House of Representatives
12 July 1922

8th Parliament · 2nd Session

  1. House of Representatives
  2. 8th Parliament
  3. 1922

Mr. Speaker (Hon. Sir Elliot Johnson) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 321

QUESTION

WEATHER REPORTS

Mr CHARLTON:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I desire to ask the Minister representing the Minister for Home and Territories whether it is a fact, as reported, that instructions have been issued cancelling the transmission of weather reports to country and coastal towns in New South Wales ? If so, in view of the danger to farmers in lowlying districts if information is not made available in regard to water coming down, so as to enable the stock to be removed in time of flood, and also the danger to shipping om the coast; will the Minister issue instructions that the reports be continued ?

Sir GRANVILLE RYRIE:
NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– The honorable member is probably referring to a report in the press which I read, but as to which I have no official information. I shall make inquiries, and will furnish the honorable member with a considered reply.

page 321

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Lands Acquisition Act - Land acquired under, at -

Bridgetown, Western Australia’ - For Postal purposes.

Brisbane, Queensland - For Defence purposes.

Mount Larcom, Queensland - For Postal purposes.

Northern Territory Acceptance Act and Northern Territory (Administration) Act - Ordinances of 1923- No. 7, Amendments Incorporation; No. 8, Brands.

Willis Island Meteorological Station - Report by Captain J. . K. Davis.

Wireless Communication - Report of Parliamentary Committee appointed to inquire into proposed agreement with Amalga-mated Wireless (Australasia) Ltd., together with Draft Agreement recommended by the Committee; Minority Report by Mr. F. Brennan, M.P’., Notes of Proceedings of Committee and scheme suggested by Senator J. D. M’u«n

page 322

QUESTION

WAR SERVICE HOMES

Closing Down of Workin South Australia

Mr MAKIN:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Has the attention of the Minister representing the Minister for Repatriation been directed to a statement by the Hon. G. R. Laffer, South Australian Minister for Repatriation, regarding the closing down of worts on War Service Homes in that State, and the refusal of the State Bank to receive further applications owing to the inadequacy of the financial accommodation provided by the Commonwealth Government? If so, will the Government give immediate consideration to the granting of a further instalment of financial help to the bank to enable War Service Homes to be completed and further applications to be dealt with?

Mr HECTOR LAMOND:
Assistant Minister for Repatriation · ILLAWARRA, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– My attention has been directed by nearly all the representatives of South Australia to the newspaper statement to which the honorable member refers. The allocation of moneys for the construction of War Service Homes inthe States is made, after the annual appropriation by Parliament, on the basis of the number of enlistments for each State. We are working on the assumption that the amount available for the present financial year will be the same as was provided last year. In that case South Australia would be entitled to a sum of, approximately, £336,000. The State Bank of South Australiahas already expended a sum in excess of £400,000, and unless the vote for the whole of Australia is increased the War Service Homes Department cannot make any further allocation until the end of the present financial year.

page 322

QUESTION

NEW GUINEA MEDICAL SERVICES

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES

-Can the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for External Affairs give the House any information as to whether the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Makin) intends to carry out his promise of a “ scrap “ with the Prime Minister on the question of the New Guinea medical servrices ?

Mr MARKS:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I am not aware that any such “ scrap “ is likely to occur.

Should it eventuate, I hope that I may be appointed “towel flapper” or bottleholder; and that my honorable colleague Sir Granville) Ryrie may be choeen to act as referee.

page 322

QUESTION

FORT SCRATCHLEY

Mr WATKINS:
NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the Minister for Defence yet come to a determination with respect to the repairing of the sea wall underFort Scratchley, Newcastle?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– No finality has been reached. The latest advices I have seem to indicate that it is inadvisable to go on with the work until further investigations have been made as to the suitableness of the site of the fort itself.

page 322

QUESTION

PUBLIC TRUSTEE

Mr BRENNAN:
BATMAN, VICTORIA

– I desire to ask the Acting Leader of the House to what Department is the public trustee of the Commonwealth immediately responsible. A great deal of dissatisfaction has arisen owing i to the fact that the interests of many persons, including naturalized British subjects, have passed into the hands of this official, who is coming to be regarded as not a public trustee, but public confiscator. I wish to know how we can reach him?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– The administration of the work of the public trustee of the Commonwealth is vested, and has been, I think from the beginning, in the Department of Trade and Customs.

page 322

QUESTION

COCKATOO DOCKYARD

Mr PRATTEN:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I desire to ask the Minister concerned - whether it is the Prime Minister, the Treasurer, or the Minister for Defence, I am not sure - when there will be supplied to this House a balance-sheet for the year ended 30th June, 1921, and also for the year ended 30th June, 1922, in connexion with the commercial and other activities of Cockatoo Island Dockyard?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I think that the matter relates to the Prime Minister’s Department. I presume balance-sheets will be furnished in the ordinary way, just as they are supplied in connexion with other Commonwealth activities.

Later.

Mr PRATTEN:

– In view of the competition now proceeding between Cockatoo

Dockyard and similar private ‘ activities, and in view of the canvassing for work that is now going on by the Cockatoo authorities, will the Minister have a business balance-sheet of these Government activities prepared and placed on the table?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I shall bring the matter under the notice of the Prime Minister, but I believe that what the honorable member suggests is the usual practice.

page 323

PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE

Commonwealth Accommodation at Adelaide.

Mr. MATHEWS, in the absence of the Chairman, brought up the report, together with minutes of evidence, of the Public Works Committee on the proposed provision of office accommodation for various Commonwealth Departments in Adelaide, South Australia.

Ordered to be printed.

page 323

QUESTION

PRICE OE SUGAR

Mr CORSER:
WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND

– Has the Minister for Trade and Customs seen a report published in the Argus in which he is alleged to have promised that the price of sugar would be reduced? Will he state whether that report is accurate?

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– I saw, in this morning’s issue of the Argus, what purported to be an interview with me on the sugar question; but I say, emphatically, that when any statement with regard to -a reduction of “the price of sugar is to be made it will be made in this House.

Mr HIGGS:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

– Has the Minister for Trade and Customs received any” protest from a so-called public - meeting ‘ which was . held in the Assembly Hall, Melbourne, on Monday evening; and is he aware that an honorable member of this House was escorted out of the hall by the police because ‘ he desired to move an amendment to’ a proposed resolution submitted at that meeting? I would also like the Minister to supply to members of the Labour party the further information that the Australian. Workers Union.’ of Queensland seek the renewal of the agreement. I ask him further whether he will lay on the table all communications in the way of memorials, petitions, &c, received by him, or by the Prime Minister, from persons, or associations, desirous of a renewal, of. the sugar agreement on just and equitable terms?

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– I was not present at the meeting in question, but I read a very interesting account of it in the newspapers. To date I have received no resolution from its promoters. It is true that the Australian Workers Union of Queensland have asked for a renewal of the -sugar agreement. All bodies in Queensland concerned in that agreement, including the Australian Workers Union, waited on me during- my recent visit to Queensland in my capacity of Chairman of the Sugar Council, and asked for the extension of it. I refer the honorable member to my reply, as published in the Queensland newspapers.

Mr Higgs:

– I have read it, but I want to know how the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) and the honorable member for Tarra (Mr. Scullin), members of the Labour party, caine’ to be at a meeting, in Melbourne which was held as a protest against the renewal of the agreement?

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– In regard to the third part of the question submitted by the honorable member, I shall peruse the various requisitions or memorials submitted to the Government asking for a renewal of the agreement, and if it is possible to do so, in compliance with the honorable member’s wishes, will lay them on the table. .

Mr CONSIDINE:
BARRIER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Can the Minister for Trade and Customs say Whether the honorable member for Capricornia (Mr. Higgs) was representing the Ministry at the meeting which he- attended, and from which’ the other ladies requested him to retire?

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– The honorable member for Capricornia was a free agent. He certainly did not represent the Ministry.

page 323

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH GOVERNMENT LINE OF STEAMERS

Mr FENTON:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

– Is the Minister in charge of the Commonwealth line of steamers aware that the- managers of the line are charging higher freights fromBritish ports to Australia than they are charging from Antwerp to Australia? If he is not aware of this, will he make in.quiries and ascertain whether or not these differences exist?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I shall have inquiries made and inform the honorable member in due course.

page 324

QUESTION

MISSING BOAT

Mr CUNNINGHAM:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES

– The relatives of Captain George, who, with two companions, left Singapore for Australia in an open boat some little time ago and have not since been heard of, are anxious to learn what has happened to these voyagers.Will the Minister for the Navy be good enough to communicate with whatever vessels may be likely to cross the route taken by this boat, in an endeavour to find some trace of it?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I shall see what can be done in the circumstances.

page 324

QUESTION

SMALL ARMS FACTORY

Mr NICHOLLS:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the Minister for Defence, in conjunction with the PostmasterGeneral, definitely decided to manufacture telephone parts at the Small Arms Factory at Lithgow? If so, when does the Department intend to commence operations?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– No definite conclusions have been arrived at in that regard; but inquiries, so far as they have gone, tend to show that the extent to which the Department of the PostmasterGeneral can place orders with the Small Arms Factory at Lithgow for telephone parts is so small that in most cases it would not pay to make the necessary tools with which to carry out the job. However, I am still making inquiries into the matter, because to whatever extent the factory can be used for that or any other purpose we are endeavouring to so utilize it.

page 324

QUESTION

PUBLIC SERVICE AT RABAUL

Mr MAKIN:

– Can the UnderSecretary for External Affairs give any information as to the remedying of the lack of accommodation for the staff at Rabaul?

Mr MARKS:

– During my recent visit to the Territory deputations were received from our civil servants respecting the matter to which the honorable member has referred, and I personally inspected the accommodation provided for them. I asked the Public Service Inspector, Mr. Clemens, who is now in Rabaul, to look morefully into tha matter and submit a report on it to the Government later on, when the matter will be fully considered.

page 324

QUESTION

RABBIT SKINS

Mr CUNNINGHAM:

– Will the Minister for Trade and Customs have a return prepared showing the amount of rabbit skinsexported from Australia during the last two years and the quantity used each year in Australia?

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– I shall have pleasure in providing the information required as to the export of rabbit skins during the period named, but it will be a very difficult matter indeed to furnish information in regard to the quantity used in Australia. However, I shallsee what I can do in the matter.

page 324

GOVERNMENT RENTS

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

-Iwould like the permission of the House to move that the paper laid on the table relative to the rents paid by the Commonwealth be printed. The Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) promised to second my proposal a few days ago, but owing to inadvertence has failed to take action.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– Will the honourable member leave the matter over till tomorrow ?

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

– Certainly !

page 324

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH BANK

Mr MATHEWS:
MELBOURNE PORTS, VICTORIA

– Will the Government appoint a Commission to ascertain to what extent the Commonwealth Bank has interfered with the operations of other banking institutions?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– No.

page 324

QUESTION

BRITISH PETROLEUM COMPANY

Mr FLEMING:
ROBERTSON, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice-

  1. In view of the statementmade by him on the adjournment of the House on 1st March, 1917 - Has the Government yet ascertained . what connexion exists between the British Petroleum. Company, which was taken over as an enemy concern by the British Government in 1914, and the British Imperial Oil Company?
  2. Will he state the nature of the connexion, the names of the principal shareholders in the British Petroleum Company, and their nationality?

Mr. GREENE (for Mr. Hughes).If the honorable member calls at the AttorneyGeneral’s Department, he can peruse the files containing the information the Government has on the subject.

page 325

QUESTION

NEW GUINEA

Land, Timber, and Mining Ordinances - Recruited Labour - Loan for Public Works - Report by Dr. Campbell Brown.

Mr BLUNDELL:
ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

When will regulations in connexion with the Land, Timber, and Mining Ordinances under the New Guinea Act be gazetted?

Mr. GREENE (for Mr. Hughes).This matter is at present receiving the consideration of the Government.

Mr SCULLIN:
YARRA, VICTORIA

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. What is the number of New Guinea natives recruited during the past twelve months from the Australian mandated territory for labour in the phosphate works on Nauru and Ocean Island?
  2. What are the conditions under which the natives are recruited?
  3. Whatare the wages paid to and the hours worked by these natives in the phosphate Works?

Mr. GREENE (for Mr. Hughes).The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow: -

  1. Forty-one in June, 1921; 69 in November, 1921; making a total of 119. This number was recruited for work on Nauru only. No New Guinea natives are engaged on work on Ocean Island.
  2. In accordance with the regulations governing the recruitment of native labour in the Australian mandated territory.
  3. The wages paid are those stipulated in the regulations referred to, plus a monthly cash bonus for good work and conduct.The hours worked are nine per diem. When on task work, the labourers usually complete their task in considerably less than nine hours.
Mr MAKIN:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Whether the Administration of the mandated territory of the Pacific has made request to the Commonwealth Government for a subsidy to its revenue or the accommodation of loan money?
  2. If so, for what amount?

Mr. GREENE (for Mr. Hughes).The answer to the honorable member’s question is as follows: - 1 and 2. - (a) No request for a subsidy has been made. (b) The Administration has asked for a loan of £47800 for public works, wharfs,

Ac, and this is receiving the consideration of the Government in connexion with the Estimates of the Territory for the financialyear 1922-1923.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– On the 5th instant the honorable member for Franklin (Mr. McWilliams) inquired as to whether any report had been received from Dr. Campbell Brown. I am now able to state that an interim report has been received and is now under consideration by the Government.

page 325

QUESTION

BAERAMI-WIDDEN OIL SHALE FIELD

Mr J H CATTS:
COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Will he lay on the table the reportmade to the Federal Government by Mr. Carne, late Government Geologist, New South Wales, on the Baerami-Widden oil shale field, New South Wales ?
  2. Was one report confidentially made to the Government and another made for the information of lessees interested in opening the oil shale and coal?

Mr. GREENE (for Mr. Hughes).The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow: -

  1. A copy of the report in question has been laid on the’ table of the Library.
  2. Nothing is known of any other report beyond that now made available.

page 325

QUESTION

NORTHERN TERRITORY

Deportations

Mr CHARLTON:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Home and Territories, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that an Ordinance is at present in existence giving power to deport any person from the Northern Territory who has failed to pay his income tax? 2.If so, how many people have so far been deported, and what has been their destination ?
  2. Does the Minister intend to continue to deport such persons?
Sir GRANVILLE RYRIE:

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

  1. The Observance of LawOrdinance 1921 empowers the Minister to order the removal from the Territory of any person who fails, within the time provided by law, to pay income tax or land tax due by him, but this power is only exercisable where, in a suit for the recovery of the tax, judgment has been given against such person and remains unsatisfied, and the Minister has caused a notice to be served upon such person calling upon him to satisfy the judgment and he has failed to comply with the notice within thirty days of the service thereof. 2and3.Up to the present no person has been removed from theTerritory in pursuance of the power referred to.

page 326

QUESTION

ROYAL COMMISSIONS

Mr BLAKELEY:
for Mr. West

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Will he furnish the House with the number of Commissions that have been appointed, by the Government or Departments from February, 1917, to June, 1922, and the coal of each Commission?

Mr. GREENE (for Mr. Hughes).The information is being obtained.

page 326

QUESTION

POSTMASTER-GENERAL’S DEPARTMENT

Postal, Telephonic, and Telegraphic Rates : Parcels Post Rates

Mr CHARLTON:

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

  1. What were the postage rates prior to the introduction of the penny postage by a Labour Government in 1910?
  2. On what dates have the postage rates since been increased?
  3. On what dates since Federation have telephone charges been altered?
  4. What have been the alterations?
  5. On what date was the charge for telegrams increased?
Mr POYNTON:
Postmaster-General · GREY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– Presuming that the honorable member refers to letter postage, the answers are - 1. (a) Within the Commonwealth-

Twopenny postage per1/2 oz. of fraction thereof applied to letters for delivery within the States and Inter-State, with the following exceptions, viz.: -

State of Victoria had1d. postage per 1/2oz. for delivery within Victoria only;

All States excepting South Australia had1d. postage per1/2 oz. for local delivery within certain towns.

Beyond the Commonwealth -

To British Possessions, 2d. postage; to other countries, 21/2d. postage, per1/2 oz. or fraction thereof

(a)1/2d. increase per letter (war tax) applied from 28th October, 1918.

War postage tax merged in ordinary postage, and letter rate within the Commonwealthand to British Possessions increased to 2d. per1/2 oz. or fraction thereof, from 2nd October,1920. (c)Letter rate to foreign countries increased from 3d. per1/2 oz. to 4d. for firstoz. and 2d. for each additional oz. from 1st January, 1922.

1st February, 1907; 1st September, 1910; 10th December. 1915; 1st October, 1920.

Prior to1907 the rates in operation in the several States were those in force at the time of the transfer of the post and telegraph services to the Commonwealth control.

In 1907 the following rates were introduced: - .

1,000 effective calls allowed free to each subscriber each half-year.

Each effective call beyond 1,000 halfyearly to be charged -

Above 1,000 and not exceeding 2,000 half-yearly, two calls1d.

Above 2,000 and not exceeding 3,000 half-yearly, three calls1d.

Above 3,000 half-yearly,four calls,1d.

  1. In 1910 the charges were revised and the following rates introduced: -

All effective calls to be charged -

For calls not exceeding 2,000 half-yearly, two calls for1d.

For calls above 2,000 half-yearly, three calls for1d.

Provision was also made that all existing flat rate subscribers be given notice and compelled to come under measured service conditions.

  1. In 1915 the charges were again altered, and the following rates introduced: -

The charge for calls was also raised from one halfpenny to one penny for each effective originating call. The provision in the 1910 rate for a reduction in charges for calls above 2,000 was also abolished.

  1. In 1920 the charges were amended and the following rates introduced: -

For each effective call originating from a subscriber’s instrument the charge shall be-

  1. in respect of exchanges or networks with 1 to 600 subscribers’lines connected,1d.; and

  2. in respect of exchanges or networks with 601 or more subscribers’ lines connected,11/4d.

    1. 2nd October, 1920.
Mr RILEY:

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

  1. Will he make inquiries and state the amount of increased business in the Parcels Post Office, Sydney, apparently due to the railway freights being increased by the New South Wales Railways Commissioners, and consequently the commercial houses now using the parcels post as a cheaper method of transacting business?
  2. Will he protect the public by placing the parcel post rates at the same standard as the railway rates?
  3. Is overtime money being paid in the Parcel Post Office in connexion with the extra work incurred there?
Mr POYNTON:

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

  1. Inquiry has been made, and it cannot be definitely stated what effect the increase in railway parcel rates has had on postal parcel business.
  2. In the fixing of postal rates full consideration is givento the conservation of public interests.
  3. Yes; but this is largely incurred by reason of several large overseas parcel mails frequently arriving within a few days of each other.

page 327

QUESTION

REPATRIATION DEPARTMENT

Vocational Trainee Edwards: Mental Cases in South Australia.

