House of Representatives
21 August 1912

4^th Parliament · 3^rd Session

QUESTION
- AUSTRALIAN GARRISON ARTILLERY
QUESTION
- ELECTORAL DIVISIONS : QUEENSLAND AND NEW SOUTH WALES
QUESTION
- POSTMASTER-GENERAL’S DEPARTMENT
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH CONTROL OF STATE RAILWAYS
QUESTION
- MR. DONALD CAMPBELL
QUESTION
- MILITARY SERVICE
QUESTION
- AMERICAN COASTAL SHIPPING
QUESTION
- NEW SOUTH WALES ELECTORAL ROLLS
QUESTION
- FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE
QUESTION
- FEDERAL CITY BOARD
PAPERS
BUDGET
TASMANIA GRANT BILL
ADJOURNMENT
- Order of Business

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

page 2434

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN GARRISON ARTILLERY

Mr RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I wish to know from the Minister representing - the Minister of Defence if steps are being taken ‘to heal the breach with the Australian Garrison Artillery in New South Wales, from which 200 or 300 men Have retired?

Mr ROBERTS:
Minister (without portfolio) · ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– The Minister has the matter under serious consideration, and will be able, in a day or two, I hope, to nuke a statement satisfactory to all concerned.

page 2434

QUESTION

ELECTORAL DIVISIONS : QUEENSLAND AND NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr HIGGS:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

– I wish to ask the Minister of Home Affairs - 1. Did he ‘direct .the Queensland Commissioners to prepare a fresh distribution of the electoral divisions of Queensland? 2 Did he, as. the result of his direction, receive from the said Commissioners a fresh distribution of the said electoral divisions? 3. Did the Minister return to the Commissioners the said fresh distribution,’ and, if so, why did he return it before consulting Parliament?

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
Minister for Home Affairs · DARWIN, TASMANIA · ALP

– My reply to the first question is “ Yes.” We asked the Commissioners to make a redistribution. The reply to the second and third questions is that the Commissioners sent to us a report dealing with only four divisions. We asked them to send us in a report dealing with all the Queensland divisions, which number ten. That, I suppose, will be done within a few days.

Mr CHANTER:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the Minister any further information regarding the New South Wales redistribution ? When will the report and plans be available ?

Mr KING O’MALLEY:

– I think that everything will be ready about the 30th of this month. The Commissioners are certain that everything will be ready about the 26th, but, if I say the 30th, that will give two days’ grace.

page 2435

QUESTION

POSTMASTER-GENERAL’S DEPARTMENT

Residential Quarters - Letters Posted at Railway Stations - Assistant

Electrical Engineer

Mr LIVINGSTON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

If he will take into consideration the advisability of altering the present post office plans “to allow of a door between the business portion ami the residential quarters, and will he make the necessary alterations in the offices recently built ?

Mr. THOMAS (for Mr. Frazer).Doors between the office and residential quaiters of postal buildings are provided, where special circumstances are held to justify it. It is not considered advisable to do this in every case.

Sir JOHN QUICK:
BENDIGO, VICTORIA

asked the PostmasterGerneral, upon notice -

Whether the proposed regulation imposing a late fee on letters posted at railway stations in Victoria will be laid on the Table of the House, and will the House have an opportunity of reviewing such regulation when approved ?

Mr. THOMAS (for Mr. Frazer).The regulation imposing a late fee on postal articles posted in the Commonwealth has been in operation for years. No new regulation is proposed, but the arrangements in Victoria are being brought into line with those obtaining in other States of the Commonwealth.

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
INDI, VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Postmaster-General, upon notice -

Whether it is the intention of the new regulation relating to late charges on letters ‘posted at railway stations that such charges should be enforced at places where there are no post offices Apart from the railway station itself?

Mr. THOMAS (for Mr. Frazer).At a place where the post-office is at the railway station, a letter posted after the closing time of the mail, and deposited in the box on the train, or in a box giving it the benefit of a later clearance than is effected at such post-office, would require to bear a late fee.

Mr FULLER:
ILLAWARRA, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

Is it correct, ns stated in the Melbourne Argus of Monday, 19th August, 1012, “That Mr.
1. M. Crawford, who is not an officer of the Public Service, has been- appointed, without examination or probation, to the position of assistant electrical engineer, on the Central Staff of the Postmaster-General “ ?
Where does Mr. Crawford, come from, and what are his qualifications?
Was there no officer in the service fitted for the position; if there was, why was he passed over for Mr. Crawford?

Mr THOMAS:
Minister for External Affairs · for Mr. Frazer · ALP

– The Commonwealth Public Service Commissioner has furnished the following information : -

Yes.
Mr. Crawford occupied the position of an electrical engineer in the British Post Office, and was attached to the Central Metropolitan District, London. He is an associate member of the Institute of Electrical Engineers, and has had twenty-six years service in the British Post Office, embracing all-round experience in telegraph, telephone, and other branches of P°stoffice electrical engineering. For the past fourteen years he was exclusively engaged on duties covering the requirements of the position to which he has been appointed.
The appointment of Mr. Crawford was effected under the provisions of section 31 of the Commonwealth PubLic Service Act. Applications were invited for the position, and only two officers of the Commonwealth applied. There was no officer available in the Public Service who possessed the qualifications regarded as essential for the appointment.

page 2435

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH CONTROL OF STATE RAILWAYS

Mr BAMFORD:
HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Whether,, under paragraph XXXII. of section 51 of the Constitution the Commonwealth Government is authorized to assume control of the. State railways for the transport of troops of all grades, including cadets, as also naval officers, men, and trainees, at any and all times when the transport of such troops or naval men may be necessary for training or other purposes?
If the Constitution does confer such power or powers upon the Commonwealth Government will the Government take control of the railways of the States whenever such control may be deemed necessary or expedient?

Mr FISHER:
Prime Minister · WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

– No; but the Parliament of the Commonwealth has power to make laws with respect to the control of railways for naval and military purposes. The only law passed in pursuance of this power is section 64 of the Defence Act. which authorizes the Commonwealth to assume control of any railway in time of war for naval or military transport.

page 2435

QUESTION

MR. DONALD CAMPBELL

Mr FULLER:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Has he received, a report from Mr. Donald Campbell. Commonwealth Representative, in regard to his attendance and actions at the Imperial Conference?
If so, will he table it?

Mr FISHER:
ALP

– I lay the reports on the table.

page 2436

QUESTION

MILITARY SERVICE

Conscientious Objections

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

asked the Minister re presenting the Minister of Defence, upon notice -

If conscientious objections to military service are held by citizens of the Commonwealth, as in the case of the religious body of “ Friends,” &c., would drill in the Ambulance or Army Medical Corps be taken in lieu of the ordinary service ?

Mr ROBERTS:
ALP

– Yes. See section 143 (3) of the Defence Act.

page 2436

QUESTION

AMERICAN COASTAL SHIPPING

Mr KELLY:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister of External Affairs, upon notice -

What is the official definition of a ship engaged in the coastal trade of the United States under the laws of the United States of America?
What is the tonnage, according to the latest returns, of -
1. The coastal shipping (as defined in answer to No.1);
2. The oversea shipping of the United States of America?

Mr THOMAS:

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

There appears to be no statutory definition of coasting trade in the United States, but that expression as used in the American Shipping Acts appears to be construed as extending to all trade between ports under the jurisdiction of the United States.
From the statistical records it appears that the registered tonnage of vessels of the mercantile marine of the United States of America for the year ended 30th June, 1911, is as follows : -

The tonnage of American and foreign vessels entered for the same period at all ports in the United States of America from foreign countries is given as follows : -

page 2436

QUESTION

NEW SOUTH WALES ELECTORAL ROLLS

Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister of Home Affairs, upon notice -

When is it proposed to publish the electoral rolls for the State of New South Wales that formed the subject of police collection some months ago?

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
ALP

– The rolls will be printed and issued with the utmost possible expedition ; but, owing to extraordinary pressure in the Government Printing Office, Sydney, which is at present working three full shifts, the commencement of the printing has had to be deferred until the 17 th prox.

page 2436

QUESTION

FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE

Mr CHANTER:

asked the Minister of Trade and Customs, upon notice -

Whether his attention has been called to a cable appearing in the Herald of the 19th instant to the effect that the stock disease, foot and mouth, was very prevalent in the counties in England, and was spreading?
Will he, under the circumstances, take stringent measures to prevent the disease being introduced into Australia by imported stock?

