Mr. Speaker (the Hon-. Elliot Johnson) took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.
page 5019
QUESTION
WHEAT POOL TRANSACTIONS
Mr RICHARD FOSTER: WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA
– Will the Honorary Minister (Mr. Greene) be good enough to consult the Minister who controls the Wheat Pool as to the possibility of obtaining for publication acomplete summary of all the transactions of the Pool in the wheat-growing States similar to the account of. the doings of the South Australian Pool, which appears in this morning’s newspapers ?
Mr MASSY-GREENE: Honorary Minister · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917
– I shall endeavour to get the information asked for.
page 5019
QUESTION
SMALL ARMS FACTORY
Payments to Employees
Mr NICHOLLS: MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES
– Will the Department of Defence pay to the employees- of the Small Arms Factory the money due and promised to them, in the shape of a war bonus, and will the men. who came to Melbourne on a deputation be refunded their expenses’, which were promised to them some two months ago ?
Mr WISE: Honorary Minister · GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA · NAT
– I shall submit the matter to the Minister for Defence.
page 5019
QUESTION
SHIPBUILDING CONTRACTS
Mr BRUCE SMITH: PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917
– Will the- Acting Prime Minister lay on the table a paper stating, or make a. statement concerning, the contracts which have actually been entered into for the building of ships in Australia?
Mr WATT: Treasurer · BALACLAVA, VICTORIA · NAT
– My colleague who has charge of shipbuilding’ has now in course of preparation a full statement, which, I think, will be sufficiently advanced’ tomorrow to be given to the House then.
page 5019
QUESTION
CENSORSHIP
Mr TUDOR: YARRA, VICTORIA
– Another War Precautions Regulation - Statutory Rule No. 132 - has just been issued. It deals with the censorship, and reads as follows : -
Regulation 28a is. amended as follows : -
By inserting the words “ Regulation 27a or “ before the words “ Regulation 28 “ in the last line, of sub-regulation (1).
By inserting after sub-regulation (1) the following new sub- regulation : - “ (1a,) An order under this regulation addressed to- the editor, the printer, and publisher of a newspaper or- periodical shallbe deemed to have been served on the editor, the printer, and the publisher of the newspaper or periodical if served on any. one of them..”
Is this one of the ways in which the Government is loosening the censorship? Is not the censorship being tightened by this alteration ? The Prime Minister stated at the Governor-General’s Conference that the arrangements decided on at the Press Conference concerning the censorship would begiven effect, and that if they did not go far enough he would meet us in other ways. Is this regulation an honouring of the compact? It is dated the 15th May, and the GovernorGeneral’s Conference finished about the 19th April.
Mr WATT: NAT
– The regulation seems not. to affect the matter which the honorable member has in mind, namely, what censorship regulations under the War Precautions Actshould stand. This regulation is merely an alteration of practice in regard to proofofservice. It merely says that instead of it being necessary to serve a notice on three persons connected with a printing office, service on any one of them will be effective.
Mr Tudor:
– Will the honorable gentleman see that the regulation is loosened a little?
Mr WATT:
– My honorable friend knows that at his request the loosening of the War Precautions Regulations generally is under the consideration of the Acting Attorney-General and myself. He had a considerable length of time in which to frame his list of suggestions, but I have not had half an hour since that list was received to give attention to it. However, the Acting Attorney-General is looking into the matter, and we shall let the House know as soon as possible the result of our investigation.
page 5020
QUESTION
SHIPS PURCHASED IN AMERICA
Mr McWILLIAMS: FRANKLIN, TASMANIA
– Will the Minister in charge of shipbuilding furnish a return as to the ships which have been purchased in- America, their classification, and the amount paid for each ?
Mr POYNTON: Honorary Minister · GREY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT
– I shall endeavour to do so.
page 5020
QUESTION
WAR AIMS OF GOVERNMENT
Mr MATHEWS: MELBOURNE PORTS, VICTORIA
– Yesterday, in reply to a question, the Acting Prime Minister said that he considered the retention of certain islands in the Pacific vital to the
Bafety of Australia. Evidently the retention of this territory is one of the war aims of the Government. Will the honorable gentleman give the House and the people a statement of the full war aims of his Government, so that we may know where we stand?
Mr WATT: NAT
– The views of the Government in this matter remain unchanged. They have been expressed on several occasions by the Prime Minister. Should the House desire their restatement before the close of our sittings, I shall give it; but the honorable gentleman cannot plead ignorance of our views on this or any other point connected with the war.
page 5020
QUESTION
VISIT OF AUSTRALIAN JOURNALISTS TO BRITAIN
Mr J H CATTS: COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES
– Will the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) make a statement to the House concerning the information given in the press on Monday last, to the effect that twelve Australian journalists were being invited by the British. Government to visit Britain; and can he say whether any intimation has been received from the British Government in connexion with the matter?
Mr WATT: NAT
– A question to the same effect is being asked, on notice, in the Senate to-day; but, for the information of this House, I may say that a cablegram has been received during this week, intimating the deBire of the British Government that twelve owners or editors of newspapers should visit Britain at the request of the recently established British Ministry of Information. The Government are now considering the best means of giving effect to that request. It is, apparently, the wish of the British Government that the visit should be made at an early date.
page 5020
QUESTION
REPATRIATION SCHEME
Mr HECTOR LAMOND: ILLAWARRA, NEW SOUTH WALES
– Will the Government consider the advisableness of arranging for the Minister for Repatriation to explain in this House thescheme with which he is associated?
Mr WATT: NAT
– I do not know of any constitutional means by which the honorable member’s suggestion could be given effect to, but I will consult my colleague, the Minister for Repatriation, andsee whether a’dditional matter may not be placed before the House, framed by himself as author of the scheme and chief administrator of it.
page 5020
QUESTION
LEGISLATION DURING PRIME MINISTER’S ABSENCE
Mr HIGGS: CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND
– Is there any understanding, expressed or implied, between the Acting Prime Minister and his colleagues on the one hand, and the Prime Minister and the Minister for the Navy on the other hand, that no legislation will be effected in regard to industrial matters or the Tariff during the absence of our representatives at the Imperial Conference ?
Mr WATT: NAT
– No such understanding exists.
page 5021
QUESTION
WHEAT SILOS
Mr PIGOTT: CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES
– Can the Acting Prime Minister say when the wheat silos which are in course of erection will be completed, and whether they will be in readiness for the use of farmers during the coming harvest?
Mr WATT: NAT
– I am not able to give the honorable member the information he requires. If he will place his question on the notice-paper, I will see that my colleague who is charged with the duty of co-operating with the State Governments in regard to this matter will have the information available next week.
page 5021
QUESTION
RE-REGISTRATION OF UNIONS
Mr WEST: EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES
– Has the Acting Prime Minister any further information with regard to the matter of the re-registration of unions, concerning which he was asked a question by me yesterday ?
Mr WATT: NAT
– I have no further information to give to the honorable member.
page 5021
QUESTION
GOVERNOR-GENERAL’ S CONFERENCE
Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
– Is the fulfilment of the conditions embodied in the resolution adopted at the Conference convened by the Governor-General optional, or is it enjoined on all parties to that Conference that they shall be carried out ? Further, are the concessions to be made by the Federal Government to be carried out irrespective of whether or not the conditions all round are fulfilled honorably by the parties to the Conference?
Mr WATT: NAT
– If the honorable member will read the report of the deliberations of the Conference, he will see that therewas no bargain struck between the parties represented there. I was not a member ofthe Conference, but, as I read the report, I gather that the procedure adopted was as follows : - Objections were lodged by those who may be regarded as representatives of the Official Labour party at the Conference to certain practices and regulations which they claimed to be hindrances to recruiting. The representatives of the Government, headed by the Prime Minister, considered those representations and gave their answers, showing what the Government were prepared to do. There was a great desire on the part of the Government to conclude the Conference with an amiable contract, but that was not secured. In the mean time, Ministers, in the utmost good faith, are going on with their part of the bargain, and they propose to appeal to those who are responsible for the movement which is represented by honorable members opposite to fulfil in the same good spirit their undertakings or obligations, moral or otherwise.
page 5021
QUESTION
DISTRESS IN NEWCASTLE DISTRICT
Mr WATKINS: NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES
– In view of the sudden distress that has been brought about in the district of Newcastle owing to the cutting off of vessels and the consequent slackness of work in the coal mines and on the water side, will the Government take into consideration the advisability of giving some sort of relief to those who have been thrown out of work by commencing essential Commonwealth public works, as has been done on similar occasions ?
Mr WATT: NAT
– I think that noticemight be given of the question, but at this stage I may say that I know nothing of the distress mentioned by the honorable member. At the present time, the Minister in charge of shipbuilding is dealing with a proposition regarding the coaf trade ; and, if his scheme is accomplished, it will mean a more regular distribution of work in given collieries. I hope that this may be achieved as a result of the conferences that are to follow shortly.
Mr Watkins:
– There will still be a shortage of employment on the water frontage amongst those who are not working in the collieries.
Mr WATT:
– If the honorable member will supply me with the particulars, I will consult with the Minister for Works and Railways, and see how far that unemployment may be relieved.
page 5021
QUESTION
WOOL CLIP
Mr PIGOTT:
– Has any arrangement been made to purch.nse the ensuing wool clip?
Mr WATT: NAT
– No arrangement has been made so far.
page 5021
QUESTION
AUSTRALIAN WOOD FOR AEROPLANES
Mr FENTON: MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA
– I wish to ask a question of the Assistant Minister for Defence.
Mr Richard Foster:
– About the Tariff?
Mr SPEAKER:
– Order ! It is not only desirable, but very essential, that I should hear questions which are submitted without notice; but it is impossible for me to hear some owing to audible conversations and interchanges across the chamber. There is also growing up among honorable members generally a habit of interjecting a reply as soon as an honorable member rises to ask a question of a Minister. I ask honorable members to cease this practice, and allow proceedings to be conducted in a manner which is more in accord with the dignity of the House and the rules which govern its procedure.
Mr FENTON:
– Owing to the proved suitability of Australian timber, will the Minister representing the Minister for Defence see that an endeavour is made to use Australian woods in the manufacture of aeroplanes?
Mr WISE: NAT
– I will submit the matter to the Minister for Defence.
page 5022
QUESTION
SOLDIERS’ CABLEGRAMS
Delayed Delivery
Mr CORSER: WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND
– In the absence of the Postmaster-General, I wish to ask the Assistant Minister for Defence whether it is not possible to do something to prevent the very unsatisfactory delay in the delivery of soldiers’ cables? I have one case where a cablegram left london on 22nd March, and arrived at Nanango, Queensland, in my electorate, on the 11th May, and a letter confirming despatch of the cable reached its destination the same day. I have had several cases of this kind brought under my notice, in one of which it took nearly three months to transmit a cable to the Commonwealth Bank, London, authorizing payment of £30 to a wounded soldier.
