WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Taranaki Daily News, 16 June 1930, Page 11

WESTERN AUSTRALIA

SECESSION MOVEMENT.-: : POSITION IN "COMMONWEALTH. The movement in Western Australia for the secession of that State from the Commonwealth was the subject of statements in Sydney recently by Messrs Gregory and Prowse, members of the House of Representatives at Perth. They both declared that the campaign for secession must be taken “For the past four or five years,” said Mr. Gregory, “the leading Sunday hews’paper in Perth has been advocating secession as the only • means by which Western Australia may relieve herself from disabilities under Federal legislation, especially under the customs tariffs and the Navigation Act. The great majority of us in the west believe in Federation, and would desire to remain in it. But the operation of Federal legislation has been so disastrous welfare of our people •' that unless we have/reform: in .theinear future we shall .find the 'growth of opinion ‘so strong that nothing will stop its demands. Such separation would not affect our loyalty to the Empire; that is as strong as it was when we had complete State autonomy.” ■ “We are in shackles,” said Mr. Prowse “Sir Janies Mitchell, the Premier, has said more than once if -we were free to buy our requirements in the open market we should save two or three millions a year, which would enable us to develop more rapidly our great State.” Mr. Prowse declared that the Navigation Act was one of tllie prime causes of high costs of production in Western Australia, and the tariff Was another. "We cannot,” he said, “enjoy any of the marked advantages of secondary industries in the Eastern States under the : tariff. Since we 'have to : buy in the dearest market in the -world, namely, the Eastern Australian, and we jnust sell our products in open competition with the world overseas, Ave find ourselves at a great disadvantage. We cannot carry on secondary industries in the west- because the more highly organised factories in the Eastern -States would immediately dump on us. We ‘are forced to use our man power on: the land.” i

.Both of these- Western Australian representatives agreed that.the bounty* paying system' on production was penalising the Western State as much as the import tr -iff. “The coastal clauses of the Navigation Act,” said Mr. Gregory, /make the costs of Western farmer- greater even than those of Eastern far. ers unci'”.- the tariff alojie. In Western Australia we are opening up areas that will grow wheat, meat and' as big as the •whole of Victoria. We have no other development open io us than in thee© farming directions; Its extent, espeei* ally in regard to railways and water supplies, renders the cost of development, and later the cost of marketing, ’ so high that it is '• impossible to carry on profitably with the present low prices for ohr products.” . ' -.

“With the control of-our-own customs for 25 . years,” added Mr. Gregory, ,“a$ recommended by the majority report of the Federal Royal Commission on Western Australian disabilities in 1921, I feel sure that we should, be. able td produce in W. Australia, .as. much wheat rest of the Co'mnionweaith. The !yita need of Australia is to increase our population and purchasing power. How can Western Australia play her part in this, a part she is willing and anxious to undertake, with every step in such development penalised by Federal legislation which heaps up the costs of primary production?”