Mr TUDOR:
Minister for Trade and Customs · YARRA, VICTORIA · ALP

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

My attention has been drawn to press statements on this subject.
Stringent measures have already been taken. Last month the importation of cattle, sheep, swine, andgoats from Great Britain and Ireland was prohibited for the present.

The High Commissioner was informed by cable accordingly on 18th July.

page 2436

QUESTION

FEDERAL CITY BOARD

Mr FULLER:

asked the Minister of Home Affairs, upon notice -

Is it a fact that he has appointed Colonel Miller, Colonel Owen, Mr. Scrivener, Mr. Murdoch, and Mr. Oakeshott as a Board to investigate the designs for the Federal City?
What qualifications or experience have all or any of these gentlemen in regard to city designing ?
Were written instructions given to the Board as to what their duties were; if so, will he table same? If there were no written instructions, will he state what their duties are?
Has the Board held any, and, if so, how many, meetings to consider the matter?
Has the Minister given the Board any, and, if so, what instructions in regard to the time they will sit and the time in which they must furnish the report? 6.Is it a fact that at least two of the members of the Board are absent at present from Melbourne ?
When does he expect them back in Mel bourne to take up their duties on the Board ?
Does the Minister think it a fair and proper way to deal with this important matter - that officers who are fully engaged in Departmental work should be called on to act in connexion with it?

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
ALP

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

Yes.
1. Colonel Miller, the Chairman, is the administrative officer who has dealt with the question of the Seat of Government from its inception, and whose experience and general knowledge must be of the greatest value.

Colonel Owen is the Director-General of Works, possessing wide experience in engineering questions and in architecture.

Mr. Scrivener is the Director of Commonwealth Lands and Surveys, a surveyor of the highest ability.

These three officers have been members of the Departmental Advisory Board in connexion with the Federal Capital City, appointed by the honorable member for Illawarra, when Minister of Home Affairs. Their valuable reports on the subject have been laid before Parliament, and speak for themselves.

Mr. Murdoch and Mr. Oakeshott are eminent architects.

Mr. Hill is a civil engineer with exceptional qualifications.

My instructions to the Board read as follows : - “ The Board to be appointed to investigate and report as to the suitability of certain designs for adoption in connexion with the lay-out of the Federal Capital to consist of -

Colonel D. Miller, Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Chairman.

Colonel P. T. Owen, Director-General of Works,’ Department of Home Affairs.

Mr. C. R. Scrivener, Director of Commonwealth Lands and Surveys.

Colonel Owen to have the assistance of Messrs. Murdoch, Oakeshott, and Hill on Board.

Should in future it be advisable, in the opinion of the Board, that further consultative assistance be obtained, representations in the matter shall be submitted to the Minister.”

The Board assembled for the first meeting at Melbourne on Wednesday last, the designs having been on exhibition in Melbourne and Sydney until then. The Board devoted itself to the consideration of the question until last Friday, and will re-assemble at Canberra on the 23rd inst.
See reply to 3.
-Yes.
See reply to 4.
I consider that the course I have adopted is in the best public interest, is the most economical as it will save much money to the Government, and also the most expeditious. I also consider that the question may not be dealt with satisfactorily in any other manner.

page 2437

PAPERS

Mr. FISHER laid upon the table the following papers : -

Public Service Act - Regulations amended, Nos. 60 to 63 (provisional). - Statutory Rules 1912, No. 167.

page 2437

BUDGET

In Committee of Supply (Consideration resumed from 20th August, vide page 2386), on motion by Mr. Fisher -

That the first item of the Estimates under division 1, “The Parliament,” namely, “The President, £1,100,” be agreed to.

Mr GLYNN:
Angas

.- The Bud- get affords us an opportunity to take a short survey of our position. Nations, like men, occasionally take stock. They must endeavour to ascertain the proportion between their effective resources and their responsibilities - to what extent they can meet without any undue disturbance of their normal social and industrial conditions, the calls that an emergency may at any time make, which must, of course, with becoming fortitude, be faced. Were it not for the continued change we are undergoing in international relations, I personally should not be much disquieted by the perceptible fastness of the financial pace. But we must remember that we are part of an Empire, the stability of which directly touches at least one-fifth of the human race - an Empire so colossal in its proportions, and so vast in its extent, that there is, perhaps, scarcely a moment of our lives when it does not touch or affect the enterprises or ambitions of some other country or people. There is no doubt that the Imperial Government are becoming conscious of the. fact that the Imperial supremacy is challenged both in regard to the material resources by which it is maintained and its effective power of defence. I notice from one of the papers which recently reached us by mail that Mr. Asquith said - I speak now from the Imperial point of view, as, in Budget matters, we ought - that the material prosperity of the Empire was never greater than at present ; that, in fact, testing it by the price of consols, our prosperity is as stable as it was in 1872. But we must remember that if, through any disturbance arising between nations, this prosperity receives a . sudden or sustained check, it will be found very difficult to withstand the strain. I again say that the Imperial prosperity is exceptional ; and the same may be said about our own. Should war arise, then, the test of our capacity to meet our responsibilities will be applied. War, we know, is always wasteful ; and, on one side at least, is generally wanton-. At the same time, we are proud to feel that the Empire makes for peace ; but the maintenance of peace depends on conditions arid” circumstances which we ourselves cannot prescribe or control. Even if the issue of peace or war did lie with the Imperial choice, we must recognise the fact that, at any time, the incapacity, haste, blundering, or petulance of a Foreign Minister may precipitate a crisis big with the fate of nations.

Mr Higgs:

– Does not the honorable member think that the capitalists of Europe can decide the question of peace or war?

Mr GLYNN:

– If the honorable member will excuse me, I must say that I am afraid that question is irrelevant to my purpose. If I may give a few figures to suggest the significance of the position to which my prefatory remarks are applicable, I find that the national expenditure of the United Kingdom in 1895-6 was £98,000,000 ; in 1904-5 it was ,£147,000,000; and for 19 12-13 it is estimated at £187,000,000. Then, if we take the naval expenditure, we find that, in these years it has been _£i 7, .000,000, then. £36,000,000, and is now £44,000,000 odd. I have heard it stated in this House that all the money required at Home for defence is, as it ought to be, perhaps, spent out of revenue. But it is a little significant that, chiefly under Conservative management, as a recent White Book shows., for the nine years ending 1909, there was borrowed £28,000,000 for defence purposes. But, happily, under Liberalism, which is always enterprise coupled with economy, no less than £[78,000,000 of the public debt has been discharged within the last three years. We have also to remember that there are conditions, healthy in their significance, of unrest at Home which may make the nation divided in itself. I say “ healthy,” because there is a class of discontent which shows a. legitimate dissatisfaction with existing conditions, and, ultimately, when manifested with sufficient strength, becomes the precursor of reform. But this unrest has to be taken into account; and the very last Times that came to hand shows what it may amount to in case of war. I find that the International Conference of Miners indicated in a declaration the probability of a general strike should war be declared by any nation against another.

Mr John Thomson:

– What is the object of the strike?

Mr GLYNN:

– To prevent the war. I do not justify that attitude one way or the other, but am merely dealing with conditions that may at -any time arise. What I say is that, if such a strike did take place, it is not always the nation that leads in morals that succeeds; one nation may refuse to act, and another will act; and we know what the result will be. The Dominions, of course, are deeply interested in the strength of the central power. We have an interest arising from sympathy - an interest connected,. I should rather say, with citizenship rather than with race, because we are, to some extent, a composite people out here - and we have an interest arising, from interdependent security. What this means is suggested by Captain Mahan:, who says that, so long as the Imperial Fleet is maintained, there will be no danger to the territories of the British self-governing Dominions. The point of these observations is. that we must,- viewing this matter from the Imperial point of view in which we are so interested, endeavour to economize our resources against the strain, which may, perhaps without anticipation,, arise; and, personally, I have no fear of the result if we do that. With, as the Budget- papers show us, an external trade of £146,000.000, a production which is not given, but which amounts to something over £200, 000,000, the1 investment of something like £200,000,000 of the public debt of the States in reproductive works, which return, in round figures, a revenue of £8,500,000, or more than sufficient to cover the necessities of working expenses and; interest - with a remarkable power of recuperation, which Australia always shows after a stroke of disaster, with a people homogeneous in character applying their eager energies to many varieties of soil and climate, and, above ali, with the liberal character of our institutions, I say that, so long as we do not mistake prodigality for enterprise, or niggard parsimony, that restrains and paralyzes, for that proper economy which renders all things possible, we need have no fear or deep-seated anxiety for the future. Were it really germane to the matter, I might say that Australia can give as good an account of itself in finance, and show, on the whole, as economical management of its resources, as any other part of the Empire. We must, then, remember our increasing responsibilities. I notice that some critics are taking this Parliament to account for the tremendous increase in the expenditure since . Federation was inaugurated. My attention was drawn to the matter last week in Adelaide by a general fulmination thrown at our heads- concerning the alleged excessive Federal expenditure. But a state- ment of comparative figures is utterly meaningless unless it is analyzed. The estimate of £300,000, with a margin of .£54,000 in .respect of new expenditure, which was given to the Federal Convention in 1 897 was confined to the cost of the machinery which at the start was absolutely essential to get the Federal machine going. Honorable members will also find that the estimated transferred expenditure was the minimum of what, at the time of transfer, would have to be met by the Federal Treasurer, and that was fixed at £1,550.000. The largest outlay was in respect of defence, which,, as far as T can remember, was then something .like ,£750,000. Since then, expenditure has undoubtedly gone up. If honorable members turn again to the Budget figures and other data, they will find the increase dates from the year after the great depression of .1902.’ It has really succeeded the disappearance of “the depression and also the ^establishment of the uniform Tariff. Let us ta.ke a few of these figures and see what their significance is. Our .production of wheat, in 1902-3, amounted to 12,378.068 bushels; in 1910-n, it amounted to 95.111,983 bushels; and, in i<9ii-i2,’ to 71,664,97,1 bushels. During the same period, the area under crop has increased from 8 472.000 acres to 12,105 000 acres. The production of wheat per acre, under better methods of tillage, the application of- phosphates, and so forth, has also, I believe, largely increased, and increased, I think, even on the average of all the acres under crop. Our wool exports have gone up in value from £12,744,000 in 1902 to £26,000,000 in 191 1, and the deposits in the banks of issue have increased from £’89,705.000 to £147,103,000. Wages in factories - another sign of our increasing prosperity, and one that we all welcome - have risen from £14,139.000 to ^”2^,874.000. Our exports of the principal articles of Australian produce have likewise increased from a value of £45.658.000 in 1003 to £76,482.000 - and that notwithstanding the. fart that our increase of population since Federation has only averaged 1.77 per cent. Curing the same period, the State expenditures and revenues have also largely increased. They balance each vear, so that I am able to give the expenditure in 1903-4 as amounting to /”2q.’;,;?.282 ; whilst, in 1910-11, it amounted to £-77.240.315. Our critics must remember the fact that, rightly or wrongly, progress is always .accompanied by an increasing expenditure, because it renders possible enterprises, works, and a policy that otherwise could not be carried out. Let me make a comparison of our position with that of Canada. We hear a great deal said to our detriment as to the marvellous effect of enterprise in the sister Dominion - a Dominion to which we must always refer with respect, and of whom we must only speak in terms of generous and inspiring emulation. I find that the population of Canada, as given in the Budgetpapers, is 7,192,338, whilst the population of Australia is 4,588,707. The population of Canada, therefore, is .nearly double that of Australia. Coming to external trade, we find that that of Australia, as I have already mentioned, is of the value of £146,000,000, whilst that of Ca.nada is of the value of £158,000,000. There is not a .marked difference, and I believe that in recent years the two countries were practically equal in this respect.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– -Do the honorable member’s figures include Canada’s trade with .the United States?

GLYNN. - I assume that they include all external trade. In regard to alB other sources of production, save wheat,, the Commonwealth is ahead. I do not wishto dwell much upon the wheat outlook, but honorable members will recollect that recently immense .areas have been suddenlythrown open in Canada, and have led to a reversal of the state of .affairs that existed in about 1905, when, I believe, -there were some 1,200,000 native-born Canadians inthe United States. In- the Commonwealth, we have 18,013 miles of railway open totraffic, while in Canada there are 25,400- miles open. The difference, however, isvery significant. I find that, in thirtyfiveyears, the Government, the provinces, and! the municipalities of Canada have given to companies 202,000,000 dollars in aid of railway construction. A portion of the 25,400 miles of railway open for traffic in Canada belongs to the Government, but 202.000.000 dollars have been given as grants to companies. Railway bonds have also ‘been guaranteed to the amount of/ 148.000.000 dollars, and land grants, Dominion and Provincial, amount to 55,000.000 acres. T believe that it will be found that in Canada a great deal of the financing of railway companies was done by the Government ; and, in the long run, it would have paid the Government to haveconstructed the lines for itself. These- matters must be borne in mind in considering our comparative standing, and its chief significance in relation to immigration. At the present time, Canada is building what is known as the National Canadian transcontinental railway, at a cost of 250,000,000 dollars. Seventeen hundred and fortyfive miles of that railway are being built by companies with the help of Government guarantees, and a section of 1,800 miles is being built by the Canadian Government. The results of railway construction in Australia are much better, because here we are benefited directly by our ownership of the railways, and indirectly by reason of the greater facilities we can give to the public by means of policy and administration. There is no doubt, however, that the financial pace in Australia is becoming too fast. In 1907-8, our expenditure, leaving out of account the amount paid to the States, was £6.162,129. In 191 1 -12, it amounted to £14.721.938, and in 1912-13, it is estimated that it will amount to £16,604,791. That is a fairly substantial increase. It must never he forgotten that your increase of expenditure, speaking generally, always remains - a fact upon which T dwelt when discussing the Budget of 1905-6 - whilst your revenue may at a sudden crisis contract. It is somewhat of a suggestion for caution that, in the Estimates of 1912-13, provision is made for a draw of£2. 261,000 upon the Trust Funds in respect of old-age pensions and naval construction; so that, without that draw, the Estimates for the current year could not balance without taxation. Are we to have these Trust Funds to draw upon next year, if the pace is kept up? Let us look at the chief lines of expenditure. Defence is, of course, the first of them. If I had to offer a motto to our youths for their guidance in defence, I should perhaps quote these words of Shakspeare -

Rightly to be great, Is not to stir without great argument, Hut greatly to find quarrel in a straw, When honour’s at the stake.

Or. if the Minister of Defence would think that perhaps too bellicose, as we differ in our opinions of what honour is, and very often misinterpret it. perhaps a more wholesome one would be that from Burke, by which the Japanese, our allies, seem to be guided -

Humanly speaking, that people which bounds itf efforts only with its being must give the law :to that nation which will not push its opposition beyond its convenience.

– My point is that so far as the recognition of our Imperial and local obligations in defence is to be assigned to the credit of any Government, it should be to the preceding rather than to the present Government. Lord Kitchener’s report says that in seven years’ time the expenditure to give a fighting force of 88,000 men would be £1,884,000. That is for the land force, so that we may reckon in eight or nine years on a minimum expenditure - because these estimates are always outstripped by fact - of £6, 400,000 in round figures on naval and military defence. One significant fact is that, leaving works out of account, the actual increase of naval and military expenditure for the year 1912-13 over the previous year amounts to £739,407, which is actually more than the total expenditure in 1902-3, when the vote perhaps was at its lowest. The Treasurer told us in his Budget-speech that the increase is partly caused by the necessity to provide for the largely increased staffs required for administration and instruction in connexion with the universal training movement. That is a commentary upon the anticipation of the first GovernorGeneral’s Speech that under a citizen soldiery we might look to the avoidance of what the Government then described as “ extravagance in defence.”I wish the Treasurer had given us materials for estimating the comparative cost, in the light even of a year or two’s experience, of the present method of compulsory training. I have given Lord Kitchener’s estimate. What I say is that we must be prepared to face these responsibilities and pay. Our economy must be directed to that certain fact, and I should like to know the comparative efficiency of the system which is costing us all this money, and its comparative cost, because we did adopt the method of compulsory training rather hastily. There was a feeling in the House a year before that, if the matter was put to the vote the vote would have shown an adverse opinion. We had a report from some experts that went Home, pointing out the merits of the Swiss system, but it ought to have been borne in mind that Switzerland is a land power wedged in between four military Powers. It has, I believe, something like 230 persons to the square mile against in Australia something under two persons to the square mile. It has had practically to defend itself againstthe aggression of European Powers since the nucleus of the first alliance, which developed into Federation, was formed in, I think, 1215, by three cantons, Zurich, Schwyz, and UnterWalden. In the circumstances, it was a very false precedent to accept for our guidance in connexion with the military system the scheme adopted by the sister federation of Switzerland. I hope our defence system will succeed. All I want, in speaking on finance, is to have some light thrown, first upon its comparative efficiency, and, secondly, upon its comparative cost, because my opinion always has been that, if we face the facts of defence, if we had increased our defence expenditure four or five years ago to the limits it has now reached for a fully trained force, we should have all that we require in the way of land defence. Defence, unfortunately, has been always the field of the empiric. Lord Curzon, speaking on “ True Imperialism “ on the11th December, 1907, said that every fresh War Minister sought to distinguish himself by inventing a brand-new military system, which. commonly passed into oblivion with its author. We have had many Ministers of Defence. In England they have the “ land “ school and the “ blue-water “ school, and so have we. We have had the policy written of by Arnold Foster, who believes in a small army, thoroughly well paid, and well equipped. Men cannot be got to fight now under the conditions that prevailed twenty or thirty years ago. Things are very different from what they were in the days when Nelson settled, for all time, I hope, the question of naval supremacy. In those days the seamen were housed worse than dogs, and wretchedly paid. Since 1906 there has been a marked change in the recognition of our obligations to those who man the Navy. Lord Roberts, believes in an army of something like 1,000,000. There have been various estimates of the number of troops that could be landed in the United Kingdom. We have had an estimate of 5>000> and an estimate of 70,000, which was considered by Mr. Balfour, about which time Lord Roberts stated that 150,000 fully-equipped men could be landed on the shores of the United Kingdom within thirty-six hours, and that the force required to repel them would be 600,000 Territorials. That was an estimate of four Territorials, or partiallytrained men, as equal to one properlyequipped and fully-trained man. In regard to the efficacy of our system, we must remember’ what has been said by experts in regard to partially-trained men. Lieutenant Pollock says that -

