COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
SPEECH BY
The Rt Hon. J. G. GORTON, M. P.
ON
APPROPRIATION BILL ( No. 1) 1968-69
Second Reading
( BUDGET DEBATE)
[ From the ' Parliamentary Debates', 27 August 1968]
Mr GORTON ( Higgins-Prime Minister)
, D: 8. O]-This House has been asked, in the
farm of an amendment moved by the
Leader of the Opposition ( Mr Whitlam), to
express the opinion that the Budget is
inadequate. I am sure the House will do
nothing of the kind and, indeed, I believe
that* the only thing inadequate connected
with the Budget is the speech upon it made
by the Leader of the Opposition. The
presentation of a Budget gives to an opposition
the opportunity to analyse a government's
assessment of the state of the economy.
It gives the opportunity to criticise
P รต ~ e objectives of the Government, to criti-
-cise its economic policy and to question the
methods by which a government seeks to
attain those objectives. It is perhaps significant
that virtually no -attempt was made
the Leader of the Opposition to use those
~ pportunities. Instead we listened : to a
speech which began with shallow and baseless
generalities, which proceeded to quote
misleading statistics to buttress an unsustain-
21691/ 68 able argument and which complained of a
lack of statistical information, although that
information was publicly available, and publicly
available to him. It was indeed-this
has not gone unnoticed-scarcely a speech
on the Budget at all.
To support what I have said aboult shallow
and baseless generalities let me draw
your attention to the Opposition Leader's
claim that yearly budgeting ' has denied Australians
opportunities for education, employment
and enterprise'.
As to education, the great Commonwealth
contributions through grants
to universities, grants to colleges of
advanced education, teacher training colleges,
technical schools, science blocks and
now libraries, have not been the subject of
yearly budgeting at all. They have been
triennial grants. The measure of the opportunity
' denied' is that these grants have
risen from $ 55m in 1961-62 to $ 210m this
vear.
As to opportunities for employment
' denied', registered unemployment is below
the total of a year ago or for that matter
years ago. During the financial year just
passed employment increased by 131,000.
Vacancies have been rising faster than usual
and placements of persons in employment
in July were an all time record for the
month of July. As to the denial of opportunity
for enterprise, the economic advances
of our nation since 1949 have proceeded
at a rate unparalleled in our history.
Mr Stokes-Say that again, sir.
Mr GORTON-The economic advances
of our nation since 1949 have proceeded
at a rate unparalleled in our history.
Gross national product at constant prices
has increased from about $ 8,600m to
S19,500m last year. Moreover, on the basis
of our recent advances we can look forward
to a further doubling of the size of
our economy within the next 13 years. The
accelerating growth and development
throughout Australia, which is there for all
who have eyes to see, provides visual refutation
of this generality expresscd by the
Leader of the Opposition, and the Commonwealth
Statistician's figures on private capital
spending provide the statistical refutation.
Those sweeping statements of the Opposition
Leader, made at the beginning of his
Budget speech, are just not true, or perhaps
I should say are just not correct. Nor is
it correct for him to claim that he did not
have available to him adequate statistical,
information. To give an example, in
discussing the growth of the construction
industry he stated that building approvals
both in total and for new houses and fiats
were lower in May this year than they were
last December, and then went on to state
that there was no more recent information
available to him and went on to take the
Treasurer ( Mr McMahon) to task for withholding
more recent information from the
House. In -fact there was more recent
information available. It is contained in the
statement ' Building Approvals Australia,
June 1968' and it was issued by the Commonwealth
Statistician on 23rd July 1968
before the Budget Speech was dellivered and
long before the Leader of the Opposition
made his speech. But the significant fact is that total building approvals during the
last financial year-this is what we are concerned
with-moved up from $ 546m in the
December quarter to $ 555m in the March
quarter this year to $ 575m in the June
quarter this year, which is a record. It serves
-no purpose for an honourable member or
a Leader of the Opposition to come into
this House and seek to support an argument
by selecting one month's statistics when that
argument is refuted by the year's statistics
and by each quarter's statistics, all of which
were known, ought to have been known
and could have been known to a Leader of
the Opposition.
