Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Wednesday, 16 September 1942


Senator LAMP (Tasmania) .- The first task of this country is to win the war. This is a fight between, not only nations, but also political systems. It must be increasingly evident to every one that the war must be conducted on the basis of economic resources. The country with the greatest economic resources will win the war. Some people tell us that the war will last ten years; others say that it will last only five years, or that it might peter out next year. I believe that it i3 more likely to last ten years. In confirmation of that belief, I invite honorable senators to study the map of India and the Indian Ocean. North of the Indian Ocean there is the great country of India. On the west is the Middle East, consisting of Arabia and Egypt, the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea, whilst on (the east are Burma, the Malay States and the rich Netherlands East Indies, now in the possession of the Japanese. Farther south is our own great continent of Australia. In addition, India is the gateway to the road to China. I propose to bring forward some startling facts with regard to India. The last census showed the population of that country to be 350,000,000. That means that every sixth person in the world is an Indian. At present, India is being governed by a war dictatorship. Under the Defence of India Act 1939, the Viceroy was given power to govern by decree. We know that India has a Legislative Assembly and a Legislative Council ; but neither of those Houses has any power whatsoever. The fact is that th people of India have no voice whatsoever in the government of their country. I emphasize that India can be made the greatest fortress the world has ever known. It has the natural resources required for that purpose. If the economic resources of India were developed as they should be, the present situation in that country would be improved considerably. However, the British people have not made a success of the government of India. As the welfare of all British possessions, and those of our allies bordering on the Indian Ocean, including South. Africa, the Netherlands East Indies, Australia, and New Zealand, depends upon the effective defence of India, Australians are vitally concerned in the present unsatisfactory position in that country. Therefore, the Government would be wise to suggest to the British Government that an Empire commission be set up to take over the government of India. Such a commission should be representative of every part of the British Commonwealth of Nations, with a representative of the United Kingdom as chairman. It would approach its work in the light of the economic development of the country, and the successes that India could achieve if it were properly organized. I shall give a. series of quotations in support of my suggestion for the appointment of an Empire commission for the purpose of developing the resources of India. The following is taken from a statement by Mr. II. W. Nevinson in a review of the Simon Report in the New Leader of the 27th June, 1930:-

The almost insuperable difficulty of constructing (not criticizing) a constitution or form of government to suit a minor continent including 500 native Indian States (nominally independent), races of about 222 separate languages, people of two main and hostile religions ( 1 08.000,000 Hindus and 00,000,000 Moslems in British India alone), 10,000,000 outcasted or " depressed " populations, also called " untouchables ". . . . Every one who thinks of India ought to know those bare facts to start with. If he does not, he should read volume .1. of the report. If he neither knows nor reads, let him hold his peace.

Is there a people of India? Can the diversified assembly of races and religions, with the barriers and divisions of caste, of language and other differences, and with the widely varying range of social and cultural levels, inhabiting the vast sub-continental expanse of India, be considered a " nation " or ever become a "nation"? Is not this a false transposition of western conceptions to entirely different conditions? Is not the only unity in India the unity imposed by British rule? British rule in India has done nothing to bring about unity. On the contrary, it has been responsible for those factors which have .brought about the present grave unrest. During the last war the same thing happened in India. There can be no unity among people who are starving. With a proper economic system, and all the people working under good economic conditions, unity is certain. People with some ideal to work for, and a proper economic system, and no trade depressions, will have unity in the economic field, and once that is attained it is not hard to get unity in the political sphere. Depressions are the only factors that bring about the rise of communism. Communism flourished during the last depression, and flourishes in India only because the people have no decent living conditions.

Take the case of South Africa, which has a great diversity of peoples. British rule in that country is less than 40 years old, but we know the magnificent effort South Africa is putting forward in this war. In that country a number of different peoples, with varying religions, races and interests, have been welded into a unified whole. They have made a very good job of it, and are an integral part of the British Empire.

I wish to direct attention also to what happened in the United States of America. In the days of unrestricted immigration great bodies of Dutch, Germans, Italians, French, Swedes, Jews, Spaniards, Scotch and Irish were scattered amongst the descendants of the English in that country, thus contributing to the present heterogeneous character of the American people. Otis, the well-known American patriot, wrote in 1765 as follows : -

God forbid these should ever prove undutif til to their mother country. Whenever such a day should come, it will be the beginning of a terrible scene. Were these colonics left to themselves to-morrow, America would bc a mere shambles of blood and confusion.

