House of Representatives
8 February 1929

11th Parliament · 1st Session



Mr. Speaker (Hon. Sir Littleton Groom) took the chair at 11 a.m., and read prayers.

page 127

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Mr BRUCE:
Minister for External Affairs · FLINDERS, VICTORIA · NAT

– I ask leave to move -

That unless otherwise ordered, Government business shall, on each day of sitting, have precedence of all other business, except on that Thursday, on which, under the provisions of Standing Order No. 241, the question is put “That Mr. Speaker donow leave the Chair”. On such Thursday General Businessshall have precedence of Government Business until 9 o’clock p.m.

That ensures that every third Thursday shall be setaside for private members’ business, as was the practice in the last Parliament.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Is it the pleasure of the. House that the Prime Minister have leave to submit this motion?

Mr Anstey:

– No.

Mr BRUCE:

– In the circumstances, I give notice that I shall submit the motion on Wednesday next.

page 127

QUESTION

TARIFF ACT

Mr GREGORY:
SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I ask the Prime Minister whether it is the intention of the Government to introduce an amendment of the Tariff Act of 1925 under which Australian material in certain circumstances is not regarded for customs purposes as British material?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– It is not usual to make announcements of government policy by way of answers to questions.

page 127

QUESTION

DISTRESS ON BRITISH COAL-FIELDS

Investigations by the Prince of Wales.

Mr ANSTEY:

– Have you, Mr. Speaker, seen the cabled statement in today’s newspapers that the Prince of Wales, as a result of his report on his visit to the northern coal-mining areas and the sympathy he has expressed with the miners and their families, has become unpopular with the mine-owners?

Mr SPEAKER:

– The honorable member’s question is out of order.

Mr ANSTEY:

– Shall I be in order in addressing a question to the PostmasterGeneral as the most efficient member of the Government?

Mr SPEAKER:

– The honorable member may address to the PostmasterGeneral a question relating to public affairs with which he is officially connected, but without comment.

Mr ANSTEY:

– I ask the PostmasterGeneral whether he has seen the published statement that the Prince of Wales has become unpopular with the mine-owners because of his sympathy with the miners?

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order ! A question addressed to a Minister must relate to the proceedings in the House, or to public business for the administration of which he is responsible.

Mr ANSTEY:

– Will you allow me, Mr. Speaker, to put my question without calling me to order before I have opened my mouth ? Has the Postmaster-General seen the published statement that the Prince of Wales has become unpopular with the mine-owners, that his report on the conditions in the northern coal areas has been suppressed, and that he has been prohibited from going to the coal-fields in South Wales ? If a motion of sympathy with the Prince of Wales in his tribulations be carried in this chamber, will the Postmaster-General permit it to be transmitted by his department?

Mr GIBSON:
Postmaster-General · CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA · CP

– This question does not relate to the business of my department.

page 128

QUESTION

PERNICIOUS ANAEMIA

Mr BLAKELEY:
DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Having regard to the great benefit derived by sufferers from pernicious anaemia through the use of liver extract, will the Minister for Health consider the advisability of arranging for the production of this extract in the Commonwealth laboratories?

Sir NEVILLE HOWSE:
Minister for Health · CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– I have already discussed this matter fully, and if the honorable member will put the question upon the notice-paper I shall let him have the latest information available.

page 128

QUESTION

DIRECTOR OF MATERNAL HYGIENE

Mr C RILEY:
COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP; FLP from 1931

– Will the Minister for Health state whether any appointment has yet been made to the position of Director of Maternal Hygiene? If no appointment has been made, what is the reason for the delay, seeing that applications were called for the position eighteen months ago?

Sir NEVILLE HOWSE:
NAT

– No appointment has yet been made. The matter is still under consideration, and I hope that an appointment will be made at an early date.

page 128

QUESTION

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

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

– What is the practice, Mr. Speaker, followed in the listing of questions on the notice-paper? Foi many months I have been endeavouring to obtain some information, both in this

House and privately, regarding the inquiry into soldier land settlement entrusted to Mr. Justice Pike. Yesterday I repeated my question, and was asked to put it on the notice-paper. It is on the notice-paper to-day, but it follows a similar question of which notice has been given by another member.

Mr SPEAKER:

– The practice is that questions are placed on the businesspaper in the order in which they are handed to the Clerk at the table.

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

– I was first in. this case.

Mr SPEAKER:

– I find upon” inquiry that notice of the question relating to Mr. Justice Pike’s report which appears on the notice-paper before that of the honorable member for Wannon, was given yesterday morning before that of the honorable member. When more than one question is handed in at one time by one member, the practice is to alternate his questions with subsequent questions. That is following the practice in respect of the giving of notices of. motion.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:
FRANKLIN, TASMANIA

– This is a matter of considerable importance to honorable members who desire to give notice of motions. Is it the custom when honorable members give notice of motion to alternate them, as is done with questions of which notice is given?

Mr SPEAKER:

– Honorable members are entitled to give notice of motion in the House one at a time.

page 128

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Central and North Australia - Report by J. W. Bleakley, Chief Protector of Aboriginals, Queensland, on the aboriginals and half-castes.

Ordered to be printed.

Commonwealth Bank Act - Regulations Amended - Statutory Rules 1929, No. 10.

Defence Act - Royal Military College - Report for year 1927-28.

Treaty of Peace (Germany) .Act - Regulations Amended - Statutory Rules 1929. No. 8.

Canberra - Administrative Building Foundations - Final Report of Inquiry by Committee of Experts.

Federal Capital Commission - Report for quarter ended 30th September, 1028.

page 129

QUESTION

ADAMSTOWN RIFLE RANGE

Mr WATKINS:
NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES

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

Will he state why the money voted on the last Estimates was not spent as intended upon the necessary repairs to the Adamstown Rifle Range ?

Mr MARR:
Honorary Minister · PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– Requisitions for works at the Adamstown Rifle Range were submitted to the Department of Works, but that department suggested certain alterations to these requisitions. The investigation of these suggestions has been almost completed, and it is anticipated that the work will be authorized shortly.

page 129

QUESTION

FEDERAL CAPITAL COMMISSION CONTRACTS

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

asked the Minister for Home Affairs, upon notice -

In connexion with the recommendation of the Public Accounts Committee that an independent authority be appointed to investigate the position of the Federal Capital Commission in relation to the contracts of W. H. Mason, Bruce Eden and Griffiths, and J. T. Walker, has such appointment been made, and if so, when will the result of the investigation be available to the House?

Mr ABBOTT:
Minister of Home Affairs · GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– An authority was appointed to investigate the contracts referred to. It is hoped to finalize his report regarding one of the contracts at an early date, when information in regard thereto will be made available to the House.

page 129

QUESTION

DUTY ON PYRITES

Mr GREGORY:

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

Whether the Government will table the report of the Tariff Board on the request that pyrites for the manufacture of sulphuric acid should be admitted duty free?

Mr GULLETT:
Minister for Trade and Customs · HENTY, VICTORIA · NAT

– Yes.

page 129

QUESTION

EUROPEAN CORN BORER AND MILLET

Mr WEST:
EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that there are large quantities of foreign millet brooms imported into Australia?
  2. Will he make inquiries into the danger of importing the dreaded European corn borer into Australia in brooms manufactured from millet?
Sir NEVILLE HOWSE:
for Mr. Gullett · NAT

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

  1. Foreign millet brooms are being imported into Australia.
  2. The possibility of risk of introducing corn borer by this means has been fully considered, and it has been decided that no such risk is involved.

page 129

QUESTION

TRANSPORT WORKERS ACT

Licences at Fremantle.

Mr CURTIN:
FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

  1. How many persons have been granted licences at the port of Fremantle under the provisions of the Transport Workers Act?
  2. How many persons were engaged for employment on each day during the working week ended 2nd February, 1929?
Mr GULLETT:
NAT

– The information will be obtained.

page 129

QUESTION

CANBERRA

Transfer of Jolimont Buildings - Housing

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

asked the Minister for Home Affairs, upon notice -

  1. What is the estimated cost of transferring wooden offices from Jolimont, Melbourne, to Civic Centre, Canberra, including demolition, re-erection, and all preparation for occupation ?
  2. Was the transfer of such buildings recommended by the Federal Capital Commission or by the Department of Works and Railways ?
Mr ABBOTT:
CP

– I regret that I am not in a position at present to answer the honorable member’s question. The information desired is being obtained, and will be supplied at the earliest possible date.

