Mr. Speaker (Hon. Sir littleton Groom) took the chair at 11 a.m., and read prayers.
page 1932
QUESTION
CANBERRA
Parliament House : Furnishing and Equipment : Official Opening - Railaway Communication - Secretariat Building.
Mr COLEMAN: REID, NEW SOUTH WALES
– Is the Minister representing the Minister for Home and Territories yet in a position to answer the questions I asked on the 12th March, regarding the use of imported material in the furnishing and equipment of Parliament House, Canberra?
Mr MARR: Honorary Minister · PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– The honorable member asked what products used in connexion with the construction, equipment, and furnishing of Parliament House and other Government works and buildings at Canberra had been imported from (a) Great Britain, and (b), foreign countries. The following particulars have now been received from the Federal Capital Commission : -
Bituminous roof covering, special sani tary fittings, rubber flooring, carpets, glassware, chinaware and linen for the dining-room, partlyfinished cutlery
Oregon timber, special white cement,
Trinidad asphalt roofing, and some special cylindrical locks - a email percentage of the total requirements.
On the same date the honorable member asked -
Is it a fact that a contract for rubber floor coverings for ParliamentHouse at Canberra has been let to a British firm?
Is the flooring to be supplied under such a contract to be made in Australia or Britain?
Did Australian rubber manufacturers tender for such floor coverings?
Was any Australian tender recommended . for acceptance by expert officers?
What was the reason the contract was let to an overseas manufacturer?
Have proper comparisons been made between the quality of the accepted British covering and the Australian-made covering?
The following are the answers to those questions: -
Yes.
Britain.
Yes.
No.
The quality of the oversea article was much superior to that of the article specified in lowest Australian tender, and the price was very much lower, after allowing a reasonable margin of preference to the Australian-made article.
Yos.
Mr BOWDEN: PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES
– Has the Government come to any decision regarding the date of the official opening of Parliament House, Canberra?
Mr BRUCE: Minister for External Affairs · FLINDERS, VICTORIA · NAT
– The matter is receiving the urgent consideration of the Government, because it is essential that an announcement shall be made as soon as possible in order to allow ample time to complete the arrangements for the ceremony.
Mr E RILEY: SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP
– Does the Government intend to invite any distinguished person to perform the opening ceremony, or will that be done by the Prime Minister ?
Mr BRUCE:
– I do not think that, in any circumstances, the Prime Minister would be the proper person to open a session of Parliament at Canberra. No definite decision as to who will perform the opening ceremony has yet been made, but at the earliest possible date I shall make an announcement to the House on the subject.
Mr E RILEY: SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP
– Can the Minister representing the Minister for Home and Territories inform the House of the progress that is being made in regard to the construction of the secretariat building ? I understand that the services of a number of building tradesmen are being dispensed with. If the secretariat building were proceeded with, their employment at Canberra could continue.
Mr MARR:
– The secretariat building was referred to the Public Works Committee for investigation and report. The Government desires to proceed with the erection of the building as speedily as possible, and would be glad if the commit/tee would expedite its report.
Mr E RILEY: SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP
– I ask the Minister for Works and Railways what steps the Government is taking to improve the railway connexion between Canberra and the southern States? I understand that visitors travelling to Canberra from Melbourne have to make an unnecessary detour of 90 miles.
Mr HILL: Minister for Works and Railways · ECHUCA, VICTORIA · CP
– The honorable member’s question relates to a matter of Government policy, in regard to which an announcement will be made in due course.
page 1933
QUESTION
ADMINISTRATOR OF NAURU
Mr BLAKELEY: DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES
– I ask the Prime Minister whether General Griffiths has been reappointed Administrator of Nauru. Have not the three countries that share the mandate for that island the right to appoint the Administrator alternately? Has New Zealand approved of the reappointment of General Griffiths?
Mr BRUCE: NAT
– The arrangement by the three countries that share the mandate for Nauru is that each in turn shall appoint the Administrator. Australia appointed the first Administrator, General Griffiths. His term expired in June last, but he had done such admirable work during his period of office that the mandatories agreed that it was desirable to renew his appointment. That has been done.
page 1933
QUESTION
S.S. WOTAN
Mr WATKINS: NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES
– Is the Prime Minister yet able to make an announcement regarding the claims for work done at Newcastle on the ex-enemy vessel Wotan?
Mr BRUCE: NAT
– I regret the delay that has occurred in connexion with this matter, in which the honorable member has taken such a keen interest. The Commonwealth Government communicated with the British Government in regard to one point that must be cleared up before a final decision can be reached, but received no reply. A few days ago, a further communication was sent asking for a reply, but so far none has come to hand.
page 1933
QUESTION
COCKATOO ISLAND DOCKYARD
Mr MAHONY: DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES
– Will the Prime Minister say whether it is true that the Government contemplates interfering with the Commonwealth Shipping Board’s administration of Cockatoo island Dockyard ?
Mr BRUCE: NAT
– The answer is in the negative.
page 1933
COAL MINING INDUSTRY
Formal Motion of ADJOURNMENT
Mr. SPEAKER announced that he had received from the honorable member for Hunter (Mr. Charlton) an intimation of his intention to move the adjournment of the House to discuss a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely : - “ The necessity for the appointment of local boards to expedite the settlement of industrial disputes in the coal-mining industry.”
Five honorable members having risen in their -places,
– For what districts were the local boards required?
Mr CHARLTON:
– Tie Newcastle district in particular, but other districts in the Commonwealth require local boards.
Mr.Bruce. - The districts concerned,, were, I think, the Newcastle, Western, and Southern.
Mr CHARLTON:
– Yes, there were three. The miners’ representatibes have considered the Prime Minister’s reply, and -have asked me to -again ibring Ihe matter before Parliament. I noticed in “the Sun Pictorial to-day a statement ‘to the . effect that a meeting of de’legates had been held in camera, and it is rumoured that, as -a result of a dispute that has arisen in regard to flie payment for safety lamps, there is a likelihood of -a Jh.nld-.up in the coal-mining industry in the near future. I do not wish -that to happen, and I do not think that any leader of the men wishes a dispute to occur.I shall do my “best to prevent industrial trouble, and I . am sure that the leaders of the organization also wish to avoid it. But, at the same . time, there is a limit to the patience ‘of . the men. I do not know whether the dispute about thepayment for safety -lamps has been under consideration -for some time.
Mr Watkins:
– Yes,a good while.
Mr CHARLTON:
– If that is so it shows that it is necessary for something to be done immediately to settle it. -It will be generally admitted ‘that the men at the head of the organization, in common with most industrial leaders, wish to do all in their power to prevent industrial trouble. They wish to avoid disputes, and are aarxious to have grievances redressed. It is a difficult matter, however, to get the members of the . rank and file to agree to further procrastination.
Mr Hughes:
– Have the men anyother means of -obtaining redress ?
Mr.CHARLTON.- No. In these circumstances honorable members wall realize how necessary it is- that something should be done, at once. It may be’ contended by some that local boards cannot be constitutionally appointed, and I think that,, in the letter JL received from, the Prime Minister, there was- a hint to that effect. Since the Industrial Peace Act was passed in. 1920 the special, tribunal appointed under it has. been functioning; and has dealt with mining disputes in. a manner satisfactory to both parties, as there have been- no complaints, from the employers or the employees. Both) parties have accepted the decisions of -the tribunal. Provision is made in the Industrial Peace Act for the appointment of local boards.
Mr Hughes:
– In what section- o£ the act is provision made for such appointments*?
Mr Bruce:
– Section 21.
Mr CHARLTON:
– Yes, section 21 provides for the appointment of local boards; but the special tribunal was appointed under sections 13 and 14, which read -
The Governor-General may appoint a’ specialtribunal or tribunals for the prevention of or settlement of any industrial dispute or disputes.
A special tribunal shall consist of- an equalnumber of representatives of employers and employees respectively,, together with a chairman.
Section 21 provides for the appointment of local boards, because it was realized at the time the act was passed that one tribunal could not deal with all the disputes that would arise in the coal-mining industry in consequence of the changes of conditions to which I have referred’,, in an industry in which 25,000’ men are employed’ in the different States. Section- 21 of the act, under which local boards are appointed, reads -
In relation to any special tribunal, the Governor-General may appoint a local board or boards to- exercise jurisdiction, within such limits’- as are prescribed or- as are defined by the special tribunal for the settlement of any industrial dispute or disputes or for the prevention or settlement of disputes which have arisen or which may arise in any industry.
That provision was made as it was realized’ at the time that it was necessary to appoint local board’s. Section 22 provides for the constitution of local boards, in this way-
A’ local board shall consist of a chairman, and an even number (not loss than four nor more than eight) of other members. (2.) Of the members other, than, the chairman,: one-half shall be representative of employers, and’ one-half shall be representative” of recognized organizations of employees. . . .
Mr G FRANCIS: KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · NAT
– Have applications been submitted for the appointment of local boards?
Mr CHARLTON:
– I think I am correct in saying- that application has been made1 on- several occasions, but the requests have not been1 acceded to. Legislation has been passed to provide for the appointment of: local boards,, and; up- to the present its constitutionality has not been questioned. Local boards- can work only ire conjunction with the special’ tribunal,, which has the right to> accept or reject the decisions arrived at im- connexion with local disputes.- The tribunal exercises full control. The coal miners’ organization controls an industry the operations of which extend beyond the limits of one State. The Industrial PeaceAct was passed as the right honorable member for- North- Sydney (Mr. Hughes) knows, because- prior- to its passage^ thecoal miners experienced’ great difficulty in getting- their grievances considered”. They have been waiting for two years to have their cases dealt with) by the Arbitration, Court. Honorable members will- admit that if a dispute which-, arises to-day is. not dealt with promptly, conditions may have altered considerably within twelve months or two years, or at least by the time, the Arbitration Court is able to consider it,, and no useful purpose is* served’ in, having, the case considered after such a lapse of time. In recognition of the difficulty surrounding the situation,, the- legislation to which I have referred’ was passed. It has given satisfaction to the mining industry, and has been in- operation ever- since the- act was passed. I think I can say that there have been no strikes in the coalminingindustry since this legislation was enacted. To-day, however, there is’ dire distress in the industry through no fault of the miners, but owing to the supply of coal being in excess of the ‘demand-. When disputes arise, we should do everything we can to settle them. In view of the action recently taken by Parliament in passing theCrimes Act,, it is essential that we should do everything possible to provide adequate machinery for settling disputes of’ this character. If there is trouble in the coal-mining industry, our transport services and trade and commerce will naturally be interfered with, and if such a position should arise, the Government must administer the law on the statutebook. It is provided in the Crimes Act that the leaders of industrial organizations who, after the issue of a proclamation, continue to carry on industrial fights, may be tried and, if found guilty, sent to gaol, and if not born in Australia, deported.
Mr Latham:
– That is not so.
Mr CHARLTON:
– I hope such a thing will not happen, but I am warning the Attorney-General that there are possibilities of action beng taken in the direction I have indicated. If the Attorney-General had a knowledge of the coal-mining industry, he would know that immediately there is a cessation in the supply of coal, which is the life-blood of commerce, industries dependent upon it for a continuance of operations, and all steamers which are not oil burners, are affected, and the trade and commerce of the country is seriously interfered with.
Mr Latham:
– That is so; but the Crimes A et deals only with those actually engaged in transport and not with those employed in the various industries which affect transport services.
Mr Scullin:
– The Attorney-General is now apologizing.
Mr Latham:
– The point I have mentioned was made clear during the debate on the second reading of the bill, and the provisions in the measure are also clear in that respect.
Mr CHARLTON:
– If that interpretation is correct, the people of this country will be staggered to hear of it.
Mr Hughes:
– If the Crimes Act docs not deal with them, with whom does it deal?
Mr CHARLTON:
– If what the Attorney-General has said is not a subterfuge, it shows that, notwithstanding the statements of the Prime Minister and of other members of the Government, that they would deal with these disputes, the Government has had legislation passed which is no good. Although I do not possess legal knowledge, I venture to say that there could not be a big upheaval in the coal-mining industry without the provisions of the Crimes Act applying to it.
Mr Scullin:
– There could not be a more serious strike in Australia than one in the coal industry.