Mr WISE: NAT
– On a recent occasion I answered a similar question, to the effect that the Defence Department has no control over the sending of cables. That rests with the cable companies, who explain that the delays are due to pressure of business. I shall, however, undertake to see what can be done in the way of expediting cablegrams to and from soldiers.
page 5022
QUESTION
ANNEXATION OF FIJI
Policy of the Government.
Mr J H CATTS:
– In view of the fact that a statement has appeared in the press to the effect that the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) and the Minister for the Navy (Mr. Cook), after their arrival at Suva on the 5th May, were making inquiries among the residents as to the feeling there regarding the annexation of Fiji by Australia, I should like to know whether it is part of the war policy of the Government that there should be a kind of Imperial domain, or greater Australia, in the Pacific? Has the matter been considered by the Cabinet, and, if so, does it form part of the business of the delegation to London ?
Mr WATT: NAT
– I know nothing of the rumour to which the honorable member refers. The matter of Australia’s relations with Fiji has not been considered by the Government.
page 5022
QUESTION
TAXABLE INCOME OF AUSTRALIA
Press Comment
Mr BRUCE SMITH: PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917
– An article appeared in yesterday’s Argus commenting very trenchantly on a statement by the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) with regard to the taxable income of Australia. I should like to know whether the honorable gentleman proposes to make a statement, either reconciling his remarks with those comments, or correcting his own figures, so as to relieve the public from a great misapprehension as to the percentage of income which has been contributing to the war expenditure?
Mr WATT: NAT
– I do not propose to make such a statement. If Ministers generally were to reply to every newspaper comment upon their utterances they would have very little time for anything else. The article I read with my customary haste, and I know that the writer was guessing with regard to certain statements I had made, and, in order to furnish pabulum for the article, had guessed wrongly. I have no occasion to reconcile either of the statements, because they are not mutually conflicting.
page 5022
QUESTION
DEFENCE DEPARTMENT
Dismissal of Married Men
Mr BRENNAN: BATMAN, VICTORIA
– Has the Acting Prime Minister considered that the dismissal of temporary employees from the Defence Department, who are married men, and nevertheless eligible for active service abroad, to make room for single men, whether returned soldiers or others, is consistent with his policy of opposition to economic conscription?
Mr WATT: NAT
– I know nothing of the practice in the Defence Department to which the honorable member refers. I should like notice of the question, so that I may make inquiries.
page 5023
QUESTION
DISTRIBUTION OF SPINNING YARN
Mr HECTOR LAMOND:
– Has any decision been arrived at with regard to the more equitable allotment of spinning yarn arriving in Australia, and the supply to the various patriotic organizations at cost price of the wool necessary for their work?
Mr JENSEN: Minister for Trade and Customs · BASS, TASMANIA · NAT
– I hardly think that question comes within my Department, tut I shall endeavour to ascertain the information for the honorable member.
page 5023
QUESTION
FEDERAL CAPITAL
Erection of Cottages
Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN: EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES
– Is the Minister for Works and Railways aware that a number of persons think there is an adroit movement to be made presently to move the Seat of Government from Melbourne to Canberra? Does the honorable gentleman know that that idea has been created by the fact that a village of cottages is being built at Canberra, and that people are speculating what these are intended for? Will he explain why these cottages are being erected?
Mr GROOM: Minister for Works and Railways · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · NAT
– There is a question on the notice-paper referring to the matter.
page 5023
QUESTION
PUBLIC SERVICE EXAMINATIONS
Mr BRENNAN:
– About three weeks ago I asked the Assistant Minister for Defence a question relating to Public Service examinations.Seeing that the question involves the honour of a member of this House, as well as the purity of the examination system, will the honorable gentleman, without further delay, supply an answer?
Mr WISE: NAT
– Inquiries are being made, and I told the honorable member yesterday that I thought I would be in a position to give a reply to-day. I shall obtain the information as quickly as possible.
page 5023
QUESTION
SOLDIERS’ DEPENDANTS
Mr FENTON:
– Is the Acting AttorneyGeneral in a position to inform the House what action his Department is taking to deal with landlords who are raising the rents of dependants of soldiers and also evicting them from houses ?
Mr GROOM: NAT
– This question was raised by the honorable member yesterday, when he cited specific cases, and, as I promised, I am having inquiries made.
page 5023
QUESTION
CONDEMNED TEA : ALLEGED RELEASE
Mr JENSEN: NAT
– The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Tudor) yesterday asked a question in reference to the alleged re.lease of some condemned tea. The facts are as follow : -
A consignment of 250 chests of tea from Hong Kong, which arrived in November, 1916, was found upon examination not to comply with the standard prescribed by the Customs regulations, in that it was deficient in aqueous extract. The goods were accordingly seized as forfeited. On 6th December, 1916, a request was made for permission to re-export the tea to Russia. As this particular shipment appeared to be deserving of somewhat more lenient treatment than some of the previousshipments dealt with by the Department, and also in view of the extreme desirability of avoiding economic waste, the ComptrollerGeneral, on 7th March, 1917, decided to permit . the re-shipment of the tea to Russia. At a later stage permission was given for exportation to the United States of America, it having been shown that tea of similar quality had been admitted into that country as being of the standard required. Shipment was effected in February, 1918. The delay in exporting the goods was due to inability to obtain space on vessels.
page 5023
QUESTION
ARTIFICIAL LIMBS FOR SOLDIERS
Mr WISE: NAT
– On Wednesday last the honorable member for Melbourne Ports (Mr. Mathews) asked: -
Are the Ministry aware that the Defence Department are discharging members of the Australian Imperial Force who have lost their limbs at the Front before the men have been fittedwith artificial limbs? That is not the practice in England. There, men are not discharged until they are supplied with artificial limbs. Will the Government undertake to see that no man who requires an artificial limb is discharged from the Australian Imperial Force until he has been fitted with one?
The answer to the honorable member’s question is as follows : -
In some instances men who have lost a limb nre discharged from the service before they have been fitted with an artificial replacement.
In all cases returned wounded men are discharged not later than six months from date of arrival from overseas, when they are placed on pension ‘if necessary. All amputation cases are placed on pension. The provision of an artificial limb is made as soon as the amputation stump is ready to receive it and the limb can be provided. It is not proposed to extend the period of six months referred to above, the adopted procedure having been found to work well in practice. Further, I am advised that renewals and repairs are provided by the Repatriation Department, which utilizes the services of private limb makers until such time as the Commonwealth Limb Factory is in a position to supply all requirements with reasonable promptness.
Directly a man is discharged, whether he has been fitted with a limb or not, he is entitledto the benefits of the Repatriation Scheme, which provides sustenance until the applicant has been given reasonable facilities for re-establishment.
page 5024
QUESTION
LITHGOW SMALL ARMS FACTORY
Housing of Employees
Mr NICHOLLS:
– I ask the Acting Prime Minister whether the Government will submit the matter of housing the employees at the Lithgow Small Arms Factory to the Public “Works Committee before the House adjourns?
Mr WATT: NAT
– It is the intention of the Minister for Works to propose such a reference.
page 5024
PAPERS
The following papers were presented : -
Racing, 1918-19- Cabinet Decisions as. to Regulation of.
Ordered to be printed.
The War-
Report onthe Transport of British Prisoners of War to Germany - AugustDecember, 1914. (Paper presented to the British Parliament.)
page 5024
QUESTION
LAND RESUMPTION AT LEICHHARDT
Mr WEST: for Mr. Mahony
asked the Minister for Home and Territories, upon notice -
Have any arrangements been made by the Commonwealth with the Government of the State of New South Wales for the resumption of certain lands and buildings known as “Killoween” and “Broughton Hall,” in Leichhardt, Sydney? 2.If so, will the Minister give the House full details of the arrangements made?
Mr GLYNN: Minister for Home and Territories · ANGAS, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT
– The State Government of New South Wales is at present negotiating for the purchase of these two properties, originally estimated to cost £18,000.They will be utilizedby the De fence Department for special medical cases until after the war, consequently the Defence Department has agreed to advance the purchase money to the State, which will be refunded by the State when the properties are no longer required by the Defence Department.
page 5024
QUESTION
NAVY DEPARTMENT
Appointment of Mr. Latham:
Dr MALONEY: MELBOURNE, VICTORIA
asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Navy, upon notice -
Is it a fact that whilst Mr. Latham was in the employ of the Navy Department he continued to receive remuneration from the practice of his profession?
Did he continue to lecture on the Law of Contracts to law students at a remuneration of £200 per year?
Was it the practice of Mr. Latham to accept one-third of the fees received by other barristers under a system whereby a solicitor delivered to a barrister, say Mr. A.B., a brief marked “ Mr. A.B. for Mr. Latham, 15 guineas,” and Mr. A.B. would have to appear in the case and hand over one-third of the fee to Mr. Latham ?
If Mr. Latham enlisted to fight, why did he not go to the Front?
Mr POYNTON: NAT
– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow : -
No. At considerable financial sacrifice, Mr. Latham ceased practice at the Bar when he joined the Navy Department.
Yes.
No such arrangement is known to the Department.
He was withheld from going to the Front because the Navy Department urgently asked for his services for war work.
page 5024
QUESTION
BADGE’S FOR SEAMEN
Mr HIGGS:
asked the Assistant Minister for Defence, upon notice -
Whether the Commonwealth Government have issued special badges to be worn by disabled merchant seamen?
Have any badges been issued to seamen disabled as the result of the Commonwealth steam-ships Australdale and Australbush?
Mr WISE: NAT
– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow : -
No.
No.
page 5024
COAL MINING INDUSTRY
Payments to Mr. C. A. Willis
Mr HECTOR LAMOND:
asked the
Acting Prime Minister, upon notice -
What was the total amount paid by the Commonwealth during 1917 to Mr. C. A. Willis, secretary of the Coal Employees Federation?
For what services were the payments made?
Mr WATT: NAT
– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow : -
£192 3s.6d.
Fees and travelling expenses as assessor in connexion with compulsory conferences on coal mining industry.
page 5025
QUESTION
QUEENSLAND CYCLONE
Mr HIGGS:
asked the Acting Prime
Minister,upon notice -
Is it a fact that the people of theMalay States have subscribed a sum of one hundred and twenty-eight thousand pounds (£128,000) for the relief of those who suffered by the recent floods and cyclone in Central and Northern Queensland?