Mr MAKIN:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Repatriation, upon notice -

  1. Whether a returned soldier named Edwards, of South Australia, has been a trainee under the Commonwealth vocational training scheme in that State?
  2. If so, what is the percentage of proficiency secured by this trainee, and at which he has been assessed while he has been an employee of Messrs. Peter Dawson and Co., Adelaide?
  3. Has this firm applied to the factoriesinspector for a permit to enable Trainee Edwards to be employed at a wage Tate of £4 10s. per week when the award rate for the trade is £56s. per week.
  4. Have the Government power to protect this trainee against such reduction of wages demanded by Messrs. Peter Dawson and Co.?
Mr HECTOR LAMOND:
NAT

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

  1. Yes.
  2. Edwards completed training with Messrs. Peter Dawson and Co., was assessed at 100 per cent. efficiency, and was retained in the employment of that firm, at which stage the obligations of the Department of Repatriation towards him were fulfilled.
  3. Inquiries elicit that the State authorities granted a slow worker’s permit on the application of Edwards himself.
  4. See answers to Nos. 2 and 3. It may be added that Edwards is not now in the employ of Messrs. Peter Dawson and Co.

Mr.BLUNDELL asked the Minister representing the Minister for Repatriation, upon notice -

Whether suitable accommodation has been provided for soldier mental cases in South Australia?

Mr HECTOR LAMOND:

– The Commissioners advise that the reports submitted as the result of a special inspection indicate that the accommodation is satisfactory and the patients are being well looked after. The question as to whether other accommodation may be required is being now considered.

page 327

QUESTION

WAR SERVICE HOMES

Operations in New South Wales.

Mr RILEY:

asked the Minister repre senting the Minister for Repatriation, upon notice -

  1. Will he state the number of employees engaged in the various grades of the War Service Homes Department Sydney; also the annual cost of the Department?
  2. Will he state, approximately, the number of applications for construction of houses finalized each month, and the cost, per head, of each house for supervision, &c.?
Mr HECTOR LAMOND:
NAT

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

  1. At 30th June, 1922, the number of officers employed in the New South Wales Branch of the Commission totalled 166. The cost of the Branch, including salaries, wages, rent, stationery, and other incidental expenses, for the year 1921-22 equalled £43,356 14s.9d., which was a charge against revenue. This figure does not include the salaries and expenses of architects, works inspectors, and other works officers, which are charged to the cost of homes, as set out below.
  2. The number of houses constructed in New South Wales to 30th June, 1922, totalled 2,293; but it is notpossible to state the number of building applications finalized each month owing to the fact that, until March, 1921, houses were built by the Commission in anticipation of applications. A number of these houses are occupied by applicants under a tenancy agreement pending determination of capital cost and subsequent sale to them. The amount added to the cost of each house to cover architects’ fees is 1 per cent. of the estimated capital cost and 11/2 per cent. for supervision fees; total, 21/2 per cent. The amount added in the case of a house costing £800 is, therefore, £20.

page 328

QUESTION

MOTOR CAR PARTS

Mr CUNNINGHAM:

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that a number of firms were established during the war to make spare ports for motors, and that these firms gave great service to those using cars?
  2. Is it a fact that importers are now getting those parts from overseas, and, in consequence, Australian works are practically at a standstill, machines idle, and a large number of employees out of work?
  3. Will the Minister take steps tosee that the industry is adequately protected in order to prevent the Australian manufactures being shut out of the Australian market?
Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

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

  1. Yes.
  2. Certain parts are being imported; but, as the result of investigation, protective duties have been imposed on such Darts as can be commercially manufactured in Australia.
  3. The matter is the subject of further inquiry by the Tariff Board.

page 328

SUPPLY OF BEEF TO RUSSIA

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– The honorable member for Fremantle (Mr. Burchell) made some inquiries last week regarding the recent supply of meat to Russia. I desire to inform him that the meat was purchased by the High Commissioner in London in consultation with Mr. J. M. Elder and a representative of the firm of Vesteys Limited. The. quantity purchased was 17,020 crops and 8,510 hinds at a cost of £49,070 ls.1d. Advice has been received from the High Commissioner’s Office that the meat has been safely unloaded at Riga, and despatched by rail to Moscow, whence consignments would immediately be forwarded to the relief centres in the famine area.

page 328

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Mr J H CATTS:

– I wish to make a personal explanation regarding several matters referred to in the House last week. During the course of my speech on Thursday last, as reported at page 200 in the proof copy of Hansard, I inadvertently mentioned the wrong christian name of a gentleman. I referred to Lionel Bridge ; the name should have been Clarence Bridge. The statement of Clarence Bridge made on 19th April, 1921, commences with the words “Lionel Bridge, my brother,” and that led to the christian names becoming confused. I desire this error to be corrected in the permanent copy of Hansard.

The honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Lambert) is reported, at page 206, as having said -

Mr. Storey also made a statement, in the presence of several members of the State Pariamentary party in New South Wales, that the Federal Parliamentary Labour party was not worth its salt to allow a manlike Mr. Catts inside its ranks after the disgraceful Court proceedings in connexion with a certain law case with the honorable member.

I have sufficient facts in my possession to show that that statement is a fabrication.

At the same time I wish to deal with a statement made by the honorable member for Yarra (Mr. Scullin), on the previous day, which will be found recorded on page 134 of the Hansard records. Therein the honorable member stated that while these alleged happenings were going on - that is to say, this wrong doing to which I had been referring - “the honorable member for Cook was breaking his neck to be campaign director of the party.” I desire to explain those two matters together, as they are interwoven.

Early in 1920 there was a State election in New South Wales. The proceedings to which the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Lambert) referred occurred in 1919. Mr. Storey knew the facts of my unfortunate family affairs very well. A few months following that, the State elections were in progress. Mr. Storey waited on me at theCommonwealth offices, in company with Dr. Wall, M.L.C., and he asked me if I would take charge or the State election campaign. Upon my acceding to his request, he suggested I should see his secretaries to arrange matters. I did so, and reported the arrangements to Mr. Storey; and, on the 23rd January, 1920, he wrote me a letter, in the course of which he stated -

I shall be very much obliged if you will take up the direction of the work, according to those arrangements, on Tuesday, 27 th January. (Signed) John Storey.

After the campaign was over I received an official letter, dated the 15th April, from the Premier’s office, signed by the Premier’s private secretary, Mr. Gordon Childe, in the course of which he wrote -

Mr. Storey asks me once more to thank you for the tremendous assistance you gave him in the recent campaign …. (Signed) V. GordonChilde,

Private Secretary.

I also received an official letter from the Premier’s office, signed by Mr. Storey himself, dated 17th April, which commences, “Dear Jimmy,” and in which the late Premier winds up by saying -

Again thanking you for your splendid help in the campaign.

Yours very sincerely, (Signed) Jack Storey.

In 1921, after Mr. Storey’s return from England, what is known in New South Wales as the Propagandists and Organizers Union was formed to combat Tammany in the Labour movement, and to protect the individual members against the victimization of Tammany. There was a pledge drawn up in connexion with this new organization. Mr. John Storey joined this anti-Tammany organization and signed that pledge. It is as follows : -

page 329

QUESTION

PLEDGE OF MEMBERSHIP

Name, John Storey

Address, Balmain

I hereby pledge myself to assist the members of the Propagandists and Organizers Union to the utmost, and to regard an injury to one as an injury to all. (Signed) John Storey. 16th August, 1921.

Following this came the recent State elections in New South Wales. I received an official letter from the then SolicitorGeneral, which reads -

Parliament of New South Wales,

Sydney, 3rd January,1922

Dear Mr. Catts,

Cabinet unanimously decided to ask you to take the position of Labour Campaign Director for the ensuing State elections, and I would be glad if you would be good enough to arrange for an appointment with the Premier.

Yours faithfully, (Signed)R. Sproule, Solicitor-General.

I informed him that, upon arrangements being made for the proper control of the finances - to meet objections which I had raised in Sydney, and in this House also - and upon the Australian Labour party executive agreeing with the request of the Government, I would accept the position. Mr. Dooley went to the Australian Labour party executive, and made the request to that body; and, with only two dissentients out of thirty-four, the following motion was carried : -

Mr J H CATTS:

– Yes, certainly !

Mr Watt:

– A contradiction of statements in the form of debate.

Mr J H CATTS:

– That is not so. I am showing that on Friday last a serious charge was made to the effect that the late Mr. John Storey had stated, in the Parliamentary Labour party, that the Federal party should not have such a man as myself within its ranks. I am demonstrating by these official documents which I have before me, and which are available for inspection, that that assertion is a fabrication. The motion which I was about to quote is as follows -

Australian Labour Party,

State of New South Wales,

MacDonell House, Sydney. 12th January, 1922.

Mr. J. H. Catts, M.H.R., Commonwealth Offices, Sydney

Dear Sir,

Hereunder I have much pleasure in giving you a copy of the resolution passed by the lost meeting of my executive:

That Mr. J. Ca.tt3, M.H.R., be appointed Campaign Director.

Yours faithfully, (Signed) W. Carey, General Secretary.

Those documentary facts form a complete refutation of this fabrication by the honorable member for West Sydney, namely, that Mr. Storey had made the statement which has been alleged. Hie late gentleman could not possibly have done so, and, at the same’ time, have written the letters which I have just quoted. Furthermore, the attitude of the Labour Ministry and the Australian Labour party executive up to a 1’ew months ago shows that they all sought to be associated with me before the public as their campaign leader.

The next misstatement by the honorable member for West Sydney was that the executive which expelled me was the same executive in regard to which he had quoted some remarks of my own in the course of his speech. It was not the same executive at all, because a number of the members had retired in order to become candidates at the State elections. Under the rules of the party, this course was imperative. The vacant positions upon the executive were thereupon filled by runners-up who had failed to gain a majority vote at the conference; and these new individuals altered the character of the executive altogether. Thereupon, as soon as the Tammany crowd realized this altered position, and that it. gave them a majority, I was expelled by eighteen votes to thirteen..

Mr SPEAKER (Hon Sir Elliot Johnson:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Order! I have been listening very closely to the honorable member’s personal explanation. Of course, where his own character and standing are assailed, some little latitude must be allowed an honorable member in making a) personal explanation. At the same time, hovever, I must point out that he cannot, under the ‘.over or » personal explanation, take a number of statements seriatim, and apply lengthy arguments to them. Wherever an honorable member has been misrepresented, he is entitled to draw attention thereto, and to deny that misrepresentation, if deemed necessary; but he is not entitled to enter upon a, lengthy discussion of the subject-matter involved.

Mr J H CATTS:

– If you, sir, think that my explanation is too lengthy, I shall endeavour to curtail it.

The honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Lambert) said that I had been expelled for turning traitor and being disloyal. The Labour News of 3rd June last, which contained the report of the General Secretary of the Australian Labour party, stated that my expulsion was on account of an article in the Sunday Times on 2nd April ; and I shall leave the matter there.

The honorable member also stated that u. writ, which was issued against me by Mr. John Bailey, was withdrawn’ on an apology being made by me. A statement to that effect was made in the Southern Cross an the 31st March, 1921, and on tho 5th April the solicitors for Mr. Bailey asked me to make a statement and a withdrawal ;if. the Australian Labour party Conference. I sent a reply next day that I was prepared to make a statement at the Conference; and I endeavoured to obtain permission from the Chairman (Mr. Lambert) to get the call in order to do so. The apology was drawn up in order to get a categorical statement of the damaging facts before the Labour Conference, but no statement was allowed to be made. The relation of the facts was so damning to Mr. Bailey that he and Mr. Lambert, upon the advice of their solicitors, refused to allow it to be read to the Conference. The issue of the writ followed. The Australian Labour party some months after appointed a Committee, which, on 17th June, 1921, recommended Mr. Bailey to withdraw his writ, and stated that my costs would be paid, which they subsequently were.

Mr SPEAKER:

– The honorable member is going far beyond a personal explanation. He is taking up the time of the House with a statement which deals with the whole question in. dispute between himself and the organization of which he was a member. I do not think that the honorable member is entitled to do this under cover of a personal explanation, though he is certainly entitled to deal with statements concerning himself, and to this he should confine his remarks.

Mr LAMBERT:
WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I also desire to make a short personal explanation. I have heard ;J.:- honorable member for Cook (Mr. J. H. Catts) deny several of the statements which 1 made here in reply to the untrue statements thathe read in the House in order that they might appear in Hansard. Notwithstanding the apology of the honorable member, or his contradiction of my statements, I desire to say that I stand by, and vouch for, every word I said. If it ever be necessary, I shall be able to prove the truth of what I said. Of course, I know that this House is not much concerned with the political squabbles and internal wranglings of the honorable member for Cook and the executive of the organization of which he was a member, and I do not desire to drag them under the notice of honorable members. Finally, I challenge the honorable member for Cook to go outside and make his statements, where the people whom he has slandered will have an opportunity to defend themselves.

Mr J H Catts:

– I made those statements in the Southern Cross Hall.

page 331

QUESTION

GOVERNOR-GENERAL’S SPEECH

Address-in-reply.

Debate resumed from 7th July (vide page 275), on motion by Mr. Jackson -

That the following Address-in-Reply to the Speech of His Excellency the Governor-General be agreed to by this House: -

May it Please Your Excellency -

We, the House of Representatives of the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, in Parliament assembled, beg to express our loyalty to our Most Gracious Sovereign and to thank Your Excellency for the Speech which you have been pleased to address to Parliament.

Mr PROWSE:
Swan

.- Two years ago when the motion for the Address in-Reply was under consideration, I took the opportunity to make certain remarks, not only in relation to the Governor-General’s Speech, but to the objects of the party to which I belong. I ventured to observe that I had at that early date discovered that it takes this House a very long time to do very little, and pointed out that this little Corner party seemed to be the bone of contention between the other two parties. 1 said that we in the Corner were not lovers of party government, and that we had shown our earnestness in this regard by remaining out of politics for nearly eighteen years of Federation. We wanted sound government.

Mr Considine:

– There was a lot of sound from you.

Mr PROWSE:

– We had expected that the other parties would give this country sound legislation which would make for progress, peace, and good-will of the people. In this regard, however, the people of. Australia had been disappointed. As the honorable member for Barrier (Mr. Considine) says, there was a lot of sound, but it was not from the Country party, because that party was not in existence.

Mr Considine:

– They were the silent worshippers at the shrine of the Prime Minister !

Mr PROWSE:

– I shall deal with the Prime Minister later. On that occasion, I took the opportunity to refer to that memorable message sent to the people of Australia by Sir Rider Haggard - a message that has been completely disregarded by the Governments of Australia. The message was to the following effect -

The chief aim of all highly civilized countries should be to keep population on the land, to multiply those modest rural homes, in which men and women grow up in health and prosperity, and become imbued with those sober and enduring qualities which have made the greatnessof our nation and maintains it now. “Prosperity will follow the feet that tread the fields rather than those that trip along the pavements.”

I was hardly shrewd enough two years ago to recognise any political propaganda in the Governor- General’s Speech, but I have learned much since, and can see such propaganda in the Speech before us at the present time.

Mr Brennan:

– That is a reflection on the Governor-General.

Mr PROWSE:

– I do not reflect on His Excellency the Governor-General, but I do reflect on those who put words into his mouth, and make promises to the country which they do not carryout.

Mr Blakeley:

– We do not know whether you are attacking us or the Government.

Mr PROWSE:

-Your turn will come. I regard the statements appearing in His Excellency the Governor-General’s Speech as being merely a second edition of the Government’s pre-election propaganda. We have in the Speech a reiteration of promises that have been made over and over again. Promise after promise has been made by the Government, but nothing has been accomplished. These promises are renewed periodically, but are not followed by any progressive action on the part of the Ministry. In paragraph 13 of the Address we have the statement -

My Advisers recognise that the welfare and progress of the Commonwealth depend upon primary production, and that a successful policy of land settlement is intimately associated with the provision of means of communication, and so on. Cultivation during the last six years has been reduced in Australia.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– Does the honorable member say that the area under cultivation has been reduced?

Mr PROWSE:

– The areaunder wheat in Australia in 1913-14 was 9,287,398 acres, whereas in 1920-21 it was only 9,069,000, showing a decrease of over 200,000 acres.

We have in His Excellency’s Speech the further statement that -

My Ministers, recognising the great value of the primary industries to Australia, and the rapidity of their expansion, have taken definite action to open up new markets and further exploit old ones. To this end they have in every way in their power assisted the’ producers to place their goods upon the world’s market by co-operative effort.

This, again, is excellent propaganda. Abraham Lincoln said, “You may fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you. cannot fool all the people all the time.” I invite honorable members to consider the statements in the above paragraph in the light of the knowledge that we ha,ve a declining production, and that some 30,000 or 40,000 who were on the land have left it during the last decade. The Minister for Defence (Mr. Greene) smiles, and seems to think he will be able to refutemy statement. He may show that the amount received in respect of the reduced production is greater, but the fact that the area under cultivation has declined is a most material consideration in this connexion.

It would not be out of place to carefully examine paragraph 19 in His Excellency’s Speech. In what way and by whom are these new markets to which reference is made to be opened up? Is there any evidence of a desire on the part of the Government to open up new markets? Owing to action of this Parliament during the last twelve months, revenue to the extent of millions of pounds has been lost to us. In Java and the neighbouring islands there are over 50,000,000 people who are anxious to trade with us and with whom the people of Australia wish to trade. We could very well do with their trade. As a primaryproducing country, we could supply them with many of the commodities they require, but we cannot enter into trade with them on a reasonable reciprocal basis. We ask them to give us free ports, and yet our ports are closed tight to them. That is the treatment that we have extended, for instance, to the people of Java and Fiji.

Mr Pratten:

– Our imports from Java are greater than our exports to it.

Mr PROWSE:

– Western Australia was opening up an excellent trade with the people of Java and the neighbouring islands, who were beginning to take and appreciate our grapes, our apples, our flour and our wheat. Quite recently commercial representatives from Java were inquiring in Western Australia as to the possibility of a regular supply of meat. It is necessary for us to export more meat in order to bring in fresh capital; but when we ask these people to give us the most favorable trade relations they at once remind us that under our Tariff there is a duty of Ss. 4d. per cental on their bananas entering this country.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I “ tipped,” five minutes ago, a reference by the honorable member to that item in the Tariff.

Mr PROWSE:

– Since the honorable gentleman’s conscience is laden with such a responsibility, it is no wonder that he expected me to refer to the duty on bananas. Primary production and its encouragement in Australia are of vital importance ; but what is the actual position ? Because of our Tariff, South Africa has set up a reprisal Tariff on our wheat, and the United States of America is ever increasing its Tariff against us. To whom shall we be able shortly to look? To whom shall we be able to go with our produce? We have vast financial obligations, and it is not possible for us to get rid of our enormous national debt unless we have trade relations with other countries on a clear, well-established basis. It is mere “ flap-doodle “ on the part of the Government to talk about sending Trade Commissioners to other countries to open up trade with people whom we have offended in this way. When our Trade Commissioners seek new business in the East, they will bo reminded that we have closed our doors to their products. When we seek trade with them, we need to have something to offer in return. All sides of tho House are agreed that the only immigrants we require are those who are prepared to go on the land and to increase our production. Increased production is the need of the hour, if Australia is to progress. But why is it that the people already in our cities, who are at all conversant with the conditions here, will nob settle on the land? Why is it that we have to bring people 12,000 miles overseas to settle on the lands of Australia? The people in’ our cities and towns will not go on the land, and many of those who have done so are forsaking the primary industries. Surely there must be something sadly wanting !