Mr CHARLTON:
– No. Such a strike would have a very serious effect upon the industrial life of Australia.
Mr Hughes:
– There has never been a coal strike that has not interfered with the trade and commerce of the country.
Mr CHARLTON:
– No.
Mr Hughes:
– If those engaged in the coal-mining industry do not come within the purview of the Crimes Act, the measure is of no use.
Mr CHARLTON:
– That is so. It may as well be removed from the statute-book. The statement of the Attorney-General shows that the people have been misled, because they understood that it was passed with the object of dealing effectively with big industrial upheavals.
Mr Latham:
– Yes, so far as there is power.
Mr CHARLTON:
– If there is no power to deal with disputes which interfere with our transport services and Ihe operations of industrial undertakings the act will do nothing.
Mr.- Hughes. - During a coal strike in New South Wales, in 1910, the Government of the day took the coal bv force.
Mr CHARLTON:
– It had “to do it, because it is impossible to keep industry going without fuel.
Mr Hughes:
– If a coal lumper refused to place coal on board a ship, would not that come within the act. The coal lumpers and the wharf labourers would be involved.
Mr SPEAKER (Hon Sir Littleton Groom: DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND
– I ask honorable members not to interject, as by doing so they are occupying the time which is allowed to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) under the Standing Orders.
Mr CHARLTON:
– It is interesting, Mr. Speaker, to have these interjections,, because they clearly demonstrate that there is a big difference of opinion on both sides of the House in regard to the Crimes Act. If the contention of the AttorneyGeneral is correct, I foresee that very little will be done under that legislation. If a big industrial disturbance occurs the Government will, in view of the mandate it has received from the people, have to give effect to its legislation. That is what was intended.
We all wish to avoid such a position, and that is the reason why I have moved the adjournment of the House. I would be recreant to my trust and to my constituents if I did not place the facts fairly before honorable members, and point out the position in which industrial leaders will be placed if a big upheaval occurs. I repeat that there are no more loyal men, and that there are none who strive more to prevent industrial trouble than the leaders associated with this organization. I do not think there are any men who could handle the difficult position with which they are confronted from time to time with more tact than do the leaders of this organization. If trouble arises in any of the mines the workers are practically forced into a difficult position; and any delay that occurs in dealing with the situation is serious. The Prime Minister would be well advised to take steps immediately to ascertain just what trouble the miners are facing. If he did so, it would probably allay the feeling of unrest. I have had no private information as to the matters discussed at the meeting of the coal miners yesterday, but the very fact that they met in camera and supplied no information to the press, tells me that the situation is serious. Nothing irritates the coal miners more than delay in dealing with the disputes that arise from time to time. I wish to make it quite clear that I am making no complaint about Mr. Hibble, or the coal tribunal. The decisions of Mr. Hibble from time to time have given general satisfaction. But it is quite impossible for his tribunal to deal with every minor difficulty that arises. Some honorable members do not seem to realize that coal mining conditions are different from those of every other industry. Miners are paid not by the day or the week, but according to the amount of coal they grass. In such circumstances every impediment to production is serious. It is necessary that there should be some local authority, acceptable to both employees and employers, to deal with disputes immediately. The local boards are composed of representatives of the miners and their employers and their proceedings are more in the nature of a round table conference. The decisions that they give are generally satisfactory. Their reappointment would render it unnecessary to submit every .minor trouble to the coal tribunal, and would leave it free to deal with the major disputes that affect the whole industry.
Mr Coleman:
– When the shipbuilding tribunal was established provision was made for local authorities to deal with minor disputes ; and that is what we want here.
Mr CHARLTON:
– That is so. The local boards really operate on the principles set out in the Whitley report. They do not call numerous witnesses, for they are practical men who understand the conditions of the industry.
Mr Coleman:
– Why does not the Prime Minister apply the principles of his Rotary speech to the case?
Mr CHARLTON:
– It is of little use to argue whether local boards are constitutional or not. The right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) established them, and their validity has never been questioned. Since they were appointed there has not been a coal shortage in Australia. The coal miners are not willing to submit their disputes to the Arbitration Court, for the delays that would result would be interminable. They want ready redress for their grievances.
Mr Seabrook:
– What causes the trouble amongst them? Are they not on piece-work ?
Mr CHARLTON:
– The honorable member does not seem to* realize that the conditions under which coal miners work are always changing. The coal seam may be six, seven or eight feet high, and clean, one day, and the next day it may be narrow, or water may intrude, and hinder working operations. Then again you may have an unsafe roof, “and have to timber it right into the face in order to make it possible to work. A fault may develop in a seam, or ‘ ‘ brass “ may be encountered. Any one of a hundred difficulties may arise in a few minutes.
Mr Seabrook:
– The coal miners knew this when they accepted the piece-work principle.
Mr CHARLTON:
– I was about to conclude my remarks, but that interjection renders it necessary for me to make the position still clearer. I have a lively recollection that some honorable members opposite, and particularly the honorable member for Franklin (Mr. Seabrook), have constantly advocated, in this chamber, the adoption of the piece-work, instead of day-work, principle. They complain that when daily wages are paid without regard to output, the workers go slow and donot work honestly. But those honorable members are not prepared to do the fair thing when piece-work is adopted. The honorable manner’s interjection shows that he would be ready, in any time of difficulty, to say, “ Oh, the workers knew all about it.” Let me tell him that the coal miners are ready at any time to abandon the piece-work principle and work for a daily, or weekly, wage ; but if they did so, the result would not be so satisfactory to the general public as far as price was concerned.
Mr Seabrook:
– The coal miners are making the trouble now; we are not.
Mr CHARLTON:
– The working conditions are making it, not the coal miners. The honorable member did not hesitate, some time since, to give a vote that may have the result of making these men criminals for protesting against unfair working conditions.
Mr Scullin:
– He would refuse the coal miners a tribunal of any sort, and even trial by jury, in the event of trouble occurring.
Mr CHARLTON:
– I wish the honorable member to understand that the coal miner is just as reputable a citizen as he is.
Mr Hughes:
– The circumstances of coal mining differ very rapidly. A man may be working in a good place to-day, but to-morrow it may be a bad place.
Mr CHARLTON:
– That is so. I can quite understand that it is inevitable that some honorable members must be ignorant of coal-mining practice, but they should be willing to be advised by those who do understand it; and they should pay some respect to the opinions of men who have worked in coal mines. Until I came into public life, I had spent all my time in the coal mines, and I claim to know something about the industry. My experience leads me to say, without hesitation, that the appointment of local boards for the redress of local grievances is absolutely necessary. If the coal miners are fairly treated, as they have a right to be, they are as law-abiding as any section of the community. They have no desire to see industry disorganized and men unemployed. That is true of the workers in every industry. The men who hold official positions in the various trade union and labour organizations are the last to wish for industrial disorder. Iurge the Prime Ministerto agree to the proposal that local disputes should be referred to local boards. I have no doubt whatever that if the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes), were Prime Minister, he would not hesitate to do so.. He established the special tribunal daring his term of office as Prime Minister, because his personal knowledge of the coal-mining industry told him that it was necessary to do so. It is impossible far the coal tribunal ito deal with every minor dispute that arises, for it is kept busy -with the big disputes on general principles that affect the whole Commonwealth. I trust that the Governmentwill get into touch with the representativesof the coal miners, ascertain the natureof the difficulties that they axe at present facing, and take every possible step to avoid another coal crisis.
Mr WATKINS: Newcastle
– I feel sure that honorable members generally willrealize that the sole purpose of the Leader of the Opposition in moving the adjournment of the House to discuss this matter was to avoid serious trouble among the coal miners. Iagree with him, that the best way to ensure harmonious working is for the Government to appoint local boards to deal with local disputes. I have had a long experience in the coal-mining industry. I was connected with it many years ago, before the colliery owners would agree to adopt any reasonable method of settling disputes. I know of the coal miners’ unsatisfactory experiences in the Arbitration Court, and of their hearty desire for the appointment of local boards for settling local disputes. It is idle for honorable members to say that the conditions under whieh coalminers work are similar to those governing all mining operations. The Leader of the Opposition put it mildly when he said that conditions might change in two or three days. It is because they change so rapidly and frequently that there is difficulty in providing a just method of paying the miners. All sorts of circumstances may arise to make it impossible for the coal miner to grass a normal quantity of coal in a day. As we have already been told, water comes in some tiroes, and at other times “brass;” is sum et. “Brass” was the cause of one of- the biggest strikes I have known. The point art issue om that occasion was payment fca- what is known as “ jerry.” Stone. 2 feet thick was encountered in the seam, and miners, determined to have » fair rate- of pay fixed for quarrying it. I can well remember’ also the conditions under which men were obliged to> work at Coal Creek. That was the most troublesome seam of which I have amy knowledge. The face altered from day to day. One day it rolled up and the next it went down. In endeavouring to settle the disputes of the miners who were engaged in mining it, I drew up five agreements before we were able to make a satisfactory arrangement. The basis-‘ of the agreement that was ultimately signed was that a local board should be appointed’, on- which both the employers and the employees should be represented, to- settle troubles as they arose. The coal miners- are frequently unfairly blamed for stoppages of work that occur’ on the mines. One .of the troubles that has arisen now has relation to working- with safety lamps in certain mines. I well remember a similar trouble occurring at the Stockton Bore Hole. In my opinion-, there should be- safety lamps in every mine; but payments for hewing where safety lamps- are used should be adjusted. When one compares the convenient awd safe lamp that is now used, with the naked light that the miners used to stick in their hats when working in the terminals, it seems to me to be ridiculous that there should be any question as tfr the wisdom, of using safety lamps everywhere. Men are able to work much more freely with naked, lights than with safety lamps. It is- impossible to refer every small difficulty to the coal tribunal, and I assure honorable members that it is absolutely essential that local boards should be appointed.This matter is so important that it should be dealt with at once.. If act-ion were taken immediately, the Government would be doing something towards establishing a- basis for the settlement of disputes in their early stages. I admit that the local boards should not give- awards which would conflict with the general rates, but prompt action in small troubles might prevent, serious consequences. This act has been operating for some years, and no- objection has. been-, taken to. it. Thelocal board system-, would prove to- be more satisfactory to. both sides in a dispute than any other system. I shall not refer to the Crimes Act further than to say that- it seems idle to contend that- a. stoppage in the coal industry would not interfere, with trade and commerce.
Mr Latham:
– I have not suggested that.
Mr WATKINS:
– The coal-mining industry lies at the very foundation, of our trade and commerce. Should tha coal miners cease, working, our other industries would soon be in difficulties.. Therein: lies the danger. Before it is too late,, the Government should establish local boards to deal with the little troubles which arise from time to time.
