AIR MAILS

Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 10, 7 October 1936, Page 5

AIR MAILS

“No Change of Policy” DEBATE AT CANBERRA Minister’s Reply The Commonwealth Minister for Defence (Sir Archdale Parkhill), in the Federal House of Representatives prior to his departure for New Zealand gave information about the negotiations with the British Government ou the air-mail service-. In reply to criticism by the Leader of the Opposition, (Mr. Curtin), he said that control of the .Singapore section of the route had not been given away. There was nothing in the British Government’s proposal, he added, which would affect the control of internal services.

Sir Archdale Parkhill denied a suggestion that the Federal Government’s policy had changed since the return of the Attorney-General (Mr. Menzies) and the. Minister for Commerce (Dr. Page) from London. He said that the Government’s negotiations had already resulted in a saving to Australia of £lOO,OOO a year on Britain’s .original proposal. He also indicated that flying-boats would carry the mail down the coast from Darwin to Sydney, and then across the Tasman. Mr. Curtin moved that the House adjourn to discuss the air-mail negotiations. • He asked members to discuss “the acceptance, in principle, by the Commonwealth Government of an undisclosed agreement with the British Government, and the failure of the Commonwealth Government to ensure national control of the internal air-mail services.”

“Lack of Information.”

Mr. Curtin said that the Government’s policy had not been satisfactorily explained to Parliament. It would appear that in principle the Cabinet had accepted participation in the British scheme, which, he understood, involved a seven days’ bi-week-ly air service with flying-boats from London to Sydney. “I challenge the Prime Minister,” he said, “to say whether the decision which the Government has of has in prospect, means that'the existing services between Singapore and Brisbane will be replaced by a through flying-boat service from London to Sydney.” Mr. Curtin added that in January, 1936, the Prime Minister had said that the Commonwealth Government found difficulty in reconciling the proposals of the Imperial Government with Australian conditions and local requirements. The Prime Minister had said that the Government had decided to retain the existing arrangements ’ of Australian control and responsibility of the service from Sydney to Singapore.

“There Is every reason to believe,” Mr. Curtin declared, “that the return of the Attorney-General (Mr. Menzies) and the Minister for Commerce (Dr. Page) to the Cabinet led to a change of policy, which involves substantial acceptance of the British proposals and loss of control by Australia of the service to Singapore.”

“Departmental Opposition.”

Mr. Curtin said that as the agreement involved proposals which, it was understood, were opposed by the Civil Aviation Department and the Defence Department, it was imperative that before Sir Archdale Parkhill left for New Zealand Parliament should decide whether the principles of the British plan were acceptable. He understood that the British plan meant that a British company would be the responsible contractor for operations over the route, not only from London to Singapore, but from Singapore to Darwin, and from Darwin to Sydney. By this procedure Australian control over vital internal al r mail services would be jeopardised, if not destroyed.

There were grave reasons for disquietude about the suitability of fly-ing-boats for Australian conditions. Mr. Curtin said. The British Government had refused to modify the flying-boat plan satisfactorily, and. therefore, Australian aviation development in the next 15 years would he greatly retarded.

“I am forced to the conviction that the Australian-Government is unjustifiably yielding to British pressure, and is being forced to a decision which threatens the safety and reliability of our own aerial services.” lidded Mr. Curtin. Minister’s Reply.

Sir Archdale Parkhill said that he had been invited to New Zealand to discuss the section of the route between New Zealancl'and Australia, but not the whole British proposal.

Reviewing the history of the British proposal, Sir Archdale Parkhill said that it had been considered reasonable to utilise the services of the AttorneyGeneral and the Minister for Commerce to obtain further details from the Air Ministry. “Information was brought back by these Ministers which is in no sense in conflict with Australian views,” Sir Archdale Parkhill declared. ‘‘There is no conflict with the views of the Civil Aviation or Defence Departments.”

Sir Archdale Parkhill added that the proposal included the use of large fly-ing-boats.

Mr. Curtin: Will the flying-boats end at Darwin or Sydney? Sir Archdale Parkhill : Under the proposal, they w.ill stop at New Zealand.

Mr. Beasley (Labour. Now South Wales) : That is the catch.

Mr. Curtin: You have given complete justification for my criticism. Sir Archdale Parkhill said that the Internal services were not. bound up with the proposal. He did not regard the service of a flying-boat round the coast from Darwin to Sydney as part of Australia’s internal aviation system. Nothing was contained in the proposal that would affect the control of the internal services. There was a further proposal for a light service between the capital cities of Australia for the carriage of first-class air mail. Mr. Perkins (U.A.P.. N.S.W.) : Would you he justified in maintaining the route between Darwin. Charleville and Cootamundra ? Sir Archdale Parkbill: That is a question which would arise, later. In my opinion, the service would still be required to those areas. “Control Not Given Away.” Sir Archdale Parkhill declared that the control of the Singapore section of the route had not been given away. It was the subject of discussion at the moment. The agreement had not been completed. The negotiations could not be conducted in the Press or in public-. The House could not he informed immediately of every step that was taken. The Prime Minister had indi-

cated that as soon as possible the House would be informed of any arrangement made, and it would be for the House to judge the proposals. Mr. Beasley: A bit late then. Sir Archdale Parkhill: The proposal will be brought down before its adoption. The Commonwealth, on the negotiations that have already taken place, has improved the financial position as far as Australia is concerned by at least £lOO.OOO. even if the proposal is finally accepted. Sir Archdale Parkhill added that the Federal Government had never deviated from its desire to protect Australian interests. It had always kept in mind the full control of Australian aviation.

Mr. Mcßride (U.A.P., S.A.) : Wil] it insist on it?

Sir Archdale Parkhill: Certainly. The question is important from defence aspects. I regret that I am not at liberty t o say everything I want to say. A full statement will lx* m.njle by the ; Prime Minister when the negotiations are complete.