Mr Considine:

– It was only a clay or two ago that the honorable member told us of the child slavery associated with land settlement.

Mr PROWSE:

– And I said it was largely due to the policy and tactics of the party to which the honorable member belonged. It would be interesting to examine the reasons why thousands of our citizens will not go on the land, and why so many are forsaking the primary industries. We are sending to the uttermost ends of the earth for land settlers, and only about 3 per cent, of those who come here go on the land. It is of paramount importance that we should determine the responsibility for this state of affairs. Every one recognises that the prosperity of a country depends on its primary production. Why is it, then, that we cannot induce people to go on the land? In the first place, our primary producers find the fight of competition in the world’s market is too great for them. They are further removed from the principal markets of the world than any competing country, and this Parliament has don® nothing to help them in this direction. In no less than sixtyone countries agricultural machinery and the machinery of production are exempt from import duties; but Australia places heavy imposts on the machinery required by those who are producing for world competition. There, again, we have another handicap imposed on the .primary producer.

I am not going to deal at, present with the question of income tax, since I have an idea that the newly-appointed Treasurer (Mr. Bruce) Ls honestly seeking to devise a .consolidated taxation measure which will be a credit to the Parliament, and not a discredit, like the amending Taxation Assessment Bill which was carried through at the close of last session.

Mr Mathews:

– Does the honorable member want to exempt farmers from taxation?

Mr PROWSE:

– We are not asking for any such exemption. All that the people on the land ask is that a measure of justice shall be granted them. They ask that they be put on the same basis as other sections of the community . in so far as the income tax is concerned. At present they arc on a different footing. All parties say that primary production is of vital importance, yet the primary producers have to pay more by way of taxation than does any other section of the community in respect of the same amount of income. When the immigrants who are settling on the land discover that the incidence of our taxation is such that they are liable to pay three times more in respect of the same return than. i3 any other section of the community, they will wake up. At present they are1 too much like Pilgrim’s man with the muck-rake - they have no time to look into these things. When they do become fully conscious of this treatment they will refuse to be fleeced any longer. If we are to have hundreds of thousands of people streaming into this country to go on the land, we must deal thoroughly with the whole question of taxation, and so make it possible for them to carry on. We must also take into consideration the opening up of new markets in other countries on a reciprocal basis. I fail to find evidence of an attempt on the part of the Government to do anything m that direction. It will be a mere waste of time a-rid money to bring more people here, unless simultaneously with our immigration policy the Murray Waters scheme and the Western Australian settlement scheme are proceeded with, and there is a genuine desire on the part of the States and the Federal Governments to provide markets for the produce raised in Australia. With the exception of a few of the items we send abroad there is no stability about the price of certain commodities consumed in Australia. One season we find potatoes quoted at £2 10s. per ton; at another time they are sold at £25 or £30 per ton. One year onions fetch £25 or £30 per ton; next year their price may be as low as £2 10s. per ton.

Mr Considine:

– Of course there are no fluctuations in wages.

Mr PROWSE:

– The people represented by the honorable member have so organized as to have had representation in the legislative halls of Australia for many years past, and to have secured, by means of Arbitration Court awards, the regulation of hours of labour and rates of pay. Although there may be no guarantee that a man renders service for the money he receives, he must get a minimum wage; but there is no such assurance to those persons who wish to go on the land. They must take all the risks.

In a Parliament containing representatives of all sections of the people of Australia, facts ought to be viewed as they exist, and not with the limited vision of the interests of one small section. For instance, we find the honorable member for Henty (Mr. Francis), the honorable member for Kooyong (Sir Robert Best), and the honorable member for Fawkner (Mr. Maxwell), or at least two of them, getting on public platforms in their constituencies and referring to the “ little Country party “ as being a menace. Of course they are merely following the lead given by the Prime Minister.

Mr Maxwell:

– I did not make such a remark.

Mr PROWSE:

– If the honorable member says that he did not utter this remark I gladly withdraw my charge against him, but I think it can be shown that these three honorable members were really engaged in apologizing for their attachment to the National Government. Honorable members of the Country party have no occasion to make apologies. We are certainly twitted from one side of the House and the other, and the Prime Minister has made use of the long recess to visit the States, not for the purpose of setting forth a statesmanlike policy for the benefit of the people of Australia, but more than anything else for the purpose of endeavouring to damn the Country party, so that he might have a greater following, and so that he might have more of those followers who apologize for following him.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– The honorable member appears to take himself and his party very seriously.

Mr PROWSE:

– The Prime Minister must regard this “ little party “ rather seriously, otherwise he would not waste somuch time on it. He said to the people, “ The Country party has done nothing for you. It was the National Government that gave you an averaging system in taxation.” The amendment of the Income Tax Assessment Act, to which the right honorable gentleman referred, was an insult to the intelligence of this House.

Mr Bruce:

– I think that the honorable member should stand by his own views on the matter.

Mr PROWSE:

– I shall do so. In reply to the Treasurer’s interjection, I shall read the reply given by the Commissioner of Taxation to the request of the Taxpayers’ Association for information concerning the operation of the averaging system. The Commissioner pointed out that “ the scheme does not involve the payment of tax on an average income.” Of course it does not. It is a scheme by which payment is based on a rate of income which, without any stretch of imagination, can be shown to possess greater anomalies than existed before the Act was amended.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– Then the honorable member condemns the system.

Mr PROWSE:

– When the amendment was before the House I condemned it, but I accepted the assurance of the Minister in charge of the House at the time that an amendment would soon follow.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– Then why did the Leader of the Country party (Dr. Earle Page) claim credit for getting the Act amended ?

Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · FSU; CP from 1920

– I claimed credit for having had the averaging principle recognised. We trusted to get what we really wanted subsequently.

Mr PROWSE:

– This seems to be a House in which one can make explanations. The party to which I belong has as a very prominent plank in its platform a true and just averaging of incomes for a period of five years. When this Parliament opened, at the very first opportunity a. member of the Nationalist party sprang to his feet and moved the adjournment of the House for the purpose of considering the averaging system in taxation. Of course, his purpose was to forestall our moving to have our plank adopted by this Parliament. He was one of thos© “ as good as a Country party “ Nationalists. Naturally. I supported him. I want to secure the passage of legislation suitable to the people, and I care not if a motion comes from, this side or the other side of the chamber so long as what is sought to be enacted is just and proper. Of course, we know that political tactics are introduced into these things, but I shall be pleased to learn that the Government will bring down a just measure of taxation of primary producers. These people cannot be expected to look for less than justice. If we want to get settlers on the land, we must treat them justly, and not throw dust in their eyes, as the Prime Minister does when he claims that it was his party who gave them the averaging system in taxation, concerning which the Federal Taxation Commissioner states that it is not an averaging on incomes. Just before last Christmas I strongly criticised the Government’s proposal. I regarded it as a clumsy and worthless amendment, but I voted for it because it was an admission of the averaging principle, and I accepted the Minister’s assurance that after the final report of the Taxation Commission had been received an amending Bill would be brought forward to put the system on a proper basis. I had no intention of making such an extensive reference to taxation, but the present system is a deterrent to the settlement of the land. The primary producers axe unduly taxed. If their unjust burdens are not removed, any bait we may throw out to induce’ people in other parts of the world to come hero will fail to attract them. I want to see immigration carried out. We have the land and the opportunities for immigrants if we only broaden our aspect, and give them a reasonable opportunity to make good. Then our secondary industries will proceed with greater success. At the present time the Government are endeavouring to help the secondary industries at the expense of the men on the land, spoon-feeding them by heavy protective duties at the expense of primary producers, to whom no protection can be afforded.

Members of the Country party are not the only persons who speak on these lines. The Prime Minister and his Government proclaim the same doctrine, and I find Mr. Gullett, a Nationalist, who is seeking to unseat another Nationalist in this Chamber, preaching it. I find, also, that business people are beginning to realize that the policy adopted by the Commonwealth is no longer tenable, and must ultimately fail, if indeed it has not failed already. Mr. Gullett, in his speech, said -

There was only one road, and that road lay through great areas of undeveloped country. If the Federal Parliament gave during ten years as much attention to the development of primary industries as it had given to the secondary industries, tho wealth of this country would have been doubled and trebled.

If this gentleman happens to be returned to this House - and I can assure the honorable member for Henty (Mr. Francis) that the people at Caulfield cheered him and applauded that statement - some further apologies will have to be made. J want to know why the speaker I have quoted does not enlist under the banner of the Country party at once, because all that we ‘seek is to develop the whole of Australia and give every one a chance of getting along.

As I waa saying, we find big business people are beginning to be perturbed about the position of affairs in the Commonwealth. Mr. J. M. Niall, chairman of directors of Goldsbrough, Mort, Limited, a gentleman who is in a position, by a close examination of figures, to know what he is talking about, said -

Australia should be producing wealth very much greater in volume than is now the case, hut until economy in public expenditure is brought about, the burden of taxation lightened, reasonable conditions of pay accepted, and more effective service rendered, it seems impossible than even present results can bo maintained.

Taxation is slowly strangling all production of primary products, he continued, and producing serious unemployment. Although private individuals have, in most cases, endeavoured to exercise economy in carrying on their businesses, unfortunately the same does not apply to Governments, who should rather set an example than continue lavish expenditure.

The general attitude of a Government toward trade and industry was one which should bo seriously considered, Mr. Niall went on. Every one knew that, in all cases, private enterprise could conduct industrial business much more profitably than a Government.

The market outlook for beef was still depressed, the chairman added. That was mainly due to excessive shipments of chilled . and frozen beef from the Argentine to the United Kingdom. There was a great struggle between American and Argentine shippers, and until that struggle ceased, the prospects for Australia were unfavorable.

If burdens continue to be heaped on Hie man on the land rather than offering bini every inducement to increase’ production, concluded Mr. Niall, instead of being able to attract settlers to Australia, we shall see the movement from the country to the cities accentuated, and immigration schemes must fail.

Those are wise words from a wise man, and their wisdom is proved by the fact that what Mr. Niall said will happen is happening.

Mr Mathews:

– Especially the cutting’ down of wages.

Mr PROWSE:

– I think the honorable member is astute enough to know that the solution of our problem is not to make things costly by increasing wages, but to improve the purchasing power of money. If the Parliament would set to work with that aim in view,’ and make it possible for the man on the land to produce enough money for the others to spend, our troubles would be lessened. At the present time money is being spent faster than the man on the land can produce it, and at the same time he is being hampered with direct taxation, Customs duties, railway freights, and middlemen’s charges, to such an extent that a situation is being created that is quite untenable, having regard to the fact that Australia’s primary products have to compete with those of the outside world.

Mr Bell:

– What is the remedy ?

Mr PROWSE:

– Lift the burdens as far as possible from the shoulders of those who are producing our real wealth. I have shown that the Parliaments of sixtyone other countries have displayed statesmanship .enough to reduce taxation. Let the farmers get as cheaply as possible the implements- they need for the production of greater wealth for the benefit of all. The average price which the farmer pays for his requisites is nearly 100 per cent, higher than is paid by his competitors in other countries. When he requires wire netting to keep the rabbits from his crops, which are to enrich the rest of the community as well as himself, he ought not to be called upon to pay at least 300 per cent, more than he paid in pre-war times, simply in order that that article may be fabricated in Melbourne or Sydney. When the dingoes are attacking his sheep and lambs, he does not desire to stay up night and day to protect them, but he cannot afford to buy wire netting. On my own property, forty miles of netting is required, but it is not a sound proposition to pay the price that is asked for it. The duty on manure and sulphur should be removed. And it has been proved that the Navigation Act is a clog on progress.

Mr Maxwell:

– Does the honorable member suggest that during this session we should reconsider the Tariff?

Mr PROWSE:

– I am indicting the Government, and incidentally the Opposition, who, representing the majority of the population centred about the cities of Australia, have voted as dictated by the manufacturers and consumers only. Like the three gentlemen to whom I have already referred, they voted for the highest Tariff possible, regardless of appeals from those who represent the men on the land, simply because implements and machinery are manufactured near the cities. But as soon as there arises a question regarding the price of sugar to feed the people of Melbourne, those same persons display gross inconsistency. If I ask for a cheap harvester I am told that I am in favour of black labour, but notwithstanding the declaration of a White Australia in connexion with the growing of a primary commodity, these people demand that it be sold to them cheaply because the price of the imported article happens to be low. I, too, want cheap sugar, but I also want cheap machinery, and therefore I am consistent. Those others who increase the price of machinery and yet ask for cheap primary products are inconsistent. Honorable members opposite voted for a high Tariff to be paid by the people outside of Melbourne, but they demand that their metropolitan constituents be supplied with sugar at a low price.

Bearing, in mind the fact that Australia is not a. manufacturing country, the statistics gathered at the latest census are startling. I would like Australia to be able to manufacture all it requires, but the time when we can profitably do that has not yet arrived. We still require to purchase many things abroad as a means of trading with other countries. The following statistics from Knibbs give the percentages of city population to total population in each of the capital cities of the Commonwealth and of some other countries : -

Those figures disclose an extremely serious state of affairs. If Australia were u manufacturing country, and the people about the cities were producing things to sell to other countries in return for money which would help to meet our national debt, these secondary industries would be of national benefit; but under the present hot-house treatment they are actually crippling the people on the land, who alone are creating new money. It must be manifest to the House that the method adopted in the past has been equivalent to placing the cart before the horse. Give the horse a chance, and the cart will follow in the natural order of things.

Mr Laird Smith:

– How does the honorable member account for the high price of agricultural land in view of the conditions he is describing?

Mr PROWSE:

– The price is not excessively high, comparatively speaking. I could take the honorable member to first class land which he may select at 10s. per acre payable in twenty years without interest?

Mr Considine:

– How much of that land has the honorable member got ?

Mr PROWSE:

– A good area; and I am working it for the benefit of men like the honorable member for Barrier (Mr. Considine).

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– Does the honorable member suggest that his comparison with the city populations of other countries is fair?

Mr PROWSE:

– I regard it as highly significant. These countries have found it highly advantageous to distribute their populations; their factories have been so decentralized that there is no question of costly haulage to centres of consumption. The whole of their economic systems, indeed, is distinctly to their material advantage. The Australian States, however, are in the reverse position. In New South Wales and Western Australia, particularly, enormous distances have to be traversed in hauling foodstuffs to the consumers. Frequently the producers have the experience of sending their commodities to market and getting nothing for them.. Indeed, we sometimes get less’ than nothing; for we are charged freight purely for the honour and privilege of despatching our products to- the points of consumption. Such are the evils of centralization.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) made a. great mistake, in spending a considerable part of the recess in visiting the various States, when he did not give the people an assurance, of his earnest intention to bring about conditions which would conduce to the true development of Australian industries. It is regrettable that the Prime Minister preferred to occupy more time in criticising the actions and intentions of other people, such as he saw or interpreted them. I would remind honorable members of the wild promises of the Prime Minister before the last general elections. I have in mind particularly the payment of the solders’ gratuities. There- was unseemly bidding between the two old political parties concerning which would promise to give the most. The promises of both sides were that the soldiers should have their money, but without much regard to the manner in which it should be given them. The view taken by the Country party was that the Prime Minister should have considered very weightily the whole of the circumstances before making promises of cash payment. The Country party held that the gratuity should be distributed in such a way that the gift would prove of lasting advantage to the soldiers and to the country for whom they had fought. We proposed that they should be made shareholders in a huge national company, having a capital of £30,000,000, and that with that capital they should become the manufacturers and the merchants of the land for which they had fought. Thus, they would have had their gratuity in perpetuity. But the huge sum has been distributed to the soldiers in a manner which can only be described, at best, as thoughtless; and it has become as a handful of sand strewn upon a lawn - pick it up if you can ! The whole history of the gratuity reveals a sad lack of statesmanship on the part of the Prime Minister. As for my personal views upon this matter, I moved an amendment to enable the soldiers to do voluntarily what ought to have been compulsorily done for them, without any consideration of electioneering bidding with wild promises of cash.

Another of the electioneering cries heard during the last campaign was that rigid economy should be observed in the interests of the taxpayers. Upon an examination of the financial statements of the Government last year, one is confirmed in the view that there was absolutely no sincerity in such promises. The same must be said following an examination of the advance statement of the Treasurer (Mr. Bruce) last week, for there are stall no indications of the promised economies.

Mr Considine:

– That does not matter. The honorable member and his party will still go on supporting the Government.

Mr PROWSE:

– It would seem that certain honorable members are scared that I am about to move a vote of want of confidence. Another of the promises of the Prime Minister during the last election campaign was in the form of a sop to Labour sympathizers. The Prime Minister makes promises wide enough to take in the world, the flesh, and the devil. The right honorable gentleman desired to cause quite a number of Laibour supporters to be deflected from their adherence, and, therefore, he promised them the basic wage. The Prime Minister undertook to appoint a Commission to ascertain what was a reasonable basic wage for a man having a wife and three children. This Commission was subsequently sent forth to investigate. It examined a few of the facts, and then the Prime Minister was informed that if he carried out his promise the basic wage would ruin Australia. Such was the outcome of the Prime Minister’s electioneering promise - one which had been given without any consideration at all. The Prime Minister had to admit that he did not know how the recommendation of the Commission could be put into practical effect. A statesman would have known before ho made any such promise; and a statesman would, therefore, never have put the country to the expense of paying for the Commission. However, this business was merely in keeping with the methods of the right honorable gentleman in making promises to the public, and in using the taxpayers of the country to pay for those promises.

Mr Considine:

– Then why continue to support the Government?

Mr PROWSE:

– I am not supporting the Government.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– No ; the honorable member is merely making an electioneering speech.

Mr PROWSE:

– I only hope that it “ cuts some ice.” I am not making an electioneering speech; for what I am now saying is, to a large extent, a reiteration of what I said two years ago, when there was no election in view.

I warn the people of Australia to beware of the Prime Minister’s electioneering promises. One of those launched for the coming campaign has to do with a superannuation for the Public Service. We have in Australia to-day, in the States and Commonwealth combined, a Public Service numbering 248,000, and these officials are receiving in annual salaries £55,000,000. We are going to the bad financially. The balance-sheets of the Federation and of practically all the States are becoming more and more alarming. But an election is due, and the great army of Federal public servants is promised a Superannuation Bill. This latest promise of the Prime Minister is just another sop, and it is being proffered as hastily and with just as little consideration as were the other promises. Before the Public Service is granted a superannuation measure, one desires to be assured that a. fair return is being given for the huge salary bill. Is the Public Service rendering full and proper return? Is it necessary that Australia should be saddled with an annual payment of £55,000,000 ?

Mr Poynton:

– We do not pay so much.