Mr BRUCE: Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT
– I appreciate the motives that have actuated the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) in moving the adjournment of the House to discuss this question, and the honorable member for Newcastle (Mr. Watkins) in supporting the motion. At the outset I wish to make it clear that neither any member of the Government nor myself has any objection to the system which has. been established for the settlement of disputes in the coal’-mining industry. Nor are we lacking in sympathy with the views put forward this morning. I have discussed this matter at length with the representatives of the men engaged in the. industry, and I understand their desire to have the disputes which arise, from time to time settled promptly. Difficulties which in themselves are not of malor importance sometimes contain elements of irritation and annoyance; and if settlement is long delayed, the men become restive, and it is extremely difficult for their leaders to hold them. In this connexion- I bear testimony to the work of the men’s leaders in this industry; they have done their best to maintain industrial peace and to assist the operation- of the Industrial Peace Act. That act was passed shortly after the war, and in some respects was emergency legislation, dealing with an industry which is fundamental, and on which the trade and the commerce of the country are. largely based. It provides for the coal-mining industry a method for the settlement of disputes different from that which operates in other industries. Not only was it necessary to deal promptly and effectively with disputes in this industry at that time, but reasons have been advanced to show that at all times special means of dealing with such disputes are needed. I do not propose to discuss that subject now, except to say that the principle embodied in the Industrial Peace Act has been more generally adopted in Australia in recent years, and I believe that that part of the community which considers that the principle underlying this legislation provides for probably the most effective means of ensuring industrial peace, is increasing in numbers. There are many phases of this question with which the House will have to deal when the industrial legislation foreshadowed in the Governor-General’s speech is before us, but I shall not refer to them to-day. It is hoped that that legislation will be introduced shortly after the Easter adjournment, and we shall then have ample opportunity to discuss it at large. I propose to confine my remarks to-day to the coal-mining industry, and to point to some of the difficulties in the operation of the act, and some of the reasons which have led the Government to postpone the appointment of local tribunals. When at Lithgow about twelve months ago, a deputation representing the employees in the coalmining industry in the western district of New South Wales waited on me with a request that a local tribunal should be appointed for that district. Subsequently, I met Mr. Willis, Mr. Pillans, and Mr. Baddeley in conference, and we discussed the matter thoroughly. It was, however, allowed to drop, until, in November last, representations were again made to the Government for the establishment of local tribunals. Some months ago another deputation, which Avas introduced by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) waited on me. The appointment of local tribunals Avas then discussed thoroughly. While I believe that the most effective way to deal with disputes in the coal-mining industry is probably by appointing local tribunals, there are great difficulties in the way of taking that course. There are constitutional difficulties, and also those which would arise from the wide extension of round-table conferences. Let us consider first the constitutional difficulties. Although the constitutionality of the Industrial Peace Act has never been challenged - and possibly it never will be challenged, because the appointment of the special tribunal which deals with the coal-mining industry falls well within the powers conferred on the Commonwealth by the Constitution - difficulties might arise so soon as local boards were appointed, because their appointment would not come within the scope of our constitutional power. Local tribunals have not been established under the act; but unofficial local tribunals have been operating, and have accomplished much good. In one case, however - in which the matter in dispute concerned the pillars left in mines - the right of such a tribunal to deal Avith the case Avas challenged. Negotiations had proceeded amicably, and it appeared that at last a long-standing dispute was about to be settled. Only the final speech by the owner s representative remained to be made, when the negotiations ended abruptly. The owners sent their representative to Western Australia, where the High Court was sitting at the time, and had the conference stopped. Similar action might not occur often; but it would always be possible for it to happen when disputes were being dealt Avith by local boards. No tribunal for the preservation of industrial peace could function satisfactorily in such circumstances. A further difficulty is that there is no power to compel either side to a dispute to appoint representatives to a board, or to compel the attendance of such representatives when appointed. Local tribunals can function only when there is absolute agreement between the two parties as to the method of settling a dispute.
Mr Charlton:
– Would the right honorable gentleman expect the representatives to defy the law?
Mr BRUCE:
– There is nothing in the law to compel them to attend a conference. Before an unofficial local tribunal can function the two parties must be desirous of coming together. Unfortunately, at the present time, there is not unanimity between the employer and em- ployees in this matter. The miners’ representatives say that, in the interests of industrial peace, local tribunals arc desirable; but the mine-owners are satisfied with the special tribunal which, they say, is operating satisfactorily. They do not want the local tribunals. They contend that their attitude is justified by the fact that, in four years, there have been only two disputes, and that local tribunals would tend to cause disputes. I make no comment upon that; my point is that, at present, there is not unanimity, and that therefore local tribunals cannot function. So long as one party to a dispute can hold up proceedings by applying to the court, or by withdrawing its representatives, no satisfactory basis for the settlement of disputes by this method exists. We should consider whether it is not possible to place our tribunals on a surer foundation. This is the main reason that has influenced the Government to express the belief that it would be a mistake, at the present time, to do what has been suggested. We are, however, considering what can be done to meet the situation, and, as I have indicated, there will be an opportunity within the next six weeks or two months to discuss these industrial problems from every angle. It would be unwise to appoint local tribunals unless there was complete unanimity, and while there was doubt as to their constitutionality. I have, of course, confined myself to the position in New South Wales, whence this request has come. I am aware that boards exist in Victoria and Queensland. With a wide expansion of local boards, functioning in different districts, difficulty might ‘ be caused by different decisions, and, possibly the establishment of different standards. If we are to have round-table conferences, there must be some central co-ordinating body to prevent conditions and decisions varying in accordance with the varying opinions of the different tribunals. It would be well, therefore, to wait until we can discuss the promised industrial legislation, which will be introduced in the near future. As a practical solution of existing difficulties, I propose to approach Mr. Hibble, and to ask him to take the earliest opportunity to ascertain what are the particular disputes which, if not dealt with promptly, may lead to the stoppage of work and cause serious trouble. In any case, the establishment of local boards - if that course were adopted - would take a little time; but if Mr. Hibble can deal with those disputes which contain the greatest element of danger to the community, I think that that will be the most satisfactory way of meeting the difficulty at the moment.
Mr LAZZARINI: Werriwa
.- I am keenly disappointed with the statement made by the Prime Minister (Mr. Bruce) that the Government does not intend to appoint the local boards to deal with miners’ disputes. He has told us that we must wait until the whole industrial position is dealt with in legislation, which will be introduced in two or three months’ time. In his concluding remarks the right honorable gentleman evaded the issue by intimating that he would ask Mr. Hibble to deal with one or two of the most serious matters in dispute. There has been trouble for several years in the South Coast mines, in my district. When the Industrial Peace Act was passed in 1920 I asked the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes), who was then Prime Minister, if the Government would appoint the local boards, and T was told that the matter would have consideration. There has been a persistent demand for the appointment of these boards for many years, and it appears to me that, in refusing to appoint them, the Government is in the position of Nero, who, we are told, fiddled while Rome was burning. If newspaper reports are true, there is a great deal of unrest in the coal-mining industry, and there is every possibility of a wide-spread industrial dispute which will affect other industries throughout the Commonwealth. In the circumstances it is futile to suggest that we should wait until we are revising our industrial legislation two or three months hence. The Prime Minister was coldly analytical of the request made by my leader (Mr. Charlton). He emphasized that the Government had to consider the question from the constitutional stand-point. If the right honorable gentleman had analysed similarly one of the bills that was rushed through Parliament earlier in the session, to deal a blow at trade unionism, the statute-book would not have been disgraced with that piece of legislation. Now, when it is a question of acceding to the request of am important industrial organization, we are told that any action which the. Government may take must be within tha few; that the Government must take no risks. The organizations concerned want to keep the wheels of industry going. Any man who says that the average coal miner is. anxious to cease work is saying something that is absolutely untrue. The- following letter, which was sent to me under date 19th June last, sets out the position very clearly: -
The pillar question. That is the bone of contention ali along the line in the southern district. I can give you, briefly, what the men want, and have wanted since 1914. When Mr. Hibble framed his award for the southern district, not under the Industrial Peace Act, he forced differential rates upon it, namely: Headings, which is now 4s. If d. ; boards, 3s. 1*id ; pillars, 3s. 7d. per ton. The majority of the work in this district now is pillar work. Mr. Hibble- has been asked repeatedly for a definition of a pillar-working place since 1914, but, up to date, has refused to do so. The proprietors, taking advantage of this, are getting the biggest part 3f their output from pillar working, and you will see the difference of rates as above; and they are the final arbiters on the definition, and are getting the majority of the bord work cut at pillar rates, and part of the narrow development work, usually 4s. 1 3/8d., out for- 3s. 7d. a ton. The deficiency trouble is largely due to this defect, and most of the stoppages are due to it. Men have to hole and shoot pillar work, -which is a standing joke to any practical miner in the country. The sole object of the agitation is to get some tribunal to sit and hear the arguments against this legalized robbery. Until something is done on these lines there will always be trouble in this district, especially on the deficiency question. You see the scientific way our wages are being reduced, and we have no redress, only the old, old way.
The writer of that letter is not looking for industrial trouble. He has always done his best to get disputes settled amicably, and he now say3 definitely that, as the men have no tribunal, there is no other way of settling a dispute, except to strike. There are fourteen or fifteen pits in my district, and there is a great deal of trouble over deficiency claims. The men’s complaint is that there is no tribunal to which they can readily appeal. Very often a strike is caused because a trouble has to spread through more than one district before, under the existing system, the original cause can be investigated and possibly settled. The original intention was to appoint local boards. As the Industrial Peace Act is being ad- ministered I am afraid that, instead of conducing to industrial peace, it- causes: trouble to spread. The trouble that occurred at- the Mr Kembla mines,, not so long ago, was due to deficiency claims. The proprietors of the mine deducted dirt, with the result that many miners were only making 13s. and 14s. a shift, instead of 19s: 9d., the. minimum hewing rate. They endeavoured unsuccessfully to obtain redress. Eventually they went on strike, and were brought before ihe court under the Masters and Servants Act of New South Wales, and fined. In default they were ordered to- undergo fourteen days’ imprisonment. In this way men are being oppressed to the breaking point, and it appears that they have now reached that stage in New South Wales. In many of the mines dirt and varying conditions will be encountered. They may persist for three, four, or five days, and the men may continue working, knowing that in. time the conditions will alter. Because these tribunals do not exist to give ready redress, grievances are not remedied until the men, being unable to tolerate them any longer, throw down their tools. If the creation of these boards would be unconstitutional, the whole act is unconstitutional. It has, however, continued in operation for a long time. It would be an almost perfect piece of legislation if the boards were functioning. If the Government wishes to overhaul the industrial machinery of this country in two or three months’ time, that is its business; but in the meantime it should appoint the boards. If the boards prove unsatisfactory amending legislation may be introduced, but something must be done immediately to keep the men at work, lt is of no use telling the mon that Mr. Hibble will deal with these matters. They know that Mr. Hibble cannot do so. The Prime Minister may regard certain matters as being important, but Mr. Hibble may think that other matters are more important. While Mr. Hibble is deciding something of importance in the south, his presence may be needed in the north or the west. If it was worth the risk of violating the Constitution to pass an act to deport trade union leaders and make them criminals, it is worth the risk of doing something that may be unconstitutional to keep the wheels of industry turning.
Mr SPEAKER (Hon Sir littleton Groom:
– The honorable member has exhausted his time.
Mr HUGHES: North Sydney
– The honorable the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) has called the attention of the Government, the Parliament, and the country to a possible industrial conflagration, and asks that something be done, so that should the fire break out it may be kept under control with little effort. It would not become me to speak with the same assurance as the honorable gentleman on the subject of the coal mining industry, since I have no first-hand knowledge of it. But, as he knows, I have spent a great deal of time among the coal miners, and have heard both parties in the industry state their views. It was my misfortune to be associated with the coal miners in, perhaps, the greatestindustrial upheaval that has taken place in this country. On that occasion I heard their case in detail; and as AttorneyGeneral and Leader of the Government, the troubles of the industry have been set before me on very many occasions. Prom my experience I should say that once this threatened strike starts it will be beyond the power of any man or any law, no matter now framed, to stay it. Like some malignant disease it will run its course. But now it is compassable - it may be dealt with. I do not say that the miners have a case. I know nothing about it; but I accept the Leader of the Opposition’s assurance that they are dissatisfied. Speaking as an old trade union leader, although never a leader of the coal miners, I have never known an occasion when they were not dissatisfied. That, however, by the way. Dissatisfaction among coal miners is not purely local; it is world wide. Only the other day we were told in the press that the greatest industrial upheaval that America has ever known had just terminated by a sort of modus vivendi, after inflicting almost incalculable loss upon the industry and the community generally, and we know that Great Britain stands on the threshold of a monstrous upheaval which may shake the country to its very foundations. The honorable gentleman says that in the coal-mining industry in Australia thereis dissatisfaction, that it is widespread, and that there is no remedy outside the provisions of the Industrial Peace Act. I am sure the House will allow me to say with what great satisfaction I learned from the lips of the honorable gentleman that the act has been most effective, as I said it would be, when introducing it, in dealing with industrial troubles. My honorable friend says that outside the act there is no means at the disposal of the miners for a peaceful and legal redress of their grievances, and he demands the appointment of local boards. He says that if I had been in office I should have granted his request. My attitude has been rightly interpreted by the honorable gentleman. “Without committing myself to an endorsement of his statement that there are good grounds for the dissatisfaction, I say that the facts must be faced. The greatest factor in industrial troubles is not material, but psychological. Half the troubles in the coal trade arise out of the nature of man. If they say there is a dispute, there is one. If they say there are good grounds for a dispute in this instance, they make out a prima facie case, and their request for legal means of redress ought to be granted. The act provides, in sections 21 to 26, for the appointment of local boards. The scope of those boards is limited, their functions duly set out in the sections dealing with them. The honorable member for Werriwa (Mt. Lazzarini) says that some time after the act was passed he asked me to appoint one of these boards. I do not remember the incident, but I accept his statement. The act, however, had only just been passed, and I naturally fell back on its machinery, which in effect provides that local boards shall be the creatures of the special tribunal.