There are other instances of attempted
sleight of hand arguments dotted throughout
the speech, but they merely support the
general glib approach I have illustrated and
I will, not weary the House with them.
Rather will-I discuss some of the main
Budget features-the economic objectives
of the Budget and the methods chosen to
attain them.
One of the Budget features is the vote
for defence. The Leader of the Opposition
claims that this is not a defence Budget. If
he means that all else is not sacrificed tt
defence, then -he is right: although the very
great sums appropriated for defence do
prevent us from doing many things that we
would wish to do. But if, on the other hand,
he means that the defence capacity of Aus
tralia will not increase during this year a.
a result of the defence vote in this Budget
-his glancing references to defence seemed
designed to give this impression-then he
is demonstrably and, I think, deliberately
wrong. The vote for defence shows the
importance we place on defence, and,
subject to what I say later, the
importance we will continue to place on it.
From the money appropriated' this year
the strength of our regular forces will increase
during the year by some 3,800 and
the strength of the Citizen Military Force,
by some 2,200-odd. 2
During the year, the Navy will take
delivery of 12 coastal patrol boats, the
third guided missile destroyer will join the
fleet in Australia, the third Oberon sul'
marine will arrive in Australia, while wor.)
will -be continuing on the fourth submarine
due to be commissioned next August.
Mr Barnard-You have not mentioned
the Fill1.
Mr GORTON-Oh, I will. There is a
great deal of defence equipment that is
going to arrive and this is why I am refuting
the impression that -the Leader of the
Opposition sought to give that there would
be no increase in Australia's defence capacity
this year. The aircraft carrier ' Melbourne',
having completed its extensive and
expensive refit, will rejoin the fleet with
its complement of Tracker and Skyhawk
aircraft. Work will be further advanced
on two type 12 frigates at present under
construction, the first of which is due to be
commissioned in something like one year's
time. The Army will take delivery of 27
light aircraft and helicopters and equipment
and arms worth some $ 331m.
Examples of such equipment-and they are
merely examples of such equipment-are
47 armoured personnel carriers, 700 Land
Rovers, 550 21-ton trucks, and ammunition,
arms and so on which it would take
too long to detail.
7) The Air Force-and this, I think,
interested somebody on the other side a
moment ago-will take delivery this year of
24 Fill strike reconnaissance aircraft. It
wvill take delivery of 12 Mirage fighters, of
J6 Macchi jet trainers which have an operaional
capacity, 8 HS748 navigational and
aero-electronic trainers; and during this
financial year the last of the Orion long
range anti-submarine aircraft have, in fact,
already arrived. So any suggestion that we
will not be better defended because of
money appropriated in this Budget is an
untrue suggestion.
As to the future we are now engaged in a
fundamental strategic reassessment. I will
not anticipate its outcome, but I will say
two things.
DFirstly, in the years ahead the amount
spent on defence will grow in volume, and
must grow as the -nation grows and as the
situation in which the nation finds itself
develops. Australia's capacity to fight will
Nncrease and the industrial capacity to back
-, gur fighbting forces will also expand. Defence
will not in any way be neglected.
Mr Devine-Who wrote this? Mr GORTON-I did. Secondly, there are
many competing needs in the years aheadthe
need to build our population, the need
to, strengthen our industrial muscles and
improve our technology, the need to develop
our resources, the need to improve education,
the need to eradicate poverty, and
many other needs. Meeting these needs, Mr
Deputy Speaker, will, in itself, increase and
improve our ability to defend this nation,
and under present international circumstances
we do not intend to sacrifice theseother
needs. We do not intend to seek guns
instead of growth at the cost of stunting
our growth. We will not ignore our other
requirements in order to mobilise for war;
but our forces will grow, their fighting
power will1 grow, the cost of defence will
grow, and this will be regarded as one
important need among many for the nation,
though not as a need which overrides all
else. I move on to consider the question of
welfare. We were told that this is not a
welfare Budget, but it is. It neither. solves
nor pretends to solve in a final way the
complex problems involved in selecting all
those who are in most need and catering to
those needs, but it does take significant steps
towards that solution. In the first speech I
made asking the electorate of Higgins to
select me for the House-which I am glad
to say they did-I said:
No nation can be great unless it seeks not only
materially to progress but also to take care of the
weaker, within it, the aged within it and the ill
within it.