Mr PROWSE:

– I am speaking of State and Commonwealth services combined. .Since the Postmaster-General, flit* honorable member for Grey (Mr. Poynton), has interjected, I desire to pay hi in a compliment. I am moved to do so, not because he has been doing much for my constituency of late. That is not the point. The Government have announced that it is their intention to make a real endeavour to bring the arrears of work associated with the postal services up to date. The House recognises that this is no party matter. ‘If we are to develop and produce in competition with other countries we must be able to take full advantage of the time-saving appliances which the ingenuity of. mau has devised; and the expenditure will be wise no matter what the conditions of the exchequer. These time-saving strings of intelligence must be extended to those people in the country who are creating wealth and adding to the peace and comfort of Australia; and the PostmasterGeneral has my commendation for his action in this regard. It does appear to me, however, that really the Prime Minister is “Hudhesing “ the people of this country. I hope that this session of Parliament will be occupied in giving consideration to those more weighty matters, such as economy, justice in. taxation, the extension of telephonic communication, and the removal of all obstacles in the way of development.

Mr Lister:

– Why not economize a little time!

Mr PROWSE:

– I do not think I am unwisely taking up th-? time of this Chamber in making these remarks. My anxiety is to at once deal with those questions which matter most. I was ashamed when I sat here at the close of last session; and, there being a Christmas feeling in “the House, Bills were brought in by the barrow-load and the clumsiest of work, without thought or consideration of their merits, bestowed on them. I was assured on mere than one occasion - for instance, in regard to the taxation assessment measure - that if there was much opposition the measure would be pitched under the table. I have ventured to speak at length in order to show! that I am prepared, if the Government and the House are prepared, to deal with those measures that will really assist the progress of the country. We have been here now nearly three weeks and have done nothing; and if I have occupied a fair amount of time this afternoon, what I have said will indicate that I, at any rate, mean business; if the Government does not mean business they know what to expect so far as I am con;cerned. I thank honorable members for their patience.

Mr GREENE:
Minister for Defence · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– We have had a long speech from the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Prowse), and I do not propose at this stage to reply to more than one of his observations; later on I may have occasion to refer more fully to it. I never listen to the lamentations of this modern Jeremiah but I am reminded of a story that was told about an old farmer friend of mine, whom I knew very well. He was noted throughout the countryside in which he lived for the characteristic that no matter what happened he always grumbled. If it rained, it rained too soon or too late, or there was a little teo much or a little too little. Another friend of mine went to see him one day when there was a wonderful season. His farm from end to end was an absolute picture of prosperity ; the crops were showing over all the fences, and nothing could be better than the prospect from his verandah. My friend said to him, “Well, what are you grumbling about to-day?” He was, of course, grumbling as usual; and when asked whether anything could be better than his crops, he replied, “ Ah ! but just look at what they are taking out of the ground.” ‘ When I hear the honorable member for Swan complaining about the income tax, I cannot help thinking that, probably, if the truth were known, it would be discovered that he is paying in income tax from the products of his land a sum which the average citizen would regard with envy if he could think that he was to receive it aa his annual income. And, further, the fact that the honorable gentleman has to pay this income tax is due, and due very largely, to the policy of this Government in supporting the primary producers of the country in obtaining the prices they have obtained, I shall have occasion later on in the course of my remarks to show those gentlemen in the corner, who are never tired of slandering this country, and who have been drawing their political lifeblood by their defamation of the country, that, considered in its broad aspects, there is not one scrap or iota of truth in what they are telling the public. The honorable member condemns the amending Income Tax Assessment Bill which was brought down in order to give effect to the averaging rate in income taxation, and his Leader (Dr. Earle Page) has gone throughout the length and breadth of Australia claiming credit for that very legislation.

Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · FSU; CP from 1920

– You put it on the statute-book.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– The honorable gentleman has claimed credit for this measure, though the credit does not belong to him, whoever it may belong to. The Government, before the last election, and before the Country party came into being, gave a definite promise, in the policy speech delivered in Bendigo, that, in regard to the anomalies which it waa admitted existed in connexion with direct taxation, in so far as that taxation affected primary producers, they would appoint a. Commission to inquire into these particular questions. No sooner was the Government returned to office than it set to work to form a Commission, and one of the very things in regard to which it was specially asked to report - I think the reference to the Commission was drawnup by the honorable member for Balaclava (Mr. Watt) - was the averaging of incomes in the case of primary production. For the Leader of the Country party, or anybody else, to claim that he originated this measure, or influenced the decision of the Government in any way, is altogether astray from the facts. One cannot help stating here that opinion amongst primary producers themselves - people whose experience goes back very many years) - is very divided as to the right way to deal with the question of direct taxation as it affects them. The honorable member for Swan says that he believesthat the averaging of the income is the best way, butthereare many producers who can show just as conclusive figures as he himselfhas shown that that plan is quite wrong. There are many who believe that the right way is to set profits against losses, and so arrive at a fair and equitable basis; and I may say that that is what I personally believe is the right course. However, the Commission was appointed, and gave the whole question the most exhaustive consideration, and the Government pledged themselves to act on their report.

Mr Watt:

– The Government did not pledge themselves to act on the Commission’s report.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– Not at the time the honorable gentleman is speaking of, but, through the mouth of the Treasurer at the opening of last session, the Government definitely promised that it would act on the report, of the features of which they had some knowledge, though the report itself might not actually be in their hands. That promise the Government kept.

Mr Fleming:

– By putting it five years ahead.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– The measure did not come into operation immediately, because it could not in respect of that year, although I think I am right when I say it will come into operation this year.

Mr Groom:

– It operates year by year.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– Quite so. I venture to say that if the Government were to suggest, now that prices have fallen, that we should take the average rateover the years when there were good prices, the honorable member for Robertson (Mr. Fleming) would be the first to object. We are picking up lee-way as we go along, and that is the only fair course in the circumstances.

I desire now to refer to a question raised by the honorable member for Moreton (Mr. Wienholt), who said that he is opposed to the proposal of the Government to subsidize the beef industry. He intimated that he thought the cattlemen were able to look after themselves - that they had experienced bad times before, and he considered that they had the pluck and the enterprise to stand up against the adverse conditions of to-day without assistance from the Government.

Mr Wienholt:

-He told the Government of means by which they could be assisted.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I am going to deal with the honorable member’s remedies and to show how utterly worthless they are to meet the existing situation. The honorable member suggested that the cattlemen were in a position to meet the present calamity - because it is a calamity - without any assistance from the Government. It is quite clear that the people he had in mind were not the small men, but the men with large resources of capital, with long-established cattle businesses, who had been in the trade for many years. Those were the men he had in mind, and I dare say that they can stand up against the losses, colossal although they have been, in many cases. But what about the small man who has only entered the industry within the last year or two? Is he in as good a position to cope with the situation as are the big squatters, who, apparently, were the only people that the honorable member had in mind? What about the small men who are struggling to get a start? Are the Government to stand by and to allow those men to be wiped out? If that is the honorable member’s idea of helping the man on the land it is not mine. It is not the view of the Government. We do not think that we should stand by and allow the small man practically to be wiped out so that the big man may reap the benefit. And that is exactly what would happen. If we allowed the small men to be wiped out the big cattlemen, whom the honorable member had in mind, would alone benefit. They would see the small men go to the wall and with asmile would step in and buy their stock for a mere song. That, I presume, is what the honorable member would like to happen.

Mr Wienholt:

– The Minister presumes wrongly.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– Let us come to the actual remedies suggested by the honorable member. He proposed first a reduction of taxation, and, secondly, a reduction of expenditure; thirdly, co-operation, and the improvement of the breed of stock. I am going to analyze one by one these three suggested remedies, and will show how far they could affect the existing position. Take the reduction of. expenditure, which the honorable member suggested should be to the tune of £14,000,000. I would ask the honorable member how he proposes to bring about such a reduction. We have to make provision for invalid and old-age pensions, war pensions, payments to the States, and interest on loans. All these are definite commitments from which there is no escape. I do not suppose the honorable member suggests that any. of them should be repudiated.

Mr Wienholt:

– I said the reduction should be both State and Federal.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I did not hearthe honorable member say anything about the States in this regard, but he urged a reduction to the extent of £14,000,000 per annum.

Mr Wienholt:

– State and Federal.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– Then I will consider the matter from that stand-point. Let us look at it, first of all, from the point of view of the Commonwealth. The Defence expenditure, I believe,has been absolutely cut to the bone. I do not think we could reduce it, with safety, to the extent of another penny. But setting aside the expenditure of the Postmaster-General’s Department and payments for services rendered, if we were to wipe out the whole of the remaining Departments of the Commonwealth twice over and refrain from spending a sixpence on them, we would not save £14,000,000 per annum, or anything like that amount.

Mr Pratten:

– The States could help the Commonwealth.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I shall come directly to the suggested reduction of taxation and the extents to which we could assist the cattlemen in that direction. For the time being I merely say that if the cattlemen had to rely upon a reduction of taxation to help them out of the present difficulty, then God pity them. Letus suppose, for the sake of argument, that it was possible by cutting in every direction to save £2,000,000 by way of direct taxation, then such a reduction, on a very liberal’ estimate, would help the cattlemen to the extent of only £100,000. I do not think it would be possible - cutting, and slashing here, there, and everywhere - to save more than £2,000,000 per annum by way of taxation.

Mr Poynton:

– Did the honorable member for Moreton show whore reductions could be made ?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– He did not.

Mr Watt:

– Would it be possible to save £2,000,000 by way of taxation?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I do not say that it would be. But supposing that we shut down on expenditure in very many directions in respect of which it would be possible, but most injudicious, to close down, and thai we might be able to reduce taxation by £2,000,000 per annum, then the utmost benefit which could accrue to the cattlemen alone from such a saving would be, o according to a very liberal estimate, about £100,000.

Mr Pratten:

– Would not that figure almost equal the proposed subsidy to the cattlemen?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I shall show presently what a vast difference there is between the proposals of the honorable member for Moreton and what we are proposing to do in the way of assisting the cattlemen. I want, first of all, to examine his remedies.

Mr Watt:

– How does, the honorable gentleman arrive at his estimate of £100,000, which is 5 per cent, on the estimated saving of £2,000,000? Has he any basis for it?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I took as a basis- I do not know whether it was right or wrong - the total figures in respect of production. I then took the figures as to the production of meat in arriving at the proportion between the £2,000,000 and the £100,000.

Mr Watt:

– That is very fallacious, because cattlemen in a large way of business pay at a very high rate.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– There ‘ must be a number of people in a large way of business in all avocations who pay at a very high rate, so the honorable member’s argument does not hold water. The saving to the cattlemen worked out, as I have said, at 5 per cent.; and I do not think a reduction of taxation by £2,000,000 per annum, would represent a saving of more than £100,000 to the cattlemen alone. The suggestion made by the honorable member for Moreton that there should be a reduction of expenditure, brings’ me to the question of whether we can look in the near future to a reduction of taxation. I agree with the honorable member that we should do our utmost to get the people on the land. I am thoroughly in accord with ‘him in that regard. I do not think any man has been more earnest than. I have been in my endeavours, in public life, to assist primary production. Primary production I believe to be one of the great essentials to Australia’s prosperity. But what is the position to-day in regard to land settlement? What is the trouble that we fmd in all the closely settled areas? Is not the price of land the chief obstacle in the way of the farmer. Is not the high price of land the greatest handicap under which the farmer labours to-day?

Mr Fleming:

– It is one of the difficulties.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– All who know anything about primary production and the view of the small man will admit that the great trouble is the high price of land. If the farmer could only get his land at one-half or one-third of the price at which it is available to-day he would be much better off. The whole trouble in this regard arises from the fact that the area of land available in those parts of Australia where there are facilities for primary production on a small scale is not equal to the demand. Proof of that statement is to be found in the constantly soaring price of land. What is the use of the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Prowse) telling me that people will not go on the land when I know that if a block of land in any of the privileged parts of Australia, where there is a. large rainfall, is thrown open for selection, there is not one applicant, but often hundreds apply for it. Every honorable member knows that that is true. There are hundreds of applicants for every block of land that is thrown open in any of the privileged parts of Australia where there is a sufficient rainfall and facilities for getting one’s produce to market. It is idle for any one to tell me that the people will not go on the land. People are going in for land settlement. The trouble does not arise from the causes which have been suggested by the honorable member, nor does it arise from lack of suitable areas capable of carrying a closely settled rural population. There is land in abundance in this great country. I could take honorable members to magnificent country, the equal of which I do not believe is to be found in Victoria, but a man could not live on less than about 2,000 acres of it. The reason is that it is far back, and lacks facilities for getting to market the produce which it is so eminently fitted to grow. The difficulty of getting produce to market from such, a district is so great that any one who has attempted farming on a small scale there has found it impossible to carry on. There are in Australia vast areas of such country, and it can be opened up only by the expenditure of money and, in many cases, by the expenditure of much money. If we are going to say that taxation must be reduced - that those who have these facilities to-day, those who have enjoyed all the privileges of the past - are not to help to open up the country, what will happen ? If we are to stop the work of developing this country by building more railways, opening up great irrigation schemes, establishing telephone and telegraph services, and providing all the facilities of roads and bridges and reasonable means of communication, we might as well give up at once attempts to promote settlement. Notwithstanding the great burdens resting on our people, we must, in the interests of our national progress and national safety, press on with the work of development even if it means that whilst practising economy wherever practicable we cannot in the meantime lighten the load of taxation. “

Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · FSU; CP from 1920

– Why not encourage private enterprise to do something when it is willing to engage in such schemes as the Gorge scheme?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– The honorable member knows that I have given him some assistance with that scheme, but it was one that would not have put another man on the land unless we also provided railways and roads and other facilities.

In passing, I wish to refer to the question of immigration. I believe that unless we can get immigrants the safety of Australia in the future might be in a very parlous position. I believe we must have immigration side by side with the development of the country by the people who are already in Australia, and that wc must be prepared to press on with a scheme that will put people on the land. The Commonwealth Government have taken up the attitude that tho task of putting people who are in Australia, the citizens of this country, on the land is the responsibility of the States, and that it is the work of the Commonwealth to assist the States in regard to works which are necessary to open up the country on which immigrants are to be placed. That is the division of responsibility. The Commonwealth Government believes that it should press on with a scheme of assisted immigration and with a scheme of helping those States who are willing to place immigrants on the land. But it will not advance money to any State unless, firstly it is satisfied that the land is available and suitable, secondly, it approves of the works upon which the States spend the money provided or raised by the Commonwealth, and, thirdly, it is further satisfied that the State’s scheme will provide work for the immigrant on the actual land upon which he will have the right to a block after the first year’s service.

Mr Gibson:

– What have the Government advanced the States up to the present?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– We have not yet been able to complete an agreement with any State except Western Australia. . We hope that in the near future that agreement will be ready for signature by the State, the Commonwealth, and the Imperial Government. The Commonwealth are also in negotiation with Victoria and New South Wales for an extension of the Western Australian scheme, which, I believe, is a perfectly sound one, and likely to produce excellent results.

Now I come to the other two points raised by the honorable member for Moreton (Mr. Wienholt). We have seen that his hope for large reduced expenditure, if we are to press on with the development of the Commonwealth in an adequate way, cannot be realized. Expenditure may be reduced a little, but not very much. If we are to press on with the work of development, we cannot expect very much reduction of taxation. The honorable member’s second proposal was that cooperation should be extended. Long before any of the honorable members of the Country party thought of politics, and particularly of using the primary producers as a means of getting them into Parliament, I was at work among the primary producers helping a scheme of co-operation. No one has been a greater friend of this principle than I have been. I have lived through the experience of what the application of it means to the primary producer. I remember that when I was first interested in co-operation I was getting 1¾d. per gallon for my milk, and I know how many years it took before we got any real benefit out of the movement. I applaud the honorable member on his conversion to cooperative ideals. It is one of those things in which I thoroughly believe, and which I realize will prove one of the greatest possible aids to the primary producers of this country. But there is a long row to hoe. It will be many days before the honorable member, if he preaches the gospel of co-operation to his cattle friends in Queensland, will be able to get them into line.

Mr Wienholt:

– Why?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I am simply telling the honorable member what my own experience has been. It has taken a long time to get dairying people into line in co-operation, and it will take an equally long time to get the cattlemen of Queensland into line. In this instance, it will not .be simply a question of finding £10,000 or £12,000 among seventy or eighty dairymen. It will be a matter of finding millions of pounds to set up cooperative meat works for the purpose of dealing with the exportable beef of this country. What will be the use of purchasing works in Brisbane to help the cattle-owners north of Townsville?

Mr Wienholt:

– I suggested that there should be three works.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– Exactly. It will be necessary to get three works, and .also all the finance which will enable the cattle to be got into those works and sent overseas. It will be a colossal task, and will involve the raising of a vast sum of money. I do not know whether the honorable member is prepared to go up north and preach his gospel to the cattleowners of Queensland, together with the gospel he has preached here in opposition to the payment of the bonus which these very men have asked the Government to give them in their desperate need.

Now let me deal with the last and remaining remedy suggested by the honorable member for Wide Bay, that is, to improve the breed of cattle. Here I am at one with the honorable member. I agree that we can still do a great deal to raise the standard of our beef cattle. But I ask the honorable member, who knows something about the matter, how long it will take to produce the necessary sires to have any real material effect upon the improvement of the breed as a whole in this country? One herd, two herds, or three herds, could be dealt with easily; but when it is a matter of applying the improvement to the whole industry, the production of the sires alone would mean a life-time’s work, and even when we have the sires, any one who knows anything about cattle-breeding will realize, as I am sure the honorable member must, that the disappointments are almost as many as the good results. It would be a long, long process, and very many years would elapse before any real improvement could be effected.

Mr Wienholt:

– That is all the more reason for making an immediate start.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I agree with the honorable member; but what would be the use of his proposal when dealing with the problem that confronted the Government? It was an immediate problem. It was not one that could be dealt with in the dim and distant future, or one that could be assisted by building up cooperative enterprise or improving the breed of cattle. Those steps would not have benefited the cattlemen of Queensland in the dilemma in which they found themselves, nor would the reduction of taxation have helped them in the very least. There were thousands, tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of fat cattle in Queensland for which there was no market. It was impossible to export them. It did not pay to drove them to the ports to ship them to the markets in the southern States. There they were, these fat cattle that could not be shipped, and for which their owners could find no market. What would have been the value of the honorable member’s remedy in those circumstances? Would the reduction of taxation of £100,000 have shifted one hoof from the cattle stations? When cattle have been fed and are prime, there is an economic loss to tho country if they are not shipped, because when they pass their prime they promptly lose their value. The Government’s remedy was to try to give these people all the benefit we could. We called into our councils the cattle-men themselves, the shipping people, those who were in control of the meat works and the men engaged in the works. We said that if they would all agree among themselves, the ship-owners to give a reduction of £d. per lb., the managers qf the meat works to cut down their charges by Jd. per lb., and the employees to cut down their wages by Jd. per lb., the Government would give a subsidy of Jd. per lb., and thus make the advantage to tha cattle-owners Id. per lb. The immediate result was that the meat works started operations again.

Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · FSU; CP from 1920

– How many meat works ?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– The Minister for Trade and Customs (Mr. Rodgers) tells me that the bulk of them actually commenced, work. I am sorry to say that as a result of the season in Queensland failing to some extent, the number of cattle treated will not be as many as we anticipated. Nevertheless, the action taken by the Government has given very material relief to men who were in a desperate position. They are very grateful for what the Government have done. But the benefit is not confined to them. As the honorable member knows well, the fact that, these fat cattle could not be sold had a depressing effect on the whole market, upon the price of weaners, stores, cows, and breeders - right down the line; but when the Government got this “ top hamper “ moving off, the result was an immediate improvement in the market all round. Therefore, it was not merely a question of the Government giving a subsidy of £200,000 that meant a benefit of £800,000 to the cattlemen of Queensland. All the other cattle-owners iri Australia benefited to some extent.

Mr Watt:

– How long does the subsidy last ?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– For this season only. Dr. Earle Page. - How much has been paid?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– At the moment I cannot say what the position is, but the fact is that the undertaking of the Government to give this help has been of immense assistance to the cattlemen, and I believe that they are grateful for it.

Mr Maxwell:

– If they have a good, year, will they pay back the money ?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I should not ask them to do that.

I propose to deal further with the speech delivered by the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Prowse), and with some remarks made by the honorable, member for Robertson (Mr. Fleming). They were typical of the speeches which have been delivered all over Australia by,’ I think, every honorable member of the Country party, with the exception probably of the honorable members for

Maranoa (Mr. Hunter), Moreton (Mr. Wienholt), and New England (Mr. Hay). From most of the other honorable members of the Country party, including the Leader (Dr. Earle Page), we have heard a continuous wail about the parlous condition of the primary industries of this country. It has been said, not once, but many times, by the honorable member for Cowper, his Deputy Leader (Mr. Fleming), and the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Prowse), that primary production is decreasing, that people! are going off the land, and that everything affecting the interests of ‘the primary producers is in as bad a state as it can be. The Leader of the Country party said the other day that the net result of the advent of the present Government to office was a decrease of 11 per cent, in the total primary production of this country. I shall deal by-and-by with those figures, and quote others which, I think, will show that the honorable member has never given to this question one minute’s consideration, and that he does not care “ tuppence” about the primary, producer, except as a stick with which to flog the Government. He does not know anything about the condition of the primary industries, if one may judge by nine-tenths of the speeches that he delivers. Honorable members in the corner are never tired of saying that they desire people to go upon the land. One gentleman who listened to the Leader of the Country party and his Deputy in Adelaide recently told me something of the tenor of their speeches. There they were, he said, praying for people to go upon the land, and, at the same time, painting a. picture of the condition of the man upon the land which would frighten any individual from ever aspiring to a rural existence. That is what those honorable members have been doing, from one end of Australia to the other. I would not so much, mind such tactics if the picture they drew were true, but, as I shall show directly, it is the very opposite to a true representation of the condition of primary production in this country.

Mr Brennan:

– The Minister’s’ own speech is not very cheering.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– At any rate, I shall finish more cheerfully. The honorable member for Robertson seemed the other day to exhibit almost a fiendish joy at the fact that the great steel industry at Newcastle was not progressing. We all know what are the causes of the temporary eclipse - I believe it is purely temporary - of that industry at the present time. But I say with all earnestness that unless it does prosper in the near future God help this country if it is ever called upon to defend itself.

Mr Watt:

– What are the causes?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I think they are purely economic, but I do not wish to be led into a long discussion of them at this stage. The honorable member for Robertson complained . about increased taxation, which he seemed to regard as peculiarly the siu of the present Government. I remind him that, with the exception of one taxation Bill, which passed through une House in his absence - he was doing his duty nobly elsewhere - lie voted for every increase that was submitted.

Mr Fleming:

– But the Government have placed a Tariff on top of that taxation, and destroyed the whole scheme.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– That excuse will not serve. The honorable member was not complaining about the Tariff when he was speaking; he was complaining about the incidence of direct taxation, and I am reminding him that, with one exception, he voted for every increase.

We have heard a good deal of complaint about the drift of population from the country to the city. I do not propose to follow in detail the absurd comparison put forward by the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Prowse) between the populations of European and Australian capitals in proportion to the total populations of their respective countries. He compared one city in Australia with London. Everybody knows that Glasgow, Liverpool, and Birmingham are infinitely 3 greater than any one of our Australian cities.

Mr Prowse:

– I compared the population of capital cities.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– That comparison as a.n argument will hold no more water than does a sieve. We are all aware that the drift of population to the metropolitan ai-eas is a world-wide’ problem, and that its causes are mainly economic. One of the chief factors which has led to the establishment of great cities, the drift of population thither, and the abandonment of many country centres cf industry, has been the fact that the .economic condi tions under which industry is carried on to-day make it absolutely necessary to have massed production. The oldfashioned order by which -a local manufacturer worked a small plant with a few workmen has passed. We must to-day go in for mass production, and that leads to the accumulation of people about the cities. In addition, Australia has. peculiar topographical features which, of themselves, do> very much to cause the drift of population towards the coastline. That is one factor that we cannot overcome. -Bit I join issue with honorable members in the “corner when they talk about the deserted homesteads of this country.

Mr Fleming:

– Does the Minister say that there are none ?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I do not. But where do we find the people who have deserted those homesteads’? Living in the city upon the losses they made upon the land - I suppose they still own the land which they have deserted. Between Toorak and Brighton I could point to scores and hundreds of homes belonging to people who derive practically all their income from the land. There is not an honorable member who does not know that one of the causes of the increase’ of population in the cities during the last few years has been the fact that to a large extent the old squatting life has passed away, and those people who used to live upon their homesteads, with their families- about them, are to-day to be found in every fashionable suburb of the great cities to which the honorable member referred.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– Does the Minister say that that fact accounts for the increase of the population about the cities ?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– It is one of the causes, and honorable members themselves are not free from blame in that respect. A little while ago we heard the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Prowse) bewailing the terrible conditions of the man upon the laud. Why is it that his home is in one of the fashionable suburbs of Perth? And why do we find the mansion home of the honorable member for Grampians (Mr. Jowett) in Toorak? I could mention similar facts regarding other honor- able members. No sooner did the Leader of the Country party (Dr. Earle Page) enter this Parliament than his name-plate was placed with those of many other doctors in Macquarie-street, Sydney. Honorable members talk about the drift to the cities, but they know that these things of which I am speaking are perfectly true. When they compare the rural population to-day with that of a few years ago, and when they talk about the decline of agriculture, I suggest to them that they should analyze the figures, and try to arrive at the real causes. I wonder if they have ever given any attention to mining?

Mr Mcwilliams:

– Unfortunately, 1 have. »

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– Then the honorable member knows something about the matter. This is what the Commonwealth Statistician tells me about mining and the people engaged in that rural industry. It is a rural industry; the shafts and poppet-heads of the great mines are not to be found about the cities, but are scattered throughout the length and breadth of the Commonwealth. - The Commonwealth Statistician, informs me that during the decade from the financial year 1910-11 to 1920-21, which provides the latest figures available, there has been a reduction in the number of workers in gold mining amounting to 32,S12. In silver mining during the same period there has been a diminution of 7,077 workers; in copper, of 6,164; and in tin, of 1,816, employees. The full particulars having to do with minerals are set forth in the following table : -

Mr. Pratten Has the Minister the figures for coal?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I have not got those. I am dealing with tho widelyscattered metalliferous mining undertakings throughout Australia. Now, looking upon those 47,869 workers as having families each numbering three - which is a conservative estimate - and taking into consideration also those who minister to the needs of those miners’ families, together with their own families, estimated to number, in all, 67,000, one arrives at a total diminution of 258,476 persons, or 5 per cent, of the population of Australia. What would have been the position if mining had held its own, or, indeed, if there had been an increase in the number of workers engaged? What would have been the balance compared with those engaged in rural industries?

Mr McWilliams:

– Most of those miners - at any rate, those engaged in Victoria - were living in cities such as Ballarat and Bendigo. They have not come to Melbourne.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– They have either drifted to the capital cities or they are on the land. I am dealing with the populations of the chief cities as against the numbers in the country.

Mr Watt:

– A good deal of that mining population was essentially urban. The workers would be largely concentrated at such places as Ballarat, Bendigo, and Broken Hill. .

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I repeat that I am taking, for the purposes of my statistical comparisons, the chief cities as against the country at large; and I wish to emphasize that there are certain facts which honorable members of the Country party have either lost sight of, or have deliberately covered up.

Mr.fleming. - Census returns for New South Wales show that districts in which there is no mining have lost population in just the same ratio.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I cannot help what the census returns may show. I have the latest available figures, direct from the Commonwealth Statistician. Whatever may be said concerning the decrease in agriculture, both with respect to quantity and area cultivated, I emphasize that honorable members of the Country party are in this matter entirely and absolutely in the wrong.

Mr Watt:

– Why did the Minister select the decade from 1910-11 to 1920-21?

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I simply took what I considered would be a fair and reasonable period, covering ten years.

Mr Watt:

– The figures circulated by the Government include the immediate pre-war and post-war periods.

Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– I desired to be furnished by the Commonwealth Statistician with particulars concerning the decade mentioned as providing a fair criterion concerning whether Australia was progressing or going back. And I think that the method and the period dealt with form as faira means of tackling the problem as may be devised.