Mr Lazzarini:
– I instanced that fact only to show that there was a demand for the local boards as soon as the act was passed.
Mr HUGHES:
– Section 23. subsection 6, provides that the special tribunal may remit certain matters to local tribunals. I think the honorable the Leader of the Opposition has made out, subject to any constitutional difficulties that may exist, a case for the appointment of local boards. We must accept the honorable gentleman as the mouthpiece of the miners, and when he says that there is dissatisfaction, that it is likely to grow, and that there is no legal redress outside the act, he makes out a case for the appointment of boards, and they should be appointed. I understand that the Government says there are constitutional difficulties in the way. 1 do not know whether there are. There may be. But when the act was being drafted, I naturally discussed such a possibility at great length, and provided in section 2 for saving out of the wreck whatever was possible. Section 2 reads -
This act shall be read and construed subject to the Constitution, and so as not to exceed the legislative power of the Commonwealth, to the intent that where any enactment thereof would, but for this section, have been construed as being in excess of that power, it shall nevertheless be a valid enactment’ to the extent to which it is not in excess of that power.
No one knows what the constitution means. And there is only one way of finding out. If you wish to find out what the powers of the police are, the most effective way perhaps is to go up to a policeman and put the matter to the test. In that way you may find out what an assault on the police means. Why listen to long dissertations on the law? Put the matter to the supreme test. Just go outside, strike an inoffensive policeman, and you will learn all about it. And so I say the only way to ascertain whether this provision of the act is or is not constitutional is to put it in force. Create the boards asked for. If that is done either of the parties, or both, under section 27, may submit the matter to the High Court. The High Court or a Justice of the High Court may determine whether in fact an industrial dispute within the meaning of the act exists ; whether a dispute is impending or whether a board has exceeded its jurisdiction. All these things are referable to the court. In my opinion, if a local tribunal is outside the scope of our powers, a special tribunal is in the same category. The Government should appoint the boards, and see what happens. I have practised in the Arbitration Court, and have amended the arbitration law, I do not know how many times. I have advised unions to appeal to the court, and know something about the arbitration law and industrial matters generally. My experience is that the most effective machinery is that which is most flexible, and the most flexible is the machinery set out in the Industrial Peace Act. It contemplates the creation of district councils, composed of members of the workers’ and employers’ organizations, dividing the whole Commonwealth into districts in which employees and employers would have quasi-legal powers, and, in fact, legal authority to deal with certain matters. They would be overlords of industrial matters within the Commonwealth. The Industrial Peace Act, in my opinion, is framed on right lines, and the boards asked for by the Leader of the Opposition should be appointed. In expressing a doubt as to the constitutionality of the act, however, the Government strikes a most serious blow at it. For its creator or the inheritors of its creator to declare the act ultra vires of the Constitution, is to create an almost insuperable difficulty. The Government says, in effect, “ This act is no good, and so we do not, we dare not, put it into force.” That is an invitation to challenge its validity. If those who have to administer it said, “ We believe in it,” then in all probability their action would not be challenged. I do not know that the employees in this case would challenge a reference to a local board. They might, but I should not care twopence if I thought that the appointment of a board was the best way to find an outlet for the grievances of the employees. I would let them see that the law really provides them with some sort of remedy, and would do what they ask.
There is one other subject about which I wish to speak, and it is this : Although time flies very rapidly, it may not have escaped the memory of honorable members that we went to the country on a matter very similar to that which the Leader of the Opposition has said is likely to arise if the unrest in the coal industry is not allayed. The condition of affairs then existing arose out of a firb which at one time could have been covered by a bushel basket. But by judicious fanning, and through other causes about which I do not wish to say anything just now, it grew into a conflagration that covered the whole industrial heavens. We went to the country to see whether, above everything else, we could not ensure industrial peace. As a result we have the Crimes Act, which says to the people, “ If you break the peace in regard to matters of trade and commerce, transport or industry, then you must look out!” We have made a new law to punish those who break the industrial peace. That is all we have done since the elections to ensure industrial peace. The Leader of the Opposition this morning asked the Government to do something else. He says, ‘ ‘ If you do not do what I ask there may be trouble which may bring certain people under the Crimes Act.” The Attorney-General says, “No, the coal-miners will not come under it.” He may be right, but if he is it is the most complete condemnation of the act that could possibly be conceived. The position is most serious if a monopoly or a scarcity of coal can be brought about. Let us remember that if the coal-miner says, “ That coal is black,” it is black, whether it is brown or any other colour. If he says that it is “ blacE,” then every engineman on our railways, every man wanting coal to run his ship or his factory, will be affected. If that is not a blow at commerce, industry, and transport, I do not know what is. So I say that if the act does not deal with that kind of thing it ought to be amended without delay. I know what a strike of this kind means. Strikes aimed at transport are most deadly and insidious. I was drawn into such a strike when the organization with which I was connected had nothing on earth to do with the dispute, and, in my desperate efforts to maintain industrial peace, I subsequently became almost the head and front of the offending.
Mr. Let. ; Is there no redress to be obtained by resort to the State tribunal?
Mr HUGHES:
– I understand the Leader of the Opposition to say that there is not. It may be that there is; but if the men will not resort to it; if these men are obstinate - as obstinate as I am, if honorable members please - then that means of redress must be ruled out of consideration. I asked to-day why the men did not go to the State industrial court.
Mr SPEAKER (Hon Sir Littleton Groom:
– Order; the honorable member’s time has expired.
Mr Charlton:
– I should like to move, that the honorable member for North Sydney be granted an extension of time.
Mr SPEAKER:
– I remind honorable members of what has been the practice. In view of the very limited time allowed for a debate on a motion of this kind, and the fact that to extend the time allowed an honorable member under the Standing Orders might deprive other members of the opportunity to take part in it, the House has adopted the practice of refusing to allow an honorable member an extension of time unless by a suspension of the Standing Orders, which requires the assent of an absolute majority of the House. Does the Leader of the Opposition desire to submit such a motion ?
Mr Charlton:
– I move -
That the Standing Orders be suspended to enable the right honorable member for North Sydney to continue his speech.
Question put.
Mr SPEAKER:
– There being an absolute majority of members present, and no voice raised in the negative, I declare the motion carried. The right honorable member for North Sydney may proceed.
Mr HUGHES:
– I shall not trespass on the time of honorable members for more than two or three minutes. The honorable member for Barton (Mr. Ley) asked me whether the miners could obtain redress by recourse to the industrial machinery of the State of New South Wales. My answer to him is that the Leader of the. Opposition has assured us to the contrary, and he is the spokesman of the miners.
Mr Bruce:
– The Government of New South Wales could appoint a local tribunal, but the miners are a Federal organization, and will not subscribe to that.
Mr HUGHES:
– I was coming to that.
Mr Charlton:
– If we had a Federal organization controlling the whole of the general conditions, and in addition a State organization, the two would clash.
Mr HUGHES:
– Quite so. With the honorable gentleman’s qualification and the Prime Minister’s explanation, the position is that a reference to a State tribunal would not be effective, because die coal-miners are members of a Federal organization. I say, from my own experience, that the miners of New South Wales will not accept it. That is why we made provision for these local boards. Why the miners will not acccept the State tribunal I do not know. Once more I say that the basis and real foundation of half our industrial trouble is psychological. Men have inherited traditions and hatreds, and have memories of wrongs done to them which they cannot forget in a minute or in a year. In my opinion, the Government ought to take action. Their attention has been called by the spokesman of the miners to a condition of things which he declares to be grave. We are shortly to have a recess which may last for some weeks. If in the interim this little conflagration should become a mighty industrial fire, there will rest upon us a terrible responsibility, because, as I have said, no law can put out an industrial fire once it reaches a certain magnitude. I have led strikes when more drastic legislation than any we have passed was directed against strikers. I refer to the Wade Act of New South Wales. I know what I am talking about. Once the trouble goes beyond a certain point we cannot stop it. The fire must burn itself out; the disease must run its course. It is a simple thing for which the Leader of the Opposition asks. He asks for the appointment of local boards under the Industrial Peace Act. The Government says that that would not be constitutional. I do not care two straws whether it is constitutional or not. If the Government will act by appointing local boards it will have done all it can. do. It will not be placed in the position of giving men who ask for bread, a stone. It will not be merely talking about law when men ask for the redress of their grievances. If it is not constitutional to do what I suggest - if our powers do not enable us to deal with such a matter as this in the way for which the act provides^ - then we must amend the constitution to give this Parliament ample authority. If we have no power to preserve industrial peace, then we must get it, and without delay. The Government have a majority, and should at once pass such an amendment and put it before the people.
Mr SCULLIN: Yarra
.- I do not intend to delay the House long, as I wish to give an opportunity to the AttorneyGeneral to say a few words in reply to the debate. The discussion has emphasized one or two very important general points. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) has asked that a pending dispute, -which may be of great magnitude and. involve this country in conditions such as we have experienced in the past as the result of a coal strike, should be referred to a board. The Government turns a deaf ear to the request. The Prime Minister has said that what the Leader of the Opposition has proposed is the proper way to deal with the question. He gave it his blessing, but he refused to give it his consent. That is the kind of thing which leads from one difficulty to another. This policy of inaction by the Government is the cause of much trouble. It went to the country, as the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) has said, with a flourish of trumpets, and claimed that it was the one and only Government to bring about industrial peace. It has returned from the country, and has done nothing yet for industrial peace. It has provided punishments for strikes, but nothing to prevent them. One of the most serious things which the head of a government eau do is to challenge the constitutionality of an act which it has been called upon to administer. That is practically what the Prime Minister did to-day. He said that a local board appointed under a section of the act would be unconstitutional, and that, indeed, if the act itself were challenged, it, or a large portion of it, might be declared to be unconstitutional. Yet that measure has done more than any other legislation passed by this Parliament to preserve peace in the coalmining industry, which, of all industries was considered one of the most difficult to manage. I dissent from the statement of the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) that the bulk of the disputes are of psychological origin, and are based on old hatreds and memories of past wrongs. My answer to that is that existing wrongs - real grievances that occur in the every-day lives of men working in the bowels, of the earth - are the causes of friction and enmity, and unless these real, and immediate wrongs and grievances are remedied quickly they develop into serious disputes.. The Prime Minister advanced two reasons for the non-appointment of local boards. Firstly, he said, such boards would be unconstitutional. As the right honorable member for North Sydney said, the only way to test whether or not the legislation is constitutional is to put it in operation. The law providing for ‘ the appointment of boards is on the statute-book, and it is the duty of the Government to test it in practice. I submit, however, that if a board, created under the act, would be unconstitutional, the act itself is unconstitutional. The Prime Minister’s second excuse for not putting the Industrial Peace Act into full operation was that the Government proposes to submit to Parliament legislation upon industrial matters,, and the miners are urged to wait until this new panacea is evolved. This policy of waiting may land the country in serious trouble. When, on another occasion, we asked that the problem of unemployment be dealt with by the Government, we were told to- wait until the Royal Commission on Insurance had submitted’ its report. This counsel of delay is futile when problems of industrial unrest and unemployment are so pressing. The Prime Minister told the House that, twelve months ago, a deputation waited on him at Lithgow, and made the same request that was .put forward by the Leader of the Opposition to-day. Yet we are asked to wait another two months while the Government further ponders the problem. I warn Ministers that there is trouble looming on the coal-fields, particularly in New South Wales, and if it develops in that State it will quickly spread to other places. If trouble does break out, the Government already has the- Crimes Act with which to punish the workers. The Attorney-General said that no employee in the coal-mining industry will be affected by that legislation. Technically, the honorable member’s statement may be correct; I do not dispute his interpretation, of the law; but if it is right it emphasizes those absurdities in the Crimes Act, to which the right honorable member for North Sydney drew attention. If trouble occurs on the coal-fields, and the miners go on strike and declare the coal black, they will be immune from any punishment under the Crimes Act; but an engine-driver who. in loyalty to his comrades, refuses to handle “ black” coal may be put in jail. What justification can be offered for such illogical discrimination? This legislation was only makebelieve, intended to save the faces of the. Government after a stunt election. Honorable members opposite went before the electors and talked of industrial peace, although they represent those forces in this country that have resisted every effort by the workers to establish machinery for the peaceful settlement of industrial troubles. If honorable members will cast back their memories a quarter of a century to the inception of wages boards and arbitration courts, they will find that every request for the establishment of pacific tribunals was fought and resisted in every possible way by the employers, and the arbitration machinery was put on the statute-book only by the strength of organized labour. Even now, only when the workers strike, or threaten to strike, can they get redress by constitutional means. But during the recent election the press was filled with lies about the workers flouting constitutional means, and declining to submit their grievances to peaceful arbitrament. Every request by the workers for the establishment of constitutional tribunals has been denied. Yet the Crimes Act has been placed on the statute-book in order that men who go on strike to secure justice may be declared criminals. The Industrial Peace Act has been in existence for years. Its purpose is to ensure industrial peace. But its operations are limited, and, in many cases, nothing is done to remedy long-standing grievances until something serious happens. Unions have spent thousands of pounds in trying to get their plaints heard by the tribunals established in accordance with the law of the land, and the employers have raised all sorts of dirty, mean quibbles in trying to prevent their reaching the court, or, if they got that far, in- contesting the legality of the proceedings. And still the workers are told that they are the law breakers, and that they should abide by constitutional means. The action of the Prime
Minister to-day was merely a repetition of old history.
Mr LATHAM: AttorneyGeneral · Kooyong · NAT
– The importance and urgency of the question raised by the Leader of the Opposition must be recognized by every honorable member. The Government earnestly desires to do everything possible to utilize existing machinery for the maintenance of industrial peace, but some honorable members appear to have misunderstood the explanation given by the Prime Minister. The Industrial Peace Act cannot function without the co-operation and consent of both sides in an industry. Both employers and employees must appoint representatives to sit on the special tribunals and local boards. Although those boards are appointed by the GovernorGeneral they must be composed of representatives of employers and employees, and no meeting can be held unless a statutory quorum is present. Accordingly, if either the employers or the employees refuse to appoint representatives to the board, or to allow their representatives to function, the board cannot operate. The employers in the coal-mining industry have been requested to join in the appointment of boards; but, unfortunately, in the northern, southern, and western districts of New South Wales, they have, for reasons which they set forth, and which I shall not attempt to canvass at this stage, declined to have anything to do with local boards. Therefore, it is impossible for the Government to appoint such boards.
Mr Hughes:
– Does the AttorneyGeneral suggest that if boards were appointed either party would abstain from attending ?
Mr LATHAM:
– Undoubtedly. The Governor-General may appoint a board consisting of persons nominated by the parties, but unless a quorum attends the board cannot function. The employers have stated definitely that they will not act- or appoint representatives to act for them on local boards.
Mr Charlton:
– If they adopt that attitude it is time the Government did something to put them in their place.
Mr LATHAM:
– I am discussing now the powers of the Government under existing legislation, and I am pointing out that the co-operation and consent of the two parties are the first essentials. In the absence of the consent of the employers, it’ is impossible to appoint a local board. The constitutional difficulties mentioned by the Prime Minister do not directly arise at the present time; they relate, not to the mere appointment of the board, but to its functioning. The power of this Parliament in relation to industrial disputes is restricted to disputes which are interstate in character. The Industrial Peace Act necessarily provides that local boards shall deal only with interstate disputes. If such a board does deal with an interstate dispute it acts constitutionally.
Mr Hughes:
– Does the AttorneyGeneral say that the Arbitration Court could not appoint a local board to inquire into and report upon a dispute?
Mr LATHAM:
– I am coming to that point. A dispute affecting a particular mine is the kind of matter with which local boards are intended to deal. If a board’s jurisdiction were challenged by one party, the question would arise as to whether the trouble was part of an industrial dispute. If it were, it could be rightly dealt with by the local board, as many such matters are dealt with by the Arbitration Court, but only because they are part of or incidents in an interstate dispute. The constitutional difficulty associated with the Industrial Peace Act does not appear on the face of the statute, but is incidental to its operation. That was illustrated recently when the employers obtained an injunction or prohibition from the High Court.
Mr Hughes:
– Does . the AttorneyGeneral know of any dispute in a coal mine which might not so extend as to become interstate in character?
Mr LATHAM:
– A dispute in a mine as to, say, the working of a particular seam by the men employed in that mine, is not in itself an interstate dispute. There may be, however, an interstate dispute involving a particular local dispute. In each case the nature of the dispute is a question of fact to be determined by the court. The matters with which local boards are intended to deal are essentially of a local character, and that brings us face to face with the real diffi- cult)’, namely, that the Commonwealth powers are limited to disputes extending beyond the limits of one State. We have to face the facts as we find them. The employers refuse to appoint representatives to sit on a local board; therefore; no board can be appointed, or, if appointed, it cannot meet with a quorum. The act contains no provision for compelling persons appointed by the Government to sit on a board ; it is therefore impossible for a board to be appointed under existing circumstances. The Prime Minister has said, however, that the Government will take steps to utilize fully the existing machinery by asking Mr. Hibble to arrange for an early hearing by the special tribunal of the disputes which are at present causing irritation amongst the coal miners. Fortunately, both sides have accepted the jurisdiction of the special tribunals, and it is hoped that they will continue to function. The Prime Minister’s proposal offers an immediate means of dealing with the situation, and is much preferable to plunging into difficulties which would probably lead to litigation, delay, expense, and disappointment. I submit that the Government is adopting the wisest course in seeking to use to the full, and immediately, the existing machinery, which is acceptable to both sides.
Debate interrupted under Standing Order -119.
Sitting suspended from 1 to 2.80 p.m.
page 1949
QUESTION
WAR INJURIES COMPENSATION BOARD
Dr MALONEY: MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936
asked the Prime Minister, uponnotice-
What are the terms of the appointment of members of the board to consider the question of compensation to those injured by Germans in the Great War?
Who are the claimant applicants for compensation?
What are the respective amounts of their claims?
What were the reports and what amounts were recommended?
What steps were taken by the board to hear the applicants before deciding on recommendations ?
Were any requests made to hear the claimants and what was the decision?
What are the grounds of such decisions?
Is it according to British fair play, or custom apart from legal rules to decide upon claims without hearing the persons concerned?
Will the reports of the board be printed for the information of honorable members?
Mr BRUCE: NAT
– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow: -
The duties of the board are -
To examine all claims by civilians for suffering and damage caused by enemy action.
To report to the Treasurer the amount of compensation, which, in the opinion of the board, should be paid to the various claimants, and to suggest the method by which reductions should be made in the event of the total compensation proposed being greater than the sum available to meet it.
It was further indicated to the board that the bases of assessment should conform with the principles laid down by the British Royal Commission appointed to deal with the assessment of similar claims of British nationals resident in the United Kingdom. 2, 3, and 4. The board has not yet completed its investigations and assessments. The complete information asked for is, therefore, not available. 5, 6, and 7. As indicated in my reply to question No. 1, compensation is being assessed in accordance with the principles laid down by the British Royal Commission. The documentary evidence furnished by the claimants, in the majority of cases, was sufficient to enable those principles to lie applied. In a few cases, however, it was necessary for the board .to seek additional evidence.
The claimants had no legal claim for compensation against the Commonwealth. Any payments made are purely ex gratia, and it is considered that the method of assessment adopted secured to the claimants full consideration of their claims.
The reports of the board when complete will be laid on the table of the Library for the information of honorable members.
page 1949
QUESTION
TRAFFIC OFFICERS FOR TELEPHONE EXCHANGES
Mr COLEMAN:
asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -
Whether the traffic officers’ positions, which are advertised, will be open to technical officers in the 4th Division?
Will the department consider the holding_ of an examination of candidates for the positions, such examinations to be open to all officers in the Service?
As all the main exchanges in the Commonwealth, and many others, are being con- verted’ into automatic exchanges:,, will’ the department receive and consider applications from, technical officers in other divisions of the Public Service:?
Mr GIBSON: Postmaster-General · CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA · CP
– Inquiries are being made,, and the desired information Will be furnished as early as possible^.
page 1950
QUESTION
PUBLIC SERVICE CLASSIFICATION
Papuan Officers - South Australia
Mr YATES: through Mr. Makin
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Home. and. Territories, upon notice -
Whether the reclassification of the Public Service of Papua has yet been finalized?
If not, when is it anticipated it will be finalized ? 3’. Will any increments occasioned be retrospective to the date when the first request was made hy the Papuan Public Service for the reclassification ?
Mr MARR: NAT
– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as f follow : -
The report of the Commonwealth Public Service Inspector, who was entrusted with the work of preparing a reclassification of the Papuan Public Service, has been completed and submitted to the Lieutenant-Governor, who is the authority under the Public ‘Service Regulations of the Territory by whom the Service is classifiable.
Advice as to the nature of the LieutenantGovernor’s, decision in regard to the Public Service. Inspector’s recommendations is expected within a few days.
It is improbable that any increments resulting from the reclassification will be retrospective to the date when the first request was made by the Papuan Public Service for the reclassification.
Mr MAKIN: HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -
As apparent serious inconvenience and understaffing is being occasioned in certain branches of the Commonwealth Services in South Australia, will he have gazetted and immediately applied those sections of classification that have been finalized?
Mr BRUCE: NAT
– The sections of the classification which have been finalized have already been gazetted and put into operation.
page 1950
QUESTION
DISARMAMENT
Mr WEST: through Mr. Fenton
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice - 1.. Is- it a. fact; that the League of Nations. Preparatory Committee on Disarmament will meet on 17 th May next?
If so, has Australia a representative on the committee ?
If an Australian representative has been appointed, will the Prima Minister state if he has an- instruction to the effect that the opinion of Australia is in favour of disarmament ?
Mr BRUCE: NAT
– The answers- to the. honorable member’s questions are as follow: -
According to latest advices the meeting of the Preparatory Commission, for the Disarmameat Conference has been fixed, to take place at Geneva on the 15th May. The work of this commission will be to make the necessary preparations for a. conference on the Seduction and Limitation of Armaments. 2 and 3. This Preparatory Commission will consist of the representatives of the: States which, are: members of the Council, together with representatives of Germany, the United States of America, the Union of the Socialist Soviet Republics, Bulgaria, Finland, Netherlands, Poland, Roumania, Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, should these countries accept the invitation addressed them by the League. Australia will,, therefore-, not be separately represented on. the commission. Australia, however, will be represented at the Disarmament Conference when it is held, and will then have every opportunity of expressing its views upon the subject.
page 1950
QUESTION
MILITARY CAMP AT SEYMOUR
Mr YATES: through Mr. Makin
asked the Minister for Defence, uponnotice -
Whether any inquiry has been made into the recent disturbance at the Seymour camp? 2.. If so, what is the nature of the finding, who was responsible, and what penalties were imposed, if any?
Sir NEVILLE HOWSE: Minister for Defence · CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– The matter was inquired into by the officer commanding the camp. The disturbance was the result of football rivalry, which ceased immediately the guard turned out. The offenders have not been traced.
page 1950
QUESTION
WAR SERVICE HOMES
Mr A GREEN: KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936
asked the Minister for Works and Railways, uponnotice -
What is (a) the minimum; and (6) the maximum number of rooms in houses constructed by the War Service Homes Commission?
If any house has been built with less than five rooms, is the lay-out so arranged that additional rooms can be added
What are the sizes of rooms recommended by the commission for the average family?
Are all necessary conveniences provided?
Mr HILL: CP
– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are: - 1. (a) Usually four, excluding offices; (6) approximately ten, excluding offices.
This point is not overlooked, but the requirements of the applicant ordering the home are paramount if they comply with the provisions of the act, and the proposed structure represents a suitable asset. Where additions to the main structure are not .in economically sound proposal, the extra accommodation can be provided either by the construction of a verandah or an attached or detached sleepout.
