House of Representatives
26 November 1908

3^rd Parliament · 3^rd Session

QUESTION
- ELECTORAL ROLLS
PAPERS
QUESTION
- PHOSPHORUS MATCHES
QUESTION
- MUNICIPAL RATES
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH OLD-AGE PENSIONS
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
- Order of Business
STRAIGHT AUSTRALIAN
SEAT OF GOVERNMENT
ADJOURNMENT
- Despatch of Business - Arbitration
- Court Award

Mr. Speaker took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 2299

QUESTION

ELECTORAL ROLLS

Mr GROOM:
DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND

– Under the Electoral Act of 1905, negotiations were entered into with the Governments of the States, with a view to having a common Federal and State roll. Can the Minister of Home Affairs say how matters now stand, and state in detail the arrangements made with Tasmania ?

Mr MAHON:
Minister for Home Affairs · COOLGARDIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

– The information is being prepared, and I hope to furnish it tomorrow.

page 2299

PAPERS

Mr. HUTCHISON laid upon the table the following papers -

Defence Acts - Military Forces - Financial and Allowance Regulation Amended (Provisional) - No. 143 - Statutory Rules 1908, No. 118.

The Clerk laid upon the table

Spirits, &c. - Statistics re, for 1907 - Return to an Order of the House dated 4th November, 1 908.

page 2299

QUESTION

PHOSPHORUS MATCHES

Mr. HUME COOK (for Dr. Carty

Salmon) asked the Minister of Trade and Customs,upon notice -

Is it a fact thathe has extended the time fixed by his predecessor for the importation of matches containing phosphorus?

If so, has he any objection to stating the reason ?

Yes.

The postponement was decided upon in order to afford time for further investigation as to a statement that difficulties are likely to arise owing to climatic effects upon safety matches in certain parts of Australia.

page 2299

QUESTION

MUNICIPAL RATES

Mr WILKS:
DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

As the New South Wales Local Government Act of 1906, under which the municipalities and shires in that State are now working, provides that all lands, with certain exemptions, whether the property of His Majesty or not, shall be rateable -

Will he waive the section in the Constitution which exempts the Commonwealth from payment of such rates?

Will he follow the example of the Im perial Government in England, where the Chancellor of the Exchequer annually forwards voluntarily a cheque to each of the respective corporate bodies for an amount equal to the amount of rates that would be payable if the Crown were liable?

Mr FISHER:

– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are -

I do not feel justified in setting aside the provisions of the Constitution.
No.

page 2299

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH OLD-AGE PENSIONS

Mr J H CATTS:
COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Prime Minister,upon notice -

In connexion with Commonwealth Old-age pensions, payable in July next, will he favorably consider the advisability of paying the pensions by postal notes or post-office orders, delivered by registered letter, with necessary safeguards, so that the old men and women will not be compelled to go some distance and wait about in the weather, as is now necessary in some parts of New South Wales?

Mr FISHER:
ALP

– Careful consideration will be given to this matter when arrangements are being made for paying the pensions.

page 2299

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

Order of Business

Debate resumed from 25th November (vide page 2209),. on motion by Mr. Fisher -

That, on each sitting day, until otherwise ordered, Government business shall take precedence of general business.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I congratulate honorable members opposite upon the presentable appearance of the Ministerial benches, which look much better now than they did when nearly empty, as we were accustomed to see them during the term of the last Administration. I also congratulate those sitting on the Ministerial corner benches. If future attendances are as good as those of yesterday and to-day, and honorable members perform their public duties as assiduously, the country will be the gainer. Never in our history has close attention to public affairs been more necessary. My honorable friends opposite never need watching more than when they appear most harmless. At the present time they are in their most harmless guise, judging by the public presentation of their intentions made by the Prime Minister yesterday.

Mr Thomas:

– The honorable member has nothing to complain of then?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– Not at present. I may comfort my honorable friends at once by saying that the Opposition has noother desire than to assist the transaction of public business during the remainder of the session. If Ministers will set themselves to dispose of the measures which have been brought forward, with one or two exceptions, they will be warmly supported by us. Further than that I cannot be expected to pledge myself. The Prime Minister’s speech yesterday reminded me of a hymn which, no doubt, we have both often sung, “ Pull for the shore, sailor.” For “shore” should be substituted “recess.” Unquestionably the first aim of the Government is to get safely into recess. That was the dominant note of the honorable gentleman’s speech.

Mr Watkins:

– What is the matter with “ Abide With Me “ ?

Mr McDonald:

– “ Here we suffer Grief and Pain-“ !

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– My honorable friend is quite right. I venture to say that there are quite a number on that side who are already suffering a little “grief and pain,” and I think with good reason. Whatever disadvantages there may be in the selection of a Cabinet by the method of a caucus, it undoubtedly relieved the Prime Minister, on this occasion, of a very delicate task, which otherwise would have caused a great deal of heart burning. The caucus - that intangible thing called the “caucus” - takes the whole of the blame for the selections, and, of course, exonerates the Prime Minister from the always difficult task of choosing seven or eight gentlemen out of a total of, I think, fortytwo, every one of them with a belief in their abilities for the positions.

Mr Fisher:

– That is a very high compliment to the party !

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– It is indeed; but I do not know a party in any Parliament that has not the same number of members equally interested in the performance of their public duties, and willing, no doubt, to make equally good use of the opportunity should it arise. I desire to offer my personal congratulations to Ministers, and to say that, whatever may come during the conduct of public business in the way of criticism, adverse or complimentary, there will, so far as I am concerned, be nothing behind any of it but the best of personal good feeling. Listening to the Prime Minister yesterday, I could not help asking myself by what right does the hon orable gentleman meet the Parliament of the country. Whence does he derive his power to propound a policy to the House, and outline the business for the remainder of the session and subsequently?

Mr Page:

– Does the honorable member not know whence the Prime Minister gets his power ? It is from the caucus, according to the honorable member’s own showing.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– Yes, I suppose that is the case in one sense; but we may take it, I think, that the caucus did not consult the Governor- General.

Mr Page:

– I do not know that.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I think the honorable member does know. I fancy that the Labour Party had a friend at court, who consulted the GovernorGeneral for them, and that friend is sitting by them to-day, staunch for the present. He is acting the part of a chivalrous adversary - at least, I must call him an adversary, because I cannot describe him by any other word. The Labour Party have treated the honorable gentleman as an adversary, at any rate, they have “booted him out” unceremoniously and ignominiously. If ever a man left office under ignominious circumstances the late Prime Minister did; and, therefore he, of all men: in this House, is behaving at the present moment like a Christian.

Mr Wilks:

– I think we ought to have another hymn now - “ Hold the Fort, for we are coming “ !

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– The late Prime Minister is carrying out to the letter that injunction of the Scriptures, which enjoins on him, when smitten on one cheek, to turn the other. To-day he is giving cordial support and approval to the present Government’s immediate programme of business. But there is something more to be considered. There is the question which always arises in a democratic community - by what right do the present Ministers govern the Commonwealth ? They themselves, I believe, are strong in their support of majority rule. Many, if not all, of them, beforetime in their history, have had to do with the enactment of electoral measures embodying that principle which finds its final economic expression in ruling by counting heads ratherthan breaking them. It is a principle which, by this time, is accepted by all civilized communities, and to which none offer the slightest objection, except, it may be, some reactionaries, who, however, are few and far between. Accepting that principle of public life as dominant, how do we honour it in the composition of this Government, and in all that is taking place to-day ? The Government represent twenty-seven members out of a total of seventy-four in this Chamber ; and when we consider that simple basic fact in connexion with their attitude on the Government benches, one is moved to inquire what influences have been at work to bring about this most extraordinary result.

Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– The honorable member does not represent as many on his side of the House !

