PM Transcripts

Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia

Menzies, Robert

Period of Service: 19/12/1949 - 26/01/1966
Release Date:
07/09/1960
Release Type:
Statement in Parliament
Transcript ID:
207
Document:
00000207.pdf 4 Page(s)
Released by:
  • Menzies, Sir Robert Gordon
SPEECH BY THE PRIME MINISTER, THE RT. HON. R.G. MENZIES, IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTITIVES ON THE 7TH SEPTEMBER, 1960

SPEECH BY THE PRIME MINISTER THE RT. HON. R. G.
MENZIES, IN THE HOUSE OF REPAESENTATIVES ON THE
SEPTEMBE. i, 960
Before I refer to the principal topic of this debate,
I should like to refer to two other natters that have been
glanced at by other honorable mnmbers. The honorable member
for lentworth ( Mr. Bury), in a thoughtful speech last night,
made reference to the Public Service Board and offered some
criticism of the inordinate delay that appears to exist in
presenting the final report of the board to the Parliament. I
am impressed by that criticism, and I certainly propose to try
to get a better performance in that field. I know the reasons
offered for the delay, but I think that the delay is far too
great. The honorable member for Fremantle ( Mr. Beazley) made
reference to the National Library. Perhaps I should point out
for his information, because I know he is interested in this
matter that we have taken the steps necessary to appoint the
Council of the new National Library, and I hope to be in a
position to announce its composition within a few days.
Now I turn to the problem of the Commonwealth and
education. I do not want to deliver a long speech on it,
because the problem has been thrashed out more than once in this
Parliament, either in the House or in commiitteeo However, I
think that I ought to say something not for the first time
about the much-debated constitutional problem, the problem of
power. My friend, the honorable member for Bass ( Mr. Barnard),
pointed out that we seen to have no difficulty in making laws
with respect to health, medical services and pharmaceutical
benefits and in having Comuonwealth Ministers in charge of these
activities. I remind hin that that is provided for in the
Constitution. Je have express powers in connexion with those
matters as a result of the last successful constitutional
referendum. So no problem of power arises in that field.
There is no question as to the power of the Commonwealth
to make grants to the States under section 96 of the
Constitution. I do not know whether I am supposed to have been
dragged reluctantly to a knowledge of that fact. All I can say
is that, over 30 years ago on behalf, I think, of the State of
South Australia I advanced an unsuccessful argunont in the
High Cour' to the effect that the power under section 96was
limited to setting our financial terms and conditions. The High
Court, with unaccustomed unaninity, disagreed with me. It
rejected the argument and said that the terns of section 96
were as they stood that money could be granted to a State on
such terms and conditions as the Comnonwealth Parliament laid
down. That is now beyond all dispute, but honorable members
opposite, as well as those on my own side, must have this in
mind: If the Comonwealth proceeded to use its power to make
grants under section 96 in such a fashion as to take out of the
control of the States in adcministrative detail if you like
some matter over which'they exercise authority, then federalism
would disappear in a few years. The position of the States could
be undermined if that took place. Consequently, any sensible
government has been astute to avoid such unnecessary
interference. On the very day when somebody in this chamber
discovered section 96, and rather twitted me with notknowing
about it, I presented a bill to make grants to the States, under
section 96, with respect to universities. But although that
legislation contains provisions for matching grants, for the
distribution of the grants to the various universities and for
financial assistance to residential colleges, nothing in it
interferes with the internal management of universities by the