If so, is this money to be placed to the credit of the Commonwealth Government for distribution ?
Will the Acting Prime Minister be good enough to arrange that those residents of Rockhampton District, who have suffered, and are still suffering, through the devastation caused by recent floods; get their fair share of the relief fund?
Mr WATT: NAT
– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow : -
No. The High Commissioner in London advises that the British Minister at Bangkok states there is no foundation for the report, the alleged fund having been apparentlyconfused by a section of the press with an amount collected for the relief of the sufferers from floods in Siam. 2 and 3. See answer to No. 1.
page 5025
QUESTION
SUPPLICATION FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS
Prayer in Parliament.
Mr HECTOR LAMOND:
asked the Acting Prime Minister, upon notice -
Whether he will consider the advisableness of adding to the prayer used at the opening of the sittings of the House a supplication for the soldiers and sailors engaged in the war?
Mr WATT: NAT
– The suggestion will receive consideration.
page 5025
QUESTION
WOMEN’S VOLUNTEER CORPS
Mr J H CATTS:
asked the Assistant Minister for Defence, upon notice -
Is it a fact that members of the Women’s Volunteer Corps, Sydney, have been asked to accept duty at the new Concentration Camp being constructed at Canberra?
If so, what duties are women required for at such Camp?
If he is not fully informed re above, will he make inquiries and inform the House of the result?
Mr WISE: NAT
– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow : - 1 and 2. The Department has no information on this subject.
Inquiries are being made into the matter.
page 5025
QUESTION
INTERNMENT OF ENEMY ALIENS
Mr J H CATTS:
asked the Assistant Minister for Defence, upon notice -
How many internees are to be provided for at the new Internment Camp at Canberra?
What is the estimated cost of such Camp?
Mr WISE: NAT
– The information for which the honorable member asks is confidential, but will be supplied to the honorable member privately.
Mr J H CATTS:
asked the Acting Prime Minister, upon notice -
Will he make a full statement regarding Germans or other aliens being brought to this country for internment?
Mr WATT: NAT
– No statement can be made for publication at this juncture.
page 5025
QUESTION
WHEAT POOLS
Mr J H CATTS:
asked the Assistant
Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -
How many bushels of wheat were pooled in the 1915-16, 1916-17, and 1917-18 pools respectively?
What amount has been paid per bushel for the years mentioned up to 30th April, 1918?
Mr MASSY-GREENE: Honorary Minister · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917
– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow : -
page 5026
QUESTION
CORNSACKS
Mr J H CATTS:
asked the Assistant
Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -
What is the estimated quantity ofbags required for Australia in 1918-19?
What is the quantity for each State?
Is it a fact that certain firms having credits in India for the purpose of purchasing bags, or who purchased bags in previous years, are to be allowed certain sums on the bags imported for 1918-19?
What are the names of the firms in question ?
What service are they rendering for such payment ?
What is the amount of such payment?
Mr MASSY-GREENE: Honorary Minister · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917
– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow : -
200,000 bales. “2. Victoria, 65,000 bales; New South Wales, 50,000 bales; South Australia, 57,000 bales; Western Australia, 23,000 bales; Queensland, 3.500 bales; Tasmania, 1.500 bales.
No. 4, 5, and 6. See answer to No. 3.
Mr J H CATTS:
asked the Assistant Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -
What charge or allowance is to be made by distributors of bags imported by the Government for 1918-19 and added to the selling price?
Is it a fact that John Bridge and Company, Sydney, are willing to undertake the distribution in New South Wales for 2d. per dozen ?
Mr MASSY-GREENE: Honorary Minister · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917
– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow : -
This matter is at present under consideration.
Not that I am aware of. The Government’s intention is to distribute the bags as widely as possible through the usual trade channels.
page 5026
IMPORTATION OF MOTOR CARS
Mr.TUDOR asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -
Will the Minister please furnish a return giving particulars of complete motor cars and chassis of the following makes imported into Australia since the date of the order prohibiting their importation: - Ford, Maxwell, Buick, Chevelot, Studebaker, and Overland?
Mr JENSEN: NAT
– The information desired cannot be supplied, because no record is kept of the individual makes imported.
page 5026
QUESTION
CENSORSHIP OF LABORCALL
Mr TUDOR:
asked the Assistant Minister for Defence, upon notice -
Is it a fact that the Labor Call was passed by the censor at 4.45 p.m. on the 15th May, 1918?
If so, notwithstanding that it is alleged that these papers were posted at the Spencerstreet Bulk Docket Office at 5.15 p.m. that day (15th May, 1918), is it a fact that they were not delivered to the news agents until 17th May, 1918?
Is it a fact that, although the censor passed the paper on the 15th May, 1918, heagain held it up in the Post Office on the 16th May, 1918, or was the delay due to the fact that the censor had neglected to advise the postal authorities thathe had passed it?
If so, as such delays mean a considerable loss of subscribers and excessive returns of papers, also the nullifying of important advertisement notices and a monetary loss, will the Minister take such steps to prevent a similar delay in future?
Mr WISE: NAT
– Theanswers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow : -
Yes.
The censorship authorities are unable to say.
No. The mail censor, after passing the paper, at once advised the postal authorities, between 4 and 5 p.m. on the 15th May, 1918, that the paper had been passed and could be sent through the post.
There was no delay by the censorship authorities.
page 5026
QUESTION
WHEAT FINANCE
Mr J H CATTS:
asked the Acting Prime Minister, upon notice -
Where is the £4,750,000 to be paid towheatgrowers coming from - is it being imported from oversea?
If it is not being imported, what institution or authority has created it, if it has been created ?
Is such money being provided by financial institutions in Australia?
If so, what are the institutions, and what are the amounts?
Have such institutions any reserves of Commonwealth Bank notes in their possession; if so, what was the face value of such notes on the last known dates?
Will the Minister name the institutions referred to, giving the face value of notes held and the dates of such holdings?
Has it been necessary to ask the institutions referred to in previous paragraphs (3) and (4) to make available the £4,750,000?
Was a meeting of such institutions held to decide the matter; if so, give the date and place of meeting?
Did the Commonwealth Government make its request to such institutions verbally or in writing; if so, will it give the text of such verbal request or communication?
What amount is being paid to such institutions for their services?.
Mr WATT: NAT
– Much of the information sought would take a considerable time to compile, and would have little bearing on the problem of wheat finance. The provision of the sum named was arranged by my predecessor as a part of the agreement made between the Commonwealth Treasury and the banks of Australia in relation to the financing of the primary products for the current year, estimated to total £76,000,000.
page 5027
WAR LOAN BILL (No. 3)
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 22nd May (vide page4976), on motion by Mr. Watt -
That this Bill be now read a second time.
Upon which Mr. Tudor had moved -
That after the word “ That “ the words “ this House condemns the action of the Government in enlisting for service abroad youths of eighteen years, who have not obtained the consent of their parents,” be inserted.
Mr NICHOLLS: Macquarie
.- I support the amendment moved by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Tudor), with the sentiments expressed by whom I am entirely in accord. The honorable gentleman has taken this course, not with the object of holding up the Government to public ridicule, but to protect the young male population of Australia. After the amendment had been discussed for some time, the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) announced that the whole question was to be considered at a meeting of the Cabinet this morning. It is singular that the Government should not have made that announcement until the last moment. Honorable members opposite assert that they are opposed to any system that would enable the child population of Australia to break away from parental control, but they plead that they cannot support this amendment since its adoption would prevent the Government from raising the loan of £80.000,000 to be authorized by the Bill. There is no justification for that plea. The amendment could be carried without interfering in the least with the desire of the Government to pass this War Loan Bill. I am confident that if any honorable member opposite had a boy of eighteen who desired to enlist, he would not allow him to do so at that age, nor would he compel him to enlist against his will. I do not know whether the Government intend to propose any modification of the system under which it is no longer necessary for youths between eighteen and twenty-one years, of age to obtain the consent of their parents to their enlistment; but we shall not be satisfied with anything less than its complete withdrawal. It would be far less harmful to the community to permit men over fifty years to enlist than it is to allowthese lads to go to the Front without their parents’ consent. A youth of eighteen or nineteen years of age is. physically unfit to bear the strain of active service. He is not sufficiently developed to be able successfully to undergo the hardships associated with actual warfare. If we have reached a stage when Great Britain and its Allies are dependent upon the child population of Australia to pull them out of the mire, then it is nearly time that some one in authority cried, “ Stop the war.”
One aspect of this question which must not be overlooked is the fact that there is a very serious possibility of these lads not being able to bear the strain of hospital treatment. Should any of them be seriously injured or wounded, there is every reason to believe that many of them would not be sufficiently developed - would not have the heart - to carry them through a severe operation. That, in itself, is another serious objection to the Government’s proposal. No one can object to youths of eighteen or nineteen being allowed to enlist with the consent of their parents ; but when it is proposed that they shall be free, to enlist without such consent the position is altogether different. Many boys of eighteen would be glad to break away from the control of their parents, and to enlist under any condition. At no time in life is a youth more in need of the advice and guidance of his parents than when he is between eighteen and twenty-one years of age, and if our lads be free from all parental restraint in this regard, there is a possibility of their being led into the greatest of temptations. I do not say that will happen in every case, but in many instances it will, and the training which their parents have given them will be thrown to the winds.
After the war had been going on for two years, Germany found it necessary to call up lads of eighteen, and to that action the people of our Empire took very serious exception. It was said that Germany was murdering its young population by putting such boys in the firing line. But while we condemned as brutal this action on their part, we are now proposing to do the same thing. Parents will not be content to allow their boys to be enticed away by any military inducement, and they will seek the first opportunity of giving practical expression to their views. I have heard of cases where mothers are sore afraid that this decision on the part of the Government will lead to their boys of eighteen disregarding parental control. It is, to say the least, remarkable that this, of all Governments, should have come to the conclusion that, while a lad of eighteen is not sufficiently developed to be intrusted with the franchise, he is well enough developed to shoulder a rifle, and to protect those who are far more capable of fighting than he is. If lads are permitted to enlist at the age of eighteen, they will break down in the firing line. They maystand the strain of training and transport, but they cannot stand the strain of actual warfare, because their hearts are not sufficiently developed, and their physique is not good enough.
Mr Gregory:
– I know boys of eighteen who have hearts good enough.
Mr NICHOLLS: MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP
– My views on this matter are as likely to be right as those of honorable members opposite, who are painfully anxious to clear Australia of its manhood.
Mr Gregory:
– A lot of those who are here would be better out of the country. They are not worthy to stay in it.