America has given all its inhabitants reasonable economic conditions, and, therefore, has built up economic unity. The marvellous war effort of the Americans to-day is possible only because of their economic superiority, which has been built upon the good economic conditions of their working classes. If the same conditions were brought about in India, India could do equally well.

I refer honorable senators to what has been done in Russia. About 90 per cent, of the people in Russia were uneducated at the time of the Revolution. When the first five-year plan was put into operation they made great strides in industry. They recognized that the defence of the country depended on their economic resources, and they set out to develop them, and are now in a position to put up the wonderful fight they are making to-day. If the same thing were done to exploit the resources of India, the British Empire would not be in the parlous position of to-day. The unfortunate fact is that we have missed the opportunity of exploiting the wonderful resources of the Indian Empire. The Indian Industrial Commission of 1916-l8 opened its report with the following statement: -

At a time when the west ofEurope, the birthplace of the modern industrial system, was inhabited by uncivilized tribes. India was famous for the wealth ofher rulers and for the high artistic skill of her craftsmen. And even at a muchlater period, when merchant adventurers from the west made their first appearance in India, the industrial development of this country was at any rate not inferior to that of the more advanced European nations.

Sir ThomasHolland, the chairman of the commission, and a leading authority on Indian mineral resources, reported in 1908 that-

The high quality of the native-made iron, the early anticipation of the p rocesses now employed in Europe for the manufacture of high-class steels, and the. artistic products in copper and brassgave India at one time a. prominent position in the metallurgical world.

It will be observed that even at that early date the iron and steel production of India had already reached a high degree of development, to the extent that the material conditions for the advance to modern industry were even then present. Sir Edwin Pascoe, late director of the geological survey ofIndia, reported in 1931 as follows : -

India possessed large reserves of coal estimated at 36,000,000.000 tons . . . India also had potentialities as a first-rate producer of iron and steel, but the industry was still in its infancy. Of manganese, one of the hardening constituents of steel, India produced a third of the world's supply.

Cecil Jones, of theGeological Survey of India, wrote in 1929 -

Especially important are the iron ore deposits, which amount, according to a con- servative estimate, to 3,000,000,000 tons, as against 2,254,000,000 tons for Great Britain and 1,374.000,000 tons for Germany, and art only exceeded by the United States with 9,885,000,000 tons, and France with 4,369,000,000 tons.

According to that report the continent of India could, if necessary, produce more iron than any other country in the world, with the exception of the United States of America. Mr. R. K. Das, in The Industrial Efficiency of India, published in 1930, wrote- '

India's iron ores are so immense in volume and so rich in iron content that they might be said to be wasted if not utilized at present, for her production might be the same as the average production of other countries such as the United States of America, Great Britain. Germany, Sweden, Spain and Russia, in which the average production was 16,200,000 tons as compared with 1,800,000 in India. In other words, the production in India was only a little over 11 per cent, of what it should have been and 89 per cent, might be regarded as wastage.

To quote the warning words of Sir Alfred Watson, editor of the leading English journal in India, the Calcutta Statesman, and Calcutta correspondent of The Times of London, uttered by him at a meeting of the Royal Empire Society in London in 1933-'

Industrially India was a land of missed opportunities and the main blame for this rested heavily on the British. . . . Though India possessed in abundance all the conditions for a great industrial country, she was, to-day, one of the backward nations of the world economically, and was very backward in industry..... We had never tackled seriously the problem of developing India's undoubted capacity for industry. . Unless India could provide in the coining years a wholly unprecedented industrial development based on growth of demand by her vast population, the level of subsistence of the country, which was now appallingly low. would fall below the starvation point.

Can we expect any people to take an in terest in a. war effort when they are living under conditions such as exist, according to that statement, at the present time? As regards agriculture, according to the 1931 census figures 73 per cent, of the population of India were dependent upon agriculture and only 2.3 per cent, upon industry. In Australia, 20 per cent, of our population are dependent upon agriculture, and 32 per cent, upon industry. I have made these quotations to show that the resources are there, and that the initiative is all that is necessary to make India one of the greatest fortresses of modern times.


Senator Collett - The honorable senator has overlooked the question of population.


