COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
SPEECH BY
~ Rt. Hon. R. G. MENZIES, CH, M. P.
ON
BUDGET 1962-63.
[ Fromn the " Parliamentary Debates," 16th A ugust, 1962.]
Mr. MENZIES ( Kooyong--Prime Minishonorable
member for
I. rra ( Mr. Cairns) has a rich vein of
humour that I have always admired; but he
really ought to make up his mind one of
these days what it is he means because in
the last five minutes of his speech, he
Jbpted in his attack on the Government
two utterly inconsistent positions. In the
first place, he drew a picture of the Government
as full1 of low cunning. He says
we arc going to make ourselves more
unpopular in the next six months; we are
getting ready to do something in a year's
time when the election is getting nearer.
You can imagine the low cunning with
which this cold-blooded Government is
planning a political future. That rather
surprises me because after the last election
I was given to understand by the Opposition
that we would not be here very long.
Now the Opposition has us engaging in a
three years' plan, all cold and calculated.
7500/ 62. In the next breath, the honorable member
for Yarra has said that the Government
is frightened-frightened of the
future and of all sorts of things.
You know, I find it difficult to
believe that anybody except the honorable
member for Yarra could be at
one and the same time consumed by terror
and full of cold-blooded, low, calculating
cunning. However, I do not want to worry
about him now. I will do that if and
when he becomes the Treasurer of the
Commonwealth of Australia.
I want to say something now about the
motion of censure moved by the Deputy
Leader of the Opposition ( Mr. Whitlam),
and then I want to say something about our
own policy, in a positive sense. The speech
by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition
was very interesting. It was a not very
original exercise in phrase-making. I
seemed to hear, as I listened to it, all the
cliches which enjoy currency in half-baked
socialistic academic circles. I gather from
this morning's press that we may expect to
hear more of these in the future, fresh from
the National University. I know the honorable
member opposite who is interjecting
does not like anything except the sound of
his own voice and the distant waves from a
certain foreign country. But may 1, even
with difficulty, return to what I was saying
about the speech made by the Deputy
Leader of the Opposition?
He accused us-I made a note of a few
of his phrases-of ineptitude, unprincipled
conduct, neglect, callousness, incompetence,
and intellectual and political dishonesty. I
hope I will be allowed to say to the Deputy
Leader of the Opposition that for him to
accuse anybody of those offences really
hurts. It hurts profoundly. Presumably-the
honorable member for Yarra gave a hint of
it in the closing passages of his speech-the
country has suffered from our ineptitude,
unprincipled conduct, neglect, callousness,
incompetence, and intellectual and political
dishonesty for twelve years or more without
knowing it. That is the most astonishing
performance in democratic history. Here
is a community which, time after time after
time, has had elections, but we are still in
government. The poor simpletons, as we
are told-the Australian electorate-did not
know the kind of people who were conducting
the affairs of this country.
The CHAIRMAN.-Order! The honorable
member for Wills is interjecting. He
must keep order.
Mr. MENZIES.-Sir, I do not expect
honorable members opposite to be very
happy. Now that they have decided they
cannot win, they have determined that they
will squeal. Let them squeal.
The CHAJRMA4N.-Order! Honorable
members are still interjecting. The Deputy
Leader of the Opposition was extended the
courtesy of being heard in silence, and I
expect the same courtesy to be extended to
the Prime Minister. If that courtesy is
not extended, the Chair will be forced to
take action.
Mr. MENZIIES-The favourite phrase
which ran through the speech of the Deputy
Leader of the Opposition was that the Australian
economy was a stagnant economy.
We have heard this time and time and
time before. I have heard it ever since we came into office in 1949. Until we had
been here for a year or two we did not hear
much of it, but thereafter there were constant
references to a stagnant economy
The stagnancy of the economy, presumably,
is due to the defects that the Deputy Leader
of the Opposition has enumerated. Sir, I
do not want to labour the obvious, but
what has happened in this stagnant
economy during our dull, incompetent and
unimaginative regime? I will tell you, Sir,
for the benefit of all those who are not
sitting in opposition and therefore are not
professionally bound to disregard it. The
population of this country in that period
time has risen from 8,000,000 to ON
10,500,000. Mr. Ward.-You had nothing to do with
that. Mr. MENZIES.-I had as much to
with it as the honorable member. My contributions
to the population during that
period were all by deputy. The net value
of production in Australia has trebled in
that time. There are very nearly 18,000
more factories in Australia. There have
been enormous increases in mineral
development and production. The value of
our exports has doubled. Just under
1,000,000 houses and flats have been built,
so that already, in the proportion of homes
to population, Australia leads the won",
General revenue grants to the States, whk
have their own great responsibilities in the
federal system, are almost five times what
they were when honorable gentlemen opposite
went out of office. The loan works
programme-sustained by the Comma
wealth Government for the first time in th,
Commonwealth's history-is nearly four
times what it was in 1949.