Mr NICHOLLS:
– Honorable membersopposite do not say much for the rising generation of Australia when they say that the country would be better without them. That is why they are anxious to see lads of eighteen put into the firing line - led to the slaughter-house unconditionally.
Mr SPEAKER (Hon W Elliot Johnson: LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES
– I ask the honorable member not to address himself to the House in terms reflecting on other honorable members. It is against the rules of debate to do so, and his sense of what is right and proper will show him that he should not do it.
Mr NICHOLLS:
– I am sorry for the expression, but honorable members keep interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER:
– I have several times called on the House to keep silence, and do not wish to resort to other measures, but if honorable members will not obey the Chair I shall have to put the Standing Orders in force to secure order.
Mr Considine:
Mr SPEAKER:
– If the honorable member interrupts again I shall be under the painful necessity of asking the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) to take a certain course of action. It is highly disorderly to interrupt the Speaker.
Mr NICHOLLS:
– I wish to deal with this matter without bias. I do not say that no one should leave Australia to fight for the British Empire. I have never attempted to prevent any person from enlisting, and, under the voluntary system, I would give encouragement to any one who deemed it his duty to go. But I would not encourage a lad of eighteen to enlist, and I take the gravest exception to the offering of inducements to such lads to leave their homes to go to the war. The position of parents should receive the gravest consideration. Many parents have got their eldest sons at the war, and they do not wish to lose their whole family by sending away the lads of eighteen or nineteen years of age still at home. When all the sons have gone, the happiness of a home vanishes, and the pleasure of the parents in their home life disappears. Recruiting has been very successful during the past two or three weeks, for which we must give credit to the strenuous efforts of the Minister for Recruiting.
Mr Charlton:
– And of Captain Carmichael.
Mr Blakeley:
– And of Mr. Mackinnon.
Mr NICHOLLS:
– Yes. If, however, we continue to offer inducements to youths of eighteen, the number of volunteers will decrease, because parents will be embittered against the recruiting movement. At the present time there is a scarcity of agricultural labour in the. country, and lads who are not capable of shouldering a rifle can take the place of absent agricultural workers. We cannot afford to dispense with the services of all who are accustomed to farm life. Then, again, there are scores of lads of eighteen who are apprentices, their parents having incurred considerable expense in giving them the opportunity to learn a trade. If they are enticed from the factory Or workshop before they have served their articles, the money of the parents will have been spent in vain. Under the present arrangements, however, lads of. eighteen can leave their workshops, and go straight to the recruiting officer. They know that if they do so their fathers can say nothing to them. In many cases when lads of eighteen or twenty have been wounded they have died of a broken heart, crying for their parents. I do not say that all of them would do that, because the average Australian does not cry for anything, but there are lighthearted lads who, finding that they have left the shores of Australia and the parental home, practically die of a broken heart. Many of these lads have never been away from home in their lives before, and the new life which they are called on to lead is wholly strange to them, and they cannot stand the strain of it. Nothing has been said to show that the enlistment of lads between the ages of eighteen and nineteen will serve the interests of the Empire. Indeed, the Empire would be better without them as soldiers. The figures show that during the past two or three weeks the recruits offering have been numerous enough to make it unnecessary to take lads under the age of twenty-one years. The Government might, perhaps, take lads into camp and keep them there until they became twenty-one years of age, if they wished to become soldiers^ but even in a camp a boy is away from parental control, and cannot benefit by the advice of his parents, and it is to lads of eighteen and nineteen years of age that parental control and advice are most valuable. At that period lads are mostly easily led into temptation. A young man of twenty-one or twenty-two is not so easily taken into bad company. It is a deplorable thing that boys should be asked to shoulder a rifle while robust men remain behind.
Mr Richard Foster:
– That is the best thing that you have said.
Mr NICHOLLS:
– There are few men in this House who are not better able than lads of eighteen to shoulder a rifle. One or two of them may have reached the time of senile decay, but most of them are fitter than lads of eighteen. Yet they sit back and offer inducements to lads of eighteen to enlist. The man of fifty or fifty-five, and even the man of sixty, is better able to fight than the lad of eighteen. The older man goes on a platform and says, “I would to God that I were only twenty-one years of age,” but in his heart he is glad that he is over fifty. That has been the attitude of honorable members opposite since the beginning of the war.
Sir Robert Best:
– What is the honorable member’s attitude?
Mr Richard Foster:
– Not to go.
Mr NICHOLLS:
– Quite right, and many honorable members opposite are in the same boat, although they are loud in their talk about the need for recruits. They have given no valid reason for not enlisting, but when a person on this side whose responsibilities are as great as theirs does not go, he is termed a disloyalist.
Mr Richard Foster:
– Who has said that?
Mr NICHOLLS:
– You have said it all through. Honorable members opposite are beginning to recognise that they made a mistake when they called us disloyalists and pro-Germans.
Mr Jowett:
– They do not do that.
Mr NICHOLLS:
– They have done it, and they are doing it to-day. At the same time they are asking us to assist recruiting to the fullest possible extent. Honorable members on this side of the House have done considerably more in many instances than honorable members opposite in the matter of recruiting. We have never shirked our responsibility in regard to the war. We are just as anxious to see Great Britain come out of the war victorious, and to see the war brought to a speedy and most effective settlement, as are honorable members opposite. We have done everything possible to advance the interests of Great Britain, but we will not suffer any indignity or injustice to be cast upon the parents of Australian youths, nor, if it can be avoided, will we permit those youths to be offered inducements to break away from their parental control. When this amendment is put to the vote honorable members opposite will say, “ We cannot vote for it, because we need the £80,000,000;” but there is nothing in the world to stop them getting the money. There is not one honorable member on the Government side of the House who would consent to his own child enlisting at eighteen years of age.
Mr Jowett:
– Do not say that.
Mr NICHOLLS:
– There is not one reasonable-minded man who would do so.
Mr Jowett:
– Not one of us would refuse our consent.
Mr NICHOLLS:
– If the honorable member would be desirous of consenting to his son’s enlisting at eighteen years of age, at any rate there are 199 men who would not do so, knowing that children cannot stand the physical strain that is placed upon the members of our Forces overseas.
Mr Jowett:
– I have a nephew who will not be eighteen years of age until August next, and he is trying his best to enlist.
Mr Gregory:
– My son went away at eighteen years of age.
Mr NICHOLLS:
– That is all right; but there are not too many parents who would give their consent to their sons enlisting at eighteen years of age. Is there one honorable member opposite who would compel his son to enlist at eighteen years of age?
Mr Jowett:
– Of course not.
Mr NICHOLLS:
– Then if honorable members will not compel their sous to enlist at eighteen years of age, why should they offer an inducement to children to enlist at that age? They know very well that these children cannot successfully carry out the work that they would have to perform. If one man’s child has enlisted at eighteen years of age - and unfortunately many have paid the supreme sacrifice - it is not a sufficient guarantee that the child of another parent should enlist at that age. If it is a good proposition to enlist these lads, why did Sir William Irvine make the astounding statement that under no circumstances would he permit a child under the age of twentyone years to go into camp for the purpose of training or enlisting for service overseas. Honorable members know wellthat the people of Australia will not tolerate an iniquitous regulation which will permit children to break away from their homes at the age of eighteen years, and I cannot understand why the Government have even attempted to introduce it. Possibly they had a certain motive for their action, but they must see now that the regulation is not acceptable to the people, and I sincerely hope that they will withdraw it in the very near future. If they do not do so there will be serious trouble. I do not know what form that trouble will take.
Mr Jowett:
– It is not a threat, is it?
Mr NICHOLLS:
– No; but there will be serious trouble. If I had a son eighteen years of age, I would not allow him to enlist, no matter what the conditions of the war might be.
Mr Pigott:
– Would you allow him to enlist at twenty-one years of age?
Mr NICHOLLS:
– He could please himself then.
Mr Pigott:
– Would the honorable member use his influence against his son enlisting before he. reached the age of twenty-oneyears ?
Mr NICHOLLS:
– I would. If he were twenty-one years of age, I would assist him if he desired to do so; but I would prevent him from enlisting before he ‘reached that age, and I would deem it a most iniquitous law that would permit him to do it, despite my attempt to prevent him. I protest against the introduction of any system that will deprive parents of rights which they have enjoyed since the establishment of a White Australia. Never previously in the history of this country have the people been confronted with such an iniquitous regulation. Parents have always held’ it as a sacred right that they can advise their children until they attain the age of twenty-one years. They have always been responsible for the actions of their children who are not twenty-one years of age, but now we find that their responsibility is wiped out of existence, and the moment a child reaches the age of eighteen years he is to become his own master, and do as he likes. No matter what advice his parents may tender to him, he can refuse to obey their will and their wishes. A child of eighteen years of age may take exception to certain advice tendered to him by his parents, and. although at the time he may not have had the slightest intention of enlisting, he can now turn round, and say to the parents, “ I do not want your advice. I will enlist, and go off to the military camp, and you will no longer be my bosses.” If this regulation continues in force, there will be disruption from one end of Australia tothe other, and recruiting will not continue to flourish as it is now doing. Possibly the interest displayed by the people of Australia in regard to the war will diminish to some extent. I hope that such will not be the case, but those parents whose sons will enlist without their consent must display hostility towards the rules and regulations laid down by the Defence Department. I hope that the amendment willbe carried.
Mr WATT: Acting Prime Minister and Treasurer · Balaclava · NAT
– May I, toy leave, claim the attention of theHouse for a few moments. (Leave granted.’)
I am under theunfortunate necessity of having to ask for leave to speak because late last night, in order to avoid a misconception of what would occur to-day, I felt obliged to make a brief statement, and I intimated to the House, with its full concurrence, that as soon as the Cabinet had finished its deliberations on this matter I would make a full statement concerning it to-day. I wish to do this before the debate proceeds further.
Before dealing with the matter which has been more particularly occupying our attention, I wish to wipe away two mutually conflicting arguments that have been used by honorable members opposite, doubtless in the best faith. I refer to them particularly because of the closing utterances of the honorable member for Macquarie (Mr. Nicholls). On several occasions lately, we have been told that, as a result of the Government’s new procedure - allowing boys between eighteen and twenty-one years of age to enlist without parental sanction or consent - we have been increasing the recruiting figures ; in other words, we have been told that all the new spirit of recruiting has been due to the fact that what one man described as “ war babies “ are being enlisted.
Mr Considine:
– That was Captain Burkett.