Senator LAMP - I have by no means overlooked it. I have shown that it takes 73 per cent, of the population of India to feed the remaining 27 per cent., which provesthat there must be something radically wrong with the conditions under which the people live, especially as we in Australia can produce all that we require by the exertion of 20 per cent, of the population. All that is necessary is proper organization. A recent American observer, Professor D. H. Buchanan, after a monumental survey of economic and industrial development in India up to 1934, reaches the melancholy conclusion that -

Here wasa country with all the crude elements upon which manufacturing depends, yet during more than a century it has imported factory-made goods in large quantities and has developed only a few of the simplest industries for which machinery and organization hadbeen highly perfected in other countries. With abundant supplies of raw cotton, raw jute, easily mined coal, easily mined and exceptionally high-grade iron ore; with a redundant population often starving because of lack of profitable employment; with a hoard of gold and silver second, perhaps, to that of no other country in the world; . with an excellent market within her own borders and near at hand in which others were selling great quantities of manufactures, with all these advantages, India, after a century was supporting only about 2 per cent, of her population by factory industry.

In respect of agriculture, the judgment of Sir George Watt, Reporter on Economic Products to the Government of India, may be quoted. He said -

It seems safe to afirm that with the extension of irrigation, more thorough and complete facilities of transport, improvements in methods and materials of agriculture, and the expansion of the area of cultivation . . . the productiveness of India might easily be increased by at least 50 per cent. Indeed" few countries in the world can be said to possess so brilliant an agricultural prospect, if judged of purely by intrinsic value and extent of undeveloped resources.

It may be noted, also, that in . 1931 the Indian Central Banking Inquiry Committee reported as follows: -

The proportion of the population of India living on agriculture is very large, and it has been steadily on the increase. The proportion was 61 per cent, in the year 1891. It rose to 08 per cent, in 1901 andto 73 per cent, in 1921. The census figures for 1931 are not available to us, but it may fairly be presumed that the figure has risen still higher in 1931.

A century ago, in 1840, Sir Charles Trevelyan reported to the House of Commons Select Committee in the following terms: -

We have swept away their manufactures; they have nothing to depend on but the produce of their land.

A century later the Royal Commission on Agriculture repeated the same melancholy tale, stating -

The overcrowding of the people on the land, the lack of alternative means of securing a living, the difficulty of finding any avenue of escape and the early age with which a man is burdened with dependants, combine to force the cultivator to grow food wherever he can and on whatever terms he can.

In India to-day the people have no voice in their own government. My suggestion is that there should be an Empire commission to govern India and develop it economically.


Senator FOLL (QUEENSLAND) - That would not be giving the people of India a voice in their government.


Senator LAMP - I admit that sweeping changes cannot be brought about immediately, but I suggest that the reformation would be accomplished more rapidly if an economic commission drawn from the best intellects of the Empire were set up to plan the development of India. At present India is under the thumb of one individual, the Viceroy, who has supreme control, and governs by decree. If India were developed economically, and the people were given better working conditions, the incentive to revolution would disappear, and improved economic conditions would pave the way for a new political system which would suit every body. The only outlet which the Indian people have at present for their grievances is the Indian Congress, which meets once a year. W. C. Bonnerjee, in his book Introduction to Indian Politics, states -

It will probably be news to many that the Indian National Congress, as it was originally started, and as it has since been carried on, is in reality the work of the Marquis of Dufferin and Ava, when that nobleman was the Governor-General of India. Mr. A. O. Hume, C.B., had in 1884 conceived the idea that it would be of great advantage to the country if leading politicians could be brought together once a year to discuss social matters and be upon friendly footing with one another. He did not desire that politics should form part of their discussion . . Lord Dufferin took great interest in the matter, and after considering it for some time he sent for Mr. Hume and told him that in his opinion Mr. Hume's project would not be of much use. He said there was no body of persons in this country who performed the functions which Her Majesty's Opposition did in England ... It would be very desirable in their interests, as well as the interests of the ruled, that Indian politicians should meet yearly and point out to the Government in what respects the administration was defective and how it could be improved, and he added that an assembly such as he proposed should not be presided over by the Local Governor, for in his presence the people might not like to speak out their minds. Mr. Hume was convinced by Lord Dufferin's arguments, and when he placed the two schemes, his own and Lord Dufferin's before leading politicians in Calcutta, Bombay, Madras and other parts of the country, the latter unanimously accepted Lord Dufferin's scheme and proceeded to give effect to it. Lord Dufferin had made it a condition with Mr. Hume that his name should not be divulged so long as he remained in the country.