0 university authorities. The autonomy of those universities,
including the great State universities, is preserved. ie have
not interfered with natters of policy and administration which
belong to the States.
I think it is essential to have that aspect of the
matter in mind. It is quite true that if the Cormonweolth
Parliament wished to provide another œ 10,000,000, œ 20,000,000
œ: 0,000,000 or œ 100,000,000 a year to the States over and
above what it provides now, and if it could prudently do so, it
could say, " This is a grant to the States for the purposes of
education primary and secondary or scientific". But that is
no discovery. The essence of this matter is that if the Coramonwealth
starts to interfere with the educational policies of the
States, with the way in which they go about their job in the
educational field, that will be a very bad day for Australia.
Although I have been very active in this field, as honorable
mrembers know, I have always made that approach, in principle,
to this problem. Although the argumont varies a little in detail, it
is always put in some way such as this: First of all, it is
said that education is vastly inportant; it is a great
national problem. So it is. The Loader of the Opposition
( Mr. Calwoll) was good enough to quote me as saying that it was
a great national problem. I onoaged in the trifling task of
looking at what was said on that occasion, and it is interesting
to note that I went on to say that land settlement was a great
national problem and so also were wateo supplies and power
supplies. These are all vastly important national problems.
The whole aspect of the matter is that some of them have been
given into the hands of this Parliament for this Parliament to
do what it wishes in relation to then, both in principle and in
detail, while other problems of great national importance, as I
agree, have been loft in the hands of the States.
But, Sir, some say education is a great problem; it
is vastly important. I agree that it is. Indeed, I venture to
say with great humility, that no Prime Minister of this country
has ever taken such an active and constructive interest in it as
I have iyself. It is a very great problem. The next step in
this strange syllogism is t. at the Conmronwealth, except in
university matters, is accepting no financial responsibility in
the solving of this problmr; it is leaving the problem to the
under-nourished State Governumnts. The conclusion from this is
that the Coi. i: onwealth Government ought to be condemned. Now
Sir, the answer to all that kind of argument is a simple iater
of facts. I just state it in this way: The Commonweaith by
express legislation and by express grant under section 96 of
the Constitution, has assumed large obligations in the field
of university education. When I m: iade my announcement in 1958
of our adoption of every recor. n-ondation of the Murray committee,
the then Loader of the Opposition, Dr. Evatt, said that our
attitude towards this matter was nunificent, That was his own
-word. Did we stop there, or do we stop there? It is quite
true that we do not make an ear-marked grant to the States for
secondary education or primary education; but we provide the
States with tax reimbursement and with support for a w orks loan
programme, and a very large : nd material factor in both is the
needs of the States educational systems. They nmow it; we know
it. Everybody knows it except those who want to pretend the
Commonwealth is doing nothing abut it.
Sir, it seems to be forgotten that only last yoer
in 1959 there was a groat conference with the State Premiers.
The Premiers are not incapable, in ny very long experience of
thon, of putting forward the claims and deserts of their own

3.
States but in the 199 conference, a discussion took place
about the reimbursement rules or formula. A new agreement was
made for a period. of six years. This is an agreement an
arrangement created to endure for six years and containing,
in itself, all the oleoents of adjustment. It contains the
basis on which the grant is to be increased, having regard to
population and having reoard to increases in wages, with a
little accommodating factor in addition. That arrangement was
made after a discussion in which the State Premiers put forward
the problems that they have, among other things, in the field
of education because of imriigration and because of a rapidly
increasing school population. All these things were put forward
by the Premiers. They knew perfectly well that whatever figure
was agreed upon, it would be a figure that paid regard to their
educational needs.
Perhaps I might interrupt myself there to mak-one
point,-and indeed I ought to apologizc to the conmmittee for
rehearsing matters that are already well known. Older members
of this Parliament will remember that back in 1945 or 1946 I
forget the precise year the then Prime Minister, Mr. Chifloy,
arranged with the States for a form: ula on which tax reimbursement
would be calculated. It was a formula that was to pay
attention to increases in wages and increases in population.
It was worked out and it was unanimously accepted by the States.
In my own teor of office since the end of 19199, my own Governeont
has never held the States to that formula as adjusted on
the basis that was worked out. Jo have always added to it.
Year after yea-, wo have mado additional payments to the States,
sometimes running to as much as œ 20,000,000.
Mr. Cairns How could you avoid it?
MR. MENZIES: Jo do not have to worry about how to .' void it,
but the honorable .: ember would be none the worse for knowing the
facts. Indeed, he would be greatly improved. The fact is that
we did make those additional payments year by year and we made
then because we realized the pressures under which the States
lived and recognized that they must be given proper troatment if
they were to discharge their duties,,
In 1959, the now arrangement was nr'. do, . ts offect in
the first financial year was this: Whoroas in 1958-59 the States
got œ 205, 00,000 in reimbursement grants, under the formula
grants for 1959-60 they would got œ 2_ 14,000,00o Every State
Premier accepted the new arrangement. The Premiers did not
accept it, as might be suggestod, unwillingly needs must when
the devil drives but each of then accepted it with great
expressions of satisfaction, most of which are in the record of
the Premiers' Conference. Anybody who knows any of the Premiers
knows perfectly well that they felt this was a fine deal and
that it gave them a feeling of security over a period of six
years. During that period they would not need to co-ne back and
argue about the basis on rwhich reimbursoront ought to occur.
Indeed they could look forward to increasing roso. ircos to
discharge their responsibilities, including their great education
responsibilities. What is the effect of all that? I would like those
who think of the problems of educ.-tion solely in terms of
getting money over and above what is now provided from the
Commonwealth to-recognize something else. I take my own State
as an example, not because I iish to conpro the record df
Victoria with any other State so far as I am able to judge
every State has a very good record in this field but because
the figures for Victoria have just emerged. As a result of this
new agreement for six years , rwhich was entered into last yoer,
Victoria, which had anticipated a deficit of over fœ 1,00,000
actually had a surplus of over œ 300,000. That is an cxample of

4.
how beneficial this arrangement -ras. But here is the point:
In Victoria it was announced only the night before last that
the 1960-61 Budget for Victoria would provide a record education
vote of about œ+ 4,000,000. The 1945-46 vote, when ny friends
opposite were in coi-mand of the exchequer, was œ 4,800,000. This
year, over and above our universities grant which is, of
course, a separate natter on our account, we have provided
œ 54,000,000. By 1949-50 the vote had risen to œ 10,500,000; last
year it was œ 45,600,000. This year the vote will rise from
œ 45,600,000 to about œ 54,000,000. In other words there will
be an increase of between œ 8,000,000 and œ 9,000,060 in one yearin
a year in which it is said that we are starving the States
of resources to spend on their educational needsl I venture
to says with all moderation, that the statement that the
Comonwealth carries no responsibility in the State educational
field is utter humbug and the people who say it know that it is
utter humbug. What they want to do is to deceive a lot of
people into believing that primary and secondary education are
being neglected6 As I have just demonstrated quite cloerly, we
provide for those categories of education scores of millions of
pounds every year through this fully accepted and woll-received
six-year agreement on tax roinbu: rsements.,
Apart altogether from tax reimbursements which deal
with revenue matters, each year, the States come to the
Australian Loan Council, very properly, and say, " We want to
borrow money for a works prograime". The ro. uost may be for
œ 300,000,000. The figure is usually a little high. t4e discuss
between ourselves how ruch money can be borrowed on the market.
It used to be the sole business of the Loan Council to decide
how much could be borrowed on reasonable terms and conditions,
and no other Commonwealth Government ever supplneented that
amount out of Cormonwealth icvcnuo, In the last ten years
however, we have supplemented borrowings out of the revenue of
the Commonwealth every year. Instead of asking simply, " How
much can be borrowed?" vo have tried to work out a reasonable
figure which would give reasonable prospects to the States of
carrying out their works prograLnnes, including the construction
of school buildings a not inconsiderable itoe,
This year, as usual, we agreed to a larger loan works
programme than in the year before and in effect, though not
technically so, we underwrote it. I say " not technically so"
because technically we do not underwrite this programme. Ule
make a monthly payment to the States of one-twelfth of the
agreed upon programe, whether the money is to cone fron the
loan market or not. Theorotically, Twe revi e this in ' anuary
but in practice the payments remain the sani. So, in teorn. s of
capital and revenue provision, this Co: IIonr'oal th is, by the
financial machinery now oxisting., accepti. ng and discharging
enormous responsibilities in respect of every form of education
that we have in this country. I do not corplain about that.
I am proud to be able to say that this is so because nobody
has a more vivid understanding than I have nyself of the great
importance of education to oor nation.

207