IMPORTANT ISSUES

Greymouth Evening Star, 20 September 1946, Page 3

IMPORTANT ISSUES

EXTENSION OF FEDERAL ’ POWERS questions for electors (From C. R. Mentiplay, Special Press Association Correspondent.) SYDNEY, Sept. 18. Few questions have been as little discussed in the recent election campaign as that of the referendum by which the Australian Federal Government is seeking to add to its powers. It seems as if all the major parties have chosen to disregard this important issue in favour of others, such as taxation, the suppression of industrial disturbances, and the restoration of order in industry. Yet the three questions on which the people will be asked to vote on September 28 constitute an important development in State and Commonwealth legislation in Australia. In Australia, as in the United States, the Federal Parliament possesses certain delegated .powers, all others being vested in the Governments of the individual States. The Federal powers have been gradually increased during the last 45 years as the need for centralised authority became apparent. This was especially true during the last war. The Federal Government can act only upon powers granted it by the Constitution, and only a referendum of the people can alter that Constitution.

Social Services.

The first question the electors must decide relates to social services. At present social services legislation in Australia consists of a number of acts and provisions by the State and Federal Parliaments, which are badly in need of correlation.

The Federal Government, which now administers invalid and old age pensions, was shaken recently when the Victorian Attorney-General successfully challenged the validity of the medicine section. 'ln asking that the provision of maternity allowance, widows’ pensions, child endowment, pharmaceutical, sickness, and hospital benefits, medical and dental services, benefits to students, and family allowances should be made a Federal concern, the Commonwealth Government wants to clear up the legality of its powers by getting them specifically stated in the Constitution. This is obviously a first step towards the introduction of an integrated social security system somewhat similar to that in force in New Zealand. Opponents of the change, the most vocal of whom is Professor F. A. Bland, chairman of the referendum “No” committee and Professor of Public Administration at Sydney University, claim that the extra powers would enable the Government to exercise an undesirable influence over the people’s lives. Professor Bland claims that the proposals are aimed at destroying the Federal system by reducing the State Governments to subservience.

Marketing Control.

The second request by the Federal Government is for control of the marketing of primary produce, which it defines without limitation as flour and other wheat products; butter, cheese, and other milk products; dried fruit; meat and other meat products; and sugar. A similar provision has of course been in operation'in New Zealand for a number of years. Last, the Government seeks power to fix the terms and conditions of employment in industry, such as the establishment of a basic wage, hours ot employment,. and uniform working conditions. In New Zealand the Arbitration Court has full power in such matters. Opponents of this proposal are afraid that it would enable the Government to wreck the arbitration system and make industrial legislation a political rather than a judicial matter.