I shall now present complete figures having to do with dairy produce. In doing so I have to state that certain of the statistics do not entirely agree with the figures published in theCommonwealth *Year-Book.* {: .speaker-KYI} ##### Mr Prowse: -- Why not accept the *Year-Book?* {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- The particulars do not differ materially. There are some slight discrepancies, but the Commonwealth Statistician informs me that those provided here are the corrected details. Any discrepancies as between the figures published in theYear-Book and provided now, at my request, are such that they will not affect or disturb by one iota the argument which I am placing before the House. The differences are merely fractional, and have no considerable bearing upon the real state of affairs. I present the following tables having to do with the activities just mentioned: - {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · FSU; CP from 1920 -- In connexion with the particulars of dairy produce, can the Minister furnish the total number of dairy cows? {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- I do not know whether the. number was. more or less at the end of the decade. The table which I have just furnished deals with results. {: .speaker-JUV} ##### Mr McWilliams: -- I have before me a. pamphlet which contains the statistics issued only a few months ago; Why should the figures be enormously different? Why should the same officials provide Parliament and the public with two entirely different sets of statistics? {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- I have already emphasized that the Commonwealth Statistician has supplied me direct with the very latest particulars available. It is the matter of values, after all, which counts in the final consideration. If there had been an increase of production equalling 50 per cent. - as there has been in respect of some classes of produce - and there had. been at the same time a decrease in value, obviously primary producers would be worse off rather than in a better position. But the actual story is entirely different. In 1910-11 the total value of the- dairy produce throughout Australia was £10,615,268. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · FSU; CP from 1920 -- What was butter worth a pound ? {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- Precious little. In 1920-21 - as the tables show - producers received a total return of £36,973,670- an increase in actual value equivalent to 257 per cent. If the position of the man on the land to-day is altogether calamitous - as one might be led to believe - what must have been the position of primary producers in 1910-11? Honorable members of the Country party say there are fewer primary producers on the soil to-day. I do not admit that. They tell us> further, that producers are not doing as well as ten years ago. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · FSU; CP from 1920 -- I am a primary producer myself, and, unfortunately, I am not doing as well. {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- Then the honorable member must be managing his private affairs very badly. I now present a table dealing with agricultural production - It is when one deals with the aggregate covering those various lines ot agricultural production that the wonder- ful progress of Australia during the decade under review is revealed. It took Australia all the years from her first occupation to- reach the figures of 1910-11, and in the decade covered by that table there has been the greatest permanent development the country has ever seen. Let those honorable gentlemen who tell us that the country is " going to the dogs,"' and men are being driven off the land, meet those figures if they can. They are so obsessed with the idea that this Government is damning the man. on the land that they do not care how they defame this country;, and, in face of the facts, it is nothing short of criminal to send overseas the statements they do. If they had the slightest patriotism - if they had the slightest desire to see- Australia prosper and to see immigrants coming here - they would tell the true tale instead of spreading this wretched, scandalous libel broadcast over the world. The true facts and figures are sufficient to bring immigrants flocking to our shores. Now let us leave the matter of acreage and deal with values. {: .speaker-KXG} ##### Mr Watt: -- The period covered by these figures, embraces seven years bef ore this Government came into office in 1917; has the honorable gentleman the figures for 1917 to 1921? {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- I have not. The figures as to values only show how little the honorable members in the corner really understand what they are talking about. This increase in values lias been in progress whilst this Government has been, in office, and it is very largely owing to the policy of the Government which, with- the credit of the whole State, has backed' up the big co-operative movements. This is the reason why the honorable member for Swan **(Mr. Prowse)** has to pay so much income tax; it is because the Government have stood' behind the primary producers' with the whole credit of the State- that we have had this wonderful' time- such as we had never known in our history. In the de- cade under review the primary producers' receipts showed an increase of approximately 225 per cent. I cannot help wondering why those gentlemen in the corner do not tell these facts to the farmers, for, after all, they only represent the truth. {: .speaker-K1J} ##### Mr Pratten: -- Those figures are not in the *Year-Book,* you know. {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- The corrected figures for 1920-21 are not in the latest *Year-Book* published, but the figures I have given, within a few pounds one way or the other, are there. I adjure the honorable member for Cowper **(Dr. Earle Page),** the honorable member for Robertson **(Mr. Fleming),** and their friends to go throughout Australia and tell the people this true story of primary production here. I venture to say that *it* that story were spread broadcast, by them it would bring a large additional stream of immigration and do the country a real service. The following table shows the position in relation to fruit: - The increase in the acreage in fresh fruit is one of 50 per cent., the highest of any primary product in the time. As every one knows, an orchard does not come into bearing immediately. {: .speaker-KFC} ##### Mr Fleming: -- We know that to our cost! {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- Nevertheless, there has been this additional acreage planted. If the acreage had all come into bearing at the time, we should have seen in actual values results as good in the case of fruit as in the case of any other product; in any event, the figures show wonderful progress. Unfortunately, the Statistician is unable to give the quantities of fresh fruit produced. {: .speaker-JUV} ##### Mr McWilliams: -- How are these values arrived at? {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- I cannot tell you; all I know is that I am supplied with these figures.The honorable member might just as well ask the members of the Country party where they get their figures. I also regret that the Statistician cannot give me the values of " other dried fruits." {: .speaker-KXG} ##### Mr Watt: -- Does the fresh fruit include jam fruit? {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- No; but the figures for jam are given in the table, and in their case there is an enormous increase of £1 ,787,261. I have purposely left out of my calculations the pastoral industry, not because it is hot of vast importance, but because of the fact that what I believe we wish to see, and what we inevitably shall see, in this country is a gradual reduction of the pastoral industry in favour of the smaller primary industries. {: .speaker-KFC} ##### Mr Fleming: -- They can grow side by side. {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- Yes; but the final development to which we are stretching forward - the real progress and prosperity of Australia - must depend upon the advance and prosperity of its yeomanry. It is the small man, the farmer, the dairyman, the small grazier, the fruit-grower, and their kind, upon whom ultimately Australia must rest for her great production from primary industry, and it is only by the encouragement of, not the large, but the small man, that we can secure that close rural population which Australia requires and desires. As long as there are great pastoral areas, as long as land fit for agriculture is held in pastoral areas, and the facilities for opening up such country and putting small men upon it are withheld, we can never have a big rural population . It is by means only of the industries to which I have been referring that we can hope to secure that result. I propose now to group together these three industries, in so far as the values of their production between 1910-11 and. 1920-21 are concerned. Here are the figures - Here we have the story in its most concrete form. In 1910 the value of the products of these three industries iu Australia was £4.5,532,673. That was the total reward which this great body of primary producers received in that year. Pot the year 1920-21, however, their total reward was no- less than £145,349,829, showing an increase of £99,817,176, or approximately 225 per cent., in tlie actual reward which the primary producers over that great field of production secured. {: .speaker-KYI} ##### Mr Prowse: -- The honorable gentleman knows that that is not a fair basis. {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- That is the story I have to tell, and it is a true one. The honorable member knows that it is in almost every respect a true reflex of the state of primary production in Australia. I am not going to say that the life of the man on the land is an easy one. It is a hard one. Unless a man has a natural bent for life on the land he had better not go in for it. Unless he delights in improving natural conditions and conquering them, unless he has the peculiar characteristics, which, *prima* *facie,* fit him for the laud, he had much better leave the land alone. I say, however, with all confidence, that the man who goes on the land to-day provided that he has the facilities for getting his products to market, and provided also that he knows how to use the land, and is prepared to work hard, can make a. competence, aye, and more than a competence, in this great country of ours. I do not believe that the picture which honorable members of the Country party have drawn is a true one. If it were, I would despair of the future of Australia. I know, however, that the picture which these honorable members draw - the picture of a land of drought, and flood, and fire, and dingoes, and other pests, is an entirely false one, and is doing incalculable harm to this country. That is why I have taken the trouble this afternoon to tell this story to the House and the country, believing that the telling of it will be to the benefit qf Australia. *Sitting suspended, front 6.27 to 8.15 p.m.* {: #subdebate-28-0-s2 .speaker-K6S} ##### Mr CORSER:
Wide Bay .- Every honorable member should be grateful to the Minister for Defence **(Mr. Greene)** for his able account of many matters adversely criticised in this House. I think that our friends of the Country party are sometimes carried away by their desire to criticise the Ministry. When I sat in the State House in Queensland, 1. took up for a long while the position of being a Country party member within the ranks of the Liberal party, and I am perfectly satisfied that those associated with ure in that Parliament were able to do a great deal to assist in the development of the large areas of land in Queensland suitable for settlement. There is now a Country party in that State, and I agree with most of their aims, but they are merely following the footsteps of those with whom I was associated in the Liberal party in the State House, with this exception, perhaps, that they are sectional in their attitude. I do not find fault with them on broad lines, because they are no doubt endeavouring to do their best to assist in the development of their State, which contains as much as 421,000,000 acres of land. Our friends in the corner say that no arrangement has been made to assist the primary producers, of whom they claim to be the representatives; but no one in this House has ever attacked the primary productions of Queensland as the so-called primary producers' representatives have done on occasions. {: .speaker-JUV} ##### Mr McWilliams: -- Why was not the honorable member at the meeting in the Assembly Hall on Monday night last? {: .speaker-K6S} ##### Mr CORSER: -- No one has been a more bitter opponent in this House of the sugar industry 'than has the honorable member for Franklin, as reference to *Hansard* will prove. In regard to the question of growing produce by white, instead of black, labour, those of us who advocated the interests of the white growers of bananas in Queensland and New South Wales were opposed by some of our friends of the primary producers or of the Country party, several of whom also opposed the white production of maize, while others voted against the attempt to give protection to another primary production of Queensland, namely, timber. I cannot understand honorable members professing to be representatives of the primary producers' interests voting against them when the producers concerned were not resident in their own States. Even if honorable members are in disagreement with me, I could give them credit for sincerity if they were only consistent, but I certainly cannot congratulate the members of the Country party in this House upon having displayed much sincerity in the past for the primary producers of the Commonwealth and their interests. Very few men would have undertaken the arduous trip the Prime Minister **(Mr. Hughes)** has recently had at the request of the representatives of the primary producers of Queensland in this House that he should see the great sugar industry for himself. We asked him for no pledges. We simply asked him to lay before his Cabinet what he saw and heard and then come down to this House with his policy. Our attitude was quite fair and only in accordance with the fairness the producers of the northern States have always shown. When Federation was first inaugurated they received pledges from all sections of the Commonwealth Parliament to the effect that if they would do away with coloured labour and adopt the White Australia policy they would be safeguarded to the extent of the difference between the cost of sugar produced' all over the world by black labour and the extra cost of production by white labour in Australia. We are the only people in the world who are producing cane sugar by white labour. But what sympathy have we had ? The honorable member for Franklin **(Mr. Mcwilliams),** who was formerly leader of the so-called Producers party, was the bitterest opponent of sugar-growing in Quensland. He wanted the Government to respect the agreement to give Tasmania about £90,000 per annum; but he was opposed to the fulfilment of the agreement to impose protective duties sufficient to enable the sugar-growers of Queensland to carry on their industry. Speaking as a business man of fifty years' standing, I think that we ought to congratulate ourselves on the fact that we have an able Treasurer in the person of the honorable member for Flinders **(Mr. Bruce),** and I cannot understand why the Country party and press in Victoria should criticise him so adversely for things for which he has been in no way responsible. {: .speaker-KYI} ##### Mr Prowse: -- Who is responsible? {: .speaker-K6S} ##### Mr CORSER: -- Not the man who has to carry out duties imposed upon him, and has no say in regard to them. The responsibility rests upon the whole of this Parliament, which authorized the expenditure the Treasurer has had to incurthrough the various Departments. He was handed his Budget after it had been in existence for months, and had to carry it out in accordance with what had been arranged by his predecessor **(Sir Joseph Cook).** No one seems to give him credit for the work he has done, nor can any one say that the extra unanticipated expenditure of at least £1,166,950, which I shall itemize, could have been interfered with in the slightest degree. There was, for instance, the expenditure of £32,500 upon the settlement of the South African claim for 1 flour. This was an unavoidable payment that had not been put forward when the Budget was delivered. The item of £14,500, Australia's contribution to the cost of the League of Nations, was a liability no one knew about when the Budget was prepared. A sum of £5,500 represents the excess cost of the Taxation Commission, which was authorized by this House. Do honorable members criticise the payment of the £8,500 which represented the expenses of the delegation to Washington? Can they say that this expenditure should not have been undertaken? Belated payments to New" South Wales for distress occasioned by the maritime strike accounted for £4,450, which the Treasurer .could not refuse to honour. Nor could he do otherwise than spend the £49,000 authorized by this Parliament to relieve distress in "Europe. A sum of £12,000 was spent in the maintenance of persons in charitable - institutions. Do honorable members claim that we have no right to meet that obligation? There was a clamour for more and more assistance to the needy, and yet the Treasurer has been adversely criticised for carrying out an obligation of that kind. Neither could he avoid paying the £26,000 increased cost of coinage. A sum of £96,000 was paid for the investigation and purchase of the British Government's interests in the New Guinea oil explorations. The House authorized that expenditure, and it had to be met. There were items, however, which did not appear on the Estimates as passed by -the House, but were nevertheless obligations the Treasurer had to meet. For instance, the increased cost of the Health Department was £35,500; but honorable members are aware that in the latter part of the financial year, when bubonic plague was prevalent, very stringent precautious had to be taken to keep it out of Victoria. Does the Victorian press complain of that particular expenditure? Again, the anticipated expenditure on the payment of invalid and old-age pensions and the maternity allowance was exceeded by £100,000. This was another obligation that had to be met. Is the Treasurer to be held responsible because he fulfilled it ? The next item on my list is a sum of £25,000, which was advanced to returned soldiers for their woollen mills at Geelong. That was a matter authorized by Parliament at the tail end of last session, and the money had to be found by the Treasurer. Another increase in expenditure that had to be met was £378,000 for war pensions. The last item on my list is a sum of £380.000, representing the extra cost of the administration of the Post and Telegraph Department. We have long agitated to secure a better set of conditions for the people outback, so that we may offer greater inducements to the immigrants whom we hope to bring from the Mother Country. The greatest encouragement we can give to immigration will be to make it possible for those who settle in the back-blocks to enjoy something like reasonable comfort and opportunities foi- intercourse with their fellows. The items I have mentioned total £1,166,950. I like to give credit where credit is due, and I resent the attitude of the Victorian press and some members who ought to- know better than to slander a man on account .of a state of affairs for which he cannot rightly be held responsible. In regard to the injustice of which I am about to speak, I do not hold the present Minister for Trade and Customs **(Mr. Rodgers)** responsible, because the Tariff was disposed of before he took control of the Trade and Customs Department. On my arrival in Melbourne from Queensland, I discovered to my surprise that black-grown maize was being imported from South Africa at the low duty of ls. per cental. On 19th May, 1921, when the Tariff was before us, I proposed *(Ronsard,* page 8547) that the duty on maize should be, British preferential, 3s. ; and intermediate and general, 3s. 6d. ; or about 9d. per cental more than was proposed by the Minister, and I explained that my reason for proposing the increase was the large production of maize in South Africa and India by black labour, and that South Africa was receiving most favorable preferential treatment. The then Minister for Trade and Customs **(Mr. Greene)** informed the Committee that when the Tariff was passed the preference would be withdrawn. We therefore imposed a high protective' duty on the by-products of maize, in the belief that, through the protection of maize, the Australian grower would secure the local market. For instance, we imposed a duty of £12 per ton on glucose, but this duty has proved to be not for the benefit of the white Australian grower, but for the benefit of people in South Africa who produce maize by black labour. The then Minister said (Hansard, page 8551) that the duty he proposed was 100 per cent. higher than that on the product of South Africa, from which country the greater part of the imported maize came. The duty on maize in the South African preferential Tariff was ls. per cental; but the Tariff schedule proposed that the duty should be 2s., and there the Government proposed to leave it. In answer to my question as to whether that would mean that South Africa would have to pay the same protective duty as any other country in the world the Minister answered " Yes." On 8th July, 1921 (Hansard, page 9875), the Minister and **Sir Joseph** Cook were ordered to prepare and bring in a Bill to carry out the resolutions of the Committee. The Tariff Bill was at once introduced and passed through all stages. When it was before the Senate, **Senator Guthrie** moved on 4th August, 1921 (Hansard *,* page 10755), nhat the House of Representatives be requested to make the duties on maize, intermediate, 2s. 6d. : and general, 3s. Gd., per cental. That proposal was somewhat on the lines of the amendment which I had submitted in this House. **Senator Guthrie** pointed out that the annual production of maize in Australia averaged between 8,000,000 and 9,000,000 bushels, and that grown by black labour in India was about 80,000,000 bushels, and that in South Africa 34,000,000 bushels. **Senator Russell,** who was in charge of the Tariff at that time, said that the real trouble of the maize -growers was caused by the reciprocal Tariff arrangements with South Africa under which maize could be imported at ls. per cental; that maize was grown by black labour. " We are not going to repeat our mistake," he said. " Under the present Tariff all imported maize will have to pay 2s. per cental." The Senate agreed to **Senator Guthrie's** request that the intermediate duty should be 2s. 6d., and the general duty 3s. 6d. When the Senate's requests were before this Chamber, the then Minister for Trade and Customs **(Mr. Greene)** moved, on 13th October, that the Senate's requested amendment be made. That motion was agreed to (Hansard, page 11969). Thus both Houses had agreed to impose the duty proposed by **Senator** Guthrie. On pages11939-11940 the Minister for Trade and Customs moved that the request of the Senate for the repeal of the South African Preference Tariff be agreed to, and said that the reciprocal Tariff with South Africa would terminate with the assent to the Tariff Bill. The Senate's requested amendment was made, and on 8th December, at page 14166 of *Hansard,* **Mr. Speaker** reported the receipt of a message from the GovernorGeneral assenting to the Tariff Bill. When the Minister moved that the Senate's requested amendment be agreed to he did not explain to the House, nor was an explanation given in the Senate when the Bill was before that Chamber, that the effect would be to enable South African maize to reach Australia at less than the Tariff rate of 3s. 6d. per cental. The subsequent discovery that maize could be imported at ls. per cental was a great surprise to me. I think this explanation is due to myself, for there are in my electorate probably tens of thousands of acres which are producing maize, and in the course of my travels I have explained to the maize-growers what Parliament had done to protect them against the black-grown maize of other countries. I have not been able to learn of any honorable member in this Chamber or the Senate outside the Cabinet who understood that at the eleventh hour of the session this Parliament enacted legislation that repealed what we had decided, in connexion with the Tariff. I ask that this matter be taken into very serious consideration by the present Minister for Trade and Customs **(Mr. Rodgers).** I am sure that had it been known that the duties we imposed upon glucose, cornflour, starch, and other by-products of maize would be enjoyed by the producers of black-grown maize in other parts of the world instead of by our own growers, we would never have agreed to them; and had we known that the Reciprocity Bill would have had that effect we would have insisted upon a further consideration of the items affected. The South African Department of Agriculture in Pretoria estimates the maize crop for the year at 12,000,000 bags, and that there will be a surplus of 2,250,000 available for export. Already some of that maize has been imported into Victoria, and I understand that shipments are on their way to Queensland and New South Wales, notwithstanding that most people believe that the protective duty of 3s. 6d. per cental passed by this House still applies. The local producer of maize has no protection in regard to freights. The freight on shipments now coming from Durban t0 Australia is 22s. 6d. per ton weight, whilst from the port of Maryborough, Queensland, which is only about 190 miles north of Brisbane, to Melbourne it is 40s. per ton on minimum shipments of 1,000 tons. I ask that some alteration in the law be made so that justice may be done to the white maize-growers in Australia. I introduced a deputation to the Minister last week, and it was supported by the honorable member for Gippsland **(Mr. Wise),** the honorable member for Lilley **(Mr. Mackay),** the honorable member for Herbert **(Mr. Bamford),** the honorable member for Capricornia **(Mr. Higgs),** and **Mr. Murphy,** of Gippsland. The Minister promised to bring the matter under notice of Cabinet, and for that reason I refrained from speaking of it in the House earlier. I suggest that the Minister should take such steps as will carry out the intention of Parliament when it enacted the Tariff. With respect to War Service Homes, some arrangements should be made by which returned men could be provided with homes of their own without such delay as is general in every State. I recently gave the responsible Minister particulars of a certain case which had come under my notice in Queensland. The exsoldier concerned had a property under offer for £280. He owned an acre block in the town, where he was permanently employed in a, butter factory, and he was prepared to hand over his gratuity bond, valued at £80, together with £20 in cash, and to remove the house to his own allotment. There would remain a liability of only £180, which he would be required to find, and he desired the Department to advance to him. However, he was through me informed by the Chairman of the War Service Adjustment Board, Brisbane, that he was not likely to get any advance until some time in 1923. To provide a new home for that returned soldier would cost the country between £800 and £900; he cannot get any satisfaction in respect of his proposition involving a departmental advance of only £180. Another matter upon which I desire to touch has to do with the necessity for encouraging cotton production in Australia. Last year there were 12,000 acres under cotton in Queensland ; by the end of the present year the area will be, I understand, about 40,000 acres. Hundreds of thousands of acres could easily be planted in Queensland alone. There are, in fact, millions of acres of the right kind of land available. During the American Civil War cotton was produced in Queensland, and a number of shipments were sent away consisting of tallow for ballast and cotton as cargo. The cotton was pronounced to be as good as any sample produced in any part of the world. After the Civil War, however, cheap coloured labour in America killed the Australian industryBut it was proved that the land was there, and that a good quality of cotton could be grown in Australia. We still have the land, and cotton every bit as good oan still be grown on it. Labour costs #have provided the sole hindrance, but to-day the position has changed. The American labour situation is vastly different. The cost of picking cotton in the United States of America is as. high as in Queensland. Many of the negroes are now in a position to own their own blocks, and they insist on being paid white men's wages, or they will work their own land. Here is Australia's opportunity. The cotton plant grows with wonderful rapidity. Less than twelve months ago I planted a cotton seed in my own vegetable garden. In ten months I had a bush, 4 feet high and 3 feet in breadth, covered with cotton of the best quality. There had not been the slightest cultivation of the soil in which it grew. Indeed, rich soil, such as is needed for the production of sugar cane, or maize, or the like, is not required. The most suitable soil is what is known in Queensland as forest land, and there are millions of acres of it nea* to the ports, available for the purpose. When I was in the State Parliament, eleven or twelve years ago, I inquired how much land there was in Queensland that had not been utilized, and from which the Government got no return. I was officially informed that there were 137,000,000 acres. The reason for such a state of affairs was chiefly lack of railway communication. There will be no difficulty in making available all the land that is likely to be wanted for cotton growing, and at a very reasonable price. It is an important fact, in the light of the possibilities of cotton growth in Australia, that a heavy rainfall is not required. The Prime Minister has been criticised for not having assisted the North Burnett land scheme. The reason assigned for the deadlock has been that a Labour Government is in control in Queensland. I have known Queensland intimately from my youth. I am in a position to give the reason why nothing has been done with the North Burnett land. There has been a deadlock because there have been three rival railway projects. On the onehand it has been proposed to extend the railway over mountainous country. The cost of the line would be about£1, 000,000, and it would invol ve two years in building. Meanwhile, there would bc no settlement on the land to be served. On the other hand, for an expenditure of £750,000 to £1,000,000, a direct line could be laid through good agricultural country where there would be nomountains to impose engineering difficulties and unwarranted costs. The whole questionis whether a line shall be constructed for political purposes, or in the best interests of the people and the State as a whole. I regret that some honorable members have been advocating a reduction in the rates of letter postage. The question of cheaper postage came before the Conference of Chambers of Commerce some months ago, in Hobart; but such strenuous objections were raised that the proposal was dropped. What Australia wants is not cheaper postage, which would be of greatest value to people of the city. City residents are already well catered for in respect of every service administered by the Postmaster-General's Department. What is more urgently required is the extension of facilities throughout the country. It is all very well for honorable members of the Country parly to say that people are leaving the land. That is not so. {: .speaker-KFC} ##### Mr Fleming: -- Census figures indicate that they are. {: .speaker-K6S} ##### Mr CORSER: -- If so, theyhave certainly left others there. It is results that tell, and I can only say that since assistance has been given to the primary producers the total value of produce sold under Federal control has been £484,000,000, of which butter and cheese alone, from 1917 to 30th March, 1921, in shipments to the Imperial Government, represent £19,763,987. In my own electorate, which is larger than the whole of little Tasmania, the co-operative companies have proved most successful. The original parent company has been extended, and there are now about five cheese factories. I may say that I have devoted both money and time to the promotion and support of these co-operative enterprises, and still hold shares in them. There are many hundreds of second and third sons of Victorian farmers there doing splendidly in the production of maize and other cereals, also in dairying. There is no doubt that the Commonwealth Government saved Australia from bankruptcy, securing, as it did, an average of 5s. per bushel for wheat as against the pre-war price of 3s. 9d. {: .speaker-K4F} ##### Mr Considine: -- I beg to call attention to the state of the House. *[Quorum formed.]