Mr LAZZARINI:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Home Affairs, upon notice -

Whether a number of houses have been built and paid for within the Federal Capital Territory, and which cannot be found?

Mr ABBOTT:

– All houses that have been built and paid for have been accounted for by the Commission.

page 129

QUESTION

DEVELOPMENT AND MIGRATION

Expenditure - Canned Fruits

Mr WEST:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that the cost of the Development and Migration Commission for the last financial year was £109,662?
  2. Is it a fact that while the London office cost £25,000, there is no record that a single immigrant has been settled on the land anywhere in Australia as a result of its activities?
Mr BRUCE:
NAT

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

  1. No. The figures quoted by the honorable member have apparently been taken from a statement of the persons employed by and the cost of the commission to the end of August, 1927, which was tabled in Parliament on the 3rd November, 1927. The correct figures for the last financial year, which was the first complete financial year of the commission’s activities, show that the total expenditure for that year was £124,092. Of this sum £78,135 represented recurring expenditure arising out of the joint Commonwealth and State Migration Scheme of 1920-21, £30,332 of which was the cost of the London organization.
  2. No. The annual report of the Development and Migration Commission for the period ending 30th June, 1927, contains particulars as to the number of assisted migrants introduced into Australia. During the seven months ending 31st January, 1929, 11,825 assisted migrants have been absorbed into Australia, and it is estimated that by the end of the financial year 22,500 will have been absorbed, as compared with 26,915 during the previous year. The schemes which the Development and Migration Commission have so far approved as agreed undertakings under the £34,000,000 agreement involve the States concerned in a responsibility to absorb 86,908 assisted migrants before the 7th April, 1935.
Mr HILL:
ECHUCA, VICTORIA

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Whether the report of the Development and Migration Commission on the canned fruits industry in the Goulburn Valley has been received?
  2. If so, when will the report be made available to honorable members?
Mr BRUCE:

– This report has not yet been received by the Government, but I am informed that every effort is being made to expedite its submission.

page 130

QUESTION

BRITISH ECONOMIC MISSION

Alleged Misconduct of Public Officer

Mr LONG:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Whether it is a fact that an officer of his department made use of cars attached to the “ Big Four “ Economic Mission for the purpose of entertaining personal friends at a picnic on a recent Sunday?
  2. Will he ascertain whether the meals provided for these personal friends at the Hotel Australia were made a charge against funds allotted to cover the expenses of the “ Big Four”?
  3. Will he also ascertain whether this same officer had to be ordered from the Hotel Australia premises on another date, owing to being under the influence of liquor?
  4. Will he further ascertain whether one of the car drivers ordered this officer to leave the car because of obscene language used while riding therein?
Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– I have no knowledge of any such acts of misconduct on the part of an officer of my department, but I am taking steps to have the charges investigated, and, in view of their serious nature, I shall be glad if the honorable member will assist me in the matter by making available any information in regard thereto that he may have at his disposal.

page 130

QUESTION

MARBLE IMPORTATIONS

Mr FORDE:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

What were the total quantities and values of importations of marble to Australia for the years 1923-24, 1924-25, 1925-26, 1926-27, 1927-28, and what was the country of origin in each case?

Mr GULLETT:
NAT

– The information will be obtained.

page 130

QUESTION

TAMAR RIVER

Navigation Buoy

Mr ATKINSON:
WILMOT, TASMANIA

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that a great aid to shipmasters entering the River Tamar used to be obtained from the buoy known as the “Bell Buoy,” especially in winter time?
  2. Will this buoy be replaced at the mouth of the Tamar before the winter sets, in ?
  3. If not, will the Minister take all necessary steps to see that the work is provided for and carried out immediately after next winter ?
Mr GULLETT:
NAT

– The information will be obtained.

page 130

QUESTION

SOLDIER LAND SETTLEMENT

Mr. Justice Pike’s Report

Mr FORDE:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. When was Mr. Justice Pike’s report on soldier settlers received by the Government?
  2. What action has been taken to give relief to these settlers throughout Australia?
  3. If no action has yet been taken, when does the Prime Minister expect that the Government will be able to give effect to the recommendations made by Mr. Justice Pike?
Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– The report has not been received.

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

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Whether the report of Mr. Justice Pike on the question of soldier land settlement has yet been received, and when such report will be made available to honorable members?

Mr BRUCE:

– The report by Mr. Justice Pike on the question of soldier land settlement has not yet beenreceived. The report will be made available as early as possible, but its completion is awaiting the furnishing by certain States of additional information. The Government is carefully watching this question, so that action can be taken at the earliest possible moment.

page 131

QUESTION

TUBERCULOSIS

Spahlinger’s Treatment

Mr LAZZARINI:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice -

  1. Whether twenty well-known British doctors have issued a pamphlet certifying that M. Spahlinger’s T.B. vaccines have been successfully adopted?
  2. If so, has he read the pamphlet?
  3. If so, does he propose to take any action to make such treatment available in Australia; if not, why not?
Sir NEVILLE HOWSE:
NAT

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

  1. The pamphlet has not come under the notice of the department.
  2. See No. 1. 3.There has been no development justifying such action;each official inquiry increases the doubt as to the value of Spahlinger’s methods.

page 131

QUESTION

AUTOMATIC TELEPHONE AT NEWCASTLE

Mr WATKINS:

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

Whether he will take into immediate consideration the necessity of installing an automatic telephone system at Newcastle and district?

Mr GIBSON:
CP

– Consideration has been given to the question of establishing an automatic telephone exchange at Newcastle, but a decision has not yet been arrived at.

page 131

QUESTION

BICTON QUARANTINE JETTY

Mr CURTIN:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice -

Why does the Quarantine Department refuse to permit the Melville Swimming Club to erect a push-off swimming board at the Bicton quarantine jetty?

Sir NEVILLE HOWSE:
NAT

– The Melville Swimming Club was permitted to erect a “push-off” board, but objection has been raised to the erection of a diving platform.

page 131

QUESTION

FINKE RIVER MISSION

Mr PARSONS:
ANGAS, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister for Home Affairs, upon notice -

  1. Has he taken any action to overcome the threatened water famine at the Finke River Mission, consequent upon the removal by the Government of over 130 natives from Alice Springs ?
  2. Has he received any information as to a report of a serious outbreak of dysentery at the above mission?
  3. If the outbreak is as serious as reports indicate, will he send a doctor at once to the scene of the outbreak?
Mr ABBOTT:
CP

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

  1. Action has been taken by the Government Resident which it is considered will temporarily overcome the shortage of water.
  2. Advice was received yesterday from the Government Resident that an outbreak of dysentery had occurred at the mission, an’’ that medicines had been supplied.
  3. The advice received does not indicate that the outbreak is serious. Further information is being obtained from the Government Resident. The Government will decide what further action is necessary on the Teceipt of reports from the Government Resident.

page 131

QUESTION

TOMATO PULP

Mr FENTON:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

  1. Have the tomato-growers in Australia made any representations in respect to the dumping of tomato pulp from Southern Europe and elsewhere?
  2. Is tomato pulp being admitted into Australia; if so, under what conditions?
  3. If imports of pulp are seriously affecting tomato-growers, will he take steps to protect them ?
Mr GULLETT:
NAT

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

  1. No complaint has been received since concentrated tomato pulp or puree was removed from Tariff Item 101.
  2. Yes, upon payment of duty under Tariff Item 54, according to size of container. As the tomato pulp imported is concentrated, duty has to be paid according to the extent of concentration, and is almost prohibitive.
  3. See answer to Nos. 1 and 2.

page 131

QUESTION

WAR SERVICE HOMES

Mr McGRATH:
through Mr. Parker Moloney

askedthe Minister for Markets and Transport, upon notice -

  1. What method is followed in dealing with applications for advances under the War Service Homes Act; is priority determined solely by the date on which applications are lodged by applicants or are there special circumstances where this method is ignored?
  2. In determining priority, are all applica tions for assistance grouped together for each State or are they divided into sections covering different kinds of assistance desired, for example, erection of new dwelling, additions to dwelling, purchase of dwelling already erected ?
Mr PATERSON:
Minister for Markets and Transport · GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA · CP

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

  1. Applications are dealt with generally according to the date of their lodging. Where a previous application was submitted or for other good reasons, priority may be extended beyond the date of the current applications.
  2. Each State is dealt with separately, and applications ure handled under the main head for which loansare granted, i.e. -

    1. erection of homes;
    2. acquisition of existing properties; and
    3. additional loans to provide extra accommodation, &c.