History may be searched in vain for examples of volunteers, however brave and patriotic, defeating or holding their own against regulars, unless, having enormous numerical superiority, or some special advantage in. their favour.

Mr W J JOHNSON:
ROBERTSON, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– Was that written since the South African war?

Mr GLYNN:

– Yes ; it was written as the result o’f experience gained during the war. Lieutenant Pollock undertook to train, in six months men who would give their whole time to the work, and a. company, called the Spectator Company, was formed. It was in. that connexion that he made the statement I have read,, which, I believe, was. justified by the event. We need to be sure that we are getting the best value tor our enormously increasing expenditure on. defence. Major-General Sir Edward: Hutton estimated that we need in peace 25,000 men, and in war 45,000. men. Lord Kitchener put the number at 127,000-,. to make provision for reserves. He was considering, the Deakin policy, which is that, which we are now developing, and which would have given a land force of 88,000. Some years ago our Ministers were advised, apparently, that a. land force of 100,000 would be sufficient, and that for its maintenance an expenditure of £1,500,000 was. required. That was in 1906-7. One of the best foreshadowings of what was coming in defence, and what would be necessary, was made by Lieutenant-Colonel McCay, in. a speech delivered in this chamber in 1905, when he. pointed out that it was certain and inevitable that our de fence, expenditure would increase. He was subsequently Minister of Defence, in the Liberal Government. He stated, that Major-General Hutton.’s estimate of £525,000 as the defence expenditure in 1905 for the equipment of the forts should be supplemented by additional expenditure amounting to £800,000; and his anticipations have been more than borne out bv the events. If,’ as a non-expert, I were asked to offer an opinion, I should pin my faith to the encouragement of the Navy. We must never forget, in our military enthusiasm, that we are a sea State as well as a sea race - a continent like the centre of the Imperial system, bound in by the triumphant sea ; triumphant, too often, in the sense so well suggested by the ugly sights of Clarence’s dream -

Methought T saw a thousand fearful’ wrack?; A thousand men that fishes gnaw’d upon.-, Wed-es of gold, great anchors, heaps of pearl, Inestimable stones, unvalued jewels,, All scattered in the bottom ot the sea.

The whole case might be allowed to rest on. the statement of this pregnant fact. At 4per cent., £1,000,000,000 will earn £40,000,000 per annum. Three-fourths of it probably earns more than 4 per cent., because Government securities yield almost that rate on anaverage, and the return from private investments is generally a point or two higher. Now, it may be admitted that if this wealth were held in equal or nearly equal shares by the units of the community, there would be no great hardship in paying for defence out of indirect taxation. But it is notorious that the wealth of this country is held by comparatively few individuals. Mr. Coghlan points out that in 1903 half the private wealth of New South Wales was owned by some 3,000 persons. The figures he supplies suggest that his estimate was well within the mark. The assessment was £368,778,000, of which 81 per cent., or £300,000,000, belonged to 3,073 individuals. The rest of the population of New South Wales, numbering 1,424,269, possessed less than 19 per cent, of the wealth- under £69,000,000. Applying this deduction to the wealth and population of all Australia, it will be seen that 8,450 persons own £810,000,000; while the remaining £190,000,000 is divided amongst 3,918,540 persons. Carrying the analysis further, as Coghlan’s researches enable us to do, the results are even more striking. In 1903, New South Wales contained 739,589 adults, of whom no less than 544,972, or nearly 75 per cent., possessed no property whatever. The corresponding numbers for the Commonwealth would be - total adults, 1,308,000 ; adults without property, 981,000. Here it may be remarked that the word “adult” is not the equivalent of “ breadwinner,” since there are many breadwinners who have not reached adult age. As every 100 adults maintain 125 dependants, it follows that 2,635,000 persons must be deducted from the number who own the £190,000,000 worth of property. So that the anomaly may be more clearly perceived, let me summarize the position : -

Owned by 8,450 persons - £810,000,000.

Owned by 1,283,540 persons - £190,000,000.

Owned by 2,635,000 persons - nil.

Totals - (population), 3,926,990; (wealth), £1,000,000,000.

It is, unfortunately, not possible by any data from Coghlan to trace further the distribution of the £190,000,000. A more exhaustive examination would probably disclose that the owners do not exceed half-a-million persons. Indeed, this conclusion is strengthened by a study of the annual incomes of the people, so far as statistics are available. The census of 1901 fixed the number of breadwinners in the Commonwealth at 1,652,280. Allowing for the increase in population since 1901, the total breadwinners should now be 1.684,000. As the position of the Commonwealth is substantially reflected in that of one of the older States, the statistics of Victoria, which are the completest available, may be used as a measure of the incomes of the Australian people. The standard may not be absolutely exact, but Victorian conditions do not differ so materially from those of the other States as to vitiate the estimate. As. the Victorian quota of our total population is about 30 per cent., the number of breadwinners in this State may be taken at slightly over 505,000. Yet the. last income tax returns,1906-7, show that only 8.7 per cent. of the breadwinners, that is, 44,262 persons, earned sufficient to warrant attention from the Income Tax Commissioner. This leaves 461,000, or over 91 per cent. of the breadwinners in this State, whose earnings did not reach the taxable minimum of £151. Income tax is collected on wages, salaries, fees, profits, and other earnings - “personal exertion-“’ is the orthodox term - but the tax is also collected on incomes from property. Now, we find that, excluding those who pay on property income, the number of Victorian income taxpayers dwindles down to 39,753, or 7.9 per cent, of the total breadwinners. Thus we see that 92 out of every100 engaged in industry receive less than £151 per annum, a fact which deserves the strongest emphasis. The returns show that £12,709,857 earned by personal exertion was taxed, of which 34,822 persons earning under £500 yearly paid on £5,086,688; and 4,931 persons earning over £500 annually paid on £7,623,169. As to property, 8,348 persons paid on an income of £2,929,544. The significance of these results will be apparent at a glance. An income of over 10½ millions was received by property owners and others earning over £500 annually; while a group nominally over four times greater divided little more than five millions. As this latter group induces all receiving from £151 up to £500, the letter being an exceptional income, it is a fair inference that the bulk of the’ taxpayers in thisgroup earn less than £250 per annum. Had the statistics shown the number who pay on earnings between £151 and £300, the disparity in the incomes of the several groups would be still more pronounced. However, in the incomplete forrn chosen by the Government Statist, the Victorian results prove that the masses, who pay so much for the protection of wealth, possess an insignificant share of it. In the following table,I have sought to apply . the Victorian data to the popu- lation of the Commonwealth. That is to say, the results shown would be obtained if the rate

and conditions of income taxation enforced n Victoria were extended to Australia : -