Mr WATT:
– That was a statement which originated with Captain Burkett, and has found support from honorable members opposite. On the other hand, the honorable member for Macquarie says that we do not require this new system, because the recruiting figures are quite good enough without these youths. Both statements cannot be true. I draw the attention of the honorable member for Macquarie, who has been responsible for the use of the last illustration, to the two statements in order that he may see that he has not solved the problem at all, be cause he collides violently with some of his colleagues opposite who hold the opposite view.”
I wish to explain very briefly to the House why the Government felt obliged to take the steps which it has taken, and before I sit down I wish to explain to what stage the Government has arrived as a result of its deliberations on the matter. It is perfectly plain from proofs beyond any doubt whatever that reinforcements of a minimum amount per month are needed for our own Armies abroad. The examination by the Chief Justice that was recently undertaken has sent to rest the number of phases of disputed figures that used to confront us at every point, and I think now we meeton common ground. Whether we believe in the war or not, so long as our troops are there and take part in any offensive, in all human probability we can assess the minimum number required for a given month or several months.
Mr McGrath:
– That is provided you keep to the original number of divisions.
Mr WATT:
– Provided our troops are maintained in the same number of brigades and battalions as were formed when the war started. I do not wish to worry honorable members with any analysis of past problems as to whether so many men are required per month or not, but, having determined that there isan irreducible minimum of men required to maintain our divisions at their fighting strength, it is perfectly plain that we have to secure those numbers. Many a time and oft, as honorable members could see if they had an opportunity of perusing some of the correspondence and cables that have passed between Australia and Great Britain, the British war authorities have drawn attention to, as it is their bounden duty to do, and stressed, the urgency of keeping up the numbers necessary to maintain our divisions at their full fighting strength. We know that several battalions have already been “ scrapped,” to put it plainly. They have been withdrawn from brigades in order to form reinforcements of other battalions; and we are also informed - and I ask the House to take this as authentic, and, if any honorable member doubts it, to apply to me for information privately - that further withdrawals of battalions are in contemplation. These are the influences that induced the Government,in view of the Recruiting Conference of His Excellency the Governor-General, to consider the necessity for all the activity we could bring to bear in order to secure sufficient recruits. The position to us is serious, and it is our duty to act; and in acting we have apparently come into collision with the views of a large number of people in the community.
Mr Brennan:
– Including your supporters, which is the important thing!
Mr WATT:
– My honorable friend opposite is uneasy at finding himself this time in the company of one of the finest bodies of women in the country.
Mr Brennan:
– I am a bit uncomfortable about it.
Mr WATT:
– I thought so ; but I ask him to bear the association for a little while. But without considering what particular sections are for or against it, it is plain that this decision of the Government has met with resistance, misunderstanding, and opposition in some sections of the people of Australia. Let me be clear beyond any possibility of misconception as to the position, because my honorable friend, the Leader of the Opposition, yesterday received my interjection with considerable surprise.
Mr Tudor:
– I did.
Mr WATT:
– I wish to make it as plain as I can - and the facts are checkable by honorable members - that it has been almost the immemorial practice for Great Britain, in recruiting for the regular Army, to take boys of eighteen without parental consent. Long before this or any recent war, boys of eighteen could enter the British Army, and certain legal rights were given to them as majors, while certain other rights, for purely legal purposes, were retained by the parents. That was the old recruiting system; and all through this war, both before and after conscription, it has been the British practice. Here, in one of the Dominions which is fighting the man power problem in quite its own way - probably a wrong way, but we have to do it - we have followed the lead of the mother of the nation from whose loins we came. When we are accused of endeavouring to destroy parental responsibility and control, I ask honorable members to recollect that probably parental control is stronger in the land from which our kinsmen came than in any part of the world.
Dr Maloney:
– The Eastern nations teach us in that respect.
Mr WATT:
– I may probably be reflecting on parental control in some of the patriarchical nations of the East, and I have no desire to do that. But Britain hangs her head to no other nation in the appreciation of family life and parental control.
Dr Maloney:
– If we may judge by the tombstones in the cemeteries of Europe the honorable gentleman could be disillusionized on that point.
Mr WATT:
– That interjection is rather too recondite for me. At any rate, the English have a way of hiding their grief in a way not observed in other nations. Another view which the Defence Department felt bound to stress for the consideration of the Government was that all through the war there have been young men enlisting under the age of twenty-one, in some cases lying, in a generous spirit of patriotism, about their parents’ consent. These young men have gone into camp, and have frequently been taken away by indignant parents after months of training, all the time devoted to them thus being wasted. . This has proved a vast expense, and of no good really to the parents, to the home, or the enlisted soldiers. On one occasion a boy enlisted four times, and remained in camp until almost the maximum time, when he was taken away by his father. On inquiry, there was reasonable ground to believe that the father, who was not as patriotic as his son, had allowed this to be done because the boy’s wages were bigger in camp than they wereoutside, and the father was feeding on them. The boy desired to enlist and go abroad, and yet at the last moment the parent exercised his control, and withdrew him.
Mr Brennan:
– That illustrates the folly of taking boys.
Mr WATT:
– It illustrates the neceesity of dealing with cases of the kind, especially if they show any definite tendency on the part of the parent in the direction I have indicated. This was given to me by the Defence Department as, perhaps, the most conspicuous case. Another instance was that of a family of two sons, one over the age of twenty-one, who had offered for service and been rejected, the other eighteen years and seven months old. This latter youth, who was employed at fair wages, enlisted, but he was withdrawn by the father on the plea that the latter desired to enjoy the benefit of the boy’s earnings, the boy having no power to serve against the decision of his father. Close inquiries were made into the circumstances of the family, and it was found that the father was in steady employment, with no financial difficulties, and the Defence Department regarded the treatment of the son by the father as improper, and hurtful to the true recruiting spirit.
I have given the facts as to the British practice, and as to the Australian tendency that induced the Government to arrive at its- decision. I speak very plainly when I say that representations against the proposal have come to the Government from men and women in all quarters, who are helpful to the nation’s cause, and anxious to help it. We realize as well as anybody could that we are driven back to the ^voluntary system, and must operate it as our only system. We are doing so in the best spirit; but it cannot thrive unless it has the general concurrence of the people. If in its operation we make an error of judgment, or go further in stressing the needs of the war than the people themselves are prepared to approve, voluntary recruiting will inevitably be prejudiced. As we have said unmistakably to the people at the Recruiting Conference and elsewhere, we propose to operate this system as far as possible, and the Government would be wanting in its sense of responsibility if it did not take into account representations that indicate a strong feeling among the people.
This very week, on Tuesday and today, the Government have considered the matter, having before it all the facts the Defence authorities have at their disposal, and we have come to the conclusion that we ought to modify the system in three distinct respects. I ask honorable members on both sides to notice what these modifications are. First of all, we propose that, instead of allowing young men to enlist without parental consent at eighteen, they shall not be able to do so until they are nineteen. Then, instead of keeping the enlisted soldier out of camp for six months, as originally proposed, until he has attained the age of eighteen and a half, he may, on enlistment, go straight into camp. The ques tion then arises as to how soon such a soldier is likely to reach the firing line, and, in regard to that, we are dependent to a great extent on the records of the Defence Department. As honorable members know, shipping is difficult and slow, and the whole desire of the CommandersinChief of the Army is to get our men into training elsewhere as soon as possible, so that they may learn modern methods. In this way many months sometimes may elapse before men are shipped; but, assuming that two months’ training takes place before the men are sent away after recruiting, and assuming, which is a low average, that it bakes them two months to reach their camp at the other end of the world, there are inevitably seven to eight months’ training, which under the conditions of modern warfare-
Dr Maloney:
– Not in France!
Mr WATT:
– I am referring to British troops, and I speak from the latest information. I was about to say this means that none of the young men thus enlisted will reach the firing lino until they are twenty years of age.
The other condition which I desire to explain is that where there are two or more sons in a family, and one of those sons is now serving with the Australian Imperial Force, while the other is under age, between nineteen and twenty-one - we do not propose to accept the remaining son without parental consent. Where the family has made its offering in fair proportion, we retain the condition of consent. If there are three sons, and two are serving, then parental consent will be necessary in the case of the remaining one.
There is another proposal which, perhaps, honorable members may consider as going too far. We make it, however, with the object of showing that the military authority itself, against which so many people in the community seem to be turning, is not to decide some of the issues connected with the matter. Where, subject to these’ two other arrangements, a person between the ages of nineteen and twenty-one enlists without parental consent, the parents may lodge with the District Commandant within ten days of the soldier entering camp, an objection, with the grounds thereof. The objection will be sent to the State Recruiting Committee for decision, and if the Committee upholds it on any of the grounds submitted, the man concerned will not be trained without the consent of the parents.
These are the three amendments which, we think, willbring the system into line with the sentiment of the people and aid recruiting. We must get recruits, or fail in our war aims. I was glad to hear from the honorable member for Macquarie (Mr. Nicholls) that he is not against obtaining recruits, although I admit that his speech would lead one to believe that his attitude has been very negative. True, he has not adopted anything like the militant attitude against the war that some honorable members opposite have attempted, and. his spirit is also that of his leader, Mr. Tudor. The latter gentleman has stood on the platform scores of times all through the war, very often with men like myself, and has strongly appealed to that impulse of duty and patriotism which young men should feel.
Mr Tudor:
– I get credit for that at all times except election times.
Mr WATT:
– I am quite sure my honorable friend never heard any other sentiment fall from my lips.
Mr Fenton:
– No man has done more for recruiting than has the Leader of the Opposition.
Mr WATT:
– I think that is right; at any rate, he has done his full share, and any one who questions that statement will receive contradiction from the Government. That is the spirit in which I ask honorable members to accept the proposals of the Government. There is still a little of that feeling which was visible for months when the Prime Ministerwas in charge. Why should there be, after the Conference that was held? The Government is depending on the spirit which actuatesthe more moderate and sensible amongst honorable members opposite. We have no undertaking of co-operation from any of those gentlemen, but we go on hoping that they will do as the Government are doing. If they do, I have no doubt the people will see that, in the matter of recruiting, there is unity in Australia, and that the old division has been wiped out for the purposes of the war. If that spirit continues to actuate us we can keep our Army reinforced - if not, we cannot do so. Having been refused the right to adoptany other method, the Government loyally accepted the present one. I ask honorable members not to make this a party question. I have not endeavoured to do so. All the representations that have come to me from members of this House have been treated regardless of party, and, if possible, I desire the whole question to be dealt with absolutely on a non-party basis. I have been particularly careful - I do not say this in my own praise, but to emphasize the attitude of the Government - not to say one word since the Conference, that might lead to a recrudescence of the antipathies and antagonisms which absolutely disfigured our attitude in the middle distance of the war. If honorable members opposite will grip that point of view, and help the Government, I feel certain that, in the absence of further political differences, we shall be able to get sufficient recruits by the voluntary method.