Where a difficulty occurs in connexion with any application, thus retarding its progress, later applications are proceeded with.

page 132

QUESTION

INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT ACT

Mr GREGORY:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Whether any determination has been come to by the Government in connexion with the amendment proposed by the honorable member for Swan that the Income Tax Assessment Act be amended to provide for the taxation of incomes derived outside Australia by persons resident in Australia; and in regard to which he promised investigations would be made?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– The Government has not completed its investigations into this matter, and is, therefore, not yet in a position to come to a decision.

page 132

QUESTION

HUME RESERVOIR

Mr GREGORY:

asked the Minister for Works and Railways, upon notice -

  1. What has been the cost of the Hume

Reservoir to date?

  1. What is the approximate area that will need to be resumed if the weir is raised to its full proposed height?
  2. If raised to full proposed height what is the estimated amount that will . be paid in compensation(a) for land; (b) for flooded homes, public buildings, business premises, and business losses; and (c) the estimated cost of alterations to railways, roads, bridges, &c. ?
  3. What is the estimated cost of the com pleted reservoir to full height, inclusive of all compensation and other charges?
  4. What was the estimated cost when first approved?
  5. Is the Minister satisfied that profitable use can be made of the impounded waters if the reservoir is completed?
  6. Is it proposed that before further Commonwealth expenditure is. incurred the fullest expert investigation will be made in regard to this work?
Mr GIBSON:
CP

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

  1. Expenditure to 31st Januarv. 1929 - £3,116,569.
  2. Approximately 42,000 acres. 3. (a) £850,000; (b) Estimated expenditure involved in removal of Town of Tallangatta, £150,000; (c) Railways £341,000, roads £211,000, bridge at Bethanga being constructed over stored waters, £194,500.
  3. £5,872,637.
  4. The estimated cost of a storage of 1,100,000 acre feet capacity in 1919 was £1,639,000. The estimated cost of a storage of 2,000,000 acre feet capacity prepared in 1923 was £3,445,000. It was then realized, however, that, pending the opening up of excavations for foundations for the dam, these estimates were of a tentative nature.
  5. This matter is now being exhaustively investigated on behalf of the four contracting Governments by the Murray River Advisory Committee.
  6. Following upon receipt of the revised estimate of £5,872,637, which estimate has not yet been authorized by the River Murray Commission, it was decided by a conference of Ministers representing the four contracting Governments that an independent committee of experts be appointed to investigate the cost of the Hume Reservoir works. The question of the personnel of the proposed committee is at present the subject of discussion between the four contracting Governments.

The estimates above referred to have been made by the State constructing authorities.

page 132

QUESTION

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY

Motion (by Mr. Bruce) proposed -

That the House will, at the next sitting, resolve itself into a committee to consider the Supply to be granted to His Majesty.

Mr THEODORE:
Dalley

.- Although this is a formal motion, it creates an appropriate opportunity to suggest to the Prime Minister that better provision should be made for honorable members to consider the Estimates. In recent years, and particularly during the last two years, an altogether insufficient time has been made available to enable us properly to discharge this important responsibility. In 1927, in consequence of the manner in which the business of the House was. arranged, only a few hours were available for considering departmental estimates at the termination of a protracted sitting, and immediately following the conclusion of the budget debate. We did not reach the Estimates until a very late hour in the sitting, and the committee continued to sit all night. The Estimates and the resolution consequent upon them, together with the Appropriation Bill, were passed ultimately in the early hours’ of the morning after quite inadequate consideration.

Mr Jackson:

– That was not the fault of the Government. Honorable members did not use the time at their disposal.

Mr THEODORE:

– It is the fault of the procedure which has grown up with the concurrence of the Government. I think I may go so far as to say it is the fault* of the Leader of the House for not making better arrangements for honorable members to consider this business. I suggest that definite days should be fixed for considering “the Estimates. Last year consideration of the Estimates was, in fact, given on days allocated for the budget debate. Almost the whole of the 30th August was devoted to this business, and so was the whole of the 31st August, but we did not touch it again until the 20th of September, when part of the day was devoted to it. The Estimates were finally dealt with on the 22nd of September, which was a continuous sitting from the previous day. I believe that we voted on the final Estimates at 5.48 a.m. It will be seen, therefore, that only three and a quarter days were devoted to the whole of the departmental Estimates. Whole departments were put through without a question about 5 o’clock in the morning. I suggest that the expenditure of some £22,000,000 of public money is worthy of a little more consideration. The Appropriation Bill, which followed, was passed through all its stages without a word of discussion. I raise this question now, not to censure the Prime Minister, but to draw attention to the need for giving the House a better opportunity to deal with the expenditure under the departmental estimates.

Mr Parkhill:

– How much time did the honorable member allow for the Estimates in the Queensland Parliament?

Mr THEODORE:

– Under the Standing Orders of the Queensland Parliament, fifteen days are allotted in every session for the discussion of the departmental estimates, and, in addition,’ a day [fi] is set apart for the consideration of the resolutions, and no limitation of time applies to the debate on the Appropriation Bill. Should the honorable member for Warringah feel disposed to make further inquiries, he will find that a similar practice obtains in all the State Parliaments and in the Mother of Parliaments. In the British House of Commons the procedure is to allot certain days - I think fifteen - for the consideration of departmental estimates. The days are specified, so that , members may know on what day the estimates of any particular department will be under consideration, and may attend prepared to raise questions and direct criticism against that department. I feel sure that the Prime Minister and his colleagues have no desire to avoid criticism of Commonwealth departments, or to adopt any course that will prevent honorable members from raising questions concerning the administration or expenditure of any particular department. Though I do not suggest that Ministers wish to dodge criticism, nevertheless in this Parliament we have got away from the very healthy practice of parliamentary control of the public purse. Without this control, the power and the authority of the elected chamber disappears, or at all events is seriously curtailed. The question I now raise involves a basic right that belongs to the House as a whole. Let me quote, for the information of honorable members, the view of Durell, a recognized authority on this subject. In his Parliamentary Grants, he says -

It is, indeed, ultimately to the power of the purse, to its power to bring the whole of the executive machinery of the country to a standstill, that the House of Commons owes its control over the executive. That is the fountain and origin of its historical victories over the other organs of the State; and since that power was recognized and confirmed towards the end of the seventeenth century, the House of Commons has remained whether reformed or unreformed, whether corrupt or incorrupt, the chief arbiter of the national destinies.

That, of course, is what this House ought to be. The House - not the Prime Minister or his Ministers - should be the arbiter of the national destinies of Australia. Unless Parliament is given the opportunity to use its full rights in this regard it cannot exercise its authority, and consequently it cannot be the arbiter of the destinies of this country. I quote also the following from Josef Redlich, in his Procedure of the House of Commons: -

All the rules as to financial procedure are measures intended to protect the House against itself, to prevent hasty grants and ill-considered increases in the responsibilities of the people, while at the same time such rules are the best safeguard of the minority against the majority.

Pull opportunity for the discussion of the finances is a right that should be preserved to all honorable members. It is not sufficient that the majority party approves of the financial policy of the Government. In that fact alone there does not lie justification for the passing of the estimates in one sitting. Every individual member, whether he belongs to the majority party or whether he is sitting in opposition, should have a free and full opportunity to raise any question in relation to departmental expenditure. On this subject John Stuart Mill states -

The proper office of Parliament is to watch and control the Government, to throw the light of publicity on its acts, to compel a full exposition and justification of all of them which any one considers questionable, to censure them if found to merit condemnation.

Mr Parkhill:

– We all agree with that.