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– At present, my duty is to criticise the position of honorable members On the other side ; ana I hope the honorable member for Calare is comfortable - he certainly looks radiantly happy. We are not on the Government benches, and, therefore, the interjection does not apply to us. It would apply, however, to any party who took office under circumstances similar to those of the Government. The interjection of the honorable member is not to the point, as the facts show. A change of Government has taken place without a scintilla of a reason being offered. That has never been heard of before in the history of responsible government.

Mr Roberts:

– Oh, yes !

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I am speaking only from my limited experience. The honorable member for Adelaide reminds me that this was a favorite method of des- patching a Government in the State from which he comes, and which is so well represented in the Cabinet. It seems that there is some monopoly in the composition of the Government - that this anti-monopolistic Cabinet has monopolized many of the positions in it for one of the numerically smallest States in the group ; and that is si fact on which the State is to be congratulated. Indeed, I believe, Mr. Speaker, that the method employed in this instance was also a favorite device of your own in your old unregenerate days - that it was a happy method of your own of despatching one Government and installing another. All I have to say is that it has one radical defect. However convenient it may be to swop places in the House in this way, the country has a right to consideration. ‘ The very method by which this Government has succeeded to power is a challenge to our free institutions. However honorable members may affect to make little of the matter, it is one on which the country has a right to an explanation at the earliest possible moment. We must assume, I take it, that before the Government became possessed of their position, assurances were given to the Governor-General by somebody - may-be the caucus, as suggested by the honorable member for Maranoa. J fancy, however, that it was not the caucus that made any suggestion to the GovernorGeneral j and I doubt if it was made by the present Prime Minister himself. I should say that the ordinary simple rule was followed, and that the outgoing Prime Minister was consulted, and offered certain advice to His Excellency.

Mr Page:

– I heard that it was the honorable member for East Sydney who said that he could not form a Government, and that the best thing to do would be to send for the honorable member for Wide Bay.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– One hears some strange statements sometimes. The Governor-General could not have received many assurances from the present Prime Minister, because it was currently reported in the newspapers that the interview which my honorable friend had with him lasted only a quarter of an hour. It may bt that, however diffuse he may be at times, his speech on that occasion was aptly condensed. I venture to think that the old method of recommending one’s successor was followed by the late Prime Minister. If that is so, then we are all the more entitled to learn in this House the basis of the recommendation made, and the reason why this change of Government has taken place, and taken place in the peculiar circumstances associated with it.

Mr Wise:

– It was the result of the vote of the Opposition.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– In answer to that criticism to which expression has already been given by many members of my honorable friend’s party, may I say once and for all that our votes were given to dispossess the late Government, but with no intention of putting the present Administration into office. I hope that that statement will be regarded as clear, candid and Straight. Honorable members would not expect me to say anything else, and it is idle for the honorable member for Gippsland to assert that the change was made by our votes. We voted on the occasion in question as we have voted many times during the last two or three years to put an end to an unrighteous combination - to put an end to the caucus domination of Parliament. Although for the moment the caucus seems uppermost, I venture to predict that its reign will be only a temporary one. It is only a stage in an evolutionary process which will put the caucus in its proper relationship to this House - the relationship of a minority to a majority - and so permit the government of the Commonwealth to be conducted, as it ought to be, by a majority of those who believe in a co-ordinated policy, and who have a common interest in that government.

Mr Roberts:

– That was said prior to the last general election, but the result was not what the honorable member and his party desired.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– The result was that the Labour Party were returned twenty-seven strong in a House of seventyfive members. There are now in this House forty -seven members opposed to caucus rule. However much they may differ, for the moment, in respect of other matters, this much is outstanding from the last general election, that at least members of the caucus have no right to govern the Commonwealth. I make that remark in passing, and believe that what we see at present is only an evolutionary stage, which will very speedily lead to a final and satisfactory solution of the problem of rightly governing Australia. We had submitted to us yesterday a statement of the policy of the Government who voted the Tate Ministry out of office. Looking at the measures therein outlined, one fails to find a solitary reason for the change. Why has it taken place? With, perhaps, one exception, to which I shall refer, there was not a word in the speech of the Prime Minister yesterday, or in the programme that he submitted, which would justify an upheaval in this chamber. The policy of the Government, for the present session at least, is that proposed bv the late Administration. There is to be no change of policy, and no change in the measures to be submitted ; everything is to go on as before. That being so, we have an elementary right in a free assembly such as this to inquire from the Prime Minister the reason why he turned out the late Govern ment, and why he is installed in office. That explanation has not yet been given.

Mr Archer:

– It looks as if they were afraid to make it.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I do not think so. It seems to me that, to use an expression which I have heard more than once in this chamber, they are resorting to the process of running cunning, and are seeking the line of least resistance. Certainly their attitude is quite in accordance viith the statement I made at the beginning of my address, that the Government are pulling for the shore - the shore of recess. We must have at some time or other an explanation of the position. The country has a right to it, and the sooner a full, free, and frank statement is made, by either the present or the late Prime Minister, the better.

Mr Deakin:

– Surely I have not to find reasons for the change of Government?

Mr Wilks:

– Was it not “up to” the Labour Party io do what they did, seeing that they were twenty-seven strong, as against the Ministerial party of fifteen members ?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– Even that explanation has not yet been offered.

Mr Wilks:

– Does not the honorable member think th.it it was “ up to them “ to take action?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– It is “up to” the late Government to take the course which they think they ought to take in the interests of the Commonwealth. They have no right- in this regard to consider personal feelings. Since the honorable member for Dalley desires my opinion as to what the members of the late Government ought to do, let me tell him that I think that when a Ministry is unceremoniously ‘ booted “ out of office, any personal obligation that it owed to the party which put them out is wiped off the slate. That is what I should feel, and there is just as much human nature on the part of my honorable friends in the Ministerial corner as there is to be found amongst honorable members in other parts of the House. Here is the only explanation that we have yet had from the Prime Minister of the reasons for the change of Government. I refer to it. because it is an extraordinary one, and leaves the matter just where it was before. In announcing his intention to withdraw the support of his party from the lave Government, the present Prime Minister said -

We are hiking this course now because it is, to our minds, one of decency :md of order.

What was there that was indecent or disorderly in the programme of the late Government? The Prime Minister is actually taking up the same planks that the late Prime Minister surrendered ; he is actually proposing to put through the same programme for the present session. Wherein is the indecency or the disorder of the proposals which he now make,, and of which he spoke on the occasion to which I have referred ? If they -were indecent and disorderly then are they not equally indecent and disorderly now? This vague statement by my honorable friend only casts upon him a greater obligation to make the position clear, and to show what his real and ultimate intentions are. Last night he told us that the finances were all right. He had nothing to .say about the Post and Telegraph Department, except that it wanted a little more money, which he thought he would be able to spare. Of defence he made no mention. Is that a matter as to which the caucus is not quite unanimous ? Are there financial troubles in the way of carrying out a defence policy? Nothing was heard, for instance, of the proposal, which was so learnedly and eloquently expounded by the Minister of Home Affairs a. little while ago, for the imposition of direct taxation in order to find funds for the adequate defence of Australia. There was no mention last night of defence in any shape or form, and not a single word of explanation as to all the other questions of Government policy, except that they are going to earnthrough one or two matters which are now in train, and then speedily betake themselves to the repose of recess.

Mr Fuller:

– Where are they going to get the money for old-age pensions ?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I intend to ask that question a little later on. The public are the masters regarding all these matters in the final appeal, and the public will need some explanation, although it be refused on the present occasion. I confess my disappointment in some particulars with the Prime Minister’s speech of yesterday. I should have thought the honorable member would take the country, and particularly the workers outside, into his confidence, and tell them what his final and ultimate legislative pro posals were, to be, if given permission to conduct them to success during the remaining months of this Parliament. We have to go outside to learn the little we know about our friends of the Labour Party.