* {: .speaker-K6S} ##### Mr CORSER: -- The Government made all arrangements about freight, and in some cases obtained the money before a good deal of the produce was shipped. The High Prices Commission of Victoria proved that, as a result of the Wheat Pool, growers had made a total gain of £10,241,500 from 1916 to 1919 over and above the London parity, and the honorable member for Echuca **(Mr. Hill),** the president of the Victorian Farmers Union, concurred in the Pool arrangement. {: .speaker-KHG} ##### Mr Hill: -- I do not agree with that sta temen t, anyhow! {: .speaker-K6S} ##### Mr CORSER: -- It is on record. As to wool, the report of the Commission says that the price received was about 55 per cent. higher than that obtained before the war. Somebodymust be credited with this, and it may be supposed that the Prime Minister **(Mr. Hughes),** while at Home, and in Australia with his Cabinet, arranged the terms on which wheat and wool were sold overseas, and the whole business carried on without any fear of bankruptcy or any necessity for the producersto realize on their properties. I was very sorry, indeed, to hear the objection raised by the honorable member for Moreton **(Mr. Wienholt)** to the arrangement made with the cattle-growers, for a bounty of1/4d. per lb. on meat to be exported, who certainly regard it as a great blessing. Of course, to nien with, small holdings the price of cattle to-day means life or death. The men in affluent circumstances who sold largely before the drop in prices camo are in a different position; there is a chance for them to buy from those to whom they originally sold. Personally, I 3peak for the small cattle-owner, who approves of anything that will give him a chance of getting his fat stock off his small run so that the ground may be ready for the calves. To retain such men on the land is to retain an asset which otherwise might be destroyed. I tell the honorable member for Moreton that cattle will keep fat only for a certain time, and will certainly lose their fat in >the winter, when the cost of fattening becomes an asset lost. If, however, a man can realize when the cattle are fat, room is left for the calves to follow. x I notice that the subject of wireless communication is mentioned in the GovernorGeneral's Speech. Criticism has been levelled at the Government for having entered into an agreement authorized by this House, providing that the Royal Commission reported in favour of it. Apparently, there are honorable members who regard the business investor in this enterprise as fools, but I have a list of the shareholders which discloses that amongst them are the smartest business men in Australia. If it is good for such men to hold shares in this company, it is certainly good for the Commonwealth Government to have control, and in the conduct of the business the Government have a majority of one as a casting vote. Many people consider that the Government, should appoint some one out of the Public Service to manage this business, holding that otherwise we have no control; but it would be foolish for the Federal Government to attempt to do such a thing. We must have the best brains in this scheme if it is to succeed, and men for a business of this kind are not to be found in the Public Service, so that the Government had to go outside. {: .speaker-K1J} ##### Mr Pratten: -- The publication of t'he list of 'private shareholders may help -the Government scheme. {: .speaker-K6S} ##### Mr CORSER: -- I believe it will. Many of those men have large interests in the Commonwealth, and they do not desire the Government to lose money. Some honorable members, principally, I believe, from our friends of the Corner party, contend that no good has resulted from the protection given our secondary industries. However, we have only to look at a return issued by the Director of the Bureau of Commerce and Industry, Melbourne, where it is pointed out that the number of industrial companies registered in 1920 was no less than 2,082. The nominal capital of the new companies was £148,270,614, and the increase of the nominal capital of existing companies, £36,937,302, the total nominal capital registered being £185,207,917. These secondary industries must mean employment for large numbers of -people, who have to buy the products of the primary producers. How could these people be replaced ? If there were any troubleoverseas, where would our market be? It is no use shutting our eyes to the facts. We are told that people must be settled in this country, which could easily support 200,000,000. Australia is larger than the United States, and, considering the area from the north of Queensland to the south of Tasmania, is capable of a greater variety of products. There is .no doubt that we shall not be allowed to hold this territory if we do not populate it. Where is the justice of 5,000,000 ' people monopolizing a country when there are other countries which cannot find room for their surplus populations ? Since I was president of the Federal League in 1S99, no man has been a stronger advocate of a White Australia ; and from that time I have faithfully done all within my power to support the policy. I see no reason to depart from it; but it certainly is the duty of the Government to see that our products are protected against the products of the coloured races of the world. There i.s just one other matter about which I should like to say a few words. As to the sugar industry, I shall probably deal with, that at length when the question of the renewal of the agreement is before U3. In the report of the Royal Commission on the Sugar Industry -which was published in 1950, it is set out thai; the capital value of improved cane fanna at that time was £5,541,4S6-; that the value of raw 'sugar -mills in Queensland "was £4,500,060 ; and that 14,500 persons were' employed in cultivating sugar cane. There are at least 100,000 people directly and indirectly interested in the sugar industry in the northern State, and at least 4,000 of those engaged in cane-cutting come from States south of Queensland. From time to time we hear statements to the effect that either the Federal Government or the Colonial Sugar Refining Company are making huge profits as a result of the sugar agreement. I would remind the House, however, that that agreement was made between the Queensland Government, the cane-grower, the crude cane sugar manufacturers, and the Colonial Sugar Refining Company. All parties met, and in entering into the agreement saw to it that no one section should receive an advantage over the others. The Colonial Sugar Refining Company was called upon to lay all its cards on the table, and it agreed to undertake the manufacture, refining, storage, and handling of the sugar, together with all the risks of sales, at absolutely cost price. It was agreed, further, that the company should allow the Auditor-General's officers to examine its books whenever they pleased, in order to ascertain what the actual cost price was, and that it should receive fi per ton over and above the actual cost price for refining, selling, guaranteeing, financing, insuring, delivering, and taking all risks in connexion with the scheme. {: .speaker-K4W} ##### Mr Nicholls: -- An additional fi pelton? {: .speaker-K6S} ##### Mr CORSER: -- It was agreed that the company should receive fi in excess of its actual out-of-pocket expenses. The company secures no other return. If I were to consider my own interests and those of other merchants I should say, " Put an end to any interference with the ordinary course of trade and lot us return to what we were doing in respect of the sale of sugar before the Government stepped in." In the interests of the consumers and producers alike I hold, however, that the present system should be continued. Under the old arrangement we had perhaps twenty or twenty-five firms - my own amongst the number - selling sugar to South Australia, Tasmania, and elsewhere and charging 5 per cent, on sales and guarantees. It would be impossible to get any firm to do this for less at the present time. I invite honorable members to seriously consider whether it would be better for us to .pay 5 per cent, to twenty or twenty-five agents throughout Australia rather than to continue the payment to one company of fi per ton for this work. If the sales of this product were carried on as before larger commissions would have to be paid, and either the consumer would have to pay a higher price to meet the extra cost or the grower would have to take less for his product. I am out to see that neither the consumer nor the grower suffers. In their interests I favour the handling of our sugar in the cheapest possible way, and that is what is now being done. "We are anxious, as we always have been, that other industries, in whose manufactures sugar is used, shall not suffer. I can safely assert that during the war the arrangement made by the Government enabled the fruit-growers and manufacturers, of jams and preserves in Australia, to do an enormous export trade which otherwise would have been impossible. But for the sugar industry in Queensland and the selling of its product, not at the world's parity, which was then £100 per ton, but at f 30 6s. Sd. per ton, this export trade could not have been carried on. The sugar-growers of Queenslaud at that time did not clamour for world's parity. They did not say that they were out to get all they could. They asked simply for n. fair deal, and the reasonable stand taken by them enabled manufacturers of jams and preserves in Australia to carry on an export trade against all competitors, and to make huge profits which otherwise would have been impossible to them. When we were selling sugar in Australia at 6d. per lb., the price in Great Britain, was ls. 6d. per lb., and in the United States of America ls. 5d. per lb. Not only did we give the local manufacturers this enormous advantage over their competitors abroad, but we allowed them a rebate of £20 per ton in respect of sugar used in the manufacture of jam for export. Because the sugar produced in Australia was in sufficient to meet local requirements, supplies had to be obtained from abroad, and for these imports we had to pay about £100 per ton. Sugar for which that price had been paid could not be sold for 6d. a lb. without great loss, and the Government, by means of the low-priced sugar that they are obtaining from Queensland, are now gradually wiping out tho loss sustained on the importations of black-grown sugar from Java. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr Charlton: -- Does not the honorable member think we should have from *tha* Minister himself a statement of the actual position. {: .speaker-K6S} ##### Mr CORSER: -- I am not going to dictate to the Minister for Trade and Customs **(Mr. Rodgers).** He has told us that he will submit to the House within the next day or two a full statement of the position, and I am sure that he will do so. I would remind honorable members that, having regard to the magnitude of the industry, it is impossible for the Minister to obtain at a day's notice all the information required by the House. As an answer to those who suggest that an undue preference was given to the Colonial Sugar Refining Company under the agreement made, I would point out that the company's only other competitor, the Millaquin factory, which is iu my electorate, is by no means satisfied with the price it receives, although it is in excess of that paid to the Colonial Sugar Refining Company. As a matter of fact, it recently turned down an opportunity to refine, at the price fixed, 3,000 tons of sugar which I had obtained from the north. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- What is the area under cane in Queensland ? {: .speaker-K6S} ##### Mr CORSER: -- The area now under cane is 43,000 acres in excess of the area so cultivated last year. What we need to do is to stabilize the industry. If the growers receive an assurance that the agreement will continue, and that they will continue to receive something about the present price, which is only a fair one, they will undertake to produce sufficient to meet Australia's requirements. In Queensland there are tens of thousands of acres of land that are as quite suitable for canegrowing as is any of the land now devoted to that purpose. The industry, however, has met with reverses. For instance, after the Dickson award was brought in many men went out of the industry finding that it was impossible to carry on and pay the rates of wages so fixed. At Innisfail, for instance, a large number of sugar farmers sold out to Italians, who have since been working their farms on co-operative lines. Only last month 200 Italians arrived there to engage in the industry. These men believe in co-operation. They are not paid per day for their labour, and I am convinced that the sooner our fanners cooperate tho better will be their returns. Above all tilings, it is necessary that we should stabilize the industry, so that those who put their money into it will know that they will obtain a fair return for their labour. As the honorable member for Lilley **(Mr. Mackay)** said last week, only about *2* per cent, of the sugar-cane growers of Queensland pay income tax. They are not wealthy men. On the contrary, they are struggling to make a living, clearing their land, fertilizing and working it as best they can, and looking to the future for a reward. {: #subdebate-28-0-s3 .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra -- I wish to draw the attention of the House to still another proposal on the part of the Government to take a serious action without first consulting Parliament. Statements made by the Minister for Defence **(Mr. Greene)** during .the last two or three weeks, and a definite statement made by him two days ago, and published in the press," show that the Government intend to take a very serious step - one that. I think is only the beginning of further grave action in the same direction - without giving this House an opportunity to express an opinion with respect to it. I propose, however, to give honorable members an opportunity to test the matter. The statement to which I refer as having been made by the Minister for Defence is as follows : - >The Ministry had made up its mind that. it. would not use the mills at Geelong for competition against private trade, and, therefore, sale was the best alternative. Parliament sanctioned the establishment of the Commonwealth Mills at Geelong. In 1910, when the Fisher Labour Government was in" power, provision was made on the Estimates for the establishment of the woollen mills at Geelong, the Commonwealth Harness Factory, the Commonwealth Clothing Factory, and other industrial enterprises. I am convinced that there is not an honorable member in this House - not an intelligent member of the community - who will not freely admit that during the war these factories served the country well, and stood by our soldiers in their trying time in the trenches. Parliament was consulted as to their establishment, and if, following the traditions of this One-Man Government, a Government without any responsibility to Parliament, all these enterprises are to be thrown aside - because this, I believe, is but the beginning of a general policy of shutting down Commonwealth factories - it is time that Parliament intervened. Honorable members will have an opportunity to record their opinions with respect to this matter. I want specially to direct my attention to the Country party, members of which have had much to say in recent years about " Flinders-lane " and the profits it rakes off the primary products of this country. They will have an opportunity to cast a vote on this question, and we shall take more notice of their votes than of the speeches which they deliver in this House. In 1910, as I have said, provision was made on the Estimates for the establishment of the Commonwealth Woollen Mills at Geelong. Operations were commenced in 1911, and the mills started to manufacture cloth in 1915. At the present time about 350 persons are employed there. It cannot be said that the Government are abolishing or proposing to sell the mills because they are not making a profit, or because they are inefficiently managed. The mills are efficiently managed. The manager and the whole staff of the mills are absolutely the best one could get in this country. I have not been able to get recent official reports, and I do not know why the Government have held them back so long, but by inquiries in many ways I have been able to get an estimate of the profits made by the mill. They have been more than sufficient to wipe out the capital cost of the establishment. I have been informed that it will show a surplus of approximately £250,000. Yet with a burden of debt on the country the Government propose to sell mills that are paying not only interest on the money invested in them, but also an accumulated profit of £250,000. {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- That is not' so. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- Very well, the Minister will have the opportunity of giving the total profits. If we had a Government working in the interests of the community - I know it is not, and that it is the worst Government Australia has ever had - it would not be talking about selling the Geelong Woollen Mills, but would be making provision to increase their capacity, and taking steps to establish other mills throughout the country districts, for instance, at Bendigo, Ballarat, Warrnambool, and other centres. In that way the Government could carry out an extensive decentralization policy, and at the same time accumulate profits that would help to reduce the taxation about which honorable members in the Country party talk so much. Australia is not manufacturing more than .15 per cent, of its woollen requirements, although its manufacturers have at their command, locally produced, the best wool in the world. "Seeing that Australia imports fivesixths of its woollen goods, and that there is a vast field for the expansion of the woollen industry, opening up markets for our primary producers, and providing employment, not only for our own unemployed, but also for people of our kith and kin overseas, the Government should be laying down the foundation of a splendid manufacturing industry, instead of proposing to sell the only woollen mills they possess. This is but the beginning of one of the worst jobs the Ministry have ever undertaken. The honorable member for Swan **(Mr. Prowse)** has told us that we should go in for a policy of extension of markets. I have indicated one way in which we can do this, and I shall be interested to see how the honorable member's vote will go on this question. We are told by the supporters of the Government, and by the Minister for Defence **(Mr. Greene)** that there will be no trouble in selling the Geelong Woollen Mills. I should say there would not be. I do not mind prophesying that already buyers are in sight. I would not be surprised to learn that the Government know exactly where to put their fingers on the people who are going to buy the mills. Interwoven with this question are all the interests of those who are the masters of the Government. We are told by **Senator Guthrie,** one of the Government's supporters, that it will be a splendid advantage to Geelong to have the mills sold, and that a company will come along, of which, if it be possible, he will be a shareholder, to extend the mills and carry them on. If a company is so eager to undertake the manufacturing of woollen cloth in Australia, why does it not get its own machinery and establish its own mills at Geelong, employing more labour there and producing more manufactured woollen goods in Australia?What is the significance of the statement that a company is eager to buy thesemills? We are not told the price at which they are to be offered. No information is given as to the sweet pickings some one is about to get; because it is not one of those cases in which there can be a lot of competition. There are not too many supporters of this side of the House who can submit tenders for this plant. Competition will be left to a few of those who have a good deal of this world's goods ; they will get together and put in a tender. At this stage I want to call attention to a remarkable somersault on the part of the Government, and to investigate the reason for it. On 12th May, 1920, the Assistant Minister for Defence **(Sir Granville Eyrie),** in answer to a question in this House, said - >The Government have approved of additions to existing plant and machinery, to enable the present output of the Geelong mills to be doubled. On the Estimates placed before Parliament last session, a sum of £45,000 was provided for the purpose of duplicating the plant at the Geelong Woollen Mills. What change has come over the scene since this time last year? What influences have been at work? {: .speaker-K4F} ##### Mr Considine: -- There is a new Treasurer. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- There is probably some significance in that fact. I shall refer honorable members to something which may suggest the change of policy on the part of the Government. In a trade supplement of the London *Times,* which appeared about the time Lord Northcliffe visited Australia, and picked up a lot of information honorable members did not get, appeared the following: >An organization of Australian business interests, the Private Industries League, has been formed in Melbourne, the express aims of which are (1) to combat State Socialism in competitive trade and commerce, (2) to give private enterprise the control necessary for the construction of railways and other enterprises to develop and commercialize the resources of Australia. The right of the Government to function as tradesman or merchant is to be assailed. We are told by the Minister for Defence **(Mr. Greene)** that the Government will not compete with existing private mills. I wish to direct the attention of honorable members to the class of people whose tender feelings the Government are so anxious not to hurt. The Inter-State Commission's report on clothing was presented to this House on 13th December, 1918, shortly after the war closed; but the investigation of the Commission had been made during the war period. In one part of their report the Commissioners set out a table showing that the total capital employed in the woollen mills in 1914 was £1,144,385, and that the net profits for the three years, 1915, 1916, and 1917, amounted to £1,197,095. It will be observed that the profit for the three years exceeded the total value of the capital invested, and the Commissioners' comment upon this fact was - >The greater proportion of their excessive profits were derived during the period in which they were engaged in supplying material for the clothing of our soldiers, I want honorable members to notice this particularly - and when they were acting in unison. How nicely they put it. The report states that the profit earned in 1916 was 39.452 per cent., and the Commissioners say- >The foregoing figures need no comment beyond the somewhat obvious fact that they refer to a period of grave nationaldanger and emergency. These are the sharks who during the war profiteered at the expense of this community, and with whom the Government say they will not compete, and for whom they show such tender regard that they will do nothing to interfere with their profits. The Inter-State Commission's report also indicates that these people will not sell direct to the retailers. Their goods go to Flinders-lane, and it is the influence of Flinders-lane that has prompted the sale of the Geelong Woollen Mills. A question was asked in the press the other day as to how Flinders-lane could benefit by the sale of these mills. I shall proceed to show how it will benefit. First of all let us examine the method adopted by the mills. They refuse to sell direct to the people who retail goods. Everything must filter through Flinders-lane No matter what parcels the retailers may be prepared to purchase, the mills will have nothing to do with them, and the retailers are obliged to buy from the wholesale people - those people who throw out their chests and talk about private enterprise, the wonderful efficiency of their system, and the wonderful blundering of public enterprise. For many years I lived in Ballarat, where there are woollen mills. These mills place their output on lorries and send it to the Ballarat West railway station, where it is railed 75 miles to Melbourne, and thence conveyed to the warehouses in Flinders-lane. Immediately a parcel of clothing arrives in a warehouse, its travellers board a train at Spencer-street, journey 75 miles to Ballarat, and go up and down Sturtstreet selling to the retailers and tailors the very goods which have been turned out in the mills scarcely half-a-mile away. That is what these people term their efficient system, and from which tilley absolutely refuse to depart. The one thing that Flinders-lane will not stand for is the selling of the output of woollen mills direct to retailers, and that is the " milk in the coconut" in this very question of the sale of the Commonwealth Woollen Mills at Geelong. The Inter-State Commission, reporting upon the profits of the wholesale warehouses during the war, says : - >The total amount of profits of the softgoods houses in1917 in the aggregate were more than double those of 1914. It mentions that the profits in 1914 represented " satisfactory returns." Thus during the war period satisfactory returns were doubled by patriots who waved the flag and sooled their fellows on to fight while they themselves remained at home enjoying their profits and robbing the people. The latest report of the Commonwealth Woollen Mills Ihave been able to secure is dated 9th February, 1921, and in it I find the following : - >A new departure in the issue of tweed for returned soldiers in nice styles of serviceable materials at 50 per cent. of the current market value is keenly appreciated by the returned men. These mills in 1920 commenced to supply returned soldiers' needs with tweeds, and these tweeds were retailed by the League to their members and their members' dependents at a profit of ls. 6d. per yard. The League commenced with a profit of ls. per yard, but afterwards found it necessary to increase the charge to ls. 6d. per yard. The difference, therefore, between the mill price and the retail price of this tweed is ls. 6d. per yard, but when cloth comes from the other mills and filters into the hands of the retailers through Flinders-lane the difference is from15s. to £1 per yard. Here we have the reason why these people are now fighting to abolish the Government Mills. They are not game to say to the Returned Soldiers' League, " We will not allow you to trade in competition with Flinderslane and private traders ' ' ; because they play the soldiers for political interests and votes; but they are proposing to do it in a subtle way by wiping out the only mill that will supply the soldiers directly with the tweed. They propose to cut off the source of direct supply, and that means the killing of the whole proposition. In 1920 this mill entered into a contract with the Returned Soldiers Associations of Australia to provide them with 480,000 yards of their output of tweeds and twills. In Victoria 130,000 yards was to be supplied. In that State alone there are over 300 branches of the Returned Soldiers League retailing this material ; and it will be understood that when the soldiers and their friends went about the country - particularly when prices were at their peak and we were paying from £10 to £12 for a suit - and they could say to people, " The suit I am wearing was made up by my tailor from cloth made at the CommonwealthWoollen Mill and retailed by the Returned Soldiers League at a profit of ls. 6d. per yard; it has cost me £6,'' people would say that that material should be available to everybody, and that would be the best way to bring down the price of clothing. {: .speaker-K4M} ##### Mr ROBERT COOK:
