1292 Estimates 1961-62. [ REPRESENTATIVES..' siaes16-2
Director-General of Security, one would
imagine that the Government would take
some further action to see that she did not
remain a resident of Australia but if the
Government attempted to send her out of
Australia, obviously it would be obliged to
reveal in the courts at least some of the
grounds on which a certificate of naturalization
has been refused.
I have only a few minutes left so I shall
refer to only one other case which concerns
a Portuguese gentleman also. He has been
resident in Australia for many years. He
was deported from Portugal as a young
man. He has never been inside a police
court in Australia or in his own country.
According to him-and I have no ' reason
to doubt him, and knowing what we do
about the Government of Portugal it could
be possible-he was seized and put on a
ship because he was the secretary of his
local municipal workers union. He was
sent to Portuguese Timor, and after a
number of years there he managed to come
to Australia. For many years he has been
~ rking on the Sydney waterfront. This
' wan applied for a certificate of naturalization
and, on the basis of a security report.
it was refused.
I think there should be some answer to
e details of these cases that have been
* vealed to mc. There should be some
opportunity for these people to reply to
some of the allegations and charges that
are made against them. If this is the type
of activity in which the security organization
is engaged, how can any member of the
Australian community have confidence in it?
I ask the Prime Minister and the Attorney-
General ( Sir Garfield Barwick), who share
the responsibility for this organization, to
give some answer to this criticism.
e Mr. MENZIES ( Kooyong-Prime Minis-
Wer and Minister for External Affairs)
[ 3.59.-I do not propose to detain the committee,
but I want to say a few words about
what has now become an annual feature of
. thiesoe Enstima. tes -a discussion on educa-
Before I do that, I might perhaps
Orelieve the mind of my friend who spoke
about tourism by saying to him that if he
looks in the estimates of the Department
of Trade he will find that this year our subvention
to the Australian National Travel Association is œ 150,000, having risen to
that amount by stages over a period of
years. I am not going to rehearse what I have
frequently spoken about before-the attitude
of the Government to the education problem
-because that is quite well known, but I
do think perhaps I might, in a very
few words, bring up to date what I have
said before. I first of all clear away one or
two misconceptions. Several speakers have
quoted figures-not always identicalrepresenting
the percentage of gross national
product which Australian expenditure on
education represents, and have compared
that unfavorably with expenditure in other
countries. It is very dangerous to make these
comparisons too hastily because, in fact,
in at least some of the countries which have
been set up by way of comparison, 90 per
cent. of the expenditure on primary and
secondary schools and so on is government
expenditure. In Australia, it -happens that
75 per cent. of expenditure on education
is government expenditure and the other
per cent, is the result of other causes, and
comes from other sources. Therefore, a
precise comparison cannot be made. If, in
Australia, 90 per cent. were dealt with in
what in effect would be government schools
and institutions, then the percentage that
educational expenditure would represent
here would rise quite materially, as must be
quite clear to honorable members.
Another honorable member had something
to say about the pressure that immigration
had put on the capacity of the States
in this matter. indeed, he and several others
have sought to create an impression that we
are in a critical condition, that the whole
State educational structure is in effect in a
state of crisis. There are two answers to
that, and I shall just mention each of them
quite briefly. in the first place, let me say
that the increase in government school enrolments
was about 7 per cent. in 1952.
That percentage has diminished year by
year, and by 1960 was only 31 per cent.
And that fall is expected to continue until
the annual increase represents something of
the order of 2 per cent. These figures do
not demonstrate a crisis. On the contrary,
they demonstrate that the pressure of
demand is rising not at the rapid rate of
which it was rising six or seven years ago,
but at a very much more moderate one.
Estimates 1961-62.
EEsittmi1a9atet1e( -6sS6 P . T1 E916B91E1-R6. ] 2 . 1293
The second thing I want to say is that
it has become quite the fashion now to say
that the Commonwealth sits idly by. I have
been accused of the most frightful indifference
to the educational demands of the
country, and I find that a rather odd allegation
to be made against me, since I venture
to say that no Prime Minister has been so
active in this field as I have and that with the
complete support of both sides of this Parliament.
The fact that to-day the Commonwealth
is spending fifteen times as much on
universities as it was spending ten years ago
is trifling to some, I suppose, but it is worth
recalling. The fact that we -have done so
much in the university field has rather
created a false impression in the public
mind, an impression which is carefully fostered
by some people, that we are making no
contribution whatever to the State problem
of primary and secondary education.
What are the facts? It is quite true that
we do not make specific grants, but, before
people become too steeped in gloom, let
me say that our Commonwealth general
revenue grants to the States have risen
during my term-over this decade-from
f102,000,000 to an estimated E302,000,000
this year. In other words, it has trebled
in that time. The expenditure by the States
from Consolidated Revenue on education,
this field in which we are supposed
indifferently to have starved them, was, in
round figures, œ 38,000,000 in 1950-51, and
œ 140,000,000 in 1960-61. So that, in spite
of this beggarly treatment of which we are
accused, the States were able to increase
their expenditure on education from
œ 38,000,000 to œ 140,000,000 over a period
of time in which our revenue grants to the
States were trebled. I venture to say that
those are very remarkable figures.
Turning to the capital side, I say once
. wmoreh thaot althloeugh I think that on the
the States have coped splendidly with
their educational problem, they certainly
could not have coped with the building
demand, the capital establishment of their
schools, if it had not been for the treatO
fmiresnt t tipmroev idined thbey hthisitso rGy oovfe rnthme enCto mfomr otnh-e
wealth, because, beginning with 1951-52,
this Government has found from taxation,
from the Budget and from general Commonwealth
resources, an average of about
œ 80,000,000 a year by way of assistance to State works programmes. In other
words, the short fall of loan raisings for
approved programmes has always been
taken up by us and, over that period, that
has in fact averaged no less than
œ 80,000,000 a year. In one year it was up
as high as œ E152,000,000, and in another
year it was down to a relatively small
figure, but, over the whole period, the
amount provided was about œ 800,000,000.
Quite plainly, without that assistance, the
States could never have maintained their
capital expenditure.
So, on the revenue side, and on the
capital side, it must be perfectly clear to
anybody that because of the way in which
we have improved revenue grants to the
States, because of the new formula that
was devised to the unanimous satisfaction
of the States, a formula which took into
account increases in school population and
things of that kind, the States have been
enabled to do something of which they are,
I think, very properly proud.
Somebody wanted to tell us that at the
last conference of Commonwealth and State
Ministers the Premiers unanimously wanted
us to go into this field, that they wanted
emergency grants, that they wanted a fullblooded
inquiry. I will take one of them
by way of type, because that will be
sufficient for my purposes. I shall take Mr.
Bolte. After Mr. Heifron had put forward
his proposal very briefly, in a mild and
disarming way, Mr. Bolte said-
I support their case on the general level, but
I point out that in presenting a ca-se for them
we may be thought to he admitting in some way
that we are not doing a very good job in the
field of education. Such an inference would
not be correct. I think that the position in other
States is much the same as is that in Victoria.
In the current financial year, we are spending
close on œ 60,000,000 on educaetion, and a lot
of the departments other than that concerned
with education are perhaps becoming Cinderellas
for the benefit of education. I firmly believe that
if we can continue to spend at the present rate
we can handle the situation. I am perfectly
frank about the matter. I am not here to admit
in any way that Victoria is behind the door with
respect to making provision for the educational
requirements of the present generation and future
generations. Having said that he went on to say-
But I think that one aspect of education should
have special attention. That is technical
education.
Fstimales 1961-62.[ 26 SEPTEMBER, 196 1.1
1294 Estimates 1961-62. RP SET iVS] Etmes16-2
That was his view, and it is an entirely intelligible
one. But I have mentioned these
figures in order to remind the House,
which * hears certain things from year to
year with some regularity, that Commonwealth-
State financial relations have been
conducted, I believe, with such justice and
liberality that the States have been able
to achieve in the educational field the
results that we all know of to-day.
Mr. Reynolds.-But they all want more
money. Mr. MENZIES.-Of course everybody
will ask for money from the Commonwealth.
That is the easiest thing in the
world. You seem to think that we just
say abracadabra " and down comes
100,000,000. We have to be a bit responsible
in handling the finances. We are not
handling them theoretically. I said and
I repeat-ho-iorable members will appreciate
the significance of it-that these
figures demonstrate beyond doubt how
false is the argument that we stand by indifferently.
I have an old-fashioned preju-
* dice in favour of doing one thing at a time.
We tackled this university probleman
enormous problem-and but for what
we did, the universities would have been
complctely bankrupted and the development
of universities would have been
frustrated for a decade. I am very pleased
that we were able to assist the universities
and, I bzelieve, to open up a new future
for them. We then established the Universities
Commission. You cannot provide
for university development a month at a
time. You must do it as the commission
decided, and as we agreed, in three yearly
terms, the triennium, as it is called, and
we have just approved in this Parliament
of the current triennium expenditure. At
the same time as approving of it we told
the Universities Commission, under Sir
Leslie Martin, that we thought it very desirable
to have an examination made of
the whole future structure of tertiary education;
not just taking for granted that what
may bz called the traditional type of
university is the only answer to the problem,
but letting our minds run on to consider
whether we might not need special
technological institutes of some kind or
other. To meet the demands of the modern world there may be a call for various grades
or types of tertiary educational establishments.
For that purpose we have appointed
a special committee, and a very powerful
one, I think. It is widely representative,
containing in it not only high-quality expert
opinion but business experience and
financial experience. We anticipate-not
in a month or two months, because this
will be a long job-getting from that committee,
which will sit under the chairmanship
of Sir Leslie Martin, a report which
we can then take up with the States in order
to see whether, for the future, some other
system of finance must be worked out.
We do not decide whether th. ere is
going to be a new university at, say, Shortland.
It is not a political decision by us.
This is one of the problems, first of all, for
the State Government, because it establishes
universities and the Commonwealth
does not, and, secondly, for the Universities
Commission, which will discuss the requirements
and the appropriateness of what is
proposed to be done and then make
recommendations to us. When all that is
added to by the report of this committee
on tertiary education generally, which will
include technological education, then we
will be to that extent further forward.
I do not beguile myself into believing
that this is not going to cost more money,
because every investigation into a problem
of this kind comes up with recommendations
which cost money to implement. But
having tackled the problem of universities
in the broad we did not pause there. We
turned to that important branch of medical
training, the teaching hospitals and clinical
instruction generally. We set up a committee
to examine that. I have not seen its
report yet, but it came near me one day
and it sounded, even at that distance, pretty
costly. But, anyhow, it is either in or on
the way in, because we realize that the
work done by teaching hospitals in the
training of medical practitioners is a branch
of tertiary education that cannot be
excluded simply because it is not conducted
actually within the four walls of a
university. I mention these matters to show that, so
far from being indifferent, we have had
a lively and imaginative mind on these
problems. We have pursued these matters
( REPRESENTATiVES.] Fstimates 1961-62.
Estim1Sa9E-e6P6sT 2 E.[ M26B ER, 1961.] Esmas1912. 29
as and when we could, and pursued them at
great outlay, while, at the same time, our
financial arrangements with the States have
put the States, to use a homely phrase, in
funds" as they never were before, to carry
out their educational activities, with the
result-I conclude by repeating it-that the
educational expenditure of the States on
their own purposes has gone up from
œ 38,000,000 to œ 140,000,000 over the
period of office of this Government.
Mr. CAIRNS ( Yarra) think it
is very significant that the Prime Minister
( Mr. Menzies) has chosen the subject of
education on which to speak in relation to
the estimates for his own department. This
I think correctly and rightly bears the
assumption that he considers that of all the
subjects he could have spoken about in ' this
debate, education is the most important.
He began by saying that he intended to
clear away a number of misconceptions and
in order to make his speech more effective
he started by stating one hinmself. He stated
t hat the Opposition and other critics had
said that his Government had ' stood idly
by and had been indifferent to the needs of
education. This was not the position taken
by the Opposition or by the other critics.
Our view is that during the last ten years
the Government has provided substantially
for education but that it has not treated the
matter with the urgency that it needs and
that it deserves and demands. In order to
make his answer to our criticisms more
effective the right honorable gentleman
overstated them. He created his own case
so as to be able to demolish it more easily.
He had practically nothing to say about
our case. But in the course of doing this
the Prime Minister attempted to show that
there is not any urgency about the problem
of edu:: ation and that there is not a crisis
Ois nta tteh e tphree sepnrets ' s~ intut atdioefni. c ienOcniees neoefd endoutc aotvioernto
know that that attitude is not consistent
with answering quickly enough the needs
of education.
The Prime Minister began by saying that
O it is dangerous to make comparisons
between the proportions of the gross
national product spent by different countries
upon education. He said that whereas
in Australia about 90 per cent. of expenditure
on education is by governments, in some other countries the position is very
different. All this is true, but it still remains
true also that the 1.9 per cent. of the gross
national product spent on education in
Australia is not any more than half of the
amount that is spent by othcr countries in a
comparable position. When one allows for
the different significance of the types of
expenditure there is still a very great deal in
Australia to be concerned about in this
respect. The Prime Minister contended that the
proportion of new enrolments had reached
the highest point in 1952 and had then commenced
to diminish. This is also not strictly
true. There has been a variation in the level
of enrolments. However, assuming for the
sake of argument that the statement is true,
the position is that the main case for improvements
in education in Australia has not
been based upon an increase in the proportion
of students each year, but on the existing
deficiencies. The various inquiries and
reports made by educationists in Australia
have been concerned primarily with the
large classes, with the insufficient number
of teachers, with the insufficiency of buildings
and with the large capital requirements,
in existing circumstances, without any question
of increasing numbers of students. Ainy
one who knows anything of primary education,'
particularly in this country, knows that
the case put forward by the educationists
about inadequacies on present standards,
leaving aside entirely any increases in numbers
of students, has been proved up to the
hilt. I suggest that it is not satisfac'ory or
pleasing to those concerned with education
in Australia to know that the Prime Minister
comes into the Parliament and attempts to
make a case, claiming that records have
been created and that there is no urgent need
to improve the situation.
The Prime Minister has said that the
Commonwealth is spending fifteen times as
much on universities as it did ten years ago.
It is not, however, spending fifteen times as
much on secondary schools or on primary
schools. Certainly the amount spent on
universities has increased, and if the Commonwealth
record in respect of primary
schools and secondary schools was as good
as it is in regard to universities, we would
have much less cause to criticize.
Mr. Reynolds.-The problem is not
solved as to universities, either.
Estimates 1961-62. Estimates 1961-62.1295