Mr THEODORE:

– I think there will be general assent to the proposition which I have stated. I raise the question at this early stage for a definite purpose. I am aware that the departmental estimates will not be ready for submission to the House perhaps for many months; but I am directing attention to the matter now so that the Prime Minister may give it his earnest consideration and endeavour to allow more time for the consideration of the Estimates than has been the practice in recent years. In addition to allotting more days for the discussion of the Estimates, the right honorable gentleman might go further and set apart definite days, say one each week, for the debate on the Estimates so that members desiring to raise matters may know when the Estimates of a particular department are to come on for discussion. When speaking in support of the motion for the election of Mr. Speaker the other day, the honorable member for Parra matta (Mr. Bowden) said that there may be a revision of the Standing Orders in the near future and that you, Mr. Speaker, as ex officio Chairman, would be in a position to render signal service to the committee. If it is contemplated that the Standing Orders should be revised, I suggest that the committee to be appointed recommend a provision to allot certain definite days for the debate on departmental Estimates. I do not wish to labour the question, but before I resume my seat I should like to quote further from Durell’s Parliamentary Grants -

The discussions in Committee of Supply are necessarily of a partisan character. The Estimates being used in practice mainly to provide a series of convenient and useful opportunities for the debating of policy and administration, rather than to the criticism and review of financial methods and of details of expenditure …. In Committee of Supply finance is never criticized …. The committee is used by all sections of the House, primarily, as an opportunity for discussing the policy of the Government in respect to the subject-matter of the department which is being paid for.

I hope that the Prime Minister will give serious consideration to this matter.

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

.- I agree with the remarks of the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Theodore). It is fitting that, at this early stage in the session, attention should be directed to the need for a more rigid examination, by honorable members, of the expenditure of departments. There is a consensus of opinion in the country that our central system of administration of great public departments is proving unduly costly. We had an illustration of this extraordinary growth in expenditure only this morning, in a reply given by a Minister to a question submitted by the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Gregory) in connexion with the cost of the Murray River undertakings. The cost to date of those works represents a colossal increase over the original estimate. The latest expenditure authorized on them is of such enormous proportions as to give ground for the suspicion that the preparation of departmental estimates is either slipshod in methods or is undertaken by persons who do not give sufficient attention to the probable cost of public works.

Mr Bowden:

– The original estimates for the Murray River works were pre-war figures.

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

– The undertaking I mention is hut one of many, the cost of which has greatly exceeded the original estimates. I hope that the Treasurer, in particular, will induce his colleagues in the Ministry to urge upon heads of departments the absolute necessity for a complete revision of the method of preparing estimates for submission to Parliament. Members of this House are entitled to be furnished with more accurate figures regarding the probable cost of projected public works. I am not sure that heads of departments are not strongly censurable for the enormous increase in the cost of almost all public undertakings. I join with the honorable member for Dalley in the hope that there will be created a more definite public conscience not only in this House, but outside, in connexion with Federal expenditure generally.

Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong

– The honorable member for Wannon (Mr. Rodgers) is not quite justified in suggesting that heads of departments are censurable for the unlooked-for increase in expenditure on public works, compared with original estimates of cost. No engineer in this or any other country, during the war and in the post-war period, could estimate accurately the cost of public undertakings. I have often complained, and I again emphasize my .complaint, that it is impossible for honorable members to review the operations of the various departments unless they are in possession of the latest figures and reports from the Auditor-General and the Public Service Board. I know there is. some difficulty about obtaining the Auditor-General’s report in time, because it is his duty to review the operations of departments for the financial year ending on the 30th of June in each year ; but it would help honorable members if’ the Auditor-General could submit a report of departmental activities tip to within two or three months of the close of each financial year. It should be possible to make some such arrangement. I feel sure that I am speaking for every other honorable member when I urge that the latest information from the Auditor-General’s

Department and from the Public Service Board should be in the hands of honorable members before the departmental estimates are being dealt with.

Mr MANN:
Perth

.- I am glad that this question has been raised again. During the last Parliament I directed attention to the desirableness of the Government allowing more time for the discussion of the departmental estimates. All honorable members should resolve to guard* more jealously than hitherto the privileges and rights of the House. In theory the power of the purse resides in the House of Commons as a safeguard against the encroachments of the Crown. In Australia, where we exercise the purest form of democracy, it is somewhat anomalous that the control of finance by a majority in the House is liable to develop into something in the nature of a tyranny quite as objectionable as that which formerly was represented by the authority of the Crown.

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

– This should be a nonparty matter.

Mr MANN:

– And the discussion on it is of a non-party character. It should be the object of all honorable members to preserve the privileges of the House. At present a majority in this House is in a position to force the passage of departmental estimates of expenditure with what many people regard as almost indecent haste. Sometimes this is done in the small hours of the morning, thus destroying the essential function of Parliament, which is to supervise the large expenditure of public money. It is having the effect of whittling away what should be our most precious possession, the rights and privileges of the member. Although one party may be in a minority and represent only a small section of the opinion of this House, honorable members individually represent nearly an equal proportion of the electors, and the voice of one honorable member, though it may be shouted down, has as much right to be heard as that of any other member. If a majority of the House is able to silence the voice of a private member then the most precious privilege of democracy is being killed. I think, therefore, that the suggestion which has been made should be seriously considered by the Government. Any government may abuse its power and for the time being escape unscathed, but in the end its action is bound to re-act upon itself. The growing practice, which is being accepted by the parliaments of this country, of placing in the Estimates only a small amount for some particular work or undertaking which will ultimately cost a much larger amount, is utterly wrong in principle. For instance, take a project costing £10,000, which has to be approved by Parliament. It is becoming the practice simply to put an amount, say of £500 on the Estimates for such a work, the full and ultimate cost of the work not often disclosed. Parliament passes this apparently insignificant item, and finds later that by voting £500 it is committed to an ultimate expenditure of £10,000. That is not right. It may be a convenience, if a work is proceeding and the whole of the expenditure is not to be confined to one financial year, to place £500 on the first Estimates, but it should be clearly shown that the vote will lead to an ultimate expenditure of £10,000. We had one instance of this at the close of the last session in connexion with the construction of a certain road. The discussion on that item developed into a warm debate in this House. It was shown in that case that if the sum of £10,000 appearing on the Estimates were granted, the vote would lead to an ultimate expenditure of £130,000. That disclosure roused a considerable controversy. If that course were adopted by the Government in all similar cases, I think that it would lead to a closer scrutiny and a more careful supervision of the Estimates. I entirely support the views expressed by the honorable member for Dalley.

Mr PRICE:
Boothby

.- As a new member it has been most interesting to me to listen to this discussion, and particularly to the remarks of the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Theodore), whom I congratulate on the manner in which he brought this subject before the House. I have had some little parliamentary experience, and it has, at all times, been my wish, and will continue to be so, that the privileges of members in the Federal and the State parliamentary arenas should be preserved as strictly as possible. But the practice seems to be growing in some of the State Parliaments, and apparently in this Parliament, too, of passing the Estimates with a rush, and without proper consideration. The suggestion that we should devote not only a certain number of days, but also certain fixed days to the study of financial matters should commend itself to all honorable members ; certainly it has my hearty support.

Undoubtedly the time has arrived when the finances and especially the expenditure of this country should be criticized. If it were possible, we should obtain the report of the Auditor-General before considering our Estimates. The report recently presented relates to the financial transactions of last year; but it would be of material advantage to honorable members and to the community in general if future reports were furnished to Parliament before its consideration of the financial position. Every opportunity should be given to honorable members to study the finances of this country most closely.