Mr CHARLTON: Hunter
.We all feel a degree of satisfaction after hearing the announcement that the Government have modified to some extent their policy in regard to the enlistment of lads between the ages of eighteen and twenty-one years. We give the Government credit for the alteration they have made, but, at the same time, their concession will not, in my opinion, be satisfactory to the people of Australia. We all agree that recruiting is a question above party considerations. It is a matter that affects, not only all Australia, but the whole of the Allies, and in those circumstances we are all anxious to do what is best for the causewe espouse. I quite realize the position in which the Government are placed. The Acting Prime Minister has said that the Government have received advice from the War Office to the effect that certain battalions are being broken up for the purpose of reinforcing other battalions. That is a very serious development, but, though I am anxious to see the strength of our Forces at the Front fully maintained, I feel that I would be lacking in my duty if I were to agree to deprive parents of the right of veto in regard to the enlistment of lads under twenty-one years of age. Up till the present, parental consent for the enlistment of minors has been necessary, and the Acting Prime Minister has stated that some people have taken advantage of that condition. He mentioned a case of a father who was opposed to the war, but permitted his lad to remain in camp until he was nearly twenty-one years of age, because he was getting more pay as a soldier than he received in his previous employment. Then his parent refused his consent. Any man guilty of such an action is unworthy to be an Australian citizen. That case was probably exceptional; I believe there are few parents who would ‘ sponge ‘ ‘ on the Commonwealth to that extent. But the occurrence of such cases does not justify us in adopting a policy which will not meet with the approval of Australian fathers and mothers generally. The Government’s amended proposals are an improvement, because in future a lad must be nineteen years of age before he is enlisted without the consent of his parents. The Acting Prime Minister has said that in the event of him being two months in camp in Australia, two months on the voyage, and eight months in camp in Europe, he would be twenty years of age before he entered the firing line. It is a fact, however, that many lads have reached the firing line in a much shorter time than twelve months, and that is just as likely to occur in the future. There may be some men whom the authorities consider sufficiently trained after three months to take their places in the firing line, and if there was an urgent need for reinforcements they would not hesitate to send them to the Front. It is quite possible that some men may reach the firing line within five or six months of enlistment.
But even if it be true that they will not reach the Front before they are twenty years of age, I contend, despite my strong desire to reinforce our boys, that that age is too young. I have held that view from the commencement of the war. One upon whose judgment I place great reliance wrote to me from the Front saying, “Whatever yon, as a representative man, do, be sure not to allow lads under twenty-one years of age to come here. Many young fellows have already failed because they are physically unable to do the work that is required of them.” We know that many young men under twenty-one years of age failed on some of the marches in Egypt during the hot weather. Those incidents prove that those men had not a sufficiently developed physique to enable them to withstand the hardships of the campaign.
Mr Story:
– The same failure occurred with some men over twenty-one years of age.
Mr CHARLTON:
– Yes. The gentleman whom I have already quoted said that many men over thirty-six years of age, like the boys under twenty-one years of age, were unable to stand the strain. They developed certain troubles, and, in consequence, were returned to Australia. We know that many men between the ages of forty and forty-five years have been returned. Some of them never reached the Front. Others did arrive in France, but the severity of the winter before last brought on rheumatism and other troubles, and rendered them’ unfit for further service. Some honorable members have had considerable trouble in regard to the pensions of such men, because it has been contended that they did not become incapacitated through military causes. Our past experiences should make us very careful, notwithstanding what the Acting Prime Minister has said regarding the British Government enlisting lads of from eighteen years upwards. We in Australia have not to follow any precedent. I hope we shall make our own precedents in matters of this kind. We have always realized that the young men and women of this country should be subject to parental control until they are twenty-one years of age. That principle is recognised in our legislation, and in many other ways.
Do not honorable members realize that lads between the ages of eighteen and twenty-one are often led away by a spirit of adventure? After hearing certain speeches, or reading war literature, they come to the conclusion that they would like to be at the Front, just us many boys who attend picture shows are carried away by some “ Deadwood Dick “ drama. They decide to take their future in their own hands, and they escape from parental control. That is not the best thing that can happen for the future of the lads, or of the Commonwealth. After all, the future of a man depends on the extentto which he has the advantage of sound parental control. Once he is removed from that influence no one can say what will happen to him. What need is there for us to take away from parents the right to give or withhold their consent to the enlistment of minors? The new policy will not make a great deal of difference to recruiting; it has not done so in the past. I say, unhesitatingly, that Captain Carmichael has done more to promote a revival of recruiting than has any other man in the Commonwealth. I wish to give him every credit for what he has done. The Governor-General’s Conference has had good results; and the present Minister for .Recruiting (Mr. Orchard) is doing valuable work. If we continue along the lines at present being followed, with a view to promoting a better feeling and understanding in the community, I have not the slightest doubt that we shall be able to get a large number of men for reinforcements without depriving parents of the control of their boys.
It may be said that already many young fellows under twenty-one years of age are serving at the Front. The answer is that, in those cases, the consent of the parents was given. After all, a mother knows more about her boy than does anybody else. She knows his constitutional strength or weakness; she knows the extent to which he is able to withstand cold weather ; and she is well able to judge whether he is strong enough to endure the rigours of a severe winter in France. A mother may refuse her consent, not because of any lack of patriotism, but because she feels that by allowing her son to go to the Front she would be doing something which will probably .prove detrimental to his future health, without helping the Empire, inasmuch as he might never be fit to render any service. By the time he reached Europe, he might develop sickness, and be returned to Australia, having involved the Commonwealth in considerable cost, without having given anything in return. Many mothers have consented to the enlistment of their boys under twenty-one years’ because they have known them to be sufficiently strong to endure the hardships of a campaign, and to efficiently discharge the duties of a soldier. I think the Government can do no better than abide by the judgment of the parents.
The honorable member for Macquarie (Mr. Nicholls) referred to the position of apprentices. Many lads under twentyone years of age are apprenticed to some trade, and if they are to be permitted, on reaching twenty years of age, to enlist without the consent of their parents, their apprenticeship will be broken. When they return after two or three years of openair life, . will they be likely to return to the trade which they were learning? Even if they are still inclined for it, they will have become men by that time, and having received a soldier’s pay for some years they will not consent to complete their apprenticeship at possibly 15s. per week. In professions also are many lads whose parents have incurred considerable expense in connexion with their education or articles. Possibly the parents have had to pay a premium of £100 to article lads to some profession for a term of five years. Having served for about two years, they may be getting 5s. a week, with the prospect of £1 a week in the fifth year. If those lads enlist and return after two or three years, the difficulty then will be to get them to resume their studies. If they will not do that, the parents will have lost the money they have paid, and the lad’s professional prospects will have been blighted. There are many reasons why lads between nineteen and twenty-one years of age should not be permitted to judge for themselves. The decision ought to be left to the parents, a great majority of whom, I believe, if they think that the lad will be of service to his country without detriment to his health and future, will willingly give their consent. That has been our experience up to the present time. In those circumstances, why should we at this stage introduce a regulation to dispense with the preliminary consent of the parents? Honorable members will argue that the Government intend to permit parents to object within ten days of a lad’s enlistment, but in many cases the parents will have no knowledge of what has happened, and will not be able to lodge any objection within the prescribed time. But even if they do know, and are able to object, within ten days, that objection would have to be dea’lt with by the State War Council. In some cases, the Council may consider it valid, and allow the lad to be discharged; in others, it will’ decide that the reasons are inadequate, and refuse to grant discharges. We shall then have one set of parents saying, “ How is it that So-and-So’s boys, who are no younger than ours, were discharged, while our boys have been compelled to go to the Front?” Bad feeling is likely to be created in this way, and it certainly will not help recruiting. I believe, on the contrary, it will do considerable harm. A mother’s feelings are easily hurt; and’ once the mothers of these lads of eighteen are roused by the action of the Government in permitting them to enlist without the consent of their parents, the movement will spread to the case of young men over twenty-one, and the result will be disastrous to recruiting. We have been working very, hard to put recruiting on a better level, and the position to-day is better than it was. We should be careful, therefore, to do nothing that will put a damper on the movement. It is unfortunate that so much trouble should have been created in the community because of certain differences of opinion; but since an effort has been made to smooth away those differences, I shall make no further reference to them. I repeat, however, that this matter demands the very closest attention. It is not a party question, and I, hope honorable members opposite will not treat it as such. The Government have certainly modified their original proposal, but to me it is still unsatisfactory; and it would be in the interests of the recruiting movement if the Government abandoned it altogether. Once the mothers understand that they are to have no control over their lads, so far as enlistment is concerned, we shall have public meetings all over the country to protest against the action of the Government, and immense harm will be done to the general principle of recruiting.
I want, now, to make a brief reference to the financial position. We are now asked to grant authority for the raising of a further loan of £80,000,000. The Treasurer (Mr. Watt) is acting wisely in making his arrangements early. To insure success, it is well that the people should have ample opportunity to subscribe; and from that point of view, therefore, the Treasurer is well advised in proposing to get his loan on the market as soon as possible. He is also to be commended for his decision that the income from this loan shall be liable to taxation. Had Parliament followed the advice offered by the honorable member for Grey (Mr. Poynton), who was then Treasurer, no part of the last loan would have been exempt from taxation. We have discovered, at last, that we have made a mistake; but for that mistake I am not going to find fault with any one. When we set out to raise our war loans locally, we did not know what were the financial possibilities of the Commonwealth. We were launching upon an unknown sea, and it was felt that it would be well to offer some special inducement to the people. We, consequently, determined that income from the first war loan should be free from taxation, and that system has since been followed. Up to the present time, the Government have received authority to raise £168,000,000; and of that amount £149,325,058 has been raised, leaving £18,674,942 still to be raised under the existing authority. This Bill will give the Government authority to raise a further sum of £80,000,000, and it is estimated that our war expenditure for next year will reach that amount. I venture to say that for the following year it will be considerably more, even if the war is soon brought to a close. When the war is over, we shall have to incur much expense in bringing our men back to Australia, and every week, by reason of the increased enlistments, will bring with it fresh demands upon the Treasury. The longer the war continues, the greater will be the cost; and, even if it ends shortly, we cannot hope to get away from the present rate of expenditure upon it for some two or three years. I anticipate that our war loan indebtedness will, at the very least, reach £400,000,000.
Mr Palmer:
– That must depend entirely upon the duration of the war.
Mr CHARLTON:
– Quite so; but we can see so far ahead of us as to be sure that our loan raisings must amount to at least £400,000,000.