In Rise and Growth of the Congress of India, by Andrews find Mookerjee, appears the following passage -

The years just before the Congress were among the most dangerous since 1857. It was Hume, among English officials, who saw the impending disaster and tried to prevent it . . . He went to Simla in order to make clear to the authorities how almost desperate the situation had become. It is probable that, his visit made the new Viceroy, who was a brilliant man of affairs, realize the gravity of the situation and encourage Hume to go on with the formation of the Congress. The time was fully ripe for this all-India movement. In place of an agrarian revolt, which would have had the sympathy and support of the educated classes, it gave the rising classes a. national platform from which to create a New India. It was all to the good in the long-run that a revolutionary situation, based on violence, was not allowed to bc created once again.

If it was desirable to set up a congress to prevent disruption and revolution in those days, surely it is equally desirable to set up a commission to prevent revolution and chaos at the present time.

Reviewing 300 years of British rule in India, Dr. Ambedkar, a leading Indian, states as follows, in regard to the " untouchable " problem -

Before the British you were in the loathsome condition due to your untouchability Has the British Government done anything to remove your untouchability ? Before the British you could not draw water from the village well. Has the British Government secured you the right to the well? Before the "British you could not enter the temple. Can you enter now? Before the British you were denied entry into the police force. Does the British Government admit you in the force? Before the British you were not allowed to serve in the military, ls that career now open to you? Gentlemen, to none of these questions you can give an affirmative answer. Those who have held so much power over the country for such a long time must have done some good. But there is certainly no fundamental improvement in your position. So far as you arc concerned, the British Government has accepted the arrangements as it found them, and has .preserved them faithfully in the manner of the Chinese tailor who, when given an old coat as a pattern, produced" with pride an exact replica, rents, patches and all. Your wrongs have remained as open sores and they have not been righted . . .

Nobody can remove your grievances as well as you can, and you cannot remove them unless you get political power in your hands. No share of this political power can come to you so long as the British Government remains as it is. It is only in a Swaraj constitution that you stand any chance of getting the political power into your own hands, without which you cannot bring salvation to your people.

These facts are an indictment of the existing social and economic organization, which fails to utilize and develop the abundant natural resources of India to supply the needs of the population. But they are not a proof of overpopulation. On the contrary, it is universally admitted by the experts that a correct utilization of Indian resources could support, on an abundant standard, a considerably larger population than exists or is in prospect in the near future in India. More than one-third of the present cultivable area in India has not yet been brought into cultivation, whilst the present cultivated area is tilled under such primitive conditions as to result in a yield of about one-third of that obtained for a similar crop, comparing wheat yields, with less man-power in the United Kingdom. The surmounting of the obstacles which stand in the way of a full utilization of Indian resources is the real way to overcome Indian poverty. The position in India should not be allowed to deteriorate. That great country has all the resources necessary to make it one of the most powerful fortresses in the world. "We should endeavour to convince the people of Britain that there is a great opportunity for the Allies to dominate the southern hemisphere by converting India into a fortress.

In company with the honorable member for Bass (Mr. Barnard) I recently made a tour of Tasmania and visited the units of the Volunteer Defence Corps in that State. I gladly acknowledge the excellence of the work the members of that corps are doing. Their enthusiasm is unbounded, although they are working under most difficult conditions. Out of scraps of metal they have constructed articles such as lamps and bombs, and they have provided their own telephones, built their own huts, and supplied their own transport vehicles and petrol. They are entitled to the thanks of the Parliament and the people for the valuable work that they are doing. We are proud of the men of the Australian Imperial Force and of the Australian Military Forces, but we should also be proud of the members of the Volunteer Defence Corps. Regulations should be passed compelling all persons of military age who have been exempted from military service, whether engaged in farm work or in the making of munitions, to train for a certain number of hours weekly in the ranks of the Volunteer Defence Corps.

I draw attention to the position of young men who are called up at the end of December at the conclusion of their school training. If they fail in English, or do not pass in five subjects out of seven, they are required to submit to a further examination before they can obtain their leaving certificate. They should not he called upon to take the supplementary examination while in camp, but should be granted leave for that purpose.