But, Sir, there are, of course, other continuing
proofs of progress in this stagnant
economy. Too few people realize
that a cash deficit of œ E120,000,000-I will
put it in round figures-will of itself have
a most expansionary effect. We shall pay
out to the citizens œ 120,000,000 more than
will be collected from them. So far from
being timorous-I think that was another
of the words used by the Deputy Leader
of the Opposition-this is adventurous
finance. Add to the deficit the tax refunds
now being made, and it is clear that purchasing
power in Australia this financial
year will be uncommonly high. The real
task of any government to-day, as well as
of the business community and all sensible
citizens, is to get that purchasing power
exercised. Sir, there are other factors. The gross
national product in the June quarter of this
year-this year of so-called super-stagnation,
but a year in which no change
occurred in the consumer price indexshowed
an increase of 7.6 per cent. over
tJhoe oJfu noef tqhue a" rtsetar gonfa ti1o9n6" 1 . ofH ethree iesc ofnuortmheyr.
eposits in the savings bank, which are not
the haunt of the rich, amounted in 1961-
62-the financial year we have just ended
-to œ 157,000,000. Hire-purchase debts
_ ll by œ 40,000,000. The banks were
) ost liquid. Our external balances, a great
source of anxiety to us only two years ago,
rose and are healthy. And all of this has
occurred, Sir, and is occurring in a period
of stable price levels and stable monetary
values. I say no more about the allegation
that the Australian economy is stagnant.
Most people in other parts of the world
would love to live in a country with so
stagnant an economy as is Australia's.
I know that the professional task of
honorable members opposite is, to use the
Jd phrase, to cry stinking fish-to make
erybody believe that the Australian people
are in the depths of misery. The Opposition
thinks that once it convinces the people that
they are in the depths of misery, they will
vote for Labour-you have to be pretty
_) iserable to vote for the Labour Party, but
. nat is what honorable members opposite
are hoping for.
Now let me say something about the
bases of our policy. The first item in our
policy-this does not distinguish us from
-other people-is to build up Australia's
population. An increased population is
vital to Australia. Whatever fluctuations
may have occurred in our population, let
me remind honorable members that in 1949
the population was a little more than
8,000,000, but to-day it is well over
10,500,000. Our second great objective is
to maintain full employment of man-power
and resources. The two things must go together
if we are to develop Australia. It is true that in January of this year
131,000 people were registered for employment,
but last month that figure was down
to 90,000. That is a magnificent reduction
in that period of time. That process of
reduction will continue. I do not need to
be reminded that honorable members opposite
will cry themselves to sleep if the number
of persons unemployed declines to the
point where it disappears, because then they
will have lost their one great claim to statesmanship.
The reduction in the number of
persons unemployed has occurred with the
full effect of the February measures
obviously yet to be seen, and most
obviously with the full effect of a
œ 120,000,000 cash deficit yet to make its
mark on the spending power and willingness
to buy of the Australian community. Of
course I am optimistic. The honorable member
for Yarra, who obviously has never had
to associate himself with the compilation of
estimates, says: " But your estimated figure
for unemployment benefit is such and such.
That means you have reconciled yourselves
to a certain volume of unemployment." I
would be very sorry for the man who, having
approached the Treasurer with an estimate
of how much had to go out in unemployment
benefit, had to go back and ask
for more. Of course, when the honorable
member for Yarra is older and wiser
Mr. Jones.-When he is grey headed, like
you! Mr. MENZIES.-Yes, when he is greyheaded
like me, or is the honorable member
referring to the honorable member for
Barton ( Mr. Reynolds)? The fact is that
confidence-the important element in
putting all this purchasing power to workis
attacked and undermined by an Opposition
which relies on unemployment to put
it into office, but, as I gladly acknowledge
from the honorable member for Yarra, not
for three years-that is what I gathered
from his remarks.
Our third objective is to restrain inflation.