In all cases the size of the rooms must comply with the ordinances and regulations of the Government or semi-Government body controlling the erection of buildings in the particular district, and must not be of eccentric design.
Each home is provided with a bathroom, foundry, and where such are available, water, gas, electric light, and sewerage are connected. Where water is not available tanks are supplied, and, in the absence of sewerage, an earth closet is provided.
page 1951
PAPERS
The following papers were presented : -
Commonwealth Film Censorship - Report for year 1925.
Ordered to be printed.
Arbitration (Public Service) Act - Determinations by the Arbitrator, &c. - No. 1 of 1926 - Arms, Explosives, and Munition Workers’ Federation of Australia; Amalgamated Engineering Union; Australasian Society of Engineers.
page 1951
QUESTION
ALLEGED ILL-TREATMENT OF ABORIGINALS
Mr MARR: NAT
– On the 11th March the honorable member for Reid (Mr. Coleman), asked whether consideration had been given to the series of grave charges made by Mrs. N; Francis in the Aussie magazine, and by Mr. Robertson, concerning the alleged maltreatment of aborigines by Japanese and others in the northern parts of Australia, and, if so, what action had been taken or was proposed to be taken in connexion with the matter. At the time of the honorable member’s inquiry the articles in question had not been seen by the Minister for Home and Territories, but an opportunity has since been afforded him of perusing them. The articles demonstrate clearly that the allegations made are as to the treatment of aborigines in ‘Queensland. No reference whatever is made therein to the aborigines of the Northern Territory, unless one vague reference to “ the North” could be construed as such, but, even in this case, no particulars are given and no evidence connecting that reference with the Northern Territory is furnished. As previously stated in the answer to the honorable member’s question, the care of the aborigines within the various States of the Commonwealth is the responsibility of the respective State Governments, and it would appear that the allegations made by Mrs. Francis are the concern of the Government of Queensland and not of the Commonwealth.
page 1951
QUESTION
CRUDE OIL MOTOR FUEL
Mr HILL: CP
– On the 18th March, the honorable member for Melbourne (Dr. Maloney) asked the Minister for Works and Railways the following question : -
Is he aware that Messrs. Clarke, Padley, and Company, of West Melbourne, have an agency of a German invention which uses crude oil with the result that they can run a car carrying 100 passengers at a cost of less than Jd. per -car mile?
If not, will he request the Commonwealth Railway Department to make inquiries with a view to utilizing such invention by arrangement with the manufacturers, and so reduce the railway costs?
The Commonwealth Railways Commissioner has furnished the following report : -
Messrs. Clarke, Padley, and Company have already communicated with rae regarding this matter. The Commonwealth Railways Commissioner is keeping himself closely posted with the developments in rail motor cars, and reports are available to him from officers of the various State railway systems, who have specially visited other countries to ascertain the latest improvements. When it becomes necessary to purchase rail motor cars for use on the Commonwealth railways, he will be in -possession of the best advice to enable a decision to be arrived at as to the most suitable car to adopt.
page 1951
QUESTION
MENTALLY AFFLICTED SOLDIERS
Sir NEVILLE HOWSE: NAT
– On the 18th March, the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) asked the following questions : -
Were certain ex-soldiers removed from civil State mental hospitals during the year 1918, and placed in a military mental hospital?
If so, why?
Did the Commonwealth bear the cost of maintenance, medical, and other treatment of such patients in the No. 16 Australian General Hospital?
I am now in a position to furnish the following replies : -
Prior to the opening of No. 10 Australian General Hospital, the soldier mental patients were admitted to State institutions, including the overseas ward for service men at Royal Park. It then became the policy of the Department of Defence to concentrate its mental patients in a special ward in No. 10 Australian General Hospital.
Treatment in civil institutions was only a temporary measure pending provision of accommodation for treatment of such cases under military control.
Yes.
page 1952
QUESTION
RAVAGES OF THE TIMBER BORER
Sir NEVILLE HOWSE: NAT
– On the 17th March the honorable member for Hume (Mr. Parker Moloney) referred to the ravages of the borer in Australian timber and asked whether the Government would cause an investigation to be made with the object of eliminating the pest. I am now in a position to inform the honorable member that this question concerns the Department of Health only in this way: The Quarantine Act is designed to prevent the introduction into the Commonwealth of plant diseases and insect pests, including such things as timber borers. It is probable that many kinds of timber have their own specific parasites, while other parasites are common to different countries or to different classes of timber. New phases of this question, therefore, are constantly arising and have to be dealt with as they arise through the detection of these borers in imported timber. Each new variety of parasite has, in its turn, been dealt with when discovered, but it is to be expected that others will from time to time be found under one of the many conditions in which wooden articles arrive in the Commonwealth as imports. No general principles can be formulated adequate to cover all possibilities, but the greatest care is being taken to detect new channels of danger and to deal with these as detected. The major portion of the borer problem to-day, however, is the occurrence over a wide area and on a considerable scale of borer insects, either indigenous to or long established in Australia. As stated by the Prime Minister in the House on the 22nd instant, the whole question of carrying out investigations regarding white ant and borer pests will be referred to the Institute of Science and Industry when reconstituted.
page 1952
QUESTION
KYOGLE TO BRISBANE RAILWAY
Mr HILL: Minister for Works and Railways · Echuca · CP
– (By leave.) - As a number of questions have been asked in the House from -time to time in connexion with the construction of the Grafton-Kyogle-South Brisbane Railway, I desire to state that the work of connecting Sydney and Brisbane by a standard gauge railway is governed by an agreement between the Commonwealth and the States of New South Wales aud Queensland, dated 16th September, 1924, which agreement was in that year ratified by the Parliaments of the Commonwealth, New South Wales and Queensland. Under the agreement the work i9 vested in a railway council, consisting of the Commonwealth Railways Commissioner, the Chief Railways Commissioner, New South Wales, and the Commissioner for Railways, Queensland. The council has entire control of the work, and determines the order and the terms and conditions under which the works are to be carried out. Under the agreement, the cost of the works is, in the first instance, provided by the Commonwealth. The States of New South Wales and Queensland pay their quota on a population basis, the Commonwealth contributing one-fifth, and, in addition, for the time being bearing the quota which, had Victoria, South Australia, and Western Australia been parties to the agreement, would have been borne by those States. The work consists of re-laying and strengthening of the railway between Grafton and Kyogle, and the construction of a railway from Kyogle to South Brisbane. The work between Grafton and Kyogle, which is being carried out by the Chief Railways Commissioner for New South Wales, acting as agent for the council, is now well in hand. Considerable work has also been done by the Commissioner for Railways, Queensland, acting as agent for the council, in the vicinity of Rocklea towards South Brisbane and also towards the border. Last year the Railway Coun- cil invited tenders, which closed on the 1st September, 1925, for the construction of two portions of the railway, 26^ miles being in New South Wales, and 60J miles in Queensland. One tender was submitted for the work in Queensland, and two for the work in New South. Wales. At the time of the closing of the tenders, sealed estimates by the railway construction engineers of New South Wales and Queensland were also submitted. The total of the two sealed estimates was considerably lower than the total of the two lowest tenders. The council proposed to arrange that the work be undertaken by the Railways Commissioners of -New South Wales and Queensland respectively, and advised the parties to the agreement accordingly. These proposals formed the basis of negotiations between the Commonwealth Government and the States of New South Wales and Queensland. A conference of the representatives of the three parties was held in Melbourne in January last, resulting in an understanding that the sealed estimates of the chief railway construction engineers should be regarded as a firm tender, subject to the following stipulations : -
The payment to be on a quantity basis according to measurement, &c, at rates shown in the schedule of quantities and prices in the sealed estimate of the Chief Railway Construction Engineer.
Provision to be made for adjustment for or against the State authorities in the event of increase or decrease in wages, or decrease or increase in hours of work as may be fixed by award of Arbitration Court or industrial tribunal, or in such other manner approved by the unanimous decision of the council.
Contract documents to include such other provisos as are usual in railway construction contracts regarding carrying out of the work, &c, as determined by the council.
After several conferences between the Railway Council and the Crown Solicitors of the Commonwealth, New South Wales, and Queensland, contract agreements have now been signed by the Prime Minister on behalf of the Commonwealth, and the respective Premiers on behalf of the States of New South Wales and Queensland, whereby the works will be carried out at the rates shown in the sealed estimate. If the total of the two lowest outside tenders is compared with the total of the amounts for which the respective States, on behalf of their Chief Railway Construction Engineers, have now contracted to do the work, it will be seen that a considerable sum of money is saved to the Commonwealth and the other parties to the agreement. The lowest public tenders, including departmental supervision, which necessarily has to be incurred, and which must be added when comparing with the State contract price, were as follow: -
The saving on the lowest public tenders is therefore £201,968. Compared with the lowest public tender in Queensland, the contract with the State represents a very large saving. Compared with the lowest public tender in New South Wales, the contract with the State represents an increase of approximately £1,S00, and in this latter case the council has not acccepted the lowest tender, but has decided that the preferable course would be to have the work carried out in the same way that it is being done in Queensland. The estimated cost of the whole work was £3,500,000, -and under the Grafton to South Brisbane Railway Act .1924 authority is given for that sum to be advanced by the Treasurer to the railway council in control of the work. The estimate of £3,500,000 was prepared by the Royal Commission on the Uniform Gauge in 1921 without proper surveys; but, when the tenders and sealed estimates were received, the railway council prepared a full estimate based on reliable data, and the work is now estimated to cost £4,000,000. A bill will be introduced to Parliament shortly to provide for the extra £500,000. In conclusion, it might be emphasized that the agreement recently made with the Governments of New South Wales and Queensland, and which will later be placed before thi*
Parliament for ratification, places those Governments in the same position as private: contractors, and they are bound to carry out the work at the rates stipulated in their contracts.
page 1954
ASSENT TO BILLS
Assent to the following bills reported : -
Western Australia Grant Bill.
Power Alcohol Bounty Bill.
page 1954
HOUR OF MEETING
Motion (by Mr. Bruce) agreed to -
That the House, at its rising; adjourn until 11 o’clock a.m. to-morrow.
page 1954
QUESTION
TARIFF
Customs and Excise Duties. in Committee of Ways and Means:
Consideration resumed from 23rd March (vide page 1933).
Item 105 -
Mr PRATTEN: Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– Sub-item aa of this item is intended to rectify an anomaly. A previous parliament decided to admit knitted cotton piece goods in tubular form free of duty, principally with the object of helping the meat packers to pack their export meat acceptably. But for some years the importers have avoided the incidence of the tariff by splitting their tubular knitted goods and bringing them out here as cotton piece goods and thereby importing asemi-manufactured article duty free. Parliament decided to close up thatloophole by adding the words “ or otherwise “ ; “but another loophole has been discovered ; and inorder to close it and make the position unmistakably clear I move -
That sub-item aa be amended to read -
Piece Goods, Cotton Silk, or containing silk, but not containing wool, knitted in tubular form or otherwise.
Mr Mann:
– Will our acceptance of this amendment involve any articles that are not included ?
Mr PRATTEN: MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– Itwill only involve articles ina semi-manufactured state which in the past have been admitted free under this item.
Amendment agreed to.
Mr PRATTEN: Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– Perhaps I ought toexplain to the committee that the only ‘alteration made by sub-itemb is that the word “towels “ has been eliminated. Towels and towelling will be dealt with on a later item.
Mr MANN: Berth
.. - I understand from a conversation I nave had with the Minister for Trade and Customs that he intends to propose an amendment to item 120o which will meet my objection to this item in its present form. Would it bepossible to take 120cin conjunction with 105b? I think it would simplify the proceedings if we did so. I understand that the word “ towels,” as it stood in the schedulebefore this amendment was introduced, included all towels, and that that was not intended.
Mr PRATTEN: Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I have , an amendment to item120c which I think will meet the wishes of honorable members. Its object is to retain the duty on all towels and towelling similar to those that are made in Australia, but to revert to the duty on towels and towelling not made in Australia that was imposed prior to the introduction of the amending schedule of last year.
Mr MANN: Perth
. -I understand that the object of the. amendment which the Minister proposes to introduce to item 120c is to retain the present duty on Turkish and other towels and towelling that is made in Australia, but to revert to the previous duty on towels and towelling not made in Australia. To put it in another way, the increased duty will be imposed only on towels and towelling similartothat made in Australia.