Dealing first with the taxable income from personal exertion, it will be seen that 60 per cent, of the total is divided amongst 12.4 per cent, of the taxpayers earning over £500 ; and 40 per cent, amongst the remaining 87.6 per cent, of the taxpayers. Those receiving more than £1,000 per annum constitute only 4.3 per cent, of the taxpayers, yet they receive over 40 per cent, of the total income. Passing to the incomes from property, 68 per cent, is received by those with incomes over £500 - although they number less than 17 per cent, of the taxpayers - while 32 per cent, of the income is divided between 83 per cent, of the taxpayers. Interesting as these comparisons are, they do not arrest one’s attention so forcibly as the meagre return which property apparently yields to its owners. We have seen that Coghlan estimates the capital value of lami and improvements at nearly 684 millions, -which, at 4 per cent., would give £27,360,000 annually. Does the discrepancy in the return of twenty and a half millions in the annual revenue mean that three-fourths of the land and improvements earn nothing? Such an assumption is negatived by common knowledge. Or is it that ownership is spread over so many individuals that the income of each does not reach the taxable minimum ? That theory is contradicted by the officially attested fact that 75 per cent, of the adults in this’ community possess no property whatever. A more likely solution,

– I am only suggesting a few of the questions that will have to be faced. Then there is the question of who is to get the money. Is it to go to the father ? Is it to go to the authorities of a lying-in home? What is to be the position of the doctor or the nurse? A group of questions of this kind, obtrude themselves when we come to discuss the matter seriously. Its consideration also leads to the consideration of that larger question of eugenics, and the relation of the State to the character of the child. The Home Secretary in Great Britain has just put through a very drastic and important Bill bearing on the question of the relationship of the sexes to each other by ties of marriage. All this means that my honorable friends opposite have, in my judgment, deemed this a very good piece of business to propose to the House, in view of what is coming. Otherwise we should have known something more about it. We should have had some scheme submitted before we were asked to vote the money.

Mr.- Riley. - You are not asked yet to vote the money.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– The money is provided in the Budget ; and we are asked to vote it before the Bill is passed. We are asked to affirm the principle before we know anything about the measure or its details. That is not treating the House fairly, and the fact that the proposal isso belated as to prevent the possibility of our exercising our responsibilities as guar.:….. of the taxpayers’ money is an indication, to my mind, that the Ministerial party think it a good proposal to make inthe present circumstances. The Budget isplentifully bestrewn with other items, like the Socialistic laundry which the Minister of External Affairs is going to set up in the Northern Territory. He is setting up to- be the champion launderer now. In addition, there are all the Socialistic enterprises in connexion with the various Departments which are not intended to have any serious effect for a long time to come. They are just little bits of things dropped out here and there through the whole of the Budget, and one cannot resist the conclusion that they have been put in for political purposes only, and in view of the election that is immediately ahead. I must, therefore, hold to my statement that I think the Budget has a very strong political significance in its make-up and presentation.

– That may be. I do not say that the Tariff does not need adjustment. I believe that it does, and am willing that as searching an inquiry as is possible should be made into the industrial conditions of Australia. But that inquiry should be made by persons independent of party politics, who would have no interest but to ascertain and present the facts. The sooner such an inquiry is made the better will it be for all concerned.

While employment outside the Service is increased, the number of public servants has also increased. Whatever other distinction this Ministry may have, it will always be remembered for having appointed a larger number of persons, at larger salaries, than was appointed by any of its predecessors. A return laid on the table the other day shows that, whereas within the hist two years the Public Service Commissioner has appointed fifty-six persons, at an average salary of £430, Ministers have appointed 134 persons, at an average salary of £558. This is a matter which should be inquired into. Ministers are getting into their hands a patronage such as should not exist under the Commonwealth regime.

Mr Thomas:

– A good many of those appointments have been Defence appoinments

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– Perhaps ; but 1 do not think that the Defence Department is responsible for a large proportion of them. In two years the permanent employes of the Commonwealth Public Service have increased by 2,316, and the temporary employes by over 3,000. We have now between 37,000 and 38,000 Commonwealth public servants, and tlo not seem to have come to the end of the appointments. According to the Estimates, there are 112 public servants in the Northern Territory, where the white population is only about 900. I do not say that the salaries paid to these persons are too high.

Mr Thomas:

– The honorable member said the other night that some of them are too low.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– The appointments to the Public Service should be scrutinized closely. The Commissioner is not now controlling nearly half of them. He is responsible for about 16,000 public servants, and Ministers for 20,000. We have, therefore, to make up our minds whether the principle of control by a Commissioner is to be applied effectively, or whether the Service is to be permitted to gradually drift into the patronage of Ministers.

While our revenue has been booming, our expenditure has been booming still more, and we propose to spend next year over £22,000,000, of which £2, 000,000 is a surplus from last year.

Mr Thomas:

– Six millions will be returned to the States.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– The Commonwealth will get rid of £22,000,000, and the amount received by the States will only be a trifle more than they received . last year, whereas our expenditure will be increased by some millions. In times of prosperity, Governments usually put their surplus revenue out of the way, to preserve Ministers from the temptation to squander it. The money is used for purposes of liquidating liabilities, the reduction of debts, the construction of public works, and schemes of development of a special character, and is sometimes put into trust funds, so that it cannot be got at. Statutes have been passed in many of the States to enable surpluses to be dealt with in this way. This Government does not believe in these practices. It carries millions forward year after year. If anything would tend to extravagance, it is that policy. Last year the Government collected fi om the taxpayers 9s. 2d. per head more than was needed to govern the country, money which might well have been left in the pockets of the taxpayers. From each family, 45s. more was taken than was needed to govern the country. Nothing is gained by amassing huge surpluses by wringing unnecessary revenue from the taxpayers.

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
INDI, VICTORIA · ALP

– Yet the honorable member says that he is in favour of imports.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– T have not said so. In years like those through which we are passing, I should like to see a remission of revenue duties. To collect from the taxpayers more than we need is bad finance, and a wrong to the community. Every Protectionist supporting the Ministry says that he would abolish the revenue duties, but does not dare to tell the Government to do that. The honorable member for Corangamite said that he would abolish all the revenue duties. That is cheap talk. He condones on the part of this Government acts which he denounces on principle, declaring them to be wrong in every particular. He told us that he would abolish the revenue duties and raise to the point of prohibition the duties on articles that can be made in Australia. He would, therefore, destroy the Customs revenue altogether.

Mr West:

– And have direct taxation.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– To the extent of another ,£14,000,000 a year?

Mr West:

– Yes.

Mi. JOSEPH COOK.- That is what the honorable member’s party would do.

I find that for the Defence Department it is proposed to vote £750,000 more than Lord Kitchener estimated would be the cost of the institution of the new defence scheme. He said that when in full working order it should cost just about what I had estimated it would cost before he arrived here. We have in his report the statement -

The other items of the estimate work out at almost the same as that estimated in the fourth year of the Government scheme…..

The honorable member for Corangamite said last night that the Government of which I was a member did nothing for defence. Here we have the statement of Lord Kitchener that we had done something. We had a scheme with estimates which he said were ample for the building up of an adequate defence system in Australia.

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
INDI, VICTORIA · ALP

– Did he not condemn the honorable member’s cadet system ?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– No; he made no alteration in it. He simply provided that, on reaching the age of twenty years, they should he kept in training until they “had reached the” age of twenty-five years.

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
INDI, VICTORIA · ALP

– But the honorable member had no provision as to that.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– Nor had the Minister, whom the honorable member praises so much, in the scheme which he detailed to the country when he was previously in office. Does the honorable member desire that scheme? If he does, I will give it to him, so that he may study it. The present Minister of Defence went into details in the scheme in question, showing that no man was to be compulsorily trained after reaching the age of twenty years. When my Bill was being put through the Senate, he did not desire that a man who had reached twenty years of age should be required to undergo more than four days’ training per annum. It was his opinion some two years ago that four days constituted a sufficient training ; but after Lord Kitchener came here, he became a glutton for training, and provided for the system now in force. Honorable members had better let that defence scheme alone, because before the close of the. session I intend to occupy an hour and a half in telling them the facts of the case. When I do, I shall surprise them, and surprise none more than the Prime Minister, who is now smiling. Only a few years have elapsed since the right honorable member declared that not more than £500.000 a year -should be spent on the land defences of Australia. We shall hear him. boasting presently all over the country what he has done for the defence of the Commonwealth; but he will never refer to his Gympie speech, or to the speech that he made in this House four or five years ago. He will take care to quote me, but will not quote his own remarks of those days. I shall oblige him, however, with a few facts.

– Judging by the way in which the honorable member is catechizing me, he must think that he has that school pf his at work again. I have not time to go into all details even if I wished to do so. Indeed, I recognise no obligation on the part of any member of the Opposition to give honorable members opposite all the details of the statements we are making. It is sufficient that we make out a case for inquiry and investigation, and the sooner we have a Finance Committee the sooner will the experience of the House be harnessed’ to our financial car, and the sooner shall we be settling down to a safe method of financing the Commonwealth.