I did not hear anything about restraining
inflation in speeches made by honorable
members opposite. As far as one can judge,
the Deputy Leader of the Opposition neither
says nor cares whether anything is done
about inflation. In fact, at one stage during
his remarks, as clich6 followed clich6 I
expected him to say that inflation was a
bogy-but I have heard that one before.
He seems to believe-presumably his party
believes it too-that stability in the value of
income of any kind and in costs is stagnation.
This is something about which everybody
should begin to think. It is something
about which I invite the people of Australia
to think. Do they believe that stability
in the price level-in the value of the money
they receive and in the cost of things they
buy-is stagnation? No sensible person
could possibly believe it.
We have had eighteen months of stability
in the consumer price index, and in that
period we have conducted, or materially
contributed to, some of the greatest works
of development in the history of Australia.
Far from believing that stability means
stagnation, we have proclaimed that stability
is a condition of growth and development.
We have spent vast sums of money on the
Snowy Mountains scheme, on the standardization
of rail gauges, on a great project in
Western Australia, on a now-completed
programme in Victoria and on the Mount
Isa railway. The latter is a very great enterprise
involving the development of our
copper resources and the export of copper
from this country. We have given encouragement
to the coal ports, and we have assisted
the building of beef cattle roads in the
north. It would be tiresome to list all the
undertakings that this Government has
helped. They are all in the minds of honorable
members. The point I make is that
those projects have been completed or
undertaken by us in a period of stability,
which the honorable member for Yarra continually
confuses with stagnation.
Our next great objective is to see that
there is a steady and strong growth of
manufacturing in Australia, because manufacturing
is one of the essential conditions
of full employment in a growing population.
Every honorable member knows that. There
is a limit to the extent to which an increased
population may find gainful employment in
rural affairs. Everybody knows that. We
must find employment in secondary industry
and in tertiary industry for the fast-increasing
population that is coming to this
stagnant" country.
Our next objective is to reduce costs of
production or, alternatively, to prevent them
from rising. I am speaking now abopt manufacturing industry. I remind honorable
members that it is this Government
that has introduced investment allowances
to help manufacturing industry to improve
its plant and to reduce its costs. It is this
Government that has introduced export tax
concessions in order to give material inducements
to manufacturers to get into the
export business and not leave it all to the
primary industries. It is this Government
that has expedited tariff procedures. It is
this Government that has introduced provision
for quota restrictions in selected cases
of some urgency and particularity. It is
this Government that has introduced exp"
payments insurance in order -to encoura,
export industries. I think it will be understood
that all of those things have a great
bearing on costs of production because if
manufacturers in Australia developed N.
large export market their turnover wot)
be greater, their unit costs would come
down and they themselves would be able
to resist other pressures upwards on the
cost level. Therefore, the whole objective
that we have, in the case of manufacturing,
is to increase turnover, to facilitate the
maintenance of plant efficiency and to
reduce unit costs. With the primary industries,
we have pursued, and are pursuing,
corresponding policies.
Let me remind the committee-and I
find that I need to remind the Depu
Leader of the Opposition, because, fromn
first to last, he had not a word or a thought
to spare for the rural industries in Australia-
that the exports of primary products
by Australia produced most of tincome
which enables manufacturing iL
dustry to have the imports of plant and
materials that it must have if it is to grow
and to employ people. Here is the perfect
example of interdependence. Manufacturing
industry needs materials. To a great extent
still, it needs plant from overseas. It cannot
buy plant and materials overseas unless
we establish overseas credits by the export
of primary commodities. As a result, the
preservation of the primary industries and
the strictest attention to their cost level
have a direct bearing on the extent to which
manufacturing industry can grow and
employ the increasing population that I
stipulated for at the very beginning.
So I can add, in the case of primary
industry, also, that the avoidance of inflated
costs is essentially related to increased productivity
of the land. So far, the results,
in terms of increased productivity, of the
use of applied science or -technology, have
been quite remarkable, as has been the
development of new and wider markets. All
of these things are being attended to by this
Government. The Treasurer ( Mr. Harold
Holt) is a much-abused man. He has been
responsible for some of these things. The
Minister for Trade ( Mr. McEwen) has been
responsible for others. I suppose that I
-may regard myself as the innocent by-
) ander. These things have been done and
are being done by this Government. Yet,
Sir, the problems of production, of costs
and of export for both primary and secondary
industries were not regarded as being
orth five minutes' time by the Opposition
) hen it presented what 1, in my innocence,
regarded as the policy speech on behalf of
an alternative government.
It is quite clear, as all honorable members
who followed the speech made by the
Deputy Leader of the Opposition will remember,
that the first fatal omission from
that speech was his failure to say anything
about rural costs. On the contrary, he
advocated, in a rather broad and undetailed
fashion, a policy of acute inflation,
laughing at the idea that we need to worry
I'Pout the stability of costs because, in his
. Jpinion, stability, if we achieve it, will be
equivalent to stagnation. This is the
thought right down in his mind, or in the
minds of these academic observers and
-advisers of his.
I have stated the first thing omitted from
the Deputy Leader of the Opposition's
speech. I am talking about major matters.
The second thing is that there was in it
not a word about the need to encourage
the productivity of the export industries and
to increase export income, because the
Deputy Leader of the Opposition failed to
realize that those two things are essential
to full employment. Is this a draft of the
policy of those who hope to form the next
Labour government? If it is, let the man
on the land in Australia take warning. He
will be forgotten and irretrievably damaged,
and full employment will be imperilled by
lack of real nourishment for the great
primary and secondary industries. Sir, we hear a lot about full employment.
We are asked questions about it now and
then, and there are arguments about words.
But full employment is not an artificial idea
or something to be achieved by some sleight
of hand, by some artifice on the part of
a government. It is the desired end of
national and industrial actions operating
together to create a ' state of affairs in which
people are employed -because they are
needed for work. In other words, you can
look at full employment as if it were a
theory, or you can look at it as the desired
end of a great co-operative effort throughout
the. country-an effort in wvhich action
is productively directed and people are
productively employed.
The next objective that we have in our
policy, Sir, is to develop the basic resources
of the country. Honorable -members opposite
would * be hard put to it to deny that
during our term of office the most astonishing
development of these resources has
occurred. This development is quite right,
because basic resources and public works
are the foundations of real growth in both
the public and the private sectors of the
economy. I have said this before, and I
repeat it: I do not accept this artificial
division of the economy betwveen the public
sector and the -private sector. We look at
the works programmes of the States and wc
think that tbey are very good programmes.
They are very good indeed. Without them
and without our works programme, private
industry could not grow. It could not
employ people. It could not see them
housed and provided with transport, schools
and all the amenities of civilized society.
So we must not draw these acute distinctions.
But wve must understand that if we
are to have all these things, the roots of
development must be deep in the soil of
Australia. We must look at our basic
resources, wherever they are, and expose
them and use them in the service of thc
people of Australia.
Our next objective of policy, Mr. Chairman,
is to raise the standard of living by
massive assistance in housing, by the maintenance
of industrial peace, by large and
growing payments to the States for transport,
schools and water supply, and by
development generally. I lump those things
together. I wish I had enough time and the
committee had enough patience to enable
me to take them one by one and analyse
them, but I must lump them together for
my present purpose. Assistance in each of
these fields represents a powerful contribution
to the improvement of the standard of
living. In consequence of this assistance,
the standard of living has actually been
rising in this stagnant economy!
Next, Sir-I hope the Opposition will
pay some attention to this-one of our
great purposes has been to maintain the
public credit so as to ensure the maximum
capital raisings in Australia, a substantial
inflow of capital, on both public and private
account, from abroad, and, generally..
Australia's international financial repute.
Nothing is more valuable to a country than
a good reputation. The Deputy Leader of
the Opposition, speaking, I admit, with not
too much knowledge about this matter, said
that if we would give the Australian Labour
Party the chance it would redu~ ce the
interest cost of raising money on the public
account. That seems quite simple to do if
you say it quickly. It is not so simple
to do. As a matter of fact, it was quite
wrong for him to say this, because he
wanted to create the impression that there
was an unduly high interest rate on public
securities in Australia as compared with
other countries. I will take the long-termi
yield, which always affords a basis of comparison.
On the long term, twenty-year
yield, what were the current figures in July
of this year-that is, last month? They
were: Australia, 5 per cent.; Great Britain,
6 per cent.; West Germany-no one has
ever said that West Germany's was -a stagnant
economy, for it has been throbbing
with activity ever since the war-6 per
cent., not 5 per cent. as in Australia; and
Canada, which has great access to powerful
financial resources from the United
States of America, 51 per cent. Australia
was the lowest of the lot.
Having made those remarks, I just want
to make two particular comments. Time
would not reasonably permit me to make
more. First, we were charged the other
night with callous treatment of the unemployed.