Mr PRATTEN: MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– That is so.
Mr MANN:
– In that case I have no objection tooffer to this sub-item.
Mr PRATTEN: Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– In viewof our having amended sub-item aa, it will be necessary for us tomake aconsequential amendment to sub-item n to exemptspecially from this duty the items that we have just included under subitem aa. I draw attentionto the reduction made in this item, and also to theGovernment’s policy inconnexion with Britishpreference. In the last tariff the dutiesimposed on silk piece goods were 15 per cent., 15 per cent., and 20 per cent. British, intermediateand general, respectively. In the proposals now submitted they are 10 per cent.,12½ per cent., and17½ per cent. respectively.In other words, the general duty has been reduced by 2½per cent., and the British duty by5 per cent., which increasesthe British preference.
Mr.C.RILEY (Cook) [3.3].- The 1921 tariff provided for duties of 15 per oent., 15 per cent. and 20 per cent., British, intermediate, and general respectively. Within the last two years a silk weaving millhasbeenestablished in Sydney, more than £10,000 capitalbeing employed in it. It seemsstrange that just at the time that the f actory hasovercome its initial difficulties it should be further hampered by having the duties reduced. Bather should they be leftas theyare, not only to encourage the mill to which I have referred, butalso to assist in establishing further silk weaving mills in Australia. I admit that the argument which has been used inconnexion with Australian cotton and wool spinningand weaving factories does not apply to silk weaving factories, because we do not grow the raw material in this country. Nevertheless, we should do all that we can to promote the establishment of factories to deal with silk from the spinning stage onward. Even if the Minister is determined to reduce the British tariff from 15 per cent. to 10 per cent., there is no justification for a reduction of the dutyon foreign goods. Australia imports, chiefly fromJapan, silk goods to the value of £5,000,000 per annum. We should encourage our own industries rather than import Japanese goods. I suggest that this matter be referred to the Tariff Board, with a view to assisting the local industry by allowing the raw material to enter free of duty. There is little justification for the proposed reduction of duty.
Mr PRATTEN: Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
.- The Tariff Board has investigated this matter, and these reductions are made in accordance with its report. I am aware that there is a small silk-weaving factory in New South Wales, but I do not know whether it makes one special line of silk only. The Tariff Board in its report stated that no local industry would be affected by this proposal. “ Mr. WATT (Balaclava) [3.6].- I ask the Minister whether the 15 per cent. British duty which it is now proposed to reduce to 10 per cent, was not merely a revenue duty, and not one imposed to protect an Australian industry. Apart from its effect, I understand that the duty was imposed because silk clothing was supposed to be a luxury. If the object of this reduction is to give the British manufacturer a greater proportion of our silk trade, the Minister should not reduce the whole of the three columns. I think that he should give the committee some further explanation, apart altogether from answering the question raised by the honorable member for Cook (Mr. C. Riley), whose desire is to still further protect the industry to which he has referred. It would appear that we are throwing away revenue for no apparent purpose.
Mr FENTON: Maribyrnong
.- Although the Minister said that the intention was to increase the British preference, the additional advantage is only 2-t per cent. It would be better if he would agree to the general tariff remaining at 20 per cent., instead of reducing it to 17-J per cent. That would give a preference of 10 per cent, to the British and more protection to the Australian manufacturer. Most of the competition is in connexion with the general tariff.
Mr Watt:
– What about the intermediate ?
Mr FENTON:
– The general tariff applies to foreign countries; most of the silk and silk goods which enter Australia come from foreign countries.
Mr Watt:
– The intermediate tariff would affect France, and the general tariff Japan.
Mr FENTON:
– My suggestion is that the general tariff should remain at 20 per cent, as at present. That would give the British manufacturer more advantage over the foreigner, and, at the same time, assist the local industry.
Mr Watt:
– Does the honorable member want to keep both the intermediate and the general tariffs where they are now ?
Mr FENTON:
– There is not much difference. Great Britain has a preference of 1 per cent, only over France.
Mr PRATTEN: MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– The intermediate tariff is inoperative.
Mr FENTON:
– It may not always remain inoperative. I hope that the Minister will accept my suggestion.
Mr PARSONS: Angas
.- I support the suggestion made by the honorable member for Maribyrnong (Mr. Fenton), as to give effect to it would not make much difference to the consumer, and would provide additional revenue. There is no need for a great difference between the British and intermediate tariffs so far as silks are concerned, because the silks, made in Great Britain are different from those made in France, and there is no great competition between them.
Mr PRATTEN: Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– In view of what is practically the unanimous desire of the committee, I am prepared to accept the suggestion of the honorable member for Maribyrnong (Mr. Fenton). I therefore move -
That sub-item d be amended to read : - “And on and after 25th March, 1026, (d) Silk, or containing silk, or having silk worked thereon, except piece goods enumerated in sub-items aa and f ad valorem 10 per cent. British, 124 per cent, intermediate, and 20 per cent, general.
The intermediate tariff is at present inoperative, and it will continue to be so until proposals are brought before Parliament.
Amendment agreed to.
Mr J FRANCIS: MORETON, QUEENSLAND · NAT; UAP from 1931; LP from 1944
.- I desire to refer to item 105k For a long time the industry concerned has been subjected to unfair competition from countries where cheap coloured labour is employed. If we are to maintain the high standard of living which we have set up, we must make it possible for industries to pay Australian rates of wages. Before this tariff was introduced, many of the mills in Australia found great difficulty in carrying on. But the amended tariff has benefited them considerably; some Queensland mills have now six months’ work ahead of them. The Australian mills have been handicapped greatly becauseof the importations, mostly from Japan, of large quantities of inferior material. Some of it was almost rubbish, yet it was got up in such a way that it was purchased in large quantities by Australian housewives, who realized later that it was not so good as it was represented to be. I wish it to be understood that I am not opposed to protection, especially so far as this industry is concerned; but I hope that this tariff will not mean that the Australian consumer will be called upon to pay more for materials not manufactured in Australia. I refer to alpacas, silesias, mohairs, and lustres. These goods are not manufactured in Australia, but they contain wool. I have made careful inquiries, and have ascertained that there is not the slightest prospect of them being manufactured in this country, manufacturers having their hands quite full with other work. I should like to know if the articles referred to come under item 105f (3), dutiable at 15 per cent. British, 20 per cent. intermediate, and 25 per cent. general.
Mr PRATTEN: MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– Yes.
Mr MANN: Perth
.- In view of the vote taken yesterday on cotton- tweeds, and the very obvious determination of the committee to support the extra textile duties, I do not propose to speak against any of the remaining textile items in the schedule, but I wish to make it quite clear that this does not in any way indicate a change of opinion on my part. I am convinced that the imposition of these duties will bring about a revulsion of feeling, and, eventually, a demand for their withdrawal. I hope that the committee will give careful attention to the extra duties imposed in the division relating to metals and machinery. I intend to take every opportunity to secure a revision of the extreme protective duties.
Mr PARSONS: Angas
.- As a believer in the future of our woollen industry, the British preferential duties imposed under sub-item 105f (1) and (2) have my unqualified support. I hope that as the result of these duties the woollen industry in Australia will go ahead by leaps and bounds. Lustres or alpacas are used extensively as linings for the higher grade ready-to-wear and measure garments for men. Manufacturers of this class of goods come into direct competition with manufacturers of imported readytowear suits. Alpaca or lustre lining is used because, unlike cotton lining, it is uncrushable, and gives the finished garment a better appearance. The manufacturers wish to be in a position to compete with the imported article, and they have asked me to see if it is possible to have the material admitted duty free, if they enter into an engagement to use it exclusively for linings.
Item, as amended, agreed to.
Item 106-
Mr PRATTEN: Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
.- Under the 1921 schedule a great deal of difficulty in administration was experienced in connexion with items 105e and 106. Cases had to be opened on the wharfs in order to ascertain if items under 106 were included with items under 105e. Both are now dutiable at the same rate.
Mr PARSONS: Angas
.- If the altered duties will do away with the difficulties mentioned by the Minister, and obviate the opening of packages and cases on the wharfs, it will be of great advantage to the trading community.
Item agreed to.
Item 107-
By omitting the figures “40” appearing in the second last line, and inserting in their stead the figures “ 48.”
Mr PARSONS: Angas
.- I have been requested by a number of representatives of friendly societies to see if it is not possible to have friendly societies’ regalia admitted duty free.
Mr PRATTEN: Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– Representations have been made to the department to admit friendly societies’ regalia free, but there are reasons why that course should not be adopted. I had inquiries made, and found that practically every big draper makes regalia ‘ of some sort. The department felt, therefore, that if regalia were admitted indiscriminately duty free, we should not only inflict an injustice upon a section of the trade in Australia,’ but also involve the department in all sorts of administrative difficulties. For that reason, I am unable to do as the honorable member suggests.
Mr PARSONS: Angas
.- The 1921 tariff provided that woven materials in the piece or otherwise, including ribbons and galoons having not more than 40 ribs to the lineal inch, and not more than 3£ inches in width, should be dutiable, ad valorem 35 per cent. British, 40 per cent, intermediate, and 50 per cent, general. It is now proposed that ribbons and galoons shall not have more than 48 ribs to the lineal inch. The object is to protect the Australian industry. Galoons are manufactured for hat purposes principally, but under this bald definition a number of other ribbons may be included. Let me give a. few illustra tions. I am sorry that I have no samples of ribbons, but they aTe valuable, and I do not wish to hand them round for honorable members to experiment with. A watch-guard is usually a black ribbon, and, in addition to being ribbed, it has a moire finish. It is not made in Australia, nor is it likely to be made here, but it comes within this definition. There are also a number of faille ribbons in light colourings which are used for hair ribbons and millinery purposes. Their importation can in no way interfere with the ribbon industry in Australia. A number of fancy ribbed ribbons are used for lingerie.
Mr Scullin:
– All ribbed ribbons are not protected under this item.
Mr PARSONS:
– They are not meant to be protected, but under the departmental interpretation they are protected. On the ribbons I have mentioned duties have been paid to the Customs Department.
Mr Scullin:
– Is the honorable member arguing that all ribbed ribbons are subject to duty?
Mr PARSONS:
– I am arguing that a large number of ribbed ribbons, which itis not intended shall be dutiable, are dutiable. I have mentioned instances of ribbons upon which duties have been collected during the last few months. I have been shown another ribbon used for lingerie. To come under this item, a ribbon must have no break from border to border; but under -the departmental interpretation this particular ribbon, because it came within 48 ribs to the inch, although it had a fine satin or silk thread near the border, and a pico’t edge, was treated as dutiable. I suggest the addition to the item of the words “ and not made in Australia.” That would give the Customs Department a clear indication of what was meant, and if in future those ribbons were made in Australia, they would automatically come within the provisions of the schedule
Mr SCULLIN: Yarra
.- I am glad to see this item on the schedule, because it re-establishes for the ribbon industry the protection that was denied under the 1921 tariff. Before the 1921 tariff the item was as- it is now, but in 1921 the duty was applied only to ribbons up -to 40 ribs to the inch. The effect was that college bands, which were being successfully manufactured in this country, were admitted free. That provision was made with the object of allowing millinery ribbons to be imported free; it does not affect them to any appreciable extent. When the item applied only to ribbons up to 40 ribs to the inch, the importerswere able to import, free of duty, college bands with 41 ribs to the inch. I have samples with 32 ribs, 40 ribs, and 44 ribs to the inch ; and I venture to say that no honorable member, without measuring and counting the ribs, could distinguish between them. In. Melbourne there are two well-equipped mills making these ribbons. I invite honorable members, as a matter of interest, to inspect those mills. When I saw them first they amazed me. I have to thank the honorable member for Kennedy (Mr. G. Francis) for pointing out to me that this industry existed in my electorate, and, apart from the knowledge I gained, I have to thank him, also, for the entertainment a visit to those factories provided . This industry is not a parasite on Australia, for almost immediately after the 1921 tariff was passed its price list was lowered. I should imagine, from the information I have received from experts, that all the ribbons referred to by the honorable member for Angus (Mr. Parsons) could be made with a larger number of ribs to the inch than 48. They are of the finer class of ribbons. Watchguards, for instance, can be made with 49 ribs to the inch. The duty applies only to ribbed ribbons that have up to 48 ribs to the inch. College bands are not made with over 48 ribs to the inch.