INDI, VICTORIA · VFU; CP from 1920 -- Could not this be done by co-operation? {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- The honorable member mouths co-operation; but this was cooperation of the best and most complete kind. The Commonwealth with its own mill was assisting co-operative returned soldiers; and with the same system of cooperation amongst others the people could have saved £3 or £4 on every suit of clothes, and £1 on every blanket which they required to keep themselves warm in the winter. I have here samples of the output of the Geelong Woollen Mills, and they are marked with the prices at which the material is retailed to the returned soldiers at Anzac House, and through the various associations of returned soldiers. I have received these samples from a soldier friend, and the marked prices, Which run from Ss. 6d. to 10s. 6d. per yard, include ls. 6d. per yard profit for retailing. A suit length costs 30s. to 35s. It can be made up by a good tailor with first-class trimmings for from £4 10s. to £5, making the total cost of the suit about £6, and I defy any honorable member to get as good an article at any tailor's shop for less than £10 at the present time. The distribution of this cloth to tho Soldiers League is exposing the whole profiteering policy of the Flinders-lane gang, and is compelling them to keep prices lower than they wish; but let this mill be abolished and they will again " work in unison " as they did before, and up will soar the prices higher than ever. But there is another reason for the agitation to have this mill sold. In 1910, when I was sitting in this House as a supporter of the Labour Government, we established a factory for the manufacture of military uniforms. That Clothing Factory received its supply' of tweeds, twills, and cloth direct from the Geelong Mill. {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- It first produced cloth in 1915. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- The Clothing Factory commenced operations in 1911, and subsequently was able to get supplies of cloth direct from the Commonwealth Woollen Mill. It is dependent on that mill today. Since the Armistice there has been a decrease in the demand for military uniforms, and in order to keep going, the factory has been manufacturing for State Departments. It lias been tendering for the uniforms of railway men such, as guards, stationmasters, and porters; and attendants in public institutions, policemen, and others. In so doing it 'has entered into direct competition with Flinders-lane so efficiently that it has undercut prices by at least 10 per cent. Consequently Flinders-lane has been howling for the last two years in the press and otherwise for the Commonwealth Clothing Factory to be closed because it- was said to be competing unfairly. The crime that it is committing is not that the workers are practising the Government stroke, not that it is inefficient, but that it is too efficient, and is carrying on its operations better than private enterprise is able to do. I have here a report that appeared in the public press on 11th June, 1920, of a deputation from the Chamber of Manufactures to **Senator Pearce** - >The Commonwealth Clothing Factory, a Government-owned concern, was carrying out contracts for the State Governments at prices 1.0 per cent, lower than the prices at which private manufacturers could do the work. This was unfair competition. Those are the people who always talk about the inefficiency of Government concerns; yet they admit that the Factory was operating at 10 per cent, lower than private traders could do the work. A similar deputation waited upon the State Premier of Victoria on 6th May, 1920, and urged for the same reason that the State Government should not give their tenders to the Commonwealth Clothing Factory. In letters to the press, private merchants complained that the Clothing Factory procured its cloth direct- from the mill, and that private enterprise had no hope of ever getting a contract when the Federal Factory tendered in competition with them. The Commonwealth Factory was able to undercut private enterprise by 10 per cent., and-that, they said, was not fair. At that time the Clothing Factory was making a complete suit for railway stationmasters, on public tender, for £3 9s.. from the best of material turned out by the Commonwealth Mill, and made up in good style, yet private manufacturers said that the Factory should not. compete for State requirements. Only a. few months ago tenders were called by the State Government for uniforms for attendants in the mental hospitals. The Commonwealth Clothing Factory's tender was 5s. 6d. per uniform lower than the nearest private tender, that of Bowley and Company, but the latter was given the contract. There was no question as tot the quality of the material to be supT plied by the Commonwealth Clothing Factory. It was the same as, and in some instances better than, that of the private tenderer, but the State Government is acting in unison with the Federal Government in this private industries protection stunt, in order to put an end to everything that interferes with their masters keeping up prices and continuing to make profits. Not only did the Commonwealth Woollen Mill make a good deal of profit, but u" to date the accumulated profits of the Clothing Factory amount to £158,000. These figures may not mean much to honorable members opposite, who are prepared to spend £8,500 in sending a Minister to Washington; that was a scandal, and details of such expenditure by Ministers when they go abroad should be made public. That £158,000 was in addition to approximately £250,000 profit made by the Mill, and enterprise that can give such results should not be curtailed in this country. But that is only part of the story. It is nothing to what the Commonwealth saved during the war by having that enterprise in existence. Not only did it provide cheaper cloth and uniforms, but it acted as a check upon the greed of the profiteers. I shall give one illustration out of scores that could be given. I have followed this matter closely ever since these establishments were .started., because I was in the House at .the time, and I took a share .of the responsibility .for bringing them into existence. I noticed that when the first tenders were called for cadet uniforms in 1911, at the inception of the compulsory training scheme, the tender for one line of youths' breeches was 17s. 9d. In 1914, when the war broke out, tenders were called for large quantities ~>f breeches, and prices ranged up to 30s. per pair. The Commonwealth Clothing Factory examined the tenders, and advised the Government not to accept them. After going into the whole of the factory costs the management offered to make the breeches at a certain price, and private traders were given an extra 10 per cent, for profit. When the Armistice was signed, in 1918, the peak price of men's, not youths', breeches made on the flat rate plus 10 per cent., was lis. 2d. per pair. Yet private enterprise was asking for 30s. per pair at a time when wages and prices were not so high. Upwards of 1,000,000 pairs of "breeches were ordered by the Defence Department, and I venture to estimate that on this line alone the Commonwealth Factory sawed, the community £250,000. T can quote another item 'to show "bow the 'Government mills are hurting the people in Flinders-lane, and I say 44, .+ as surely as the sun will rise to-morrow morning, if the Woollen Mill is sold the Clothing Factory will be closed. Policemen have to pay for their own uniforms, and the price charged them by Bowley and Company in 1920 was £7 10s. Through the Clothing Factory they were able to get their suits for £3 12s., but on account of some increases that have taken place the price is now £4. The police as a body are amongst the lowest-paid public servants in the country; but Flinders-lane was ringing with protests, and that was the beginning of the agitation to wipe out the Commonwealth Woollen Mills. When we were proposing to establish the Woollen Mill, in 1912, there was a protest, particularly in the Senate. **Senator Simon** Fraser spoke on behalf of private enterprise, and the then Minister for De- fence **(Senator Pearce),** said, on 9th September, 1910 - The honorable .senator's old fashioned idea that the 'State cannot do anything has been bowled out long ago. His colleagues in Flinderslane are howling about the State entering into competition with private enterprise. Those words are applicable to-da.y, but his " colleagues in Flinders-lane" are in the Cabinet with **Senator Pearce,** doing the sort of thing of which I complain. **Senator Pearce** continued - The fear which is expressed that State enterprise will not prove payable finds its best answer in the fear of the capitalist generally to be subjected to State competition At that time **Senator Pearce** was a Minister in a. Labour Government, and he expressed the truth that we express now, that the great fear of the capitalist is not that State enterprise will fail, but that it will succeed and compete with private enterprise. There has been no argument in favour of the sale of the Woollen Mill at Geelong on the ground that it is inefficient, or that it will not pay. On the contrary, it has proved a splendid paying proposition, both directly and indirectly, and such enterprises, instead of being curtailed should be extended. **Senator E.** D. Millen, speaking in the Senate on 9th September, 1910, said - If these factories can be shown to be profitable there is no reason why they should not be launched. My answer is that these factories have proved profitable, and there is no 'valid reason why they should not be retained and extended. The 'profits made by the Woollen Mill, clothing Factory,, and the Harness Factory are net after allowing 5 per cent, on the capital invested, and proper depreciation on plant and machinery. And those profits are substantial. They represent something in the direction of easing the burden of taxation upon the people. When it is proposed to part with such a, concern - one which is paying full interest upon capital, and is assisting indirectly to reduce the burden of taxation - I want to know where stands the Taxpayers Association. What is that body doing ? What is it saying about theproposition to part with such a profitable public tax-reducing concern? And where are honorable members of the Country party who have had so much to say about taxation ? Here is a chance to reduce taxation by extending this enterprise in order that it may make larger public profits. But the Taxpayers' Association says nothing. The Country party makes no protest. What conclusion can one come to other than that both bodies would prefer the continuance of high taxation rather than there should be any interference with private enterprise. Both organizations are out for economy. But if one may take their spoken word, or accept the written word of the press which represents them, it would appear that their sole idea of economy is to reduce the wages of the workers. I was amused this afternoon when the Minister for Defence **(Mr. Greene)** was giving the cane to the naughty boys in the Corner. The Minister talked largely about " no competition with private traders," but he evidently believes in any amount of competition with the working classes. He cried, " Press on with immigration." The Minister informed the House that for every block of land having the necessary facilities and available for settlement there were hundreds of applicants waiting. Within ten minutes of making that statement, the Minister said, " We must press on with immigration." Then he proceeded to explain the Government's policy. Be said, in effect, that the settlement of Australians on the land was the work of the States alone, but that, when it came to settling immigrants on the land, the Commonwealth Government would assist the State Governments. Two conditions were laid down, among others. I noted them. They were that the Commonwealth Government would assist if work in preparing the land was given to immigrants and if the blocks of land were made available to the immigrants. Preference for immigrants! No money or assistance to States if they propose to settle more Australians ! The Minister for Defence said there were hundreds of applicants waiting for every available block; and, almost in the same breath, he cried, " Press on with immigration." All this means that immigrants will be dumped into the cities to become competitors with our working men. That, however, will be all right from the point of view of the Government so long as there is no competition with the private traders of this country. Is this House going to allow the Government to sell the Commonwealth Mill at Geelong? Is there to be no protest from honorable members on the Government side who, when the enterprise in question was established, offered up their cheers? Members of the Country party have been making speeches throughout the land, talking about the prices realized for their wool, and comparing them with what they have to pay for their clothes. What are they going to do about this matter? If the House fails to record a vote against the Government, and if the people at large do not protest, the mill at Geelong will be sold. The only source of supply at a cheap and reasonable rate which the returned soldiers have will be cut off; the onlycompetition with the private trading profiteers will be abolished. And the Harness Factory will follow. Its activities have already been reduced to a minimum. In pre-war times that factory employed eighty men; to-day it is finding work for eighteen. It will be the next to go. Then the Commonwealth ships will follow. And, if the people do not protest, as sure as I live, the Commonwealth Bank will be handed over to private enterprise. The Government have stated that the mill at Geelong cannot be carried on except during three months in the year unless it competes with private enterprise; and that, the Government will not permit it to continue to do. The Commonwealth Bank has so successfully competed with private banking institutions that its profits total more than £3,700,000. Is the Minister for Defence prepared to say that the Government will not continue that profit-making public institution in competition with private banking companies ? The Minister does not answer. I ask the House to note that I have put the question direct. Does the remark of the Minister to the effect that the Government will not, compete with private trading apply to the Commonwealth Bank ? {: .speaker-JUV} ##### Mr Mcwilliams: -- There is no competition between the Commonwealth Bank and the private banks. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- I invite the honorable member to ask the private banking companies and their champions whether such is or is not the case. They would wipe out the Commonwealth Bank tomorrow. The Commonwealth Bank was the only institution of the kind which, during the war, did not raise its rate of interest on overdrafts. The trouble is that the Commonwealth Bank is too efficient. It has beaten private enterprise wherever it has entered into competition with it. As for the immediate proposal of the Government under review, I put the question direct to honorable members as a personal matter: Would they propose to sell the Commonwealth mill at Geelong if the enterprise were their own private business? Would the Minister for Defence, if he had a good paying proposition, such as that mill, airily wave his hand and say, " I will sell it to somebody who is eager to buy from me " ? Would the Treasurer, the honorable member for Flinders **(Mr. Bruce),** sell some Flinderslane concern in which he might be interested if it were providing him' with profits such as are produced by the Geelong mill? Not much! When it is a public concern, however, and one which is making profits for the people, the Government do not hesitate to say, " Pass it over to a company which is very eager to buy it." One sees in this issue the dictation of the masters of the Government. The Prime Minister says that honorable members on this side are in the web of the unions. We are not controlled by the moneyed interests of the country, who are the masters of the Government, and keep them fettered. Not only the Commonwealth Government, but the New South Wales Nationalist Government also are pursuing tha same end, acting on the same principles. The same old Nationalist party stands for the private ' profiteers. Scarcely are the New South Wales Government seated in the saddle than they begin to sell every State enterprise that is showing a profit. {: .speaker-K1J} ##### Mr Pratten: -- Will the honorable member name the State enterprises which have been profitable? {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- The State brick works are among them. Why are these works to go? At the dictation of the Brick Combine, they must be sold. The Government timber yards in New South Wales are up for sale. Can the honorable member for Parramatta **(Mr. Pratten)** deny that? {: #subdebate-28-0-s4 .speaker-K1J} ##### Mr PRATTEN: -- I do. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- I repeat that they are up for sale. The New South Wales Government are limiting or selling every enterprise. The State motor garage, which has been working at a profit, is being limited in its scope of activity. The State drug stores, which have been supplying medicines at cheap rates to hospitals, and conferring benefits upon the poor, have now been limited entirely to Government concerns. All these signs are part of the general scheme in the interests and for the welfare of private traders. The war furnished opportunities for this country to get on with State enterprises, which have proved successful ; but the Government, speaking for those whom they represent, say that these activities must no' longer continue. It is not as if the management of these various public institutions had proved a failure. The managers have shown themselves to be excellent business men. Labour conditions at that factory are better than those to be found in an average mill in any part of Australia. The mill has saved the Government thousands of pounds indirectly, besides making direct profits. It has shielded returned soldiers from exploitation, and it would save money for the civilian population, too, if it were permitted to extend its operations so as to cater for the public generally. Its successful operations have had the effect of exposing and hurting the profiteers, for which reasons the mill is to be handed over to private enterprise. Competition must be stifled; Flinders-lane must be freed from this irksome competitor. All the private traders will soon be able to act in unison again. What a happy hunting-ground there will be for the profiteers ! In disposing of the mill the Government will be merely doing the behest of their masters, of those men who subscribe to the party funds, of those who have given their tips for the benefit of the Prime Minister. On this side of the House honorable members are doing the work of the people. Here is a clear dividing line as between Labour and anti-Labour. Honorable members on this side stand for the people and their interests. Members behind the Government, supported almost entirely by honorable members in the Corner, stand for the profiteers. I intend to make this matter a test question in the House, and the party to which I have the honour to belong intends to see to it that it is made a test in the wider field of public opinion. I move - >That the following words be added to the proposedaddress - " but we declare that any action by the Government to dispose of the Commonwealth Government Woollen Cloth Factory at Geelong will hot meet with the approval of this House." **Mr. RODGERS** (Wannon- Minister for Trade and Customs) [10.13].- I do not propose to deal with the amendment further than to say that, ifthere could be placed before the country a clear-cut issue as between the value of the conduct of trade by private enterprise - properly regulated and controlled - and under State control, there would be no doubt concerning the outcome. Personally, I welcome the amendment, because it may provide that clear-cut issue. The public will bear freshly in mind the experience of Government activities in that glorious land of Russia, which has strewn its wreckage around the world. Surely we do not wish to emulate Russia! My purpose is to devote some attention to a matter raised by the honor able member forWide Bay **(Mr. Corser),** having to do with the duty on maize. The presentation of the case put by the honorable member is substantially correct up to the stage at which this House accepted an. amendment made in another place fixing the duties at1s.6d. preferential, 3s. 6d. intermediate, and 3s. general Tariff. The statements of my colleague **Mr. Greene** were made in perfect good faith, as will be shown by what I have to say. Following on those statements, cable communications were opened up between the South African Government and the Commonwealth Government. It was the intention of the Commonwealth Government at that particular stage to place South African maize in the same position as maize from any other country, and then to negotiate terms for the future relationship of South Africa and the Commonwealth, so far as maize and other commodities are concerned, on a reciprocal basis. I remind the House very briefly that, in 1906, the Commonwealth Government negotiated an agreement with South Africa in respect of many items, of which maize was one, and under that arrangement the duty was fixed at1s. per cental. That position South Africa has enjoyed since 1906. It is only fair to say at this juncture that, while South Africa was not prepared to accept the position in which we placed her in the general Tariff, as approved by this Chamber and anotherplace - namely, that South Africa, until we negotiated other terms, wasto pay the same duty as any other country - the balance of trade, in the year prior to the telegrams sent by my colleague, was overwhelmingly in favour of the Commonwealth. The figures show £3,900,000 of trade from Australia to South Africa, as against £400,000 of trade from South Africa to Australia. So important was the position that I venture to say that not even the honorable member forWide Bay **(Mr. Corser)** would suggest that we should have imperilled an agreement so overwhelmingly in favour of Australia, and all for the sake of this one item. Therefore, at the eleventh hour of the session, as the honorable member for Wide Bay **(Mr. Corser)** mentioned - when my colleague received the intimation from South Africa that, unless she were allowed to denounce the whole of the1906 treaty arrangement, she was not prepared to accept the position with respect to maize - he, in the interests of this country, effected an amendment in the Bill on amessage from the Governor-General. As a result we have the position in which wefind ourselves to-day, and that position I, personally, very much regret. The matter was, however, so serious for Australia that it would never have done for us to imperil a trade treaty under which Australia enjoyed preferential treatment in respect of the volume of trade I have mentioned. {: .speaker-K1J} ##### Mr Pratten: -- Was that amendment made in this Chamber? {: #subdebate-28-0-s5 .speaker-KZT} ##### Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917 -- Yes. As I have said, the assurances were given by my colleague in perfect good faith, and I regret that those assurances should have been relied upon by certain honorable members. All I can say is that the facts do not speak toowell for some of the manufacturers of cornflour, starch, and glucose, who, onthe strength of their utilization of the Australian raw products, received a greatly increased duty on their secondary product. The intention of the House was that those manufacturers should use Australian maize, and thus assist a primary industry; but. at a time when they could got the maize a little cheaper elsewhere, they threwover the local producers and ob tained it from outside. I certainly do not regard that as in keeping with their attitude on the question when they were granted an increased duty. A number of returned soldiers area growing maize; and I must repeat that, in my judgment, the attitude of the manufacturers was not a commendable one. However, the Government are opening up negotiations with South Africa with a view to a reconsideration of the trade relations of the two countries. The whole question of the Tariff relations will bc reviewed, and the maize question gone into thoroughly. In the meantime, however, I am considering very caref ully another alternative which is at the disposal of the Government. Of that I will say nothing further to-night, but I hope that the warning given will show those who asked for protection for the secondary industry of which maize is the raw material that it is " up to them " to stand by the men who grow it here. Debate (on motion by **Mr. Mcwilliams)** adjourned. {: .page-start } page 368 {:#debate-29} ### ADJOURNMENT {:#subdebate-29-0} #### Northern Territory Administration Motion (by **Mr. Greene)** proposed - >That the House do now adjourn. {: #subdebate-29-0-s0 .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter . -I have received the following telegram from Messrs. H. Nelson and P. Brennan, on behalf of the residents of the Northern Territory, asking me to ventilate the subject of their communication in this House. The telegram is as follows : - >On behalf people Territory we enter emphatic protest against future development Territory being dependent on Vesteys Bros, as per recent statement by **Senator Pearce.** Considering general concessions being granted Vesteys they should be compelled faithfully carry out condi tions their leases re fencing well sinking &c. We request that no leases land Daly River be granted individual until such lands arepublicly advertised and gazetted as open selection. We urge immediate necessity Government diverting their steamers now calling Java and Singapore soas call Darwin and not leave place for ever mercy profiteering monopoly of Burns Philp who still charge highest war freights and fares though subsidized by Government. Isolation is strangling this place and Burns Philp are twisting the Tope. We further urge the immediate starting of Katherine-bridge which cannot be effected by battle of routes and would absorb most of Territory unemployed. We protest against the system of government rations for unemployed as degrading when plenty of necessary and useful work that requires immediate attention would provide them with employment. The unemployed situation here is damning evidence of Government's wilful neglect or utter inability to handle its own estate intelligently. We also direct attention to statements recently made from Bench by resident magistrate alleging interference by Administrator and others with the course of justice. There are some important statements in that telegram, and I hope that the Government will take them into considertion. {: #subdebate-29-0-s1 .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr GREENE:
Minister for Defence · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- All I can say is that I will bring the telegram under the notice of my colleague the Minister for Home and Territories **(Senator Pearce)** and let the honorable member know the result. Question resolved in the affirmative. House adjourned at 10.27 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 12 July 1922, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1922/19220712_reps_8_99/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant