THE CASE FOR SECESSION

Press, Volume LXXI, Issue 21399, 15 February 1935, Page 17

THE CASE FOR SECESSION

* —- POSITION IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA INTERVIEW WITH THE HON. J. M. DREW How those who favour the secession of Western Australia from the Commonwealth hope to increase the development of both the secondary and primary industries of that state was explained by the Hon. J. M. Drew, leader of the Legislative Council of Western Australia, yesterday. Mr Drew is on his fist visit to New Zealand, and he arrived at Wellington by the Wanganella on February 11. He mentioned that he had watched the political affairs of the Dominion with close attention. Mr Drew touched briefly on the great work that was being found for the unemployed on the goldfields, and said that the placing of 1000 men at 15s a week had been so successful that the Government had determined to place another 1000 as soon as possible. The money was only on loan to the men, and already some £IO,OOO had been paid back. The Government stood to gain by the experiment in all ways. Though he knew that there were some things drastically wrong with the present state of the industries in Western Australia, Mr Drew explained that he was not putting forward his own views, but rather those of the ardent secessionists. The men who favoured federation in 1900 were now the leaders of the secessionist movement, while those who had opposed the federation were now staying in the background. They claimed that the trouble was that the constitution had been interpreted by the High Court and various governments in a different manner from that which the founders of the federation had intended. "Three-quarters of the net revenue from the customs was to be paid to the states under the act for a period of 10 years, and afterwards till Parliament provided otherwise. Some time after the 10 years were up, the Government decided to arrange the matter on a different footing, as it was found that this bookkeeping method was unwieldy and expensive. A flat rate was decided upon, and it was computed that a payment of 25s a head of population would be equivalent to what, was received before,'' said Mr Drew. "At that time the customs revenue per caput was only a comparatively small amount, but later the customs duties increased, and amounted to a considerable. sum a head. TilJ 192/ there was no change, but as the population of the states was increasing the Federal Government abolished the per caput payments, and put nothing in its place. It did at last make a financial proposition to the states, which, if they did not accept it, would mean that they received nothing. By accepting it Western Australia was assured of an unalterable income of £480,000. This arrangement has become a grievance with all the states," continued Mr Drew. Mr Drew also explained that when Western Australia joined the federation there were, hardly any secondary industries in the state. When an attempt was made to increase these it was found that manufacturers in the cast dumped their goods, and sold at a lower price than the local articles commanded even in the rest of Australia.

The primary products—wheat, wool, gold, and timber —were also stopped in their development by the high duties put on the articles necessary to their development. Thus under the present arrangement both the primary and secondary industries were being crippled before they had a proper chance to be started. Those favouring secession maintained that a protective policy was all right for th" rest of Australia if Western Australia was allowed something in the form of a recompense. If the secession went through there would be the position of Western Australia being able to set up trade barriers against the remainder of the Commonwealth. This state could then regulate its customs and tariffs to give its industries the best chance of thriving.