Recently, I asked the Minister for the Navy (Mr. Makin) a question regarding the canteens on His Majesty's Australian ships. The canteen rights on certain vessels are let by tender, and I enter an emphatic protest against the action of the Department of the Navy in regard to the conduct of the canteens. It is unreasonable to suppose that because a ship's commander can conduct the ship's complement, be can successfully conduct the canteen. The widow of a man who was employed for private profit on H.M.A.S. Sydney was granted a pension of £4 a fortnight by the Commonwealth Government. Had the man been employed by the Young Men's Christian Association or the Salvation Army, or one of the other servicesthat are not operating for profit, but are assisting to supply the members of the fighting services with comforts, I should not complain, but in this case, a pension was received by the widow of a non-combatant who was working on the ship solely for his own profit. The granting of a pension to the widow of such an employee was a grave misuse of public funds. I hope that the Government will reconsider the position with regard to the canteens on His Majesty's Australian ships. On the small vessels, where the canteens are conducted on a co-operative basis, better results are obtained than on the large vessels, where the right to conduct the canteens is secured by tender. I am opposed to the letting of the canteens by tender.

Some time ago, I referred to the free distribution of apples in Tasmania. They have been distributed free of charge to schools, hospitals and charities. Now, however, the free distribution has been extended to the Army, and I contend that the Apple and Pear Board should be allowed to show in its balance-sheet that it has supplied members of the fighting services with free fruit. Too many apples are being wasted in Tasmania at present, and I desire to prevent that waste. If the Government has been good enough to supply members of the Navy, the Army and the Air Force with free apples, the board should be credited with the cost of that service. I hope that the Government will introduce the necessary reform in that regard.


Senator Fraser - At present, the cost is debited to the board.


Senator LAMP - That is what I wish to avoid. The cost should be shown in the balance-sheet of the board, as though the fruit had been supplied to a private person. It would be merely a book entry.

I am not satisfied with the uniforms issued to members of the Australian fighting services. In this respect the Australian troops compares most unfavorably with their American Allies. Each American soldier is issued with the following kit : -

J.   - Heavy overcoat. 2 - Pack carrier. 3 - Raincoat. 4 - Entrenching shovel. 5 - Two working suits and caps, 6 - Field jacket. 7 - Six handkerchiefs. 8 - Four cotton singlets. 9 - Half-tent, pole, pegs, and rope. 10 - Garand semi-automatic rifle. 1 1 - Respirator. 12 - Canteen cup. 13 - Two woollen suits (underwear), four cotton underpants. 14 - Meat can. 15 - Steel helmet. 16 - Six pairs woollen socks, four pairs cotton socks. 17 - Knife, fork, and spoon. 18 - Razor, soap, shaving brush, toothbrush. comb, toothpaste. 19 - Two face towels, two bath towels. 20 - Four pairs suntan trousers. 21 - Four suntan shirts, two black ties, one suntan tie. 22 - Two pairs gaiters. 23- First aid kit. 24- Rifle belt. 25 -Water bottle and carrier. 26 - Meat can carrier. 27 - Three pairs field boots. 28 - One pair goloshes.

There is room for a great improvement of the Australian fighting man's uniform in regard to appearance, quality and variety.

Australia is suffering from a serious lack of rubber, and we must do our best to make up the deficiency. Japan's entry into the war has robbed us of 90 per cent, of the supplies of rubber which we formerly enjoyed. In the United States of America the authorities are aiming at a production of 215,000,000 tons of synthetic rubber annually. They claim that they will be able to produce800,000 tons per annum by 1943. We in Australia have not. yet commenced to manufacture synthetic rubber. In this connexion the following extract, from an article by Mr. A. R. Penfold, of the Sydney Technological Museum, in the Daily Telegraph of the 20th August, is interesting -

At Electrona, in Tasmania, the Australian Commonwealth Carbide Co. Ltd., has been making carbide for 25 years. Near the works is a huge high-grade limestone deposit mined by the company.

Two years ago this company was producing 8,000 tons of carbide a year. This output has been stepped up since, and could be increased probably four times.

From carbide you get acetylene, and from acetylene you get neoprene - which is synthetic rubber.

Neoprene was introduced in . 1931 by the big American company of Du Pont, and highly developed since then. It is far superior to natural rubber in many qualities, particularly in resistance to oil and chemicals.

Here is what neoprene is, as least involved chemically as I can put it:

Neoprene starts with the formation of calcium carbide from coal and limestone. Calcium carbide is converted into acetylene gas on the addition of water. By treatment this gas becomes chloroprene, a limpid, clear, colorless liquid when first prepared. But When it is allowed to stand for a few days it becomes viscous, and with the addition of alcohol synthetic rubber is obtained.

