members of Parliament residing in the A.C.T. should receive half the Canberra Allowance. As this matter is now being treated in isolation, it has been decided that Members of Parliament residing in the A.C.T. will not receive any increase in Canberra Allowance but will not have the allowance reduced. These Members will continue to receive $15 a day.

Mr JusticeKerr recommended increased travelling allowances for Ministers and Office holders. In general, the amounts of these allowances have not changed since 1964. The allowances are paid for travel away from Canberra on official or parliamentary business. The recommended allowances were:

Prime Minister - $42 a day

Senior Ministers and Leader of the Opposition - $36 a day

Ministers, the Presiding Officers, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate - $33 a day

Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and the Leader of the Second Non-Government Party in the Senate- $28 a day

These recommended amounts of travelling allowance will be paid.

The current travelling allowance of $21 a day payable to Members of some parliamentary committees for meetings away from Canberra will be increased to $25 a day. Travelling expenses will be reimbursed to assistant Ministers to a maximum of $25 a day.

The new rates will be payable from tomorrow. 26 April 1972.


Mr SNEDDEN - The second misrepresentation to which I referred was the misrepresentation by the Prime Minister (Mr Whitlam) in relation to the Pipeline Authority Bill. The rest of his diatribe I will ignore but on the Pipeline Authority Bill our position was made quite clear in this House by my colleague, the honourable member for Farrer (Mr Fairbairn) who moved an amendment to the second reading of this Bill, that the Opposition, through its policy committee, had not had ample time - indeed, it had had very little time - to consider its attitude to the Bill and any amemdments of detail which should be moved. Therefore, a general amendment was moved to the second reading of the Bill. We made it clear at the time that, because of a lack of time to consider the Bill in the Party and because of a guillotine on the Bill which would prevent us from moving all our amendments at the committee stages of the Bill, we would have to take a different attitude. It will be seen by a reference to the journals that we voted for our amendment and against-


Mr Whitlam - Did you vote on it in the Party?


Mr SNEDDEN - We voted against the second reading.


Mr Whitlam -It was consensual?


Mr SNEDDEN - Oh, be quiet, you foolish fellow. We voted against the second reading of the Bill in this chamber and made it clear that when the matter came to the Senate we would give it a passage through the second reading stage because we were not objecting to the principle of the Bill but we wanted the Bill to appear in a better form than that in which it appeared in this House. There have been a number of amendments moved and about to be moved in the Senate and to suggest a change of attitude is to state what is wrong. What did happen was what was intended to happen and was the view of the Party. As to the interjection by the Prime Minister asking whether we voted in the Party room on this matter, the answer is no, we did not, because we do not believe in our Party that members who may form a very considerable minority should be totally ignored and overridden in their attitudes to policy, even if the honourable gentleman wants to use his numbers in this House in that way.







Suggest corrections