This I believe to be true, and my Government
will make a continuing effort to
achieve those ends.
In health we have taken a great step
forward in this Budget by providing that
insured persons will receive the full hospital
benefits for which they are insured whether
in a public ward, an intermediate ward or
a private ward, no matter how long their
illness may continue and no matter how
long they may be required to stay in hospital.
We have begun a three-tiered attack
on the problem of bed care for those who
are ill. We seek to keep those who need
only light nursing at home by co-operating
and offering financial inducements to the
States in financing and running home nursing..
We are providing more daily allowances,
greater daily allowances, for those
who need heavy nursing care-for those
who cannot stay at home and need heavy
nursing care in approved nursing homes.
We are offering $ 1m a year to help build
State nursing homes so that -the increased
benefits we offer patients will be the less
likely to be absorbed in increased fees. As
I have said, we have solved the problems
of those who are insured and who suffer
long continued illnesses.
We know there still remains the problem
of enabling all our citizens to insure themselves
without hardship. We know there still
remains the problem of a possible rise in
hospital fees causing a possible rise in
insurance rates, but the Welfare Committee
of Cabinet and the Nimmo inquiry
into hospital funds is working on these
matters now and we are determined to
solve them. In the field of social services
we sought to identify those most in need
and selected, as a first step, families
without bread winners-families of widows
and invalid pensioners, for example-as
those to whom in this first Budget we
should give most. In repatriation we have
quite deliberately devoted the money available
to those who have suffered most from
defending this country and who are, terefore,
likely to be most in need-the totally
and permanently incapacitated ex-soldier,
the intermediate pensioner, the ex-soldier in
receipt of a 100% war pension because
of war caused injuries. There is the
area in which we think it most likely
that need exists and to which we
think we should pay special attention.
We believe that most ex-soldiers would
wish to see available resources devoted to
those who have suffered most in the defence
of their country.
We had perforce-because it is not
possible in 6 months thoroughly to overhaul
a social services structure which has not
been overhauled for some decades-to raise
social service pensions generally across the
board. This will mean that some single and
married pensioners who may need more will
not get more, but this problem, too, we are
determined to work towards solving. Our
aim is a society where the fear of the
crippling cost of illness is removed from
those who are able and willing to contribute
towards removing it through insurance. Our
aim is a social welfare structure which
identifies the most needy and sees that those who have no other means are provided
with enough to live on in a modest, self
respecting way without requiring any other
assistance from outside the pension. Our aim
is to encourage all to work and to save so
that they can live at a standard above that
minimum. What we want to see is that the
aged needy, the ill needy, those really suffering
from some unfortunate circumstances
through no fault of their own, are
adequately pro. vided for by the nation, but
that this should be done without destroying
the incentive to save and without destroying
the incentive to self reliance. These goals
are not easy to achieve, but we have set
our hand to the plough and we will not
turn back. Step by step we will achieve
them. Mr Deputy Speaker, a Budget is designed
so to manage the economy that certain economic
objectives are attained. If we are to
achieve the goals we have set ourselves in
defence, in development and in social welfare,
we must ensure as an essential a
healthy and balanced growth of the economy.
On the economic side this is the
primary aim of this Budget. We must prevent
demand from running to an inflationary
excess, but, equally importantly, we must
ensure that all we can supply and all we
can acquire are demanded and are used
for growth. The general objectives of this
Budget are to achieve this. Firstly, the
Budget seeks to ensure that there will be
in the year ahead a continuation and an
acceleration of that growth and development
which have characterised the year just
past. The Budget seeks to ensure that there
will be full employment opportunities for
the present work force, for the migrant
intake-we have made provision for a
record migrant intake-and for the natural
addition to the work force from within this
country. The Budget seeks also to ensure that these
things will happen without the development
of conditions in which demand for manpower,
materials and goods outstrips production
and supply. For the development
of those conditions does not add to growth;
it adds merely to the cost of growth and
to the difficulty of selling exports and earning
foreign exchange. Those conditions,
once allowed to develop, require for their
correction far more stringent measures than
are required to prevent their development.