In the estimation of many impartial technical men, neoprene is the best and most thoroughly developed of all synthetic rubbers so far - with the exception of the German Buna.

From carbide can also be made the Buna type of synthetic rubber, but neoprene is probably the easiest to make, because production is less involved technically.

Most of the technical information about neoprene has already been published in scientific journals, but the liner details could almost certainly be obtained from Du Pont if we wanted to make rubber in Australia.

We can make rubber in Australia, and I know that the Australian Commonwealth Carbide Co. is doing preliminary work to that end.

Our need for rubber is great and now is the time to start the manufacture of synthetic rubber to meet that need.


Senator Keane - Is thehonorable senator aware that synthetic rubber is now being made from linseed oil?


Senator LAMP - That may be so, but the manufacture of rubber from the deposits in Tasmania from which carbide is produced, offers a great opportunity to make up our deficiency of this essential commodity.

At the last conference of the Australian Labour party in Tasmania the following resolution was carried : -

Recognizing the great practical importance of a reform in the present financial system, this Conference is of the opinion that the time has arrived for the Federal Government to utilize National Credit, operated through the Commonwealth Bank only, in accordance with the National Credit planks of the Federal Labour Party, both for a considerable portion of the Federal revenue requirements of the nation at war and also in connexion with a large proportion of the capital expenditure on public works, authorized by the Loan Council, and which is now met by the issue of burdensome interest-bearing bonds, and that the Commonwealth Government be requested to instruct the Commonwealth Bank Board to enter into competition with the Trading Banks.

In some directions the Government has instituted a system by which some goods are rationed and prices pegged, but it has not gone far enough. The extension of the system to other commodities would prevent the purchasing power of the people, which is greater because of war activities, being used unwisely. On this subject the Treasurer, in his budget speech, said -

Expansion of bank credit, therefore, without a corresponding capacity to expand production would increase purchasing power without increasing the supply of goods and services. Increasing the volume of money without increasing the supply of goods for civil consumption not only creates the danger of inflation, but it sets up serious competition between demands for civil goods and demands for war requirements.

That can be prevented by a proper system of rationing. With such a system in operation in respect of practically every commodity, each person in the community would get a fair share of what the country produces. With prices and wages pegged, all that would be necessary would be to introduce a ticket system for transfers. If the system is operated scientifically, there will be no need for a policy of borrowing.

The budget contains evidence that since it assumed office the Labour Government has done an excellent job. Ministers are to be congratulated on their achievements. In a recent issue the Sydney Morning Herald paid a tribute to the Government in the following terms: -

The Federal Labour Ministry can justly look back on its first parliamentary session with a good deal of satisfaction. Though the sitting was short, it has undoubtedly enhanced the political stature of the Prime Minister, who has displayed since his assumption of office a firmness of purpose and capacity for parliamentary leadership with which few would have accredited him two months ago. He has been fortunate, too, in most of his senior Ministers, and, particularly, in the Treasurer.

I repeat that our. thanks are due to the Treasurer for bringing down such an excellent budget.

I take the following quotation which speaks for itself, from the Launceston Examiner. "Complete disappointment" with the performance of the United Australia party and Country party in Federal politics was expressed yesterday by the State Opposition Leader (Mr. H. S. Baker).

Mr. Bakerwas addressing the annual Australian Women's National League conference at Hobart, which he opened.

Mr. Bakersaid he had endeavoured to be loyal to the federal party to a reasonable extent, although he was not bound to that party in any way. That partywas entirely distinct from the party he led. He had no responsibility for its policy but, working in a spirit of co-operation in the past, he had refrained from criticism when it seemed to him that criticism was called for.

He had hoped that the United Australia party and the Country party would join together for the maintenance of the Government which they had formed, but it was not so. This applied also to the Labour party. So far from endeavouring to work in cooperation with the Government, it had missed no opportunity whatever of making party capital out of every political mistake the Government parties made. A change had been brought about which had put Labour in power, but it did not have complete power. " We must be prepared to give this Government a fair trial and see what it is prepared to do ",he said. " We must see if it can bring unity to the Australian people and knit all classes together".

All I wish to add to that statement is that if the Government pursues the course it is now following it will bring together all sections of the community, and succeed in overcoming the difficulties which now confront it.







Suggest corrections