Mr Poynton:
– It will take two years after the war to get our men back.
Mr CHARLTON:
– It will.
Mr Jowett:
– And we shall be lucky if our total war loans fall below £400,000,000.
Mr CHARLTON:
– I think so. This is an enormous load for the Commonwealth to carry, but it is inescapable. It is imperative that we should be very careful in dealing with our finances, and, for that reason alone, I think the Treasurer is justified in proposing that the income from investments in this loan shall be liable to taxation. Our total war loan debt is £197,507,169, and the income derived by subscribers, taking the rate of interest at 4£ per cent., is £8,880,000 per annum. That is a very big sum, and a tax of 6d. in the £1 upon it - which would be a very moderate rate - would yield a revenue of £220,000 per annum. “We are losing that revenue, but we shall avoid further loss of the kind if, in the case of all future borrowings, we do away with the exemption from taxation. In connexion with the last loan, subscribers had the option of accepting 4£ per cent, free of taxation, or 5 per cent, without such an exemption. But, of the £42,500,000 raised, only £6,500,000 was taken up at the 5 per cent rate. There can be no doubt that that. £6,500,000 was taken up by people who, if they pay income tax at all, come under the lowest rates, and that the bulk of those who put their money into the loan at 4£ per cent, are in receipt of high incomes, and would have had to pay a high rate of income tax had they not been exempt. We have thus lost a very considerable amount of revenue.
I have no time for those who are urging the repudiation of the agreement into which we have entered in regard to the exemption of previous war loans from taxation. Parliament, having solemnly entered into such an agreement, we must carry it out, irrespective of what the cost to the country may be. To do anything else would be to violate the honour of Parliament. As to the method of financing the war, I have a different view from that held by the Government; but I shall not refer to it to-day. The community is not going to be helped in the prosecution of the war by the encouragement of the feeling that there is a disposition on the part of. any section of the community to urge the repudiation of what has been done. That is a point that we need to emphasize. We have to finance the war, and money is just as essential to its prosecution as men are. That being so, we have a right to stand by the compact made, no matter what may be our view to-day as to the proper method of raising the money we require.
In addition to our ‘war loan indebtedness, we owe the British Government £30,560,000 for the maintenance of our troops. The Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) told us that he has informed the British Exchequer that in future he is going to promptly pay the amounts due to it under this heading. That seems to me a very big undertaking. I do not say that it should not have been given. I think it should have been, but I cannot see how we are going to give effect to it. It means that our present war expenditure of £80,000,000 per annum will be increased by another £10,000,000, and it is questionable whether we can raise that amount of money. The last loan was undoubtedly a huge success; it was double that of the previous loan, but even now we have only sufficient money in hand to meet the requirements of the next six months.
Mr Poynton:
– There is also the disadvantage that the bulk of the money that we pay the British Government for the maintenance of our troops is expended abroad, and, consequently, does not come back here so quickly as when it is expended locally.
Mr CHARLTON:
– There is a lot in that point. The great bulk of the money we have been borrowing has gone into circulation here, and has consequently returned quickly into its usual channels, so that it has been soon made available for the next loan. But to the extent that we spend our money abroad we must diminish the amount available for local loans. I hope we shall succeed with our local borrowings. It is the duty of every man, at a time of national crisis, to put his money into the war loans,, and I have no time for the man who abstains from subscribing to a war loan because he is able to obtain a higher rate of interest in other directions.
Mr Poynton:
– Another difficulty is that in connexion with the last loan many people pledged their credit so that they might invest in it.
Mr CHARLTON:
– That is so. Manypersons availed themselves of the offer of the banks to advance money at a special rate of interest for investment in the loan. We have met that position by legislation, so far as we could. Probably most of those who could advance money under these circumstances have already done so.
Mr Poynton:
– They are tied up for eighteen months.
Mr CHARLTON:
– Yes. And probably we shall not .get as much money when next we float a loan from persons prepared to mortgage property to make advances. Those who have been patriotic enough to do that cannot do it a second time. Consequently, that source of revenue is a diminishing one. Where, then, are we to get what is required ?
Mr Jowett:
– Prom the savings of the people.
Mr CHARLTON:
– That source is becoming more and more circumscribed. A great deal of money is going away to Great Britain.
Mr Poynton:
– The deposits in the savings banks have increased by many millions since the war began.
Mr Jowett:
– Still, there is a colossal amount of money being wasted.
Mr Poynton:
– The increase is from £20,000,000 to £30,000,000.
Mr CHARLTON:
– We need to get those who have made the deposits in the savings banks to subscribe- to the war loans. If they were ready to put all their money into the war loans, we should have over-subscription, but Parliament would always indemnify the Government for taking more than it had authority to borrow. It is to be hoped that those who have money will realize that it is necessary for them to lend it to the Government. If they do not lend it, they must expect heavier taxation. In any case, the taxation must increase. The Treasurer has told us that our interest bill is now over £10,000,000 a year, and if within a couple of years we double our debt, it will be £20,000,000 a year, which is as much as prior to the war we required for carrying on the affairs of the Commonwealth. On this reasoning the expenditure of the Commonwealth will be twice as much two years hence as it was before the war. We have lost a large source of revenue by exempting from income taxation the interest on earlier loans. That will not he done again, but we must seek ways and means for meeting our interest hill and sinking fund. My view1 is we shall have to increase the income taxation. J have always urged that the exemption should not be less than £200, but there should be a substantial increase in the taxation on large incomes.
Mr Poynton:
– The taxation on incomes up to £600 is only about 6d. in the £1. There should be room for an increase there.
Mr CHARLTON:
– I would not have taxed incomes below £200 a year, but T would have increased the taxation on incomes above that amount.
Mr Poynton:
– The great bulk of incomes range between £200 and £1,000 a year.
Mr CHARLTON:
– But the recipients have to feed, and dress, and house a great many more people than are provided for by the larger incomes. It would have been fairer to allow a £200 exemption.
Mr Poynton:
– The exemption is now £156, with an allowance of £26 additional for each child under a certain age.
Mr CHARLTON:
– It is to be remembered, however, that the cost of living is 33 r>er cent, higher now than it was before the war began. Certainly the taxation should be heavier on incomes above a certain amount. It is not enough . to levy a tax of ls. 6d. or 2s. in the £1 on incomes of £800 or ‘£1,000; their taxation should be higher. Furthermore, our taxation law should be simplified. Very few persons can understand it, however carefully they may study the explanation and curves.
Mr Jowett:
– How many persons in this House understand it?
Dr Maloney:
– Not one.
Mr Boyd:
– Even the Minister who introduced the original measure did not understand it.
Mr CHARLTON:
– Our system should be simplified so that it should be clear that the taxation for certain incomes is a certain amount.
Mr Boyd:
– Parliament is being run financially by the Commonwealth Statist and the Commissioner of Taxation.
Mr CHARLTON:
– Yes. We have it on the authority of a University professor that it is impossible for an ordinary person to follow the method adopted in calculating the tax. I hope that when an amending Bill is introduced the system will be simplified.
Although I approve of the modification made in the regulation dealing with the enlistment of minors, I cannot support even this modified arrangement; I do not think that it is in the interests of the community, or that it will encourage recruiting. Parents will complain that their boys are being taken away from their control whilst still under age. 1 hope, therefore, that further consideration will be given to the matter, and that before the debate concludes, Ministers will be able to see their way to allow things to remain as they were before the regulation was framed.
Mr PALMER: Echuca
.- I regret that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Tudor)has moved the amendment, because his action will prevent the discussion on its merits of the question that he wishes to have discussed. He might have had considerable support from members on this side of the chamber had he moved the adjournment of the House to discuss the matter.
Mr Blakeley:
-Would the honorable member then have supported it?
Mr PALMER:
– My action then would have depended to some extent on the nature of the debate;. but, broadly speaking, I agree with honorable members opposite that parental control should not be weakened. However, they have not gone to work in the way that I think they should have done, and therefore, as a Government supporter who knows the absolute necessity of passing this War Loan Bill, I must vote against the amendment.
The Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) has put before us a set of very valuable figures, containing a great deal of information. It would not be my intention to traverse them now, even if I had the schedule before me. What has impressed itself on my mind is the enormous indebtedness of Australia, which amounts to something like £609,000,000, taking Commonwealth and States obligations together. Under these circumstances it is almost criminal to contemplate the continuance of large expenditure on new works. I have neverlent a kindly ear to the enticements of the Minister for the Navy (Mr. Cook) regarding expenditure on Naval Bases. From many points of view Naval Bases must be regarded as necessary, but expenditure on them cannot be of any value during the war, unless the war is to outlast the longest calculations. Therefore, an effort should be made to reduce this expenditure. Wherever expenditure can be discontinued without interfering with the prosecution of the war, the Government should discontinue it until the piping times of peace come again.
Mr Richard Foster:
– Unnecessary expenditure should be discontinued, partly because we cannot afford it, and also because materials now cost twice as much as they did before the war.
Mr PALMER:
– That is so. The honorable ‘ member for Hunter (Mr. Charlton) said that a solemn promise had been made by Australia regarding the finding of money for the prosecution of the war. A promise binding on the Commonwealth has been made in regard to the finding of both men and money. But while we are committed to voluntary effort for the finding of men, we resort to compulsion for the finding of money. Those who have money must contribute to the revenue, whether they wish to do so or not. Under the altered loan conditions, we have to see that those who have money have the position presented to them in terms which will induce them to subscribe. It must be made clear to the wealthy, and to others who have money which they should contribute to the war loans - many of these, unfortunately, have not yet contributed - that they must choose between two alternatives. Money must be obtained. We must carry this fight to a finish, and for that we require money. Therefore those in the community who have money must lend it to the Government. We should say to them, “ You must either contribute to the war loan, and receive a fair interest for your money, or foot the bill in the shape of taxation.” I am satisfied that people, who have money and have not contributed to the war loan, would do so if this alternative were presented to them. If I had money available, it would be infinitely better for me to have war bonds in my possession than to pay a lump sum in the shape of taxation, and part with it for ever. The honorable member for Hunter (Mr. Charlton) has referred to the solemn pledge given by Mr. Fisher, that is, in regard to the last man and the last shilling. We cannot afford to lose this war. If we do, we lose everything which we prize most highly.
Mr Tudor:
– Did the honorable member hear what the Treasurer said the other day, namely, that not more than 10 per cent, of the accumulated wealth of Australia had gone into the war loans ?
Mr PALMER:
– I do not believe it.
Mr Tudor:
– Nor do I believe it, because not more than 8 per cent, has been contributed.