Mr FOSTER:
NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– Does the honorable member want Tom Mann’s programme?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I do not want Tom Mann mentioned in this debate. I am dealing only with the party opposite, and seeking if I can to gauge their real intentions. The Worker, one of the most influential organs of the party in Australia, placarded over the country last week the fact that the advent of the workers to the Government benches was “ a day’s march nearer home.” I wonder what friend Andrew calls “ home.” Does his home consist of the planks of the Government’s legislative proposals for this session? Is that the final “home” of the Socialist Labour Party of Australia? Is that all that the Government have to offer the workers as the final solution of all their industrial troubles - merely the one or two measures which they sketch for one or two weeks’ work in this Chamber ? That is really all we hear of it. We are told that the advent of the present Government is “ a day’s march nearer home,” but as to just what and where the home is we are quite in the darK I wish to refer to some statements made by the late Prime Minister and some members of his party. I hope I may do so without being accused of indulging in any personal feeling. I certainly have none, but the country requires an explanation from the Ministerial corner quite as much as from the benches opposite. I should like to ask the late Prime Minister whether he gave assurances to the Governor-General that this Ministry could conduct the affairs of the country as they should be conducted, and that, if they attempted to conduct affairs in the way they should, his party would support the reigning Ministry.

Mr Deakin:

– The honorable member knows as well as I do that on such occasions the retiring Prime Minister offers no information or advice, unless it is asked for.’

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I do not know that that gets us much nearer to an answer to the question which I respectfully put to the honorable member.

Mr Deakin:

– It gets us this much nearer, that if His Excellency has no objection to that being stated I have none.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I think we may fairly assume that the usual course was taken, and that my honorable friend was requested to give advice.

Mr Deakin:

– The honorable member had better look at the numbers in the division list. He can then form an opinion as to whether it was necessary to ask any question.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– It is when I look at the numbers in the division that I am prompted to ask this question. When I see a Government being put out of power in the way my honorable friend was the other night, it becomes the more necessary to find out the reason for the accession of the present Administration to power.

Mr Deakin:

– The honorable member followed the lead of the present Prime Minister.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– Unquestionably we followed his lead in the disruption that took place; but certainly not in the reconstruction. It is the honorable member who follows his lead there, and, by-the-bye, we were hardly given any option. Owing to some unfortunate oversight, that honorable member was permitted to jump the position, and did so with an alacrity which has rarely been equalled in this Chamber. We were, therefore, in the position of supporting either the present Prime Minister or the late Prime Minister with regard to that particular motion. There occurred then an opportunity of doing what we tried to do a fortnight before.

Mr Wise:

– The present Prime Minister would not follow the honorable member.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I am not asking the Prime Minister or my honorable friend to follow me. That is not the question, nor do I think that it will be an excuse to the country. I do not know that any dereliction of duty or of principle, or attitude of personal hostility to any side of the Chamber, will be a sufficient excuse to the country for this extraordinary state of affairs. It is not a question of the Prime Minister following me or my late chief, who I sincerely regret has seen fit to take the action he has. It is a great grief to all of us, who have been with him for so many years, that he has felt called upon to take that course.

Mr FOSTER:
NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– He is only moving with the times.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I hope the honorable member, when he reaches the age of my leader, will have as much behind him. I hope he will move also in an equally disinterested way so far as the public welfare is concerned. All these trumpery explanations of what has taken place with regard to a particular vote have no bearing whatever upon the present situation, which finds a Labour Government in power, with twenty-seven members behind it, confronting an Opposition, all told, of forty-seven members, who are pledged against them and their policy and political methods. The honorable member for Ballarat may treat it as he likes ; but he knows that when he is before the electors he will be compelled to take an attitude antagonistic to that party. He knows well that if he does not do so, they will take up an attitude antagonistic to him. They are at it now. They are threatening every day in their periodicals what they will do with the honorable member, and with all the rest of us. Did the honorable member read the other day a statement in the public prints of this State by certain Labour ° supporters outside, who, in their congratulatory complimentary resolutions regarding the present Ministry, took occasion to speak in terms of the utmost contempt of the late Prime Minister ? Does he forget that? He knows that that kind of thing is reeling from the press almost every day of the week, and, whether he likes it or not he will be found at the next election in a position of complete antagonism to the Labour Party - either willingly on his part or unwillingly, for that is what will happen. The Labour Party is ‘self-contained, with methods peculiarly its own. It is pledged not to seek alliances, but to follow its own path for the realization of its aims. It will have nothing to do with other parties, except to use them for its own purposes. Therefore, we should be told why this party, which consists of only twenty-seven members, is to be allowed to guide and control the destinies of Australia. When the honorable member for Wide Bay was supporting the honorable member for Ballarat, he was able to speak for a solid compact party of twenty-seven:, but the honorable member for Ballarat will notbe able to reciprocate. A radical difference between the two parties makes it impossible that what happened in the past cart happen in the future. Much of the support given in recent years by the Labour Party to the late Ministerialists was given unwillingly, and the dislodging of the late Prime Minister was also effected against the will of some members of the party. But its platform requires that on vital questions all members of the party shall act together, and when called upon to do so. shall move as a solid phalanx. The party behind the honorable member for Ballarat observes no such rule j its members act in accordance with what they regard as the dictates of reason and justice. Under these circumstances, either the present or the late Prime Minister should explain how the change of Ministry came about, ‘and let us know what are the relations between them. We have been told that we have made our bed, and must lie on it. I hope that the honorable member for Ballarat rests as quietly on his bor! as we do on ours.

Mr Deakin:

– If the Opposition is as comfortable as I am, it is very comfortable.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– Our bed is soft and downy, and we shall continue to lie on it until we can leave it with self respect. I hope that the followers of the honorable member do not fin’d the cross benches too draughty. If they do, they mav perhaps be more comfortable in the cosy corners on this side.

Mr Batchelor:

– The Opposition looks a cold place.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– The honorable member himself is before a particularly warm fire; and I congratulate him upon the comfort of his quarters. Our political consciences are easy, and I hope that ‘ we shall find our bed comfortable until we. san get off it with respect to ourselves, and without outraging our political reputation and experience. We have been charged with having put the Labour Party into power; but the late Prime Minister, in a recent speech in this Chamber - Hansard, page 2138 - said -

It is a singular circumstance, upon which those who have been associated with this Government can look with a considerable amount of consolation, that, although’ our party is not numerically strong, no party combination is possible in this House which can transact thi: business of the country without its consent.

In view of that statement, is it not idle to say that the Opposition is responsible for the present state of affairs? The honorable member for Ballarat laughs; of course, I assume that he is under no obligation to support the Labour Party. I hope that there is no secret compact.

Mr Deakin:

– There never has been, and never will be.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I believe that there is no such compact ; but the honorable member’s laughter is ill-timed. The quotation I have read answers his criticism.

Mr Deakin:

– It is quite irrelevant.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I differ from the honorable and learned member. He has openly boasted that no party can carry on without the consent of that which he leads, and must therefore take responsibility for the present position.

Mr Deakin:

– Absolutely ; but what has that to do with the vote which was given?”

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– The honorable and learned member’s party must accept responsibility for the continuance of the Labour Party in office.

Mr Deakin:

– Hear, hear. But what the honorable member is saying does not defend the vote which put the Labour Part*- into office. It relates to the situation created subsequently.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– That vote needs no defence. We sought the disruption of the alliance between the Labour Party and the Ministry of the day, and have brought it about, the country being the gainer thereby.

Mr Deakin:

– It is the Labour Party which is the gainer.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– Theirs is the immediate gain; I spoke of the future. The honorable and learned member is responsible for keeping the Labour Party in office. In the mouths of many of his supporters free-traders have been anathema. One of the reasons given for voting against the Opposition was that its ranks contain free-traders; but now the secretary tothe Victorian protectionists, the honorablemember for Batman, and the honorablemember for Gippsland, three of the keenest protectionists in the Chamber, are supporting a Government of which four of the Ministers are free-traders. At the last elections the Prime Minister pledged himself to vote for effective protection, but he was a free-trader when he entered this House.

Mr Fisher:

– No; I voted for the first Kingston. Tariff against the Opposition amendment.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– If the records were searched, it would be found that ihe honorable member did not vote for much of that Tariff.

Mr Fisher:

– I voted with the Government on the main fiscal question.

Sir William Lyne:

– How many freetraders would the honorable member’s Cabinet contain?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– That is a question which, for obvious reasons, I cannot answer. Honorable members to whom freetraders have hitherto been anathema, support, with singular complacency, Ministers of whom half are free-traders. No doubt they have an explanation which will satisfy their constituents. But it is time that the honorable and learned member for Ballarat set himself to support the Government on its merits, and not in our demerits. I shall be glad to let personal animosities drop, and to endeavour to find the solution of the trouble ii this House with a view to the benefit of the country. The Prime Minister yesterday lifted the veil enough to give us a Deep at the legislative future desired by his party. The vision was instructive. What did we see regarding the new protection ?

Mr Wilks:

– The consumer has been chopped.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– The consumer is left out of sight. When we began to agitate this question in this Chamber and the country, the consumer was supposed to have first claim ; but all that is now thought of is that section of the workers who are engaged in the production of certain articles. The Prime Minister last night, in his vision of the future, left out of sight any consideration for the consumer. I look keenly at this part of his speech to find the difference between his new protection and the new protection of the Government which he has displaced. If I understand the difference, it simply consists in this - whereas the late Prime Minister proposed to limit new protection to the wages of employes in protected industries, the present Prime Minister seeks a full grant of concurrent industrial power with the States, to deal with all wages and all industrial conditions from end to end of Australia. The present Prime Minister and his colleagues know that concurrent power means paramount power in the working out of any such scheme. If an Act be passed granting such power, the working of the organizations will be so ordered and arranged that industrial power will all go to . the Commonwealth to the exclusion of its exercise by the States. That I take to be the essential difference between the sketch of the new protection of the late Prime Minister, and the vision as indicated by the present Prime Minister; and it raises a very serious issue. It raises the whole question of States rights in one of its most vital aspects. I believe that the majority of the people outside, and certainly the majority of honorable members, are averse to so grave and serious an inroad on th« rights and privileges of the States.

Mr Wilks:

– We are told we must not make too much of States rights !

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I desire to give States rights their proper emphasis. I take it that States rights are involved in Federal rights, and that herein lies the distinction between unification and Federation. If we are going to unify all the industrial conditions of the Commonwealth, we shall not be very far from unification, pure and simple, and, to my mind, the new protection proposals are the most serious inroad on the rights and privileges of the States that has yet been attempted in this Chamber.

Mr Hall:

– Is the honorable member for Dalley one of the solid forty-seven?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I believe that the honorable member who is interjecting will find that the honorable .member for Dalley will look as well to States rights as most members of the Chamber.

Mr Page:

– Surely the honorable member does not mind trusting the people? It will be the people’s will, and not the will of Parliament.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– My opinion of those who are always calling out about “ trusting the people “ is that they “ take in “ the people most. Certainly my honorable friend cannot say that his party has been trusted by the outside organizations so far as the Government of the country is concerned.

Mr Page:

– I do not know about that; we come back in spite of all your lying yarns about our party.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I am sure the honorable member does not mean that.

Mr Page:

– I do not mean personally -I mean the whole of the honorable member’s party.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I think the words should be withdrawn.

Mr SPEAKER:

– It may be that foi the moment I was not attending to the debate, but I did not hear any remark that ought to be withdrawn. If, however, the honorable member for Maranoa has made any remark which should be withdrawn, I ask him to withdraw it.

Mr Page:

– I do not know to what the honorable member for Parramatta objects, but if he will tell me, I shall be very glad to withdraw any words regarded as offensive.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– “ Lying yarns,” I think, were the words.

Mr Page:

– I did not apply the words to the honorable member, but simply re- .ferred to party warfare, in which lying yarns are told about our party. I did not say that the honorable member told lying yarns individually; but if he thinks that I applied the words to him - which I say I did not - I shall be glad to withdraw them unreservedly. I can take my gruelling without complaint.

Mr Wilks:

– The honorable member should take it without whining !

Mr SPEAKER:

– This simply illustrates once more the great inconvenience and irregularity of remarks across the Chamber. If honorable members on both sides would refrain, it would be much easier for the honorable member for Parramatta to proceed, and the dignity of the House would be conserved to a much larger degree. Will honorable members during this and other speeches to follow strive to avoid, as far as possible, interjections which are not intended to elicit information, but simply to disturb the honorable member addressing the Chair ?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– As to the new protection proposal, I desire to dissociate myself from any movement which may be considered antagonistic to the workers of Australia. I differ from my friends opposite as to the methods they pursue - I differ from them honestly, fairly, and fearlessly, it may be - but regarding the ultimate desire which we all have in common, that the working man shall receive a fair share of what is granted by way of concession by this Parliament, there is and can be no question. My honorable friends opposite have a strange infatuation ; and it arises from their caucus rule and caucus methods. If we do not shout their Shibboleth, and do not agree with them as to their particular method of doing things, they say that we are opposed to all reform, and are traitors to the interests of the workers, whom they claim to solely represent. I desire to make it plain that I will not be associated with any anti-Labour Party of any description. Honorable members opposite may laugh; but I decline to believe that all the sympathy with the legitimate aspirations of the labouring classes of this country resides in the caucus. That is not at all my reading of affairs. I see in the caucus only a pure political machine, which has not in it any clement of amelioration, so far as the great bulk of the working classes of the country are concerned.

Mr Wilks:

– We shall have to put up a better caucus to beat it !

Mr Hall:

– Hear, hear. There is the chance for the Opposition.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– If we do make a machine I express the hope that it will be conducted on lines less tyrannous than those of their caucus, and that it will be permeated by a sentiment which does not find expression amongst my honorable friends opposite. They seek the brotherhood of man, but they seek it by methods of hatred.

Mr Wilks:

– Class hatred.

Mr SPEAKER:

– It is not five minutes since I asked honorable members to refrain from making remarks, but the honorable member for Dalley and other honorable members have twice or thrice since interjected. I shall be driven, much against my will, to take other steps if the interjections do not cease at this request.

Mr Wilks:

– I apologize, Mr. Speaker, and can only say that I am so much interested in the speech that I was carried awa v.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– In my judgment, the proposals of the Government will not help the working men of the country. My experience up to date is that the workers in the best paying States of Australia have gained nothing in industrial conditions or otherwise by Federation. I believe it is inevitable that the law of Federation must be the law of the average. That seems to me to be the centre of gravity so far as industrial matters relate to Federal control. My honorable friends opposite, who are clamoring so loudly at the moment for Federal industrial control, will find a tendency to bring about the condition of thing* I am describing. In mv opinion the best results accrue to the workers from the interplay of Inter-State competition, arising from differences in the natural features in the various States. This gives the best industrial results; but what the Government propose to do is practically to socialize natural conditions of Australia. When we begin to fight in that way with nature, we shall find nature beat us, as she beats all her enemies, by establishing an average, which is usually far and away below the best. That law, in my opinion, is inevitable in connexion with Federal control of industrial conditions, as in every other relation of natural life”. I have seen that law already in operation - it can be seen in operation to-day - and I believe, therefore, that what the Government seek to do will not be found ultimately to be in the interests of the working men of Australia, but quite the contrary. Why, in the Prime Minister’s vision, was there nothing more than new protection? Is that the reason for the trouble that lately arose between the two sections? Was it owing to the inadequacy of the new protection proposals of the late Prime Minister that the change of Government has come about? It would seem so, since this was the only departure made from the programme of the late Government by the Prime Minister yesterday. The proposal of the late Government was declared to be inadequate, as one has only to look to the Labour newspapers to see. Here is an extract from the Worker, of which I am and always have been a diligent reader. The words -

page 2308

STRAIGHT AUSTRALIAN

Entirely Inadequate. are the head- lines which precede the denunciation of the new protection proposal -

The proposals of the Government concede but one-half the demands of the Brisbane Conference. As a means of securing new protection they might be acceptable, but they leave the Commonwealth position with regard to unprotected industries as it was. Such questions as the legislation of the eight-hour day, and the maintenance of fair industrial conditions as be- tween State and State would remain in their present unsatisfactory condition.

The question which the Labour Party is now faced with is whether it is worth while entering upon the vigorous campaign which will be necessary to obtain an amendment of the Constitution, for so half-hearted a proposal as that which the Government ask it to accept. The Worker is decidedly of the opinion that the people of Australia are prepared to give Parliament full power to secure just industrial conditions throughout the Commonwealth. That Parliament should present the question in any form less than that which would enable this will of the people to have full effect is indefensible from any sane Australian point of view.

Here, it seems to me, is an explanation of the change in the personnel of the Govern ment. The new protection proposed by the late Government was not sufficiently drastic ; and the present Government, as we were told very distinctly yesterday, seek to go further. But why stop at new protection ? What has happened to the Land Tax ? On that matter the other day we listened to a most eloquent address in this Chamber by the present Minister of Home Affairs. He said -

– That is not a forewarning, it is a simple statement ot fact with which honorable members are familiar, and it explains the programme outlined by the Prime Minister. The Government are seeking the line of least resistance. I suppose, too, that it accounts for the altered note outside as well as in the House. We have had struck outside the Chamber at the very commencement of the career of the present Ministry an apologetic note. For instance, Mr. Prendergast, leader of the State Labour Party, the other day made a piteous appeal to an audience not to be too expectant of results, and declared that if the Labour Party remained in office for three months they would do a great deal by way of administration. I admit that they would. The Minister of Defence, for instance, is now proposing to take away the gold lace worn by some of the officers.. I presume that that is to be a set off to the action which the Labour Party took some time ago in supporting the distribution of public moneys in the shape of a bounty on the production of high-class cigars. They were then very- anxious that those soldiers should smoke the highest class of cigars that could be produced; but now they are endeavouring to strip them of their little bit of gold braid. I hope that this contemplated action will put something into the hungry stomachs of the unemployed.

Mr FOSTER:
NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– The honorable member’s troubles about the unemployed.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– And the same may be said regarding the Minister when he resorts to minor reforms of that character. Another brilliant act of administration is proposed by the PostmasterGeneral. The honorable member had scarcely got seated in his office when he declared that it would be admirable if we could have an all-red cable route, and he made the simple proposal that an effort should be made to induce Canada to buy out her own land line. I hope that this, again, is a matter of immediate reform for the workers of Australia. I am sure that if Canada resumed this land line it would add a great deal to the empty cupboards of the starving workers of Australia ! I venture Io think, however, that a practical man would say, “ Confound you, Mr. Postmaster-General ! Come home ! Deal with our troubles here, and when you have a little time to spare you may open up negotiations with Canada regarding the resumption of her land line.” These are specimens of the administrative acts to which we are to be treated. They are certainly, as before, harmless and safe. This Government will risk nothing, so far as I can see, during the months immediately ahead. Therefore, the country may sleep easy o’ nights for .all that the Government will do in the way of injuring it. Their one great desire seems to be to tell the country how little they have done when in office ; they appear to take an altogether strange delight in being safe, responsible, conservative administrators. They did so before, and after they left office said, “ Nothing has happened.” Nothing had happened, and nothing will happen now. Nothing is intended to happen, except that they may remain in office for a few months. They will then go to the country and say what they would have done had’ they been allowed to remain in power. On the last occasion they were in office for four months, and the ohe achievement to which I have already referred stands to their infinite credit. They propose, so far, a programme of legislation which we shall have great pleasure in helping them to carry through. I am glad to find my honorable friends determining to settle once and for all the question of the site of the Federal Capital. It has been a sore and heart burning one in this House for many years and if they succeed in carrying the question to finality they will deserve well of Australia. I would remind the House, however, that what they propose in this regard would have been carried out if those unfortunate individuals whom they have dispossessed had been permitted to remain in office. Did the Labour Party put out the late Government because of their attitude with regard to the Federal Capital, or the Manufactures Encouragement Bill ? Have they turned them out because of their financial administration? Why have they put them out? Everything that the former Government was doing they propose to carryto completion. As to their other schemes, the veil of futurity kindly hides them from our view. Meantime I think we ought to ask the Prime Minister to be a little more explicit with regard to one outstanding reform to which the whole House is pledged. I refer to the question of old-age pensions, and to the most unsatisfactory statement made by the Prime Minister regarding the intentions of his Ministry. What did he tell us last night? He simply repeated the words of the late Treasurer, “ I shall find the money. The money must be found.” We wish to know where it is to come from. The honorable member might have been a little candid. He was the perfection of candour when sitting below the gangway. Why is he not as candid to-day? Has an. investigation of the finances of the country altered his view? If it has altered his view, I hope it has not altered his candour ; yet, strange to say, we could not get a word from him last night. Here is what he said in criticism of the late Treasurer upon this very matter -

I regret that the Treasurer has not provided more money for old-age pensions.

Well, have we any more money provided for old-age pensions now ? The honorable member told us last night, as though in triumph, that he had put away ,£50,000 for the month. That is at the rate of £600,000 a year to meet an obligation of ^1,750,000 a year.

Mr Fisher:

– Not so much as that. It is rather under than over that.

Sir John Forrest:

– The honorable member said it would take .£1,500,000.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– If he is going to get through with a payment of. £1,500,000, then his own language, addressed to the late Treasurer, is applicable to him. He said then -

I am expressing the view of the Labour Party when I say that attempts to tamper with the Act by giving a restrictive reading to the sections in regard to either invalid or old-age pensions will meet with a short shrift.

If the honorable member is going to get through with a million and a half, he must give a restrictive reading to those sections.

Mr Fisher:

– Certainly not.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– It is impossible for him to give an extended reading to them when expending that amount. Any one who knows anything of the subject will agree that it will cost more than the honorable member says, and certainly a great deal more than the honorable member for Hume, when Treasurer, hoped to get through with. Here is what the honorable member said as to the ways and methods of financing this matter of old-age pensions. I call attention to his words, because the matter becomes one of supreme importance now that the honorable member is not only Prime Minister, but also Treasurer. He is sitting on the Treasury chest, and is able to do as he pleases now with regard to the finding of money for various projects. He said -

The Treasurer flatters himself that he will be able to pay invalid and old-age pensions with a sum, approximately, of£1,300,000. I do not think the honorable gentleman has the least chance of being able to do so, and I hope that he has not. . . . What should we say of a public company that entered into an obligation to pay invalid and old-age pensions, and that, though its resources were as extensive, and its prosperity as great, as that of the Commonwealth, begrudged a few thousand pounds to completely fulfil that obligation?

When we asked the honorable member last night how he was going to fulfil that obligation, he said, “I will meet it; funds will be forthcoming.” Anybody could say that. Taking the honorable member’s own simile of a public company, a bogus director could assure the shareholders that the money would be all right, but the shareholders would want to see their money and to know that it was all right. My honorable friend, on that occasion, went fur- ther, and, not relying upon merely negative criticism, went into the constructive realm, and proposed to find the money from a particular source. This is what he said -

I wish to know exactly where we are going in this matter.

We wish to know exactly where we are going now -

No matter who the Treasurer at the time may be, there is not the shadow of a hope that, solely from indirect taxation, there will be sufficient money available to meet all the claims for invalid and old-age pensions up to the end of1910.

He says there is no hope of paying the pensions out of indirect taxation. Is that still his opinion after an investigation of the finances? That is a, plain, straight question. He made that statement only a fortnight ago. I ask him now, and I think the country is entitled to an answer, whether it is still his opinion after inquiring carefully into the matter, that old-age pensions cannot be financed out of indirect taxation ?

Mr Fisher:

– They will be financed all right.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– The late Treasurer is not in it. He was simplicity itself compared with this Machiavellian silence. The moment honorable members become possessed of the Treasury bench, they become the personification of all the craft in creation. My honorable friend to-day is not able to answer a straight question which he would have answered without hesitation only a fortnight ago. We must draw our own inferences. The fact that the honorable member declines to make any answer leaves us no option but to infer that he is forcing the difficulty further into the distance, and that he will then make a definite proposal to meet it by means of direct taxation. If that is his purpose and intention, what harm could happen if he told us plainly now upon the floor of this House that taxation of a direct character would be absolutely necessary and that the Government would introduce it at a convenient season? That would be straightforward - as straightforward as the honorable member always was when sitting below the gangway. I hope that he, of all men, will not follow the devious courses of previous Ministers - those so-called mere politicians of the past. I thought we should have had a little straight Labour statesmanship for once, but honorable gentlemen are dumb as oysters on anything concerning the country’s finances, and, strangest of all, on anything concerning their own Labour platform. I suppose it will be left to honorable members who sit behind them to talk a little more plainly, as one of them did the other day. The honorable member for Herbert then said that they were going to. get ready at the next election to go through all the thunders and lightnings of. the Conservative press, and that they would come back, as he said, sailing the ship into port “with a larger and more valuable cargo than we have ever had yet.” The honorable member for Lang interjected, “More Socialism?” and the honorable member for Herbert said “ Yes, and of a more advanced type, too.” Where is the trace of advanced Socialism in this programme - Capital Site, old-age pensions, £50,000 for the Post Office, and not a word about defence? There is no special reform there of any kind. We shall have to leave my honorable friends, as they will say nothing. They have adopted the methods of the Sphinx. They will not speak.

Sir William Lyne:

– It is a good job the honorable member has some one else to worry now.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– The late Treasurer, if he had been asked, would have said, “ Yes, I will pay old-age pensions even if it is done out of direct taxation.” H”. would not have hesitated, and, in fact, he did not hesitate. Why should he be pluckier and more straightforward than the present Prime Minister, who is supposed to represent the platform on which he was returned to Parliament? And so one could go through this platform of theirs, but I do not wish to prolong my remarks. I had intended to read one or two extracts showing how the evolution of events has completely justified the criticism of the Labour Party made by the late Prime Minister two or three years ago - I refer to the criticism in which he said that the nearer you got to the Labour members, the more bitter they became. I think I had better read the extract, because, if ever a prophesy has come true, and been substantiated to the very letter, it is the one then made by the late Prime Minister at Ballarat. Our complaint against that honorable member all through the last three years has been that he was in too close alliance with the Labour Party. That was principally and chiefly our complaint against him, and now that it no longer exists, it is worth while to look over his record to see how completely he predicted what has actually come to pass. He has tried to help them for three years. He has done his best for them. I think I put it on one occasion that the honorable member had shafted beautifully in the gala coach of Socialism for them, and now they have hunted him out. They have turned him out without any corn - turned him out to political grass. All that has come about is in fulfilment of a prediction which he himself made two or three years ago. He said then -

Those most closely allied with the Labour Party, those who make the greatest sacrifices for them -

And will any one in this House say thai the late Prime Minister has not made sacrifices for them? Every one knows that he has suffered in reputation by the sacrifices he has made to the Labour Party.

Mr Hall:

– He has made his reputation for wise democratic work.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

-That is a matter of opinion. He said then : -

Those most closely allied with the Labour Party, those who make the greatest sacrificesfor them, who stand closest to them, und wishmost to help them, are always the first to besacrificed to them. One may help the Labour Party for one month, for two months, for three months, or four months, but the moment onestops or makes a single independent step he istreated as a bitter enemy. This i« the frear. ment that follows alliances with political machines.

This is practically the position which was taken up by the prominent member of the Labour Party referred to; but what did the late Prime Minister say in regard to this code of political honour then ? The honorable gentleman asked, “ Could a more demoralizing bargain be proposed by any public body or institution?” That is the bargain to support a party whose platform they do not believe in and give them votes so long as they propose the legislation the other party to the bargain desires. If the late Prime Minister was right in denouncing that prominent member of the Labour Party - and I think he was - then I say that what is “sauce” for the caucus “goose” ought to be “sauce” for the anti-caucus gander.” We are not here to barter our votes, but as the trustees of the people ; and a large majority of the people, in no uncertain way, have given us a mandate to oppose what not long ago the late Prime Minister described as the “ crude and hasty notions and vain visionary imaginings of those who wish to rush us over a precipice.” It must be apparent to every honorable member, and I atn sure that it is uppermost in the minds of the Government themselves, that whereas when they were sitting in the Ministerial corner, twenty-seven strong, supporting a Government consisting of a party of only fifteen members, they occupied a position of power and authority, they ,are now powerless to do anything except with the consent of those who are temporarily assisting them.

Mr Roberts:

– Then why does the honorable member complain ?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I simply wish to let the Labour Party know that they have exchanged a position of power for one in which they can do nothing.

What hope have you from the Labour Party? In all its long programme and remote aims, that party has not yet been able to find space to include any fiscal policy whatever. You have to look jealously at the Labour Party before you intrust them” with the control of those measures that make for the protection and the future of Australian industry.

A few days afterwards, also at Ballarat, he referred to the Caucus Party as a party step by step sapping away the liberties of the people. They were, he said -

. fast travelling in the path which, in his judgment, would manifest itself a gross abuse. That party first of all knocked away a little liberty here, a little” independence there, and then a little bit of authority somewhere else. What would be left?

I ask, too, what will be left ? That is the party that boasts of freedom, and is never tired of proclaiming its regard for its fellow men. It is not freedom but thraldom that they advocate -

Thraldom who walks with the banner of freedom, and recks not to ruin a realm ‘in her name.

Then the honorable member, expressing an opinion which I concur in, and which I think a great many others in Australia will concur in, said -

No caucus, except the caucus of the Labour Party, sought to compel a minority to vote against judgment and conscience, because a majority of their following demanded it.

– That is an exaggerated statement.

Mr HUGHES:

– It is a tact. I do not know what an exaggerated fact is, but I shall say that for the five years that the right honorable member was in office he remained there, except on one or two exceptional occasions, through the support that the Labour Party gave him. He was content then to receive that support. During the whole of that time we did not have from him one solitary reason why he should not receive it, or why we should not give it. But since he resigned his views have changed. He said in the beginning of his speech that he defied any one to prove that he had not resigned early enough. He said he had not delayed the moment of his resignation. We do not know whether he did or not. We only know that he resigned, £and has been obviously very sorry for it ever since. If there is one fact patent to this House and to the country, it is that the honorable member realizes that he made the mistake of Wis life. He thought, as others have thought, that his withdrawal from the

– Perhaps the constituency needed financial assistance. The recent elections in Western Australia considerably increased the membership of the Labour Party there. In South Australia, a Labour Government is in power, supported by members belonging to other parties’; in Queensland, the Labour Party returned from the country with added strength; and in

New South Wales it has also gained considerably. In each of the States, and in the Commonwealth, while other parties are going down, the Labour Party is climbing rapidly up. Neither bluff nor eloquence will prevail against that fact. To emphasize these remarks, let me quote a few more figures. In 1904, there were thirty-nine Labour representatives in the Commonwealth Parliament ; now there are forty-two. Last year, while the members of all the Australian Parliaments numbered 664, 159 were Labour representatives, and 505 anti-Labour ; while, at the present day, 171 are Labour representatives, and only 493 anti-Labour, the Labour Party having gained twelve seats at the expense of its opponents. We belong then to a party whose adherents are increasing every day. We have clearly a right to be where we are, especially since we have the support of a number of members who, while not belonging to our party, are pledged to support principles which are planks of our platform. A writer in the Review of Reviews for July, 1904, said -

No one can be biassed to the rising of the tide of sentiment and to the way in which it is making. All over Australia the Labour Party is winning at the elections. The recent contests have shown a great increase in numbers returned on labour pledges. He is a blind student who fails to see and make a proper estimate of this growth of public sentiment. It is not to be fought and killed ; but nourished and educated that it may serve the best interests of the Commonwealth.

– I shall look the matter up during the dinner hour, and quote the letter.

Sitting suspended from 6.30 to 7.4.5 p.m.

Mr HUGHES:

– I referred to the caucus as developed by the Liberal Six Hundred at Birmingham - a caucus which was used by that party for many years, and is in use now - and I said that the caucus and party discipline, with control of members of Parliament by outside bodies, had there been carried to an extent that would not be tolerated here. On reference to page 198 of Volume I. of Ostrogorski’s Democracy and Organization of Political. Parties, it will be seen that this is amply borne out. Mr. Forster was at that time one of the leading politicians in Great Britain, and it was thought that if Mr. Gladstone were to retire, he would take that gentleman’s place as leader in the House of Commons. He was a man of first-class reputation, and held, as I have indicated, a very prominent place in the British Parliament. The local caucus and Mr. Forster had a quarrel, in the course of which the chairman of the caucus said -

that with a candidate who ventured to ignore or thwart the decisions of the party in order to follow his personal interest, his own duty was to support the association : that a candidate had no right to appeal to the whole constituency.

– At page 4349 of Hansard, of 7th September, 1904, we have the statement by the right honorable member for East Sydney -

A Bill for the creation of the position ot High Commissioner is on the Notice-paper, and I believe that the late Government proposed to deal with it during the present session. In our view, however, it is utterly impossible to establish the position of High Commissioner until the various States have been consulted.

We, therefore, do not propose to proceed with that Bill until we have had an opportunity in the recess ….

– Nor was that done on a previous occasion. We propose that it shall be done this time. I have spoken about the combination that brought about the downfall of the Watson Government, and the honorable member for Ballarat has explained how he was drawn into supporting it, not clearly recognising the inevitable end. We intend that that shall not occur again, and we claim the right to have a proper opportunity of bringing down our programme. That has always been extended to every Government, and we ask that it be extended to us. The honorable member for Parramatta, of whose election , to the office of leader of the Opposition we all approve, for he has certainly borne the heat and burden of the day, and has a right to the position, has elected to signalize his accession to the post by digging indecently down into the scarcely filled-in graves of some resolutions put forward by members of our party. It is only proper to ask him to explain one or two things that he said himself in days gone by in reference to those very matters. He asked . us this afternoon, “ What about your progressive land tax?” He is, of course, a very vehement opponent of the Labour Party now. He was not always so.On the 2nd February, 1893 - Vol. 62 of Hansard, New South Wales, page 3813 - he, said -

With respect to the income tax, i do not object to that tax at all, but i do object to its taking precedence of a land tax.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order ! I understand the honorable member to be referring to a debate which took place fifteen or sixteen years ago. I ask him whether he thinks it necessary, on this occasion, to depart so far from the matter that is before us.

Mr HUGHES:

– The honorable member for Parramatta has said nothing of this kind about a land tax since, so that I am scarcely able to refer to a more recent debate. I have something that he said in 1894, but I presume that would hardly prove much more acceptable to you. With your permission, sir, I shall merely make the quotation. The honorable member said -

With respect to the income tax, I do not. object to that tax at all j but I do object to its taking precedence of a land tax. I admit thm it is a good mode of taxation, and second, perhaps, only in effectiveness to a land tax. But am i to be satisfied with this being poked at me when the Government, already pledged to a most superior tax, quietly ignores it? The income tax as proposed by the Government does not differentiate between incomes from property and incomes from personal exertion. i submit it is only reasonable to tax incomes from property to ‘ a greater extent than it is to tax income which .is earned by the working man of the country….. It does not touch the man who holds hundreds and thousands of acres of land which are lying idle, and from which he derives no income. The Colonial Treasurer the other night professed that an income tax would be derived from these unremunerative lands. How he proposes to obtain it i am at a loss to understand. That seems to me to be the veriest piece of political jargon that I have ever heard coming from a person in the exalted position of Colonial Treasurer. The income tax will tax incomes from land, but only to the extent to which that land is used and put into occupation. That is not what we want. . . . It is not the thrift of the country, but the legalized theft that we want to tax - the men who have taken, through the medium of land values, something which they did nothing to create, who have taken from the people the result of their own flesh and blood, who have taken it by the machinery of the law and appropriated it to their own personal use. That is the kind of value, and that is the substance we want to tax, and the income tax does not necessarily reach these people. It only reaches those who are cultivating their estates, but it does not reach the estates that are locked up, and which are contributing nothing to the revenue.

– What if the Labour Party do not touch their programme?

Mr DUGALD THOMSON:
NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906

– If the Labour Party do not support their own programme, that will be an evident attempt to retain office without carrying out the policy that they are pledged to the people to bring into effect when they have an opportunity. That would be a sufficient reason for dealing with any Ministry. If the members in any portion of the House are supporters of the full policy of the Labour Government, no doubt they will support, and continue to support, them. If they are not, they will no doubt act in the way their consciences dictate. I am not going to say what that action should be. Every man must judge for himself. But the question that must guide each of us in coming to a decision is this : “Is the programme to which the Government are pledged one that can be supported in toto by honorable members”? If not, no doubt honorable members will give expression to their views.

I do not think that the Labour Party, if they have any pride or satisfaction in their own programme, any consideration for their own reputation, would wish to hold office merely by deserting what they had been elected to carry out. It would- be the worst compliment that any Government could get, that only by deserting and continuing to desert their pledges could they, obtain support or remain in office. If they deserted those principles in order to retain office, it would be one of the worst actions that they could be guilty of. After the able speeches of the leader of the Opposition and the right honorable member for Swan, there is no occasion to go into many matters that might be dealt with in this debate ; but I would allude to an interjection made by the honorable member for Ballarat when the right honorable member for Swan was speaking. He said that the right honorable member for Swan and others who voted with him had placed the Labour Government in office. While, of course, every honorable member who voted against the late Government may be responsible for that Government going out of office, they cannot be held responsible for another particular Government coming into office or being retained in office.

It is our duty, when laying down the official conduct of business, to endeavour to strengthen the’ hands of those who will take it up while the conduct of that business by them does not conflict either with the principles upon which we were returned, or with the interests of the Commonwealth. . . . No matter into whose hands that policy may fall -

By that the honorable member meant the policy of the late Government - it will be both our privilege and our duty to support it. This can be accomplished, as my honorable friends in the corner have shown for the past three years.

In that he referred to the action of the Labour Party in supporting the late Government during that term - ‘

– I make no suggestion ; I merely say that that would be a more wholesome state of affairs.

Mr HALL:
Werriwa

.- A good deal has been said about the attitude of members of the Labour Party towards the late Ministerialists. May I point out briefly that the resolution of the Brisbane Conference does not affect the freedom of the local labour leagues? At the last election, the honorable members for Riverina, Hume, and Eden-Monaro were not opposed by candidates chosen by the local labour leagues, and these bodies are free to act similarly on the next occasion. Honorable members say that the contemplation of the present situation has afforded them a good deal of amusement ; and I have been considerably interested in what has happened since it became obvious that there would be a Labour Ministry. I have here an interview with the honorable and learned member for Parkes, which appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald a week ago, and is the strongest instance of political dishonesty that has come under my notice. It is headed -

Appeal for Unity by Mr. Bruce Smith. Selection of an Opposition .leader. Party loyalty, and Patriotism.

– Honorable members opposite have an extraordinary capacity for drawing wrong inferences from the utterances of the Prime Minister. The late Prime Minister said -

I see in this House many gentlemen with whom it would be a privilegefor us to act - some with whom we have acted, and others with whom we may act again - but we also see here the remnants I have spoken of, with whom we cannot act.

Mr Reid:

– The Labour Party.

Mr DEAKIN:

Mr LIVINGSTON:

– I’ have read enough to know that the Federal Parliament was created to deal with the larger questions of Australian politics. The late Government has certainly dealt with one or two big questions, but in such a way that it has been necessary to appeal to the High Court to secure an interpretation, of their measures. The Prime Minister and his colleagues have taken up a number of noncontentious Bills introduced by their predecessors, and are likely to get into recess in a very short time. I regret that they have not announced their intention to legislate with regard to some of the larger questions that await our attention. The proposed transfer of the Northern Territory to the Commonwealth is apparently once more to be shelved. It must, however, be speedily taken in hand, for South Australia cannot continue much longer to administer its affairs. It has done a creditable work in holding it so long as a white man’s land.

Mr Wise:

– Is that why the honorable member voted against the late Government ?

Mr LIVINGSTON:

– The honorable member has too much to say. If he had a little more sense he would keep his mouth closed. In my opinion, we should have elective Ministries. That system would put an end to the trouble to which I have just referred. Every Parliament in Australia elects its Speaker and Chairman of Committee as soon as it meets, and no one’ will deny that the occupants of those high offices are a credit to Australia. That being so, why cannot this Parliament be intrusted with the work of electing a Government? 1 am satisfied that we should proceed on right lines, and that some of the members of the present Ministry would find a place in an Administration elected by the House. In such a Government, all sections of the community would be represented.’ ‘1’fie system is well worth a trial. Any system that would put an end to the miserable wire-pulling that has been going on to secure possession of the Treasury bench would be a good thing for the people ot Australia. I hope that before ‘ long we shall adopt the system of elective Ministries. Is it any wonder that the people are at present disappointed with Federation ? Let us hope that the Prime Minister will rise to the occasion. It has been said during this debate that he will tlo nothing. 1 do not hold that view, and 1 sincerely trust thai he will put forward a bold and vigorous policy. If he falls, as the result of such a programme, he will surely rise again to power. I must confess that 1 do not like the proposed legislation in regard to stowaways, and I have only to say in conclusion that I trust that when next a change of Government is made we shall have an elective Ministry.

Mr J H CATTS:
Cook

.- One of the methods adopted by the enemies of the Federal Labour Party to discredit them as administrators of the affairs of the Commonwealth is to decry their knowledge of finance. The Sydney Morning Herald of 23rd November, . 1908, in its leading article, wrote -

Now that the Labour Party has control of the financial affairs of a continent it will find that its experience, gained upon the fate of the labourer who, out of work, takes his wife’s trinkets to the pawnbroker, does not altogether apply.

A more degrading statement than that has never appeared in any newspaper which prides itself upon being a respectable publication. There are greater authorities than the partisan press of Sydney. These papers, owned by wealthy shareholders, who tremble because the Labour programme threatens the unrighteous toll they exact from the toiling masses, will print any calumny and invent any falsehood for their own party ends. The most reliable test of the financial ability and integrity of a Labour Ministry is the confidence expressed by the investors in Australian stocks. This confidence has been expressed most emphatically upon each occasion when Labour has assumed control of the affairs of Australia. The first Labour Ministry took office, led by the honorable member for South Sydney, on 27th April, 1904, and resigned on 17th August, 1904. The London Times recorded the price of Australian Stock on specified dates as follows : -

This shows a marked appreciation in Australian securities. ‘ The second Labour Ministry, led by the honorable member for Wide Bay, took office on 13th November, 1908. Again have the London investors expressed themselves. The Sydney Morning Herald on 19th November, 1908, records increased prices of Australian stocks, as does the Melbourne Herald of 18th November, 1908. The latter paper on that date published the following : -

LONDON, 18th November, 1908.

The following are the latest quotations for the Australian stocks named : -

Bank of Australasia shares, buyer £104, seller £105, as against£103 10s. and£104 10s. respectively a fortnight ago.

Bank of New South Wales shares, buyer £44 15s., seller£45 5s., as against£44 and£45 respectively on November 3.

Union Bank of Australia shares, buyer£60 5s., seller £60 15s., as against £59 10s. and £60 10s. respectively a fortnight ago.

This indisputable argument of concrete fact altogether dissipates the whole artillery of libels directed against the Labour Party by unscrupulous opponents. We meet the enemy at their last ditch, and, as usual, effect their destruction by incontrovertible evidence.

Debate (on motion by Mr. Wilks) adjourned.

page 2346

SEAT OF GOVERNMENT

Motion (by Mr. Mahon) agreed to -

That leave be given to bring in a Bill for an Act to determine the Seat of Government of the Commonwealth.

Bill presented and read a first time.

page 2346

ADJOURNMENT

Despatch of Business - Arbitration

Court Award

Mr FISHER:
Treasurer · Wide Bay · ALP

– In moving -

That the House do now adjourn,

I desire to express the hope that every honorable member will facilitate the conclusion at the earliest possible opportunity of the debate upon which we have been engaged.

Mr MATHEWS:
Melbourne Ports

– I should be glad if the AttorneyGeneral would lay upon the table a copy of the application of the Marine Cooks, Bakers and Butchers’ Union to the Arbitration Court, and also a copy of Mr. Justice Higgins’ award and his general remarks in connexion with the matter.

Mr POYNTON:
Grey

– I wish to impress on the Prime Minister and honorable members generally the fact that as there are only fourteen or fifteen sitting days available before Christmas we shall have to apply ourselves closely to business* in order to get through anything like a decent amount of work before the prorogation. We ought to push on with the business, and I trust that after this there will be no suggestion of adjournment so early as twenty minutes past 10.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

.- I agree with the honorable member for Grey that as the time at our disposal is so short we ought to endeavour to push on with business. But I would suggest to him the propriety of Government supporters settling their . differences as to the conduct of Government . business either in the caucus room or elsewhere outside this chamber. Honorable members of the Opposition and, I think, of all parts of the House, are anxious to proceed with the conduct of useful business, but we do not want to be discouraged by Ministerial squabbles. The Prime Minister occupies a highly responsible position as leader of the House, and bis own followers ought to set an example in supporting him in the difficult position in which he is placed. I am anxious to assist him to push through the useful measures which have been forecast, and I hope 1 shall be encouraged in that dispostion by the display of an equal good will on the part of his own followers.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned at 10.23 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 26 November 1908, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1908/19081126_reps_3_48/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives26 November 1908

QUESTION

ELECTORAL ROLLS

Mr GROOM:DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND

Mr MAHON:Minister for Home Affairs · COOLGARDIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

PAPERS

QUESTION

PHOSPHORUS MATCHES

QUESTION

MUNICIPAL RATES

Mr WILKS:DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr FISHER:

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH OLD-AGE PENSIONS

Mr J H CATTS:COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr FISHER:ALP

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

Order of Business

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Thomas:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Watkins:

Mr McDonald:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Fisher:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Page:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Page:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Wilks:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr THOMAS BROWN:CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Roberts:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Page:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Wise:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Roberts:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Archer:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Deakin:

Mr Wilks:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Wilks:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Fuller:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr FOSTER:NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Deakin:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Deakin:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Deakin:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Deakin:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Wise:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr FOSTER:NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Deakin:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Batchelor:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Deakin:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Deakin:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Deakin:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Deakin:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Deakin:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Fisher:

House of Representatives
26 November 1908

Mr GROOM:
DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND

Mr MAHON:
Minister for Home Affairs · COOLGARDIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

Mr WILKS:
DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr J H CATTS:
COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr FISHER:
ALP

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr FOSTER:
NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr FOSTER:
NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr FOSTER:
NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr FOSTER:
NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Swan