I take it that that is the general
belief of the Opposition. I -hope that all
honorable members on the Opposition front
bench agree with that charge-callous
treatment of the unemployed. Mr. Ward.-That is an understatement.
Mr. MIENZIES.-He will always rise if
you cast the fly enough. That is an
understatement says the honorable member
for East Sydney. Well, well! Sir, I
seem to remember that the Australian
Labour Party was in office for a number of
years-eight years. I remember that well,
because I was sitting on the Opposition
side of the chamber. The Labour Party
was in office for eight years. It was not
notably deficient in talent, compared with
those now on the Opposition side. Labou!
was in office for eight years, had majorities
and ran the country. In 1949-my year'
grace, if I may put it that way-whe..
Labour was still in office, there was substantial
unemployment for a time. I am
not worrying about-
Mr. Allan Fraser.-Of course you ar--
not! Mr. MENZIES.-I know that the unemployment
arose primarily from a Communist-
inspired coal strike. But do not
forget that right through the period there
was some unemployment.
Mr. Allan Fraser.-Three hundred.
Mr. MENZIES.-You ought to study the
figures. I defy you to find any time in
the whole of that period when no people
were registered as unemployed. There
were masses of people unemployed. Any
how,' whether they were unemployed for
short time or a long time, or whether they
were few or many-
Mr. Reynolds.-Many jobs were available.
Mr. MENZIES.-I am talking aboL)
people receiving unemployment benefit.
Even you must understand that when they
were drawing benefit they did not have a
job; so let us discuss it in that way. Few or
many, it does not matter; they were still
unemployed. What did the Labour Party
provide for them? The benefit for an adult
or a married minor was 25s. a week and
for a wife, œ 1.
Mr. Pollard.-And it bought three times
as many pounds of butter as your benefit
will buy.
Mr. MENZIES.-The honorable member
for Lalor will be advocating a reduction
in the price of butter shortly. Really,
Reggie, you must behavel Mr. Chairman,
I know Opposition members want to
interrupt the reception of this speech.
The benefit was 25s. for an adult or a
married minor, œ 1 for a wife, 5s. for one
child, nothing for any more children, and
a permissible income of This year,
under this " callous" Government which
does not care what happens to the unemployed-
that was the phrase used by the
Opposition, so we had better accept it-
Mr. Uren.-Who created the unemployment?
Mr. MENZIES.-Under this Governent
in 1962, no thanks to you, the adult
married minor receives, not 25s., but
œ 4 2s. 6d.; the wife receives, not but
each child receives 15s., not just one
child receiving 5s.; and the permissible income
is Let me just summarize that.
"' bour provided for an unemployed man
/ th a wife and two children, œ 2 10s. a
week. Mr. Pollard.-You provided nothing in
1939. Mr. MENZIES.-I know you do not like
it, but for once in your life take it. I will
repeat it.
Mr. Pollard.-Why don't-
Mr. MENZLES.-I will repeat it as long
as the honorable member for Lalor does
not want it to be heard.
-' The CHAIRMAN.-Order! I warn the
, onorable member for Lalor that he must
cease interjecting.
Mr. MENZIES.-I know what happens
the moment you get them like this. The
-moment you have them on the hip, they
Sgin to say, " What did Lord Wellington
-say in 1832?" This is the oldest debating
exercise in the world.
Mr. Peters.-What did he say?
Mr. MENZIES.-I haven't a clue. Probably
all he did in 1832 was to vote against
the Reform Bill.
I will repeat this; it will ultimately reach
the public ear. Labour provided for an
unemployed man with a wife and two
children, œ 2 10s. a week, and permitted an
additional earning of œ 1 a week. For the
same family we provide, not œ 2 10s., but
œ 8 12s. 6d., with permitted additional income
of not It is of no use for
honorable members opposite to say, " Ah, but the cost of living has increased No
increase in the cost of living that has
occurred can explain the difference in the
benefits paid. Opposition members have
my deepest sympathy when confronted by
these figures, when they have it demonstrated
that this argument about callousness
to the unemployed is hypocritical drivel.
When this is demonstrated to them, of
course, they run back and ask what happened
in-oh, dear, dear!
The second particular comment that I
want to make-I might well make 50, but
I will limit myself-is that the honorable
gentleman said in his projected budget
there would be an emergency grant to the
States for education. He did not give any
details of this. I confess it puzzles me a
little. An emergency grant! Does he
mean for one year? Does he think -that a
grant for one year will solve the problem?