Mr PALMER:
– Much of the 90 per cent, to which the Treasurer referred is not a realizable asset.
Mr Richard Foster:
– Most of it is the working capital of the country.
Mr PALMER:
– If we levied on that percentage we would simply reduce ourselves to beggary. There is nothing like 90 per cent, of the wealth of Australia which can be levied on by taxation or by way of loans.
Mr Boyd:
– Nothing like 50 per cent.
Mr PALMER:
– Another ground of appeal to the people who have money to lend is the law of self-preservation. If we fail in our obligations to the Empire at large, the moral effect of our action will be to weaken other parts of the Empire, and this we should avoid if we possibly can. The honorable member for Hunter asks whether we can get the money. I am satisfied that if wo are judicious we can raise the money. That brings me to another point. I am sorry that the Treasurer is not in the chamber just now.
Mr John Thomson:
– He is receiving a deputation.
Mr PALMER:
– I object to certain means which were adopted for raising money on the last war loan flotation. We must popularize our loans if we wish to make them a success, and in order to do that we must appeal to the most solid and best-thinking people in the community. If our loans do not commend themselves to the judgment of such people, they will be failures. But a method was adopted in connexion with the last loan to which serious objection was taken by a large section of the community, and I was one of a deputation representative of that section of the people which protested against the introduction of a lottery system of cash prizes for investors in the loan. The more we appeal for contributions in that way the more we shall be compelled to do so. Previously people were asked to lend their money from the highest and most patriotic motive, namely, for the good of the Empire; but now a certain num ber of people are asked to do so from selfish reasons. It is encouraging the gambling spirit to ask a man to put £1 in with the chance of drawing out £1,000. Before this debate concludes I hope that we shall have some statement from the Acting Prime Minister as to his intentions in this regard. If I had my way I would have a clause attached to this Bill which would render it impossible for the Treasurer to appeal for contributions in this way, because anything that tends to weaken the moral conception of the people is wrong. *
Mr Richard Foster:
– What does the honorable member suggest?
Mr PALMER:
– I suggest that we should revert to the previous system of appealing to people to. subscribe to the loans on their merits, and not in the expectation of receiving cash prizes for their investments. Another objection to the system which has been adopted is that it is only available to large traders and mercantile people. The Leader of the Opposition will agree with me that if anything is of a commercial advantage to one section of the community, it should also be of equal advantage to those who are in a small way of business. In regard to the last loan, what was done was to go to large, well-known wealthy firms.
Mr Tudor:
– Did the Treasurer go to them?
Mr PALMER:
– I cannot say whether he did or not. At any rate, an arrangement was arrived at whereby these large firms were made venders of bonds.
Mr Richard Foster:
– It was a mere peppercorn.
Mr PALMER:
– It was a mere peppercorn so far as the result was concerned; but the practice may grow, and that is why I want to have it killed before it has a chance of growing. The more we do this sort of thing, the more we shall be compelled to do it. Why should I put my money into a war loan on the conditions prescribed, which give me no possible advantage, while an appeal is made to other people to put their money into it under conditions which give them the possibility of securing a substantial cash advantage? It is a wrong principle to adopt, and it will operate against the success of our future loans.
Mr Richard Foster:
– The honorable member cannot condemn that system unless he also condemns the income taxation of 10 per cent. which is imposed on cash prizes paid by Tattersall’s lottery.
Mr PALMER:
– I condemn the system of Tattersall’s altogether. , I have presented these views, ‘ not as my own, although they do represent my own, but as those of a very large section of people in the Commonwealth. I feel justified in saying that the persons who are to be relied upon to make the launching of a loan a success are those who have a higher conception of their duty to the Commonwealth and the Empire as a whole than to put their money into a loan with the hope of getting a cash advantage out of it. “We ought to be able to finance the war without appealing to the lower feelings of the community - to selfishness, or to the desire for sordid gain. Of course, an appeal to such sentiments might enlarge the number of subscribers, but I question very much whether many people will be drawn in as subscribers in that way who would not otherwise be subscribers. However, I view it as a matter of urgent and of great importance. The war will not be completed until the people of the world arise to a higher conception of their moral obligations; yet here we are pandering to the gambling spirit of the community. I deprecate the running of spinning-jennies in our streets. It is a vicious method of raising money. The further we get away from that sort of thing, the more we shall elevate the race, and make it worthy. I hope that my remarks will be brought under the notice of the Treasurer, and that, in due course, some statement will be made which will satisfy honorable members that a system which is objectionable to thousands of people, and an offence to them, will not be continued in regard to future loans. These people did not ask that any steps should be taken in regard to the matter in connexion with the last loan. The system was in active operation when it came under their notice; but they immediately took steps to express their resentment, and ask that there should be an alteration in regard to future loans. On behalf of these people, I ask the Government to give some assurance that there shall be no further con tinuance of a system which is in itself an inherent evil, and which cannot possibly have any good effect on the community at large.
Our financial obligations are very serious. As the Treasurer pointed out last night, we have raised the following loans : -In 1915, £13,000,000; in 1916, £44,000,000; in 1917, £42,000,000; and this year, £43,000,000. All these loans will be maturing at an early date, as well as the new flotations which are ahead of us, and for which provision will have to be made. The renewals of these loans will have to be liquidated in some way or another, probably at higher rates of interest. We cannot, therefore, view the financial position ahead of us with any degree of equanimity. It must cause every seriousminded man in the community a considerable amount of concern. I have been told by traders, more particularly those in the clothing and boot lines, of the tremendous extravagance of individual people in dress and other commodities in every-day use. People have not yet awakened to the fact that if there is urgent need for public economy there is also need for private economy; but the time will come when we shall find ourselves up against a wall. Up to the present we have enjoyed an entirely fictitious prosperity, due to the free circulation of money - principally war expenditure - in the shape of allowances to the relatives of soldiers at the Front. This, as I say, cannot last indefinitely, and we shall soon have to face the cruel facts. The public expenditure should be reduced by the Government wherever possible, whether in connexion with the Federal Capital, Naval Bases, or any other public utility. Every penny ought to be conserved, not only by the Government, but by the individual members of the community, because, while we have escaped the many disabilities under which the people of Great Britain are suffering, we shall, if the war continues, begin to know something of them. In the meantime, we ought to prepare our minds to meet the conditions which must obtain in the near future.
Mr WEST: East Sydney
.- I rise to support both the motion and the amendment. It is much to be regretted that the Government have made any such proposal as that dealt with in the amend-, ment, and for which I do not think that the Government could obtain the approval of any father of a family. How would honorable members, especially those who are prepared to go on the recruiting platform, answer the question, should it be put to them, as to what must be the effects of a loosening of parental control in Australia? Personally, I am very fortunate in having most dutiful children, who have the greatest respect for their parents; but, in any case, I cannot see any reason for the action of the Government. As hitherto, boys of eighteen could be permitted to enlist with their parents’ consent, and then no harm could, be done. I should like to bring under the notice of honorable members the brutal and unjustifiable treatment by the Government of those concerned when it is sought to withdraw a minor from service. In a case which came under my notice, two boys, both under age, enlisted and went to the Front without their parents’ consent. The eldest boy was killed before he was twenty, and the second son, just over eighteen, was wounded in the same action and removed to hospital in England. The father, who was= a good Presbyterian, had highly disapproved of the lie which the lads told to the recruiting authorities, but finally decided’ that it would be better to let them go. When one had been killed, he suggested to me that he thought it was time he had the wounded son home again ; and he was the more moved to this attitude by the fact that, in the meantime, his wife had died. When I wrote to the Department representing the views of the father, I received a reply to the effect that if a telegram were sent to Great Britain, and the boy recalled, all the moneys due to him at the time of his leaving the Old Country, and from then onward, .would be forfeited.
The other day the honorable member for Melbourne (Dr. Maloney), in the course of his remarks, made some reference to the Ten Commandments; and as one who has always endeavoured throughout my life to observe them, I regret that the Government are disposed to ignore them so sadly. If the community as a whole paid more attention to the Ten Commandments it would be much better, not only for ind.ivid.ual progress, but for the progress of civilization generally. The
Government, however, in their disregard of the feelings and wishes of parents, do not show any keen appreciation of the holy commands ; and I think they would be well advised, now that they have- modified their proposals so far, to abandon them altogether. This, I think, would prove of advantage to recruiting, and at the same time remove a stigma from the fair name of Australia. Of all countries in the world, there is none in which there is more necessity for- the exercise of parental control than in Australia. Here boys of eighteen are full- of activity, intelligent, and, thanks to our grand educational system, educated, and fairly able to cope with the world; but, however that may be, parental control is highly necessary for the energetic youth of the country, and the Government would be carrying out the wishes of Australia as a whole if they reverted to the old system of recruiting. After all, the parents, and those who advise them, are the best judges of a boy’s fitness for service, not the boy himself.
As to the Loan Bill, what I say may not meet with the approbation of some honorable members, but it is said in the interests of Australia ; and if the Government do not place the finances on a proper footing, I shall have the satisfaction of knowing that I endeavoured to suggest what ought to be done. I do not rely entirely upon my own opinions, but shall quote authorities and figures, and shall cite the example of the British Government in war finance. If Australia had followed, on the same lines, we should now have been in a state of financial stability, instead of running on to the rocks. . The Government in these financial matters ought not to rely entirely on their own knowledge, but seek the advice of others more expert than themselves, just as is done in private business. I suppose honorable members will he surprised to learn that Great Britain defrayed half the cost of the Napoleonic and Crimean wars out of revenue, and that at a time when the creation of wealth was not nearly so easy as it is to-day. When the present war started, Mr. McKenna was Chancellor of the Exchequer, and in the first year of war his Budget showed a surplus of some millions of pounds, which had been raised by additional taxation.
Mr. Bonar Law, who succeeded him, seems to have departed from the policy of his predecessor. After all, something more is required in war-time than mere expenditure of money to carry on the government as in times of peace. But in Australia we have done no more than that. We have made no special provision for the extraordinary circumstances created by the war. We have acted just like a child who, having been given a penny, spends it in “the first lolly shop, and thinks no more about it. There does not seem to be anybody who realizes the financial position in which we are placed,
and the necessity for maintaining a balance between income and -expenditure. Nor does anybody seem to fully grasp the need for devising further means of raising revenue to meet the exceptional disbursements connected with the war. There is, apparently, a belief on the part of some people that there is some mysterious fund which can be tapped by borrowing, not by taxation. That view, however, is disproved by the revenue raised by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in Great Britain. The Economist of 9th March of this year contains the following summary of war-time finance : -
Cite as:Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 23 May 1918, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1918/19180523_reps_7_85/>.