In seeking growth, national development,
accretion to our strength, we do not accept
the view that this can be best achieved
mainly through government spending. So we
have in this Budget cut the rate of growth
in government spending rather than place
more limitations on the growth in private
spending. We believe that true growth
depends on the economic climate created by
a government and on a government assisting
the development by private enterprise
of the resources of the country. We believe
that true growth depends on the amount
of private investment and private saving
within Australia from Australian resources.
If we are to grow quickly, as I believe it
is imperative that we should, this depends
also on the attraction of overseas development
capital, without which we could not
grow as quickly as the times demand. We
have maintained and improved the climate
for growth. We are attaining significant
private savings. We are attracting development
capital. But the full benefit of this,
indeed the continuation of it at its present
level, depends on maintaining relatively
stable costs and prices. This does not mean
-any preoccupation with stability as such, for
stability as such is not enough. One can
Chave stability in conditions of stagnation.
But it is an affirmation of the need to see
that while all our resources for growth are
used to the utmost demands are not created
Cwh ich cannot be met from our production
. and from what we are able to import. We
C. should earn more this year from our
exports. Mr Beaton-You will need to.
Mr GORTON-We will, of course.
Mr Beaton-You will not, you know.
Mr GORTON-The honourable member
is underlining what I am saying-that
we should earn more from our exports.
CaB ucta piint alt hien flyoewa r asa hleaargde , woer cnaenarnloyt arse llya rgoen,
as we had last year. So, ' believing this and
C noting the trend of rising demand in Australia,
we have thought it necessary to
budget for a lower deficit in order to
restrain our expenditure. Two or three
Qimntoemrjeecntti oangso infdriocmat ed, thMe r DOeppuptoys iStipoena kera,
that honourable members opposite may
be thinking along the same lines. This is
the first indication we have had from them as to the economic objectives of this
Budget. The measures we have taken will
mean that the amount of bank credit
pumped into the economic bloodstream
could be reduced by about one-third in
the coming financial year.
Against the background I have sketched.
-are these objectives wrong? Are the
measures taken to achieve the objectives
wrong? On these points the Leader of the
Opposition ( Mr Whitlam) was virtually
silent in his speech. There were no answers
to the questions I -have just asked. It
appears that by default the -members of
the Opposition agree that we are right.
This is, Sir, as the Leader of the Opposition
said, the nineteenth successive Budget
introduced by the Liberal-Country Patty
Government. In those 19 years Australia
has been transformed. Our
steel production has increased from
1.2 million tons to 6.3 million tons.
Our output of cement increased from 1
million tons to 3.8 millions tons. Electricity
generated increased from 9,000 million kilowatt
hours to 44,000 million kilowatt hours.
Our population has risen from less than 8
million to 12 million.
Dr J. F. Cairns-Are you responsible for
that too?
Mr GORTON-Not all of it. Real personal
consumption expenditure per head has
increased from $ 760 to $ 1,020. Motor
vehicle registrations have risen from 1 million
to over 4 million. More than 70% of
occupied dwellings in Australia are either
owned by or are being bought by the occupants-
a higher proportion than in any other
advanced country. The number of students
receiving university education has risen
from about 33,000 to about 100,000. Manufacturing
and heavy industries have gone
from strength to strength. [ Extension of time
granted.] I thank the House and again will
not trespass upon its generosity.
Greatly increased production is coming
from the land and new vistas are opening
for Australia from its mineral discoveries.
It we keep the economy on the growth
path which, as a result of these years of
Liberal-Country Party Government have led
to the improvements and increases I have
enumerated, if it follows that path which
it has followed for the last 5 or 6 years,
a child born today will, on reaching the
age at which it could graduate from high
school, enter a work force in Australia
with an economy two and a half times its
present size. That record of what has been
done, and that promise of what can be
done, provided the administrations which
brought about what happened before continue, is why I say that though Australia
is not yet great in the councils of the world
it is destined so to be. This is no record
of opportunities denied, as we were told;
this is a record of achievement and of
management carried on in a very real sense
for the true welfare of the people of Australia.
This is a record we propose to continue
and improve.
BY AUTHORITY: A. J. ARTHUR, COMMONWEALTH GOVERNMENT PRINTER, CANBERRA, A. C. T.