Or does he mean that it is to be permanent
and therefore not an emergency grant? He
really ought to tell us, I think, at some convenient
time, which idea he has in his
mind. But under this stagnant Government,
in this " stagnant" period in Australian
economic and social history, what has happened?
In 1950, -the States, which have
the prime responsibility for educationgreatly
assisted by us, as I will show-were
spending œ 46,000,000 on education. In
spite of us and our villainy, in 1960-61, ten
years later, they spent, not œ 46,000,000,
but œ 184,000,000. This does not sound
much like stagnation. From 1951, when
we began it, ' to the current financial year,
Commonwealth direct payments to State
universities rose from œ 1,000,000 to just
under œ 16,000,000, and our scholarship
provision was multiplied four times. I will
not take too much time on this, because I
am preparing a statement which will show
how much the Commonwealth contributes
directly and indirectly -to State education
expenditure. The figures will show that in
1950-51 the Commonwealth component of
the œ 46,000,000 that the States spent was
œ 22,000,000, and -that out of the current
œ 184,000,000 the Commonwealth component
was no less than œ 85,000,000. But,
Sir, I will not anticipate because I think
it is due to the honorable members that I
should have a paper prepared-and it is
now well in hand-to deal with these
matters.
I have briefly explained the objectives of
our policy and I have explained them, I
hope, in positive terms. We know quite
well, if nobody else does, that in any country
economic conditions will fluctuate.
But that does not mean that a long-term
policy cannot be pursued with vigour and
determination provided that it is widely
understood and that targets are clearly
seen. If we compare our progress in Australia-
this great country of ours-for the
last decade with that of any other comparable
country we shall see that our advance
has been steady and sure. True, we have
recently had some recession of business
activity-now recovering-and some unemployment.
But this Budget, coming as it
does on top of the liberal measures of a
few months ago, is expansionary and will,
subject to one element to which I shall
refer again in a few minutes, facilitate a
full return to a rapid but sound national
growth. The large deficit of nearly
œ 120,000,000 is, for reasons I have mentioned,
calculated to stimulate this process.
Sir, our foundations are solid and sure.
Our overseas reserves and our balance of
payments, which gave us great concern in
the boom months of 1960, have been restored
to health. The banking position and
the availability of credit are both satisfactory.
We have cost and price stability.
The inflow of capital for Australian investment
is being maintained. The public credit
is high. We are confident of a good future,
and we are determined to achieve it. Our
task -is not to produce a return to an inflation
which, in its turn, could produce
rapidly rising costs and prices with excessive
labour turnover, inefficiency and damaging
speculation. That that is not our task, I
am happy to say, was recognized by every
businessman and primary producer with
whom we had discussions about six weeks
ago. Our duty is not negative but positive. It
is to promote a climate favorable to rapid
but sound growth of national resources and primary and secondary exports and the new
and enlarged markets that we need in a
changing and challenging world. To do all
these things we must and will accept some
risks, but not foolish risks. However the
chances in this national adventure may fall,
we do not propose ever to lose sight of the
need for growth, which is supremely important,
nor of the basic condition of
growth, the preservation by the joint efforts
of science, management and labour of a
general cost level which will enable us to
meet and overcome competition both at
home and abroad in the products of our
fields and factories.
Sir, before I conclude, may I say thi
Much play has been made by our opponents,
evidently unacquainted with the fact that
the economy, as well as road transport, has
its traffic problems, on the brilliant term
stop-go Adopting this metaphorical ex
pression I can say for the Government tha
economically speaking, we shall drive ahead
on the right road as fast as we sensibly can.
We hope to have the green light with us. We
may well occasionally see the amber light,
which means caution, but we will not drive
through the red light just because some
passing pedestrian would regard that as a
proof of liberal thought.
I said that there was one element operating
against a full return to speedy growth.
That element is insufficient confidence up
the line from consumer-buyer to manufac
turer. For all the reasons I have mentione.
there should be to-day a powerful surge of
confidence. Those who devote their major
attention to the defects of our present position,
and withdraw their attention from the
real foundations of prosperity, do a grer
disservice to the nation. They promote it,
the public mind that very ill-founded uncertainty
which is the sole remaining cause of
the degree of unemployment that still exists.
There is no room for pessimism in a
country whose entire history is a triumph
for hope and faith and confidence.
BY AUTHORITY: A. J. ARTHUR, COMMONWEALTH GOVERNMENT PRINTER, CANBERRA.