Burns, Philp And

Co. Ltd.

Attack and Defence In Federal Parliament

INURING the discussion of the New Guinea Shipping Bill in the Federal House, Canberra, on March 18, some speakers attacked Messrs. Burns, Philp and Co. Ltd. A summary of the debate will be found elsewhere in this issue.

A notable speech in defence of the big trading firm was made by Sir Charles Marr, formerly Minister for Islands Terri tories. The following is from Hansard report; “During two previous administrations in which I held the portfolio of Territories,” said Sir Charles, “frequent complaints were lodged that the operations of Burns, Philp and Co. were not calculated to serve the best interests of the two countries con cerned in the Pacific mail contract.

“On the last occasion when tenders were about to be called for this service, in terested parties asked for sufficient time to enable any shipping company, whether registered in Australia or overseas, to sub mit tenders, and the Government allowed a period of twelve months, yet Burns, Philp and Co. was the only firm to tender for the service. The reason is obvious.

“As a keen student of territorial and Pacific Islands questions, I am well aware that the Australia to New Guinea mail boat service and other similar services con ducted in the Pacific are a losing business.

The Government of the United Kingdom itself has to pay £3,000 a year in subsidy for mails carried to the British Solomons.

The Fijian Government, the Commissioner for the Western Pacific and other island administrations have to pay subsidies for mail services.

“My only complaint in this regard is based on a statement which appeared in this morning’s press by a New Guinea official that the affairs of the Mandated Territory are so flourishing that this year it has had to budget for a surplus of £65,000. In those circumstances, New Guinea, and not Australia, could well afford to pay the mail subsidy for its own ser vice. Why should it not do so?

“Planters in New Guinea are experienc ing difficulties, but I have yet to learn of any visitors to the territory who have any serious condemnation for the vessels that convey them.”

Mr. Mulcahy: “They are a scandal.”

Sir Charles Marr: “The company which runs these boats would employ palatial liners if it paid them to do so/ In 1927, when I was sent by the Commonwealth Government to perform a certain task in New Guinea, Burns, Philp and Co. com missioned the Montoro to take me to Papua. It cost that company £4OO a day to go to Port Moresby, and that additional cost was not borne by the people of Aus tralia or of the Islands. I do not hold one share in, or any brief for. Burns, Philp and Co., but I take my hat off to any firm which has exploited and pioneered ”

Mr. Beasley: “Hear, hear! ‘Exploited’ is the right word.”

Sir Charles Marr: “I use the term in its widest and most honourable sense. Burns, Philp and Co. is a firm which has recog nised the Australian seamen’s rates of pay and the Commonwealth’s navigation law.”

Mr, Garden: “It has to do so.”

Sir Charles Marr: “It does not have to do so. The Commonwealth Navigation Act do£s not apply to New Guinea. The Bruce-

Page Government, of which I was a mem ber, was the only government to apply it to the Mandated Territory, but after two years it was seen that its provisions could not be operated in New Guinea.

“This country, as the result of war, had to get £40,000,000 in reparations from Ger many. Portion of that amount was to be obtained from the sale of expropriated pro perties in New Guinea. The then Govern ment agreed that the sales should be made on long terms to returned soldier appli cants. These soldiers had to find 5 per cent, of the purchase money in submitting tenders, and 10 per cent, if their tenders were accepted, and they were given 20 years in which to pay the balance of interest and principal. Very few of the soldiers could even find the 5 per cent, which was to accompany tenders, and of the companies which conduct businesses in the islands of the Pacific, only two—Burns, Philp and Co. and Carpenter and Co.—came to their aid. Those companies did what no bank in Australia—not even the Common wealth Bank—was prepared to do: they financed the returned soldiers and enabled them to take over the plantations.”