It is true, as the honorable member for Corangamite said last night, that a tremendous amount has been expended on the defence of Australia during the current three years. The honorable member said, “ Only £9,000,000 was spent in the first nine years of Federation, whereas we have spent over £12,000,000 in the three current years.” Who was responsible for the failure to spend more during the first nine years of Federation? The fact is that honorable members opposite would not permit more to be spent. They were not in office, but they were in power, and they would not permit the money to be spent. .

Mr Webster:

– Not in the way it. was proposed to spend it.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– But in another way which I shall set before the Committee. I do not make statements without having authority for them, and I make the broad, general statement that , honorable members opposite were responsible for the starving of the .defences of Australia for the first eight or nine years of Federation. The present Prime Minister said, in 1903 -

Personally, I think that £500,000 is ample to expend on our Defence Forces.

Mr. Watson, then Leader of the Labour party, took the same view. When opposing the ratification of the Naval Agreement with Great Britain, he said that he opposed it, not that he did not appreciate the value of having a sea-going squadron here, but because in his view it was absolutely essential that all the money we could’, spare for naval defence should for some time to come be devoted to putting the harbors in an impregnable state. It was useless, he said, to talk about defending the coasts of Australia with one squadron. The money which was then devoted to the auxiliary squadron, and additional money, should be devoted annually to provide a proper floating harbor defence right round the coast. These are the schemes which were in the minds of my honorable friends opposite a few years ago. They sing a different tune now, and I wonder that they do not talk with a shamed face when they try to show that some honorable members of the Opposition have changed their opinions of recent years. There was never a more marked change of opinion in the matter of defence than that which has taken place on the part of honorable members opposite. The Prime Minister himself just about this time declared emphatically in this House that he would not subscribe to compulsion of any kind in connexion with the Defence Forces of Australia. 1 have had statements thrown at me so often that I think it about time a reply was made. I have excellent company in all these matters. Let me quote what the present Prime Minister said in the days to which I have just referred. I should not make this quotation, but that the other day the Minister of Defence quoted with great gusto some remarks that I made about the same time. He thought that he had scored a great triumph over my humble self in quoting something I had said as to compulsion.

Mr Webster:

– What did he quote?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– A statement of mine a few years ago, in reply to the honorable member for West Sydney, when he was agitating those crazy schemes of his, the principle of which has been adopted, although the schemes themselves have been heaved overboard. I then ventured to say that the time was not ripe for compulsion as applied to our military defences.

Mr Webster:

– We did not think it was ripe then ; but it has since ripened.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– Quite so. I feel a little lonely in this regard; I need some company, and I had better make this quotation from a speech made by the present Prime Minister -

This is not a joking matter.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

The Labour party promised greater efficiency in the Post Office.” Have we got it? Greater contentment in the Public Service. Have we got it? Cheaper and better services. We have not got them.

Mr Thomas:

– What, about penny postage?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– In 1906, when, the honorable member for Eden- Monaro proposed the adoption of penny postage, Mr. Watson, the then Leader of the Labour party, said sneeringly, “ We shall have half-penny postage by-and-by.” This is an extract from the subsequent discussion -

Mr CHAPMAN:
EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I believe tlie honorable member was one of those who, as a member of the Parliament of New South Wales, advocated penny postage.

Mr. Watson. ; That is not correct.

Mr CHAPMAN:

– Did not the honorable member vote for the proposal that I submitted to that Parliament?

Mr. Watson. ; 1 am sure that T did not.

Mr CHAPMAN:

– The honorable member, at All events, has been an advocate of penny postage.

Mr. Watson.; That is not correct.

The honorable member for Grey, who followed the honorable member for EdenMonaro, said - lt is all very well to say that the people are in favour of penny postage. Every one of us is in favour of it ; but I am not going to give business men a great advantage at the expense of the ordinary taxpayer who posts comparatively few letters in a year ; and in the present state of our finances, the proposed change is not justified.

The present Postmaster-General. whose illness we regret, asked -

Has the Minister had any representations made to him as to the necessity for reducing the postal rates ?

He added -

I suppose that the Government will impose a t.ix upon tea and kerosene to make up the deficiency.

The honorable member for Herbert said -

Tt is proposed to make a free gift to a small section of the community at the expense of the rest of the people of Australia.

On the 23rd July, 1907, on the first reading of the Postal Rates Bill, introduced by the honorable member for Eden-Monaro, the present Prime Minister said -

I must express my regret that Ministers are apparently exceedingly anxious to be able to institute penny postage during their term of office rather than to conserve the interests of the old people of Australia. This Bill particularly concerns the commercial community. I admit that the Postmaster-General has manifested his eagerness to afford facilities to the country districts in the matter of extension of telephonic communication, but at the same time 1 must remind him that there are people living in parts of Australia who would willingly pa.- a shilling on a letter if they could get mails regularly Hut they are denied such facilities, and while that is so. it appears to me to be idle to talk about penny postage.

Mr Roberts:

– The honorable member claims all the credit for the compulsory training system, but I can quote remarks of his against it.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– I have shown that the Prime Minister is in my company in that matter. As to the results of the Budget criticism, they reveal the existence of high prices, favoritism, and extravag,ance. I can find no trace that the resources of Australia are being husbanded carefully as they should be, or that business principles are being applied to the government of this great country. I see.no looking ahead to meet the serious problems that will have to he faced. The problems that the

Labour party set out to solve are still unsolved, and have become more difficult by reason of their amateur financing and legislation. The people of the country will come to see that they are paying more for the government of Australia than [ney need pay, and when they get the opportunity will remove the present Government from their positions of power and responsibility, and put in their stead men who will look after their interests in a better and more business-like way, and will help Australia to go ahead.

Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong

.- The speech of the honorable member for Parramatta, when analyzed, will be found to contain a considerable number of mistakes. We, on this side, endeavoured to correct his error regarding the land tax, snowing him that two-thirds of its revenue came from the country, and one-third from the cities, but he would not accept the correction. If he in like manner intends to adhere to all his statements, most of them must go by the board.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– The honorable member is hard-up for objections if he has to seize on an obvious slip.

Mr FENTON:

– I presume that the honorable member for Parramatta desires to place the true position before the people ; but he would not correct his misstatement. If there is any honorable member here who is always speaking to the electors, and playing to the gallery, it is he. He spoke of the great increase in the Commonwealth Public Service, but just before doing so, he used figures to demonstrate the manner in which the output of Victorian factories has grown, how the number of employes has increased, and how the rates of wages have been raised. Although he recognised this boom state of affairs, he complained of the increase of employes in one of the biggest business concerns in the Commonwealth - the Post Office. In view of the extra services which have had to be given to the people, there has had to be an increase in the number ot postal employes. The honorable member quoted from . the Budget-papers to show that the average salary in the Postal Service is to-day less than at the inception of Federation, ignoring the fact that of recent years many persons under the age of twenty-one years have been appointed. The young girls and lads employed in connexion with the Sydney telephone service, for instance, number scores, and, perhaps, hundreds The same remark applies to Melbourne, and, in a lesser degree, to Brisbane, Adelaide. Perth, and other centres of population. When a vast number of girls and youths pass the examinations, and are engaged at 15s. a week, we must expect the figures to disclose a low average wage.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– That was the suggestion 1* made.

Mr FENTON:

– But the suggestion was that, with the increased number of employe’s, a lower wage per capita was being paid ; .and it only needs a moment’s reflection to show how fallacious such an argument is. The honorable member for Parramatta complained of the increased cost of the Department ; but it is only natural that all public Departments should progress, stride for stride, with general business outside.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– If there were depression, would the honorable member decrease the services?

Mr FENTON:

– We will not meet trouble half way; but should it arise, both the honorable member and myself will apply the best business means at our disposal. The signs are not too good at present, in view of a considerable lessening in primary production in the coming year, with a consequent decreasing revenue ; and those who preach caution are preaching a wise doctrine. Of course, there is no need to give way entirely to pessimism, but rather, with characteristic Australian hope and courage, let us be ready to meet trouble should it arise. The honorable member for Parramatta made a mistake in his analysis of the postal balance-sheet. Practically there are two balance-sheets, one dealing with the ordinary service, and another dealing with new works. As to the latter, there never was. so much expenditure, and never so much necessity for it ; and I hope that, so long as the revenue is coming in, we shall continue to supply the people with the services they require, even though it may mean millions of expenditure.

– We cannot consider the balance-sheet of the Commonwealth without considering those of the States as well. We are handing over to the States this year over £6,500,000, including the interest upon the transferred properties, and we are also giving Tasmania ,£95,000 as an instalment of a vote of £500,000.

Mr Fuller:

– And lending the States a lot also.

Mr FENTON:

– If the money which has been lent by the Federal Treasurer to the State Treasurers is being wisely invested, it ought to be giving employ rr,ent to a large number of men on reproductive works. If the State Treasurers are sensible, that is the way in which the money is being spent, and if that is so, we are doing a good work in lending it to them.

– We are living in a British community, and do not wish to adopt Russian methods. We do our best to place our case before the people from the public platform, and have been fairly successful in that regard during the last twenty years.

The tight honorable member for Swan was disposed to be critical about the Commonwealth Bank, and especially the opening of a Commonwealth Savings Bank. Surely he knows that the Prime Minister gave “the Premiers of the States the opportunity to join with us, making them the magnificent offer, when in conference in Melbourne, of 75 per cent, of all new business, participation in the remaining 25 per cent., and .the use of the post-offices for the conduct of banking operations. For that he was only snubbed, though the offer would have been snapped up 1 1 v any one possessing a knowledge of finance. There was to be no disturbance of the Credit Foncier systems of the States. My opinion is that if the State Treasurers persist in their present methods, they may find themselves in difficulties, and may have to come cap in hand to the Commonwealth for assistance. 1 hope that that will not happen, but that is the tendency in Victoria, at any rate. A spirit of vindictiveness has been displayed in this State, the man in charge of its affairs considering himself a Pooh-b.ih, who by a wave of his hand, can dispose of everything. He committed a grievous error, and a great injury to the people of Victoria in refusing the offer of the Prime Minister.

Mr Palmer:

– “ Will you come into my parlour said the spider to the fly?”

Mr FENTON:

– Suspicion ever haunts the guilty mind. There was a hint by the right honorable member for Swan about dear money. I do not profess to be at the bottom of things in the financial world ; but when the Commonwealth Bank gets into full operation, and there is anything like a tightening of the money market, I know that the people of Australia will look to this institution to get them out of any difficulty. It is the savings of the people which carry on the banks; but I shall not go into that question more than to sound a warning note. It was, I believe, the honorable member for Angas who told us this afternoon that in the Old Country the banks are amalgamating; and, in my opinion, that is what they ought to do here, with a view to more economical working. The people here are Britishers, and will not be controlled by financiers, bankers or otherwise. However, in order to show what eminent bankers think of the Commonwealth Bank, I should like to quote from the speech of Mr. J. C. Hamilton, Director of the Bank of Australasia Limited, in London, who presided at the annual meeting of that institution. He is reported as saying -

So far as he knew, there was no other instance of a State owning and conducting a bank, and the experiment would be watched with interest. Of course, they did not welcome a new and powerful competitor -

– I shall simply quote what he is reported to have said. According to the Age of the 19th of this month, Mr. Curtain, in the course of a lecture, said -

It was only human to give as little as possible and take as much as possible. There was not a man in business who was not engaged in the extraction of values above what he was entitled to.

The world was suffering from too much work. (Hear, hear.) Workmen were mad to get work, mad to get something to do, and when they got it they were mad to finish it. They rushed pellmell to get a job and rushed to get it finished. The speeding-up process was wrong, lt aimed at getting out of the worker all that was in him ; at crippling him, and eventually breaking his back. The workers worked too hard, too long. They produced too much and got too little for it. Loafing was a good thing. Jesus Christ said it was. He said, “ Consider the lilies of the field how they grow ; they toil not, neither do they spin.” If that was all right the people had a right to loaf, because it was a doctrine of Christianity.

Those are the words of a man in authority who is instilling those doctrines into the men whom the Minister has to employ.

Mr Anstey:

– What is the difference between a man who makes money by loafing and another man who makes money by adulterating his coffee with chicory?

Mr FAIRBAIRN:

– Those conundrums are beyond me.

Mr King O’Malley:

– The poor man gets very little of this world’s goods.

Mr FAIRBAIRN:

– I quite agree with the Minister, but he has to spend nearly £4,000,000 of the people’s money - the money of the poor people as well as the rich people - and he will have to do it with men into whom that class of doctrine is being instilled. He must see that what I have just read is not likely to conduce to good work. The Minister has not told us what inspection system is adopted, and I hope he will give us some enlightenment on the point, because the matter is most serious. When a work is done it has to carry its own capital, or the community has to lose its capital. If the work is badly done Australia suffers, and I am certain that no man can carry out £4, 000,000 worth of work in this slipshod way with any success to the community. It. is not only that I am complaining of. The Minister of Works in New South Wales is confronted with the same problem as the Minister of Home Affairs here, and feels himself in a very tight place. He has only a limited amount of money to spend, and wants to do the best with it. Our honorable friend, the Minister of Home Affairs, does not make any complaint at all, but seems to go along with a flowing sail. The New South Wales Minister of Works has adopted a system of rewarding men for getting through their work promptly. I read that-

The Minister for Works has established a system of rewarding men for getting through their work promptly at Burrinjuck. Pay under the new arrangement is in accordance with the award rates, but it is supplemented when work is performed quickly and expeditiously.

We do not find any proposal of that sort in the programme of the Minister of Home Affairs -

Where a foreman gets his work done promptly he is to meet with special recognition by the Department.

The proposal is not regarded favorably in union quarters. The railway workers are in a state of violent indignation.

I do not believe the honest railway worker is in the slightest degree .perturbed by having to do a decent day’s work for a decent day’s pay, and that is all they want him to do -

The matter was alluded to at the last meeting of the Railway Workers and General Labourers’ Association, when the secretary (Mr. D. O’sullivan) was instructed to write to the Minister for Works, protesting against the introduction of the piece-work system at Burrinjuck.

– To buy Commonwealth notes.

Mr Fisher:

– They need not take them if they do not require them.

Mr FAIRBAIRN:

– The banks desire to carry on business, and they have to buy these notes to meet the demands of those who require them. The fact that £10,000,000 in gold has been taken from the great money-lending institutions of Australia is one of the drawbacks of the Commonwealth paper currency. To-day we are experiencing the inconvenience of a tight money market, caused by a great variety of circumstances, and the note issue is one of them. As a business man who, in his time, has been in many tight places, I think it is only right to say that we have financing rocks ahead. I felt it my duty to point them out, and have done so to the best ‘.( my ability, but if my honorable friends opposite will pay no attention to the warning the responsibility must rest with them.

Mr. ATKINSON (Wilmot) [10.5J.–I am not prepared to deal with the Budgetpapers as fully as I had intended ; I ut even if I were, I should not do so at this hour of the night. There are, however, one or two features of the financial statement that call for special attention. I agree with the honorable member who has just resumed his seat that the Commonwealth is fast running into financial difficulties, and that we have rocks ahead that it is the duty of the Government to try to avoid. A careful examination of the Budget shows that it is a mere statement of accounts. Surely we have a right to expect something more. It certainly imparts some information, but the Treasurer should have told us how he views the future, and where he expects to get the money that he will require to find during the next year or two to meet the expenditure of the Commonwealth. Our revenue since Federation has steadily increased, but we cannot overlook the fact that our expenditure has kept pace with the rising revenue, and that there are many large and serious items for which we shall have to provide, wherever the revenue comes from. The present Government came into office on the flood-tide of prosperity. Everything in Australia was moving ahead, and our primary industries, which constitute the great source of our wealth, were particularly flourishing. Our wealth is drawn largely from our primary industries, and since our exports have been very great the people have imported largely, so that the Customs revenue has been materially benefited. The history of Australia shows, however, that a serious drop in the Customs revenue is by no means uncommon, and if we have a series of lean years we mav expect a serious falling off in this, our chief source of income. In such an emergency, what does the present Government, if it remains in office, intend to do?

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
Minister for Home Affairs · DARWIN, TASMANIA · ALP

– The Customs revenue has not yet commenced to drop.

Mr ATKINSON:

– The prospects are not too reassuring.

Mr Thomas:

– Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.

Mr ATKINSON:

– But the taxpayers like to be able to see at least twelve months ahead. My great complaint, which I think is shared generally by the people, who are becoming aware that financial danger is ahead of us, is that we have nothing to indicate how the Government intend to meet a slump in our affairs and balance the ledger for the future. The Treasurer should be prepared to give us something in the shape of a forecast. When a balancesheet is drawn up for an ordinary company there are generally some remarks indicating its probable future. The Treasurer should have given us some information of that sort, but outside of a statement of accounts, in the shape of a sort of balancesheet, he simply said, after referring to the fact that Federation had increased the trading capacity of Australia -

We are sometimes inclined to be pessimistic, and in bad times we hear a great deal of the misfortunes of the country, but T think that all the evidence now before us indicates a continuance of progress and prosperity equal to that which we have hitherto experienced in Australia. Iri speaking thus, I have in mind not the prosperity of this year or last year, but the average.

He assumes there that he is always going to have abounding revenue. Apparently the expenditure is being increased so widely because he thinks we are going to have a continuance of the exceedingly good seasons that we have enjoyed in the past. I say the prospects are quite the other way, and we have only to look at the commercial affairs of the country to see it. Australia is a debtor nation. It has to pay a large amount of interest to the Old Country for money borrowed there, and consequently has to export a good deal more than it imports in value if it is to keep the balance of trade. But in Australia to-day our imports are increasing and our exports decreasing. For the first time for a good many years our imports have actually exceeded our exports. When that happens, or when we do not export sufficient to meet the imports and cover the interest on our debts, we have to export gold, and there has not been for a long while so much gold exported from Australia as recently. These facts ought to appeal to a business man, as the Treasurer of the Commonwealth certainly ought to be. The position is getting very serious, and the people of Australia require a great deal more to satisfy them than a bald statement that we have had good times, that the Government have been lucky so far as revenue and general prosperity are concerned, and that, so far as the Treasurer can see, the Government are going to con-‘ tinue to be lucky. It seems to me that we are not going to have a continuance of our bounding prosperity, and, therefore, we cannot look for the heavy revenues we have had in the past. If the present Government go out next year, what will happen to their successors? They will be committed to all this expenditure, a great deal of which is permanent and unproductive. Are they to tax the people to make up any deficiency, when the people are already taxed sufficiently heavily for a young country, or must they retrench, as has been done before in Australia? To what unfortunate straits are the successors of this Government to be reduced? If such a state of affairs as that came to pass, and the present Ministerial party were sitting in Opposition, they would be the first to howl against any resort to retrenchment. They would be the first to make trouble if it was suggested that old-age pensions should be reduced, because the money was not available to pay them.

Mr Roberts:

– Is that the first line that occurs to you for reduction?

Mr ATKINSON:

– No, but I shall show later that old-age pensions stand a very good chance of being reduced if the Labour party are allowed to remain in office, because they are making no attempt to buttress up the system. They are relying solely on the general revenue to pay the pensions, and have made no effort whatever to establish a contributory system of old-age pensions or a compulsory insurance scheme. Without these, the oldage pensions fund stands a very good chance of being reduced in lean years. The Government had a revenue in the year just closed of over £20,000,000. They had a surplus on hand from previous years of over £2,000,000, but they estimate to spend in the financial year 1912-13 the whole of that £22,000,000. It is only fair to admit at once that the Government were bound to increase expenditure greatly. That has been forced upon them. I admit also that in the Postal Department they have spent a great deal of money that ought to have been spent years ago. My charge, however, is not so much that they intend to spend so much, but that they do not show us how they are going to finance the country after this year, because we must be prepared for a falling revenue, and we shall have heavy commitments. Our expenditure on defence has jumped almost at a bound to over £5,000,000, or 24s. for every man, woman, and child in the Commonwealth. That is a per capita expenditure almost equalling that of the older countries of Europe. I admit that it is perfectly legitimate and necessary, and I am simply calling attention to the fact that it will have to be incurred year after year. We have a liability of £2,250,000 for old-age and invalid pensions, and there is a proposition to absorb £400,000 during the current financial year for a maternity bonus. These are expenditures which are also likely to continue. There is also the Northern Territory, which in the distant future may be a mine of untold wealth to Australia, but which,

I am afraid, for many years to come, is going to be a handicap on all the southern States, which have to provide the sinews of war. We have heavy expenditure to face in other directions which are not reproductive. We have come to a crisis in the financial history of the Commonwealth. We are committed to an immense expenditure, whether the party opposite or this party occupy the Treasury bench. I want to know where the revenue is coming from to meet these heavy outgoings, and if the revenue is not there, what the proposition is to make up the deficiency ?

– Perhaps that is due to faulty selection, in which respect I think Australia has somewhat failed, as, indeed,

Mr. SPEAKER reported the receipt of a message from His Excellency the Governor-General recommending an appropriation for the purposes of this Bill.

page 2487

ADJOURNMENT

Order of Business

Mr FISHER:
Prime Min ister and Treasurer · Wide Bay · ALP

– In moving -

That the House do now adjourn,

I desire to intimate that after the Budget debate, which we hope will be brought to a conclusion in the next two sittings, we shall proceed with the debate on the motion submitted by the honorable member for Illawarra regarding the Land Ordinances of the Northern Territory, and with the Bill relating to the survey of a railway line from Pine Creek to the Katherine River.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned at 11 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 21 August 1912, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1912/19120821_reps_4_65/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives21 August 1912

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN GARRISON ARTILLERY

Mr RILEY:SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr ROBERTS:Minister (without portfolio) · ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

QUESTION

ELECTORAL DIVISIONS : QUEENSLAND AND NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr HIGGS:CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

Mr KING O’MALLEY:Minister for Home Affairs · DARWIN, TASMANIA · ALP

Mr CHANTER:RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr KING O’MALLEY:

QUESTION

POSTMASTER-GENERAL’S DEPARTMENT

Mr LIVINGSTON:BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Sir JOHN QUICK:BENDIGO, VICTORIA

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:INDI, VICTORIA · ALP

Mr FULLER:ILLAWARRA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr THOMAS:Minister for External Affairs · for Mr. Frazer · ALP

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH CONTROL OF STATE RAILWAYS

Mr BAMFORD:HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

Mr FISHER:Prime Minister · WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

QUESTION

MR. DONALD CAMPBELL

Mr FULLER:

Mr FISHER:ALP

QUESTION

MILITARY SERVICE

Dr MALONEY:MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

Mr ROBERTS:ALP

QUESTION

AMERICAN COASTAL SHIPPING

Mr KELLY:WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr THOMAS:

QUESTION

NEW SOUTH WALES ELECTORAL ROLLS

Mr THOMAS BROWN:CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr KING O’MALLEY:ALP

QUESTION

FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE

Mr CHANTER:

Mr TUDOR:Minister for Trade and Customs · YARRA, VICTORIA · ALP

QUESTION

FEDERAL CITY BOARD

Mr FULLER:

Mr KING O’MALLEY:ALP

PAPERS

BUDGET

Mr GLYNN:Angas

Mr Higgs:

Mr GLYNN:

Mr John Thomson:

Mr GLYNN:

Mr Mcwilliams:

Mr Joseph Cook:

Mr GLYNN:

Mr W J JOHNSON:ROBERTSON, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr GLYNN:

Mr Roberts:

Mr GLYNN:

Mr Roberts:

Mr GLYNN:

Mr Roberts:

Mr GLYNN:

Mr W J JOHNSON:ROBERTSON, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr GLYNN:

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:INDI, VICTORIA · ALP

Mr GLYNN:

Mr Livingston:

Mr GLYNN:

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:INDI, VICTORIA · ALP

Mr GLYNN:

Mr Fenton:

Mr GLYNN:

Mr West:

Mr GLYNN:

Mr ARCHIBALD:Hindmarsh

Mr Harper:

Mr ARCHIBALD:

Mr Harper:

House of Representatives
21 August 1912

Mr RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr ROBERTS:
Minister (without portfolio) · ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

Mr HIGGS:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
Minister for Home Affairs · DARWIN, TASMANIA · ALP

Mr CHANTER:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LIVINGSTON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Sir JOHN QUICK:
BENDIGO, VICTORIA

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
INDI, VICTORIA · ALP

Mr FULLER:
ILLAWARRA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr THOMAS:
Minister for External Affairs · for Mr. Frazer · ALP

Mr BAMFORD:
HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

Mr FISHER:
Prime Minister · WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

Mr FISHER:
ALP

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

Mr ROBERTS:
ALP

Mr KELLY:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
ALP

Mr TUDOR:
Minister for Trade and Customs · YARRA, VICTORIA · ALP

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
ALP

Mr GLYNN:
Angas

Mr W J JOHNSON:
ROBERTSON, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr W J JOHNSON:
ROBERTSON, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
INDI, VICTORIA · ALP

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
INDI, VICTORIA · ALP

Mr ARCHIBALD:
Hindmarsh

Mr EWING:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · PROT

Mr MAHON:
COOLGARDIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
Parramatta

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
INDI, VICTORIA · ALP

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
INDI, VICTORIA · ALP

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
INDI, VICTORIA · ALP