Mr Mann:
– Do the Australian factories referred to by the honorable member make all widths and kinds of ribbons up to 48 ribs to the inch ?
Mr SCULLIN:
– I do not think so. They are specializing largely in the lines I have mentioned.
Mr E RILEY: SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP
– If we specify 48 ribs to the inch, will not the ribbons be imported with 50 ribs to the inch ?
Mr SCULLIN:
– Such ribbons would not be suitable for college bands.
Mr Hughes:
– What would be the duty on a ribbon, containing a badge, with more than 48 ribs to the inch?
Mr SCULLIN:
– I think it would be free.
Mr Hughes:
– Then that disposes of the argument of the honorable member for Angas.
Mr SCULLIN:
-The committee would be well advised to pass the item as it is.
Mr PARSONS: Angas
.- The honorable member for Yarra (Mr. Scullin) has not grasped my point. I speak with the knowledge of an expert, for I had two and a half years’ experience in a wholesale ribbon department, and am still able to judge the value of silk within1d. or1½d. a yard. This question of ribbons does not appear to be understood by honorable members. If the committee will postpone the item for a quarter of an hour I can obtain some specimens of Tibbon to illustrate my point. I reiterate my previous suggestion that the difficulty could be overcome by adding the words “ and not manufactured in Australia.”
Mr PRATTEN: Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I ask my honorable friend to accept my assurance that this is a rectification of a wrong done in 1921. All ribbons that come under the item can be manufactured in Australia. If there are any that cannot be manufactured here they will be dealt with very lenienfly by the department under other items of the tariff.
Item agreed to.
Item 109 -
Mr DUNCAN-HUGHES: Boothby
– When speaking on the tariff generally I referred to the item dealing with artificial flowers, and the Minister was good enough to promise to make a statement as to the number of factories and the number of employees engaged in the manufacture of artificial flowers in Australia. I should like to ask the Minister further to say whether the employees in this industry are male or female.
Mr PRATTEN: Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I obtained full particulars of the industry in Australia some time ago, and speaking from memory I think there are about seven small factories making artificial flowers and employing 200 employees, principally girls. So far as the Government is concerned it will do nothing to starve this small industry out of existence. This item has for years been a source of worry to the Trade and Customs Department. The old tariff levied a specific duty on “sprays, trails or posies,” and in order to effectively protect the revenue it has been found necessary to open up almost every case of artificial flowers imported and go through it in order to collect the different duties on the two varieties of imports. The department and the Tariff Board considered this matter very carefully. Something has to be done to protect the local industry against the importation of cheap artificial flowers at the ends of seasons. The little industry that has already been established has many difficulties to face owing to its products being dependent upon seasonal trade. I have said that the item has been a source of worry to the department because of the necessity of opening up cases of artificial flowers on the wharfs, and this has also been harassing to importers. It was felt that it would be a fair compromise to simplify the item and impose an ad valorem duty covering all imports under this item.
Mr DUNCAN-HUGHES: Boothby
– Although I do not pretend to have made exhaustive inquiries into this matter, I was given some figures concerning it two years ago, and they have remained in my memory. That is why, when speaking generally on the tariff, I asked the Minister for Trade and Customs to supply the committee with exact particulars concerning this industry in Australia. I was told that there was but one artificial flower factory in Australia, and that it employed 35 girls. In view of the Minister’s assurances to me I think it is regrettable that he is not today in a position to give the particulars for which I asked. He says he thinks that there are about seven factories employing about 200 persons, principally girls. It appears to me that under the new form in which the item is drafted, artificial flowers will include “ sprays, trails or posies.”
Mr PRATTEN: MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– That is so.
Mr DUNCAN-HUGHES:
– Then there is no point in the omission of those words.
Mr PRATTEN: MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– There were previously two different duties imposed under this item.
Mr DUNCAN-HUGHES:
– This item is one which affects nearly all the women in the Commonwealth. Under it they may be called upon to pay unduly high prices for artifical flowers. The interests of 200 employees, principally girls, should not weigh against those of all the women of Australia.
Mr PARSONS: Angas
.- During last week-end I made inquiries into the artifical flower industry. I do not vouch for their absolute accuracy, but I give the facts as they were given to me. I have them from the manager of the millinery department of a very large company, and they are confirmed by my own experience. During the war period an artificial flower company, known, I think, as the Australian Flower Manufacturing Company, was started in Sydney. It manufactured a certain quantity of artificial flowers, but got on to the rocks and was reconstructed from time to time in different hands.
Mr Watkins:
– That is why the duty isneeded.
Mr PARSONS:
– That is not so. The artificial flower trade is a very peculiar trade. First and foremost, it is a fashion trade. Flowers are in fashion in one season, and out of fashionin another. During last winter season, with the exception of a few celluloid trimmings, flowers and trimmings were scarcely used at all. The ladies of Australia, for some reason, probably because of the fashion of shingled hair, went in for close fitting felt hats in conformity with the straight lines of their costumes. The result was that people who imported artificial flowers and millinery ornaments, and I was one of them, had to scrap the stuff. The industry is dependent entirely upon fashionable trade. What is going to be worn is decided, not here, but in the fashion centres of Paris, London, and New York. Rightly or wrongly, Australian women follow the dictates of the creators of fashions in those centres. Our seasons follow the seasons overseas, and the artificial flower industry in Australia is for this reason placed at a very great disadvantage. I believe that the best thing to do would be to pay the people engaged in this industry what it is worth, and put them to some more profitable occupation. Honestly, for the reasons I have given, I do not see that there is any future for the artificial flower industry. My informant, who is a personal friend of mine, and a brother member of the lodge to which I belong, told me that the manufacturers of artificial flowers came to him and said, “ We cannot sell you anything original, but we are prepared to copy anything.” He tried to give them orders on those lines, but the trouble was that by the time the copy was delivered it was too late for the season. I had many years experience of the millinery trade, and I may say that whilst a few years ago fashions in millinery ornaments changed about every six months, to-day, what is right in January may be wrong in February. The honorable member for Boothby (Mr. Duncan-Hughes) has pointed out that this is an item which concerns our women folk.. I am not going to move for a reduction of the proposed duty, brat I have placed the facts concerning it before the committee so that honorable members may vote upon the item with some knowledge. If the Minister thinks that it would be better to reconsider the item, I shall have no objection to that course being followed.
Mr LAZZARINI: Werriwa
.- Artificial flowers for . millinery purposes made in Australia compare favourably in quality and price with the imported article. My experience is opposed to that of the honorable member for Angas (Mr. Parsons). I had a fairly extensive experience of the trade, and did not find it necessary to go outside of Australia for the purchase of these goods.
Mr Parsons:
– Has the honorable member actually handled these articles?
Mr LAZZARINI:
– For the information of the honorable member I may say that I handled them for years. I was in the trade all my life until I came into this House. I had a sister in the business with me, who was considered’ in Ihe trade to be exceptionally expert in the making of millinery and in creating hats. During the period to which I refer, running into nearly seven years, artificial flowers were not imported to any extent for the business which I conducted.. The Australian article was right in quality, iu line with the fashions, and was considerably cheaper than the imported article. I was not aware that the Australian Flower Manufacturing Company went into liquidation, as the honorable member for Angas has said.
Mr Parsons:
– I said it was reconstructed.
Mr LAZZARINI:
– The honorable member for Boothby (Mr. DuncanHughes) seems to think that the interests of 200 women may be lightly brushed aside, but it is as serious a matter t,o take their livelihood from them as it would be to take their means of living from the same number of men. Many of the women engaged in this industry may be .helping to keep the families to which they belong, or to support widowed mothers. If we can put a duty of 20 per cent, on silks as a luxury, there is no reason why the duty on artificial flowers should not be allowed to remain. I contend that there is an opening ‘for the expansion of this industry in Australia. It is a small- industry, wherever it is engaged in but it will expand here with the increased requirements of th.fi people. I agree with the Minister that this Parliament ought not to strangle it.
Item agreed to
Item 110-
Item 110 - continued.
Mr GREGORY: Swan
– I draw the attention of the committee to the additional duties upon this item. Do honorable members think it is justifiable to further increase the cost of clothing to this extent? For instance, honorable members will see that on a costume, dress or robe of silk, or containing silk the general tariff is 15s., and 45 per cent. ad valorem; in other words if the landed cost of a Paris robe were 40s, the duty would amount to 64s. I suggest that if the duties imposed by the 1921 tariff were retained, local industry would be receiving a fair measure of protection. In the windows of the huge emporiums of Melbourne we can see for sale at from £7 7s. to £15 15s., robes which probably cost not more than 30s. or £2. In order to test the feeling of the committee, I move -
That the Item be amended by inserting the following in sub-item b (3), after “45 per cent.” : - “And on and after 25th March. 1926, British 20 per cent., intermediate 30 per cent., general 35 per cent.
Amendment negatived.
Item agreed to.
Item 114 (Caps and Sewn Hats) postponed.
Item 115 (Socks and Stockings) agreed to.
Item 118-
Mr PRATTEN: Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– This is one of the items upon which a general reduction of duties has been effected, but since the schedule was submitted to the House, the Tariff Board has further investigated the duties on carpet felt and under carpet felt. It is not the policy of the Government to reduce the duties on articles that are made in Australia, and as a very fine industry for the production of carpet felts is established in the constituency of the honorable member for Cook, I move -
That the item be amended by adding the following: -
Mr Watt:
– Does that mean a retention of the duties in the old tariff?
Mr PRATTEN: MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– No; I am proposing a slight increase.
Mr C RILEY: COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP; FLP from 1931
.- I support the amendment, and am glad that the Minister has accepted the recommendation of the Tariff Board to reimpose the duties on imported carpet felt. As he has said, a very fine industry has been established in my electorate, and under the direction of an expert felt maker from England the factory is producing all types of felt, including all wool felt, carpet felt, under carpet felt, slipper felt, cattle ruglinings, saddle cloths and a- few other small items. The works are capable of supplying the whole of Australia’s requirements in these articles. The increase in duties has been asked for by the company, not with a view to increasing the price in the local market, but merely as a protection against unfair competition from abroad. The works are capable of producing 20,000 yards of felt per week. Carpet felt to about the value of £120,000 is imported annually, and Parliament should encourage a local industry which will retain that money in Australia. I call the attention of honorable members to samples of slipper felts; carpet felts, under carpet felts, and saddle cloths. Local manufacture of these articles will help considerably other branches of the woollen industry, the tanners and manufacturers of gelatine. Under carpet felt is made from cowhair.
Until recently there was no use for cowhair, and tanners employed a process that actually destroyed it. Felt manufacture having created a market for cowhair, the tanners have changed their process, and they and the makers of gelatine will save many thousands of pounds annually. Itis a great pleasure to visit the felt factory and see the quality of its products.. Australian felts are superior to the English article in the opinion of experts and many large retailers. Since the Sydney factory has been producing felt the English combine has reduced the price of one class of felt from 7s. to 5s. 9d a yard, and the second quality from 5s. 9d to 5s 2d. a yard. If the Ford Motor Works require large quantities of upholstering felt, the factory in my electorate will be able to supply it. I trust the Minister will give favorable consideration to the question of protecting cattle rug lining, which is not provided for under this item. I hope that its inclusion will be favorably considered by the Government,and that in the next schedule submitted to Parliament provision will be made for the adequate protection of cattle rug lining.
Amendment agreed to.
Item, as amended, agreed to.
Item 120.
Mr PRATTEN: Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– As quilts are entirely manufactured in an Australian factory, which employs 300 or 400 hands, I move -
That the item be amended by adding to sub-item a the following:- “ and on and after 25th March. 1926 : - aa- Feather or Down
Quilts, ad val., British Preferential, 35 per cent.; Intermediate, 40 per cent.; General, 50 per cent.”
If this amendment is adopted, the duty originally imposed upon quilts will be restored.
Amendment agreed to.
Mr PRATTEN: Minister for Trade and Customs: · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
Cite as:Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 24 March 1926, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1926/19260324_reps_10_113/>.