Mr McWILLIAMS:
The introduction of this subject at this stage must undoubtedly have a beneficial effect in this House, particularly in the closing hours of the session. My experience has been that in all parliaments, both Federal and State, no matter what party may be in office, the so-called discussion of the Estimates has become a farce, or rather, a financial debauch. As the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Theodore · Franklin; [12.5].

has said, practically the whole of the expenditure of this great Commonwealth is rushed through in a few hours when members are exhausted and only a few of them awake. I trust that this discussion will be accepted as the deliberate expression of opinion by honorable members that the Estimates and every form of government expenditure must receive the proper and fair consideration of this Parliament. The discussion on the Estimates should not be made a party question, and it is essential to the good government of the country that departmental expenditure should be open to criticism. There is a tendency, we have to admit it, all over Australia, in all democracies, in the mother of Parliament herself, for Cabinets to take greater powers upon themselves to the detriment of the proper representation of the electors. When Estimates are forced through in the closing hours of a session there is little opportunity for discussion ; in fact, in such a case it would be far better not to discuss them at all. During the eighteen years that I was a member of this House, I continually protested against this practice, and it was a great pleasure to me indeed when the present Treasurer instituted a reform by bringing forward his budget at an early stage of the session. Every honorable member should have an opportunity of discussing freely and fairly the management and control of departments and the expenditure upon them; and especially is that so at present when those interested in the financial position of Australia are shocked to find that despite the heavy taxation levied last year by the Commonwealth and the States, not one government budgeted for a surplus. Last year every Government showed a deficit at the close of the financial year.

Mr Bell:

– Tasmania did not.

Mr McWILLIAMS:

– We all know the exceptional circumstances under which Tasmania enjoys her satisfactory position. Withthat one exception, the whole of the governments showed a deficit at the end of the financial year. That is certainly not a satisfactory position for the Commonwealth, and makes it essential that every opportunity should be given for an adequate discussion of every financial proposal that comes before this Parliament. I hope that this discussion will prove beneficial, and at the same time sound a note of warning to the Treasurer, although I have every appreciation of his action in giving the House an early opportunity of discussing the Estimates.

Mr BEASLEY:
West Sydney

– My interest in this discussion goes a little beyond the subject of finances. I wish to refer more particularly to the consideration of class legislation. I contend that sufficient time should be given to honorable members, particularly to those on this side of the House, to discuss with the people they represent, the various aspects of such legislation. In saying this, I have in mind the notorious measure relating to the registration of transport workers.

Mr SPEAKER (Hon Sir Littleton Groom:
DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND

– Order! An honorable member may criticize the legislation of a preceding parliament, but he is not entitled to apply to a statute of Parliament, language which is disrespectful.

Mr BEASLEY:

– I find it difficult to couch my remarks in language that will conform with the Standing Orders.I shall therefore use the term “ class legislation.” Such legislation should be brought forward in a manner which will give sufficient time to honorable members to consult the people they represent. If that is done possibly we shall be able to prevent bad laws from being passed. Class legislation is exceedingly dangerous, and I think that when consideration is being given to the Standing Orders, full opportunity should be afforded to honorable members of discussing the best means of dealing with legislation of that character.

Mr BRUCE:
Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT

– I am extremely glad that this question has been raised. The subject is one which this Parliament must face. We must try to get a better system of conducting not only our financial discussions, but our parliamentary business generally. This Parliament has, in its Standing Orders, machinery which, when put into operation, will ensure the provision of a reasonable period for the discussion, at every stage, of every measure that comes before it. But asour numbers are small - there are only 76 members of this House - it has not been considered necessary to put that machinery into operation as a general and accepted practice. But. the House of Commons has nearly 700 members and there this machinery has to be employed in order that business may be despatched with sufficient expedition and a reasonable opportunity afforded for the discussion of every measure brought down. Notwithstanding our comparatively small membership, I think it will be necessary to follow a similar practice in this Parliament. At present, when a measure of great interest to members is brought forward, its discussion on the second reading stage may extend over not only days, but sometimes weeks before finality is reached, at that stage.

This does not ensure full consideration of the principles and details of a legislative proposal, because inevitably in such a debate there is unnecessary repetition of opinions and criticism. I refer to the matter now, because it directly affects the point raised by the honorable member for Dalley. I think every honorable member would like provision to be made for the setting aside of a definite time for the consideration of the budget and the general Estimates. But that cannot be done unless we enforce definite rules of procedure. On the assembling of Parliament, certain business has to be transacted during the session, but when a measure which might reasonably be disposed of in three days occupies three weeks, the time so occupied cuts into the time allotted for other measures, such as the discussion of the finances. During the budget discussion, we frequently hear speeches which do not contain any allusion whatever to Commonwealth finance.

Mr Scullin:

– That is not quite so.

Mr BRUCE:

– When supply is asked for, almost any topic is open for discussion. If the Leader of the Opposition will refer to the report of any budget debate in recent years, he will, I think, find that in most of them certain issues have predominated which have not directly concerned the finances of the country, although they may have done so indirectly.

Mr Scullin:

– My recollection is that budget debates in the past have been relevant to financial questions.

Mr BRUCE:

– This is not a controversial subject. We wish to ascertain the cause, and, if possible, find a remedy for a state of affairs which we are generally agreed should be altered. Speaking generally, I think it will be found that in the past a reasonable period has been allowed for the discussion of the financial measures, and that in most instances the debates on the budget and Estimates have extended over three weeks, but generally the whole of that period has been occupied by the general debate, little time being left for the consideration of the departmental estimates. I think we are all in agreement that it would be preferable that a period of three weeks - or whatever time might be agreed upon - for the discussion of the finances should be distributed between the budget debate and the consideration of the Estimates. The Government has no objection to. such a procedure, and is quite prepared to consider the best way to meet the position, and to make arrangements accordingly. It is the desire of Ministers that the Parliament should function as effectively as possible, and that full consideration should be given to the measures that come before it ; and this allocation of time should not be confined to financial questions. If we could adopt the practice of the British, Parliament, and regularly fix the time for the discussion of every measure, it would be an advantage.

Mr McWilliams:

– Why not?

Mr BRUCE:

– That would assist the transaction of the business, and it would be in the interest of individual members. Unfortunately, now, whenever our machinery for facilitating business is put into operation, the members of the Opposition regard the action of the Government which sets it in motion as an act of tyranny. I cannot say what action the Government is. prepared to take in the future ; but I ask honorable members opposite to consider seriously whether the business of the House, particularly when important measures are before it, could not be more satisfactorily conducted if we allotted a fair and reasonable time for its discussion. The allocation of time is suggested directly in regard to the broad issue of finance; and I readily admit the desirability of fixing a period for such discussion. The Government will endeavour to ascertain what is the most satisfactory way of doing what is desired.

With regard to the cost of the Murray River works - a matter which is really irrelevant to this discussion - I must say in fairness to our Commonwealth officials that the estimates referred to were prepared by the engineers of the three contracting States - Victoria, South Australia and New South Wales. The Commonwealth officials were not responsible for the original estimate.

Mr Stewart:

– And the Commonwealth Government is not finding the whole of the money.

Mr BRUCE:

– No ; it is contributing only one-fourth of the total expenditure.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 139

WAYS AND MEANS

Motion (by Mr. Bruce) agreed to -

That the House will, at the next sitting, resolve itself into a committee to consider the Ways and Means for raising the Supply to be granted to His Majesty.

page 139

LEAGUE OF NATIONS

Ninth Assembly

Mr BRUCE:
Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT

– I lay on the table the Report of the Australian delegation to the Ninth Assembly of the League of Nations, which met between the 3rd and 26th September, 1928, and move -

That the paper be printed.

For the information of honorable members I think I should refer very briefly to the major matters considered at the last meeting of the Assembly of the League of Nations. The Australian delegation consisted of Senator McLachlan, its leader, whose report I have just tabled, General Ryrie, the High Commissioner for Australia, Sir William Harrison Moore, and Mr. Olive Baillieu, and Mrs. McDonnell, who acted as substitute delegates. It is also to be tabled in another place, where Senator McLachlan will move a motion similar to that I have just submitted.

Australia has been represented at the annual meetings of the Assembly of the League of Nations from the beginning; that is, since 1920. We have recognized the desirability of sending each year a strong delegation, led whenever practicable by a Minister of the Crown.

Australia’s first representative was the late Senator E. D. Millen. As it is desirable that every member of the Commonwealth Parliament should know what the League is doing I shall, for the benefit of new members, commence with a word or two about the constitution of the League and its conduct of business. The League consists of a Council and an Assembly. The Council is composed of representatives of what we know as the Great Powers, which have permanent representation - it was contemplated that the United States of America would join the League and have permanent representation on the Council - and of representatives of other nations which are members of the League. These representatives are elected annually, and for a period of years. Speaking generally, the Council controls matters considered by the Assembly, holding meetings periodically through the year. Great Britain, of course, has a permanent representative on. the Council, and at present Canada also has a representative on the Council, although Canada’s representation is not permanent. Last year the representation was changed by the inclusion of representatives of Spain, Persia and Venezuela. The representative of Spain was elected in somewhat different circumstances from those which usually prevail, in that after a period of three years has expired she is to be eligible for re-election. China retired this year, and that nation desired to be declared eligible for semipermanent representation; but the Assembly decided otherwise. Personally, I think it a pity that that nation, which is just entering upon an entirely new phase of its national life, out of which important developments may come, should have been denied re-election; but the Assembly so decided.

I confess that before I had attended the meeting of the Assembly in 1921, I was inclined to regard it as a most unbusinesslike body of distinguished and enthusiastic gentlemen who made speeches but did nothing practical ; but I was soon convinced to the contrary. The Council of the League submits to a plenary session of the Assembly a report on the matters dealt with during the preceding year; upon that report a general debate takes place, similar to that at the second reading stage of a bill. The senior representatives of most of the countries which are members of the League participate.. After this report is disposed of, all the matters appearing on the agenda-paper are remitted to one of six committees constituted at the first meeting of the Assembly to deal with (1) legal and constitutional subjects, (2) technical organizations, (3) the reduction of armaments, (4) budget and finance, (5) social and general questions, (6) political matters. Each committee appoints a rapporteur who drafts its recommendations for the consideration of the Assembly. The recommendations are brought up in plenary session, but are not usually discussed in detail; my experience in 1921 was that the responsibility of dealing with the various matters referred to them was left entirely to the committees, the Assembly in full session merely adopting the recommenda-tions made to it. This procedure is remarkably businesslike and effective.

The finances nf the League received a good deal of attention at the Assembly which met in 1921. At that time there “was an impression amongst the representatives of several countries, particularly of the British Empire, that the expenditure of the League was extravagant. The Fourth Committee, after a complete survey of the accounts, recommended that a supervisory committee should meet in Geneva in May each year to review the budget prepared by the Secretariat; that the budget, as agreed to by the committee, should be posted to each member of the League, to allow of its full consideration by the various governments before it came up for adoption at the meeting of the Assembly in the following September. That procedure is now in operation. Unfortunately, owing to our remoteness from Europe, we do not receive the budget until the eve of the departure of our delegates, but the government of nearly every other country . has ample opportunity to consider carefully the expenditure proposed for the coming year. The Secretariat is composed of men who believe firmly in the League, and their enthusiasm inclines them to expand its expenditure in order to increase the League’s activities. The unwisdom of this is recognized by most of the nations, and the Supervisory Committee, supplementing the work of the Fourth Committee appointed at the September meetings, acts as a wholesome check upon too ambitious proposals for expenditure. The Fourth Committee has properly discharged its responsibility to scrutinize the budget carefully, and some countries which are particularly enthusiastic in support of the League have the impression that this scrutiny is hampering “and curtailing its work. The view of the Australian delegates, however, is that the committee has done nothing to unduly restrict the proper activities of the League, but has merely restrained any tendency towards wasteful expenditure.

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

– The committee would do a great deal more good if it were to examine the budgets of nations that are making war-like preparations.

Mr BRUCE:

– That may come. The most important subject dealt with by the league is that of disarmament and the reduction of armaments. This is the most gigantic task yet undertaken by any organization in the world’s history, and it is not surprising that the efforts of the league to bring about progressive disarmament have not yet met with great success. Nevertheless distinct progress has been made. The Third Committee, which deals with this specific matter, commenced by taking account of the armaments of all the countries and their offensive and defensive possibilities, and tried to evolve a plan for gradual disarmament upon a mutually acceptable basis.

Mr Maxwell:

– Doles the committee confine its attention to military disarmament?

Mr BRUCE:

– It has not dealt with naval disarmament because of the “Washington conference and the discussions which have taken place since between various governments.

Mr Maxwell:

– I was referring to military disarmament as distinct from commercial disarmament.

Mr Hughes:

– The League has considered customs tariffs.

Mr BRUCE:

– I shall- refer to that later. After the committee had been working for some time, the fact became clear that questions of national security were indissolubly bound up with disarmament, and that no country would advance far towards disarmament until its security was assured. That is the main reason for the lack of progress towards the solution of this all-important problem.

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

– The faith of the world is destroyed when a country after signing a peace pact lays down a new cruiser.

Mr BRUCE:

– That is true. The signing of the Locarno treaties and the Kellogg Peace Pact are indications that progress is being made towards establishing that national security which is the essential preliminary to a further reduction of armaments. If compacts like the Locarno treaties, which are in the nature of regional pacts, designed to preserve peace in particular quarters, can be extended and multiplied, a foundation for national security may gradually emerge. The codification of international law also offers hope. When the Permanent Court of International Justice was established some enthusiasts believed that the nations would adhere absolutely to that tribunal, and that the reign of law had been substituted for the reign of war. But unfortunately there is no body’ of international law for this court to administer, and a considerable time will be required to bring it into existence. The league, however, is grappling with the problem of the codification of international law, and this is a line of possible development towards insuring national safety. A conference will meet this year to consider three subjects’ dealt with at the meeting in September last. It is possible that a code of international law will gradually evolve which will form a basis for the operation of the Permanent Court of International Justice.

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

– Are the two South American republics, which were recently at war, members of the league?

Mr BRUCE:

– Yes. Another step towards the creation of national security is the standardization of treaties for the pacific settlement of international disputes.

Mr Hughes:

– What does the right honorable gentleman mean by standardization ?

Mr BRUCE:

– The league has prepared standard forms of treaty for use by all countries. There is a general act dealing with judicial settlement conciliation and arbitration for the settlement of international disputes. Any nation may subscribe to the general act and the treaty forms prepared by the League will provide for the settlement of every conceivable kind of dispute. But besides the general act there are model bilateral treaties; one treaty deals with arbitration and conciliation, another relates only to conciliation or arbitration. Some nation may not be able to accept an arbitration and conciliation treaty, but will subscribe to a conciliation treaty. This standardizing of agreements is a starting point for the creation of that sense of national security which will gradually make disarmament acceptable to the peoples of the world.

Sitting suspended from 12.45 to 2.15 p.m.

Mr BRUCE:

– Honorable members will remember that we had a discussion in this Parliament about two years ago of the agenda for the Economic Conference to be held under the auspices of the League of Nations, though not a conference of the members of the League of Nations. That agenda included matters which unquestionably every nation would regard as being purely domestic, interference with which wouldbe an infringement of their sovereign rights. At the meeting of the assembly in 1926, which the present AttorneyGeneral attended, he made Australia’s position towards those economic questions very clear, and I think it is fairly generally understood now just where we stand in this matter. While we enthusiastically subscribe to the ideals of the League of Nations, we are not prepared to surrender any of our rights as a sovereign nation on such matters of domestic jurisdiction as the fiscal policy we think fit to pursue, or the migration to our shores of the nationals of other countries. The attitude which Australia has adopted is finding increasing favour with other nations, whose representatives are making it clear that, while they welcome, the league undertaking an economic investigation in certain directions, they strongly deprecate interference in such domestic problems as finance and migration. There was one, however, in which the League of Nations may safely pursue its activities in the economic field, and that is by acting as an international clearinghouse for statistical and other information, concerning which existing arrangements are unsatisfactory. The tendency in future,

I think, will be for the League to devote its time to this and allied subjects, and to refrain from activity which may interfere with the sovereign rights of nations. The League has done very fine work regarding health matters, and it is to be hoped that this will continue. In Australia we are particularly interested in this work, because two years ago the Australian Government invited representatives of the Pacific nations to hold a conference in Australia to discuss the problem of health in the Pacific, and the conditions of the native races inhabiting the islands which are scattered. As a result of that conference it was decided to invite the League of Nations to take certain action regarding health “ in the Pacific. The League responded, and there is now a representative of that body working in the Pacific. An intelligence centre, which is proving of the greatest value, has been established at Singapore.

There are some persons who never weary of belittling what has been done by the League. They point out that one of the objects of the League of Nations was to bring about world’s disarmament, and because it has not been able to do this they draw the conclusion that its work has been futile ; that it is the dream of idealists only, and has no place in a practical world amongst practical men. I strongly dissent from those views. While the League has not accomplished the impossible, it has done a great deal in the direction of bringing the people of the world to recognize a new standard of international morality, and of conduct among nations. Up to the present the League has, to a great extent, been sustained by the enthusiasm of a few individuals in various countries. One point which was very strongly stressed at the Assembly of the League last year, was that direct work must be done to educate the masses to the significance ‘ and importance of the work being done. As the people realize more and more just what the League is doing they will be prepared to afford it a greater measure of support. The power of the League of Nations will, I am quite certain, never rest on a basis of physical force. If it is attempted to make the League something that can enforce its decisions by sanctions and physical force, the whole movement is doomed to failure; but if we can get into the minds of the peoples of the world a respect for the authority of the League, and that authority is based on a general international conscience demanding recognition of the principles which the League has been authorized to enunciate, we shall have placed the League upon a firmer basis, and its power and influence amongst the nations will be enhanced. It will take a long time to do this, and the League, at the present time, is in great danger from the over-enthusiasm of some of its supporters, who are trying to make it go too far and too fast. They endeavour to induce the League to embark upon matters concerning which sovereign nations will never ‘tolerate interference. If, however, the League is guarded from this danger, I am confident that it will become a force for great good in the world, and a means for promoting a better understanding among the nations. If it has done nothing else it has provided in the council a constant meeting place for the representatives of the great nations of the world, and of some of the other nations as well. Many of the things accomplished during the last seven or eight years could never have been brought about had it not been for the improved personal relations that have thus been established. That alone is sufficient to justify what the League of Nations has cost the participating countries.

Mr MANN:
Perth

.- Although we are under a disadvantage in speaking on this subject without having the report before us, those who have been interested in the work of the League of Nations have followed its activities closely enough to understand fairly well the main points of the report. The Prime Minister referred to the financial cost of the League, and the necessity of restricting its activities because it was stretching out too far and becoming too costly. Everybody is aware of the stand taken by the British delegation to the League at the last meeting of the Assembly, and there is certainly much to be said for the attitude adopted by it on that occasion.

On the other hand, the attitude of the British delegation, supported by the Australian section of it, came in for a certain amount of criticism in this regard. I quite agree that the scope of the League might be so widened as to cause it to obtrude upon a number of subjects which do not seem properly to belong to the sphere of international politics; but there might be a valuable indirect effect, in the creation among certain countries of a friendly feeling towards the League and towards the larger nations which previously have been thought to dominate European politics without much regard for the welfare of their weaker neighbours. In consequence of the broad activities of the League these small nations are coming to have . a more sympathetic interest in its operations. Even in such countries as China and India the mind of the people is being cleared, and a true realization of the full political significance of what the League is doing to bring about a closer co-operation and understanding and greater trust and goodwill between the nations is gradually coming. For these reasons I believe that the expenditure of money on these activities of the League is justified.

Great Britain has taken a prominent part in this matter, and one of the outstanding features of the work of the League is that what Britain says carries greater weight than what any other nation says. That is a striking tribute to the influence of Great Britain. It is also a recognition of the unselfish attitude which she has always adopted towards the other nations of the world. In consequence of this the British delegation, and we as part of it, should be very careful to do or say nothing which may imperil the confidence which the other nations of the world have in the British Empire. We should take all possible pains to consider every question that is submitted to the League in an openminded way, so that our influence may not be weakened.

What the Prime Minister said respecting the failure of the League to make as much progress as people desired towards practical disarmament is true. We should all like to see greater progress in this regard; but we should not discount the advances that have already been made. In my opinion, the League has done a great deal to clarify our conceptions of disarmament and the obstacles which stand in the way of achieving it. We should give the most careful consideration to the factors which are preventing the realization of this great ideal. Apart from the more direct conception of military disarmament, ‘ certain other views of the subject have emerged from the discussions which have occurred. One of these is that, before we can expect material disarmament, we must work continuously, energetically and enthusiastically towards mental and moral disarmament. I do not hesitate to say that the greatest obstacle in the way of a greater fulfilment of the ideal of material disarmament is the suspicion and distrust which continues to exist between the nations of the world in their commercial and other relations.

The Prime Minister referred to matters of domestic jurisdiction, and said that some of the dangers of the League arose from the over-enthusiasm of its supporters and their desire to push into the forefront certain economic questions which he has classified as entirely domestic and therefore not appropriate for the League to discuss. Probably more progress has been made during the last 18 months in the economic sphere of the League’s operations than iri any other. More earnest and solid investigation has been made into economic subjects than most of us realize. This is continually pointed out in the literature issued by the League. Not only was the great economic conference held in 1927, but effective work has since been done by subsidiary conferences and by the Economic Committee of the League. This has tended to clarify the causes of economic friction between various countries and that, of course, opens the way to their removal. I was a little surprised to find that the Prime Minister did not seem to understand the allusion that the honorable member for Fawkner (Mr. Maxwell) made this morning to commercial disarmament. The term was a proper one to use. There is at present a great deal of commercial hostility among the nations which must be disarmed before substantial progress can be made in material disarmament. In my view the report presented by the Economic Conference was one of the most weighty international documents of its kind ever issued. It surveyed the economic conditions of the world as they had never previously been surveyed, and showed that the various countries are mutually dependent. It it remarkable that this report was almost parallel in the international sphere to that submitted to this Government a few days ago by the British Economic Mission which has been inquiring into Australian affairs. The Prime Minister has stated that the greatest work of the League has been to create a new standard of conduct among the nations and to create an international conscience. I believe that it has done a great deal in this regard, and we should do nothing which is likely to interfere with the good results which must follow work of that description. I regret therefore that the Australian delegation to the last Assembly expressed views which were, in my opinion, out of harmony with these objects. We may take it that the delegates expressed the views of this Government when they spoke ; but if so their views were not in accordance with those uttered by the Prime Minister this morning about the necessity of a new standard of conduct among the nations and the development of an international conscience.

The whole matter turns, of course, upon what are subjects of domestic jurisdiction. I had said on a previous occasion in this House that I consider that our interpretation of what constitute domestic matters is too narrow. For instance, it has been said that migration is a matter of domestic jurisdiction, although we know perfectly well that this subject has been and is being considered to-day in relation to the natural sensitiveness of other nations. If we desire to improve the standard of international conduct and strengthen the international conscience we must take the views of other nations into account in formulating our own. I am sorry therefore that during one of the debates at the last Assembly of the League the leader of the Australian delegation acquired a rather unenviable notoriety by expressing opinions on this subject which were different from those of any other delegation. He said -

There are many reasons why it is a dangerous, even a hazardous undertaking, for the League to concern itself actively with the question of customs tariff.

In effect, he said that the League must keep its hands off the tariffs of the nations, although the Economic Conference made it clear that one of the questions which must be faced before material disarmament can be achieved is the tariff relations of the different countries. It is regrettable that only the Australian delegates expressed views of the nature I have quoted. Their attitude was definitely and uncompromisingly against that of the other members of the Assembly. The observations of our delegate were replied to by the Minister for Finance of the Irish Free State who said -

I do not agree with the speaker, who on Thursday last suggested it was improper and perhaps dangerous for the League to deal in any way with the complex problem of Customs tariffs. It is obviously not enough that the League should strive to bring about the reduction of armaments and to prevent war when disputes have arisen which involve the danger of war; the League must endeavour to dissuade nations from the adoption of policies which are likely to produce exasperation or a sense of injury among their neighbours.

The general comments by members of the Assembly seemed to indicate that the Australian delegate had, by the expression of his views on this subject, made himself somewhat unpopular. It appears to me that the attitude of the Commonwealth Government was, perhaps, prompted by a desire to develop the idea which apparently is influencing the present British Government to establish free trade within the Empire and to set up tariff barriers against other countries. That fantasy, which is being condemned even now by conservative organs in England, is impracticable, and useless. If we entertain it too long we shall jeopardize our relationships with other countries, because imperial preference implies a hostile attitude towards other countries in the economic sphere. Moreover, it is entirely contrary to the spirit of the League, which we profess a desire to maintain and uphold. It is unwise for us, for the sake of this wild chimera, which can have nothing but a bad effect upon the Empire itself, to dissociate ourselves from the obvious movement in European countries towards a better commercial relationship. It would be a pity if we persisted iu our present attitude. We shall be judged, not by our professions in regard to League matters, but by our attitude towards specific questions.It is unfortunate that we should have taken this stand at a time when Australia is feeling the strain of a great economic burden. We should open our ears to the arguments of the representatives of other countries, and certainly we should display a less recalcitrant attitude towards other nations. Considerable progress has been made in removing some of the outstanding difficulties to the improvement of commercial relations between the various countries’ of the world. It is much to be regretted, therefore, that the Australian delegate was alone in his refusal to sign an agreement entered into by other countries. I am afraid that we are placing ourselves more and more in an unenviable position of isolation on this issue. From our own point of view this is unwise. The same remarks may be applied to our attitude towards the “ optional clause “, to which the Prime Minister, I understand, did not refer to-day. This matter has been receiving a great deal of attention in other countries. The British Government was one of the few of the great nations represented on the League that has’ withheld its signature, the reason given being that the British Government had first to consult and obtain the approval of the dominions. It appears to me that there are no insuperable difficulties. I listened to the remarks of the Attorney-General (Mr. Latham) on this subject, and I think we might very well inform the British Government that as far as we are concerned we have no objection to Britain’s signature being attached to the “ optional clause “. Apparently, an undue sensitiveness and distrust of the League have prevented us from according our support to it.

I am greatly obliged to the right honorable the Prime Minister for his courtesy in allowing me to speak at this stage. On former occasions the discus sions of the report of the Australian delegation to the Assembly of the League of Nations has been curtailed in the most unsatisfactory manner. Sufficient time has not been allowed for that careful consideration which its importance demands. Hitherto discussion has been postponed till so late in the session that the interest in the report had entirely faded and the practical issues arising out of it could not be dealt with adequately. I hope that on all future occasions the Government will endeavour to co-operate in the economic side of the work of the League more actively and in a spirit of greater goodwill. At all events, I trust that the Government will not display an uncompromising attitude, because if we are to bring about cooperation and a better understanding among the nations, we must be prepared to give as well as take; we must be willing to make concessions even in regard to those matters which perhaps we have come to regard as our inalienable right to deal with under our domestic jurisdiction.

Debate (on motion by Mr. Scullin) adjourned.

page 145

TARIFF BOARD BILL

Motion (by Mr. Gullett) agreed to -

That he have leave to bring in a bill for an act to amend the Tariff Board Act, 1921-24.

Bill presented and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr GULLETT:
Minister for Trade and Customs · Henty · NAT

(By leave.) - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

When the original Tariff Board Bill was submitted to this House in 1921, the Minister in charge admitted that it was largely of an experimental nature. The board which was. created under the act has done good work although as was to be expected in the course of seven years’ operations certain defects in the machinery of the act have been disclosed. The purpose of the bill is to make good those defects. It is generally agreed that it would be unthinkable to abolish the board and revert to the old method of tariff-making by ministerial or departmental initiative with unlimited log rolling. Experience has shown that the capacity of the board to hear and deal with applications was over estimated. I should like, at the outset, to pay a tribute of respect to the pioneer members ‘ of the board and particularly to the departmental chairmen upon whom has fallen the greater part of the work. The thanks of the Government are also due to the lay members of the board who have served this country so well in the discharge of their important duties. I do not suggest that the board’s recommendations have been always acceptable to either the government of the day or the interested parties; but the reports presented have disclosed sound knowledge of the particular subjects dealt with, and have given evidence of the most careful consideration for all the interests involved, direct and indirect. The main criticism of the board - and I think it is admitted that the complaint is not unfounded - has been because of the delay in hearing applications, many of which have been of first importance. Honorable members will recognize that undue delay in matters of this nature not infrequently means heavy loss to the interested parties. The amendments in the bill fall into two classes. The first group aims at altering the machinery of the board to make it more adaptable, and to increase the board’s capacity to consider applications. The second group of amendments is designed to relieve the board of a good deal of work in connexion with minor matters, so that members may give more of their time and energy to the hearing of the more important tariff, issues.

When the board was first constituted it consisted of three members - a departmental officer, who was chairman, and two laymen. Subsequently, the number of the laymen was increased to three, giving a membership of four. Up to the present the board has always sat as a single body. The first change proposed in the bill is that at the discretion of the chairman the board may be divided into two boards or sub-boards of two members each. The question whether there shall be a division will be left with4 the chairman; although the Minister may at his discretion at any time instruct the board to sit as a whole on a particular case.

Each sub-board of two members will have all the powers of the full board in regard to the taking of evidence and the conduct of hearings generally, but the reports of the sub-boards must be signed by the members of the full board. There will be a deputy chairman presiding over the sub-boards, but, unlike the chairman of the full board, he will have no casting vote. In the event of unanimity between the two members of the sub-boards, their report will be forwarded as a single report to the full board. The evidence will be briefly surveyed by the full board, and the report eventually signed if an agreement is reached. In the event of a disagreement between the two members of the sub-board, two reports containing their dissenting views will be presented to the full board, which body will come to an ultimate decision. In this way the usefulness of the board will be considerably increased. The working speed of the board will not be actually doubled, because at times its members will be sitting as a single board on cases of special importance, and they will be together for the consideration of reports from the sub-boards. It is proposed to make some slight increase in the remuneration of members of the board. Up to the present the chairman has been receiving an annual salary of £1,400, which, I am sure, all honorable members will agree, is not a very large remuneration for that position. It is now proposed to pay the chairman £1,600 a year. The lay members have been in receipt of a fee of five guineas a sitting. They have been sitting practically six days a week all the year round, and have averaged about 300 sitting days a year.

Mr West:

– They have better jobs than members of Parliament.

Mr GULLETT:

– And a little more work. Up to date the amount paid to each layman has been about £1,500 a year. It is now proposed to increase the fees from five guineas to six guineas a day, and to limit the days of sitting from six to five a week, and thus cut out meetings on Saturday mornings. These, I understand, do not permit of much work. It is also proposed to grant the members of the board on fees an annual recreation leave of three weeks, or fifteen days, on full pay. Whereas the average earning of the lay members in the past has been a little more than £1,500, under this arrangement they will sit some 248 days a year, and receive an annual remuneration of £1,560. It is considered desirable to increase the fees so as to make the positions more attractive- withoutimposing a further burden upon the taxpayers. We have had great difficulty in the past in obtaining suitable men for these positions, the reason advanced being that we have not paid enough for this class of work. Consideration has again been given to the question of paying fees or salaries to the members of the board, and the Government has come definitely to the conclusion that whatever chance we may have of getting first-class men under the arrangement of paying fees, we have none whatever of. getting well-known business men to give up all their time to the work of the board at a salary of £1,500 a year.

Mr Stewart:

– Where is the difference ?

Mr GULLETT:

– There is a difference, as we have ascertained from business men. I come now to the question of reducing the work of the board. As honorable members are aware the board, as originally constituted, was given, by the Minister of the day, all manner of things to consider. It was given not only all requests for tariff revision, including requests for new, decreased and increased tariffs, but, in addition, a lot of what may be termed small work, and that work has occupied a great deal of the board’s time. This minor work included what are known as by-law cases valuations under section 160 of the Customs Act, interpretations, and cases arising out of the Industries Preservation Act.

Mr Scullin:

– Who will deal with them now?

Mr GULLETT:

– The last two will remain with the board. It is now proposed to withhold from the board all applications for admission under the by-laws and cases arising out of section 160. In case some honorable members are not familiar with the by-law cases, let me explain that there appear in the Australian tariff, as in all tariffs, a number of articles classed as dutiable which may not be actually manufactured in this country, but which it was hoped by Parliament would be manufactured here at some future date. At the discretion of the Minister, however, these articles may under certain circumstances be admitted free or at a nominal rate of duty, provided that the Minister is satisfied that they cannot be commercially manufactured in this country. Under the act as it stands, however, all such applications for admission under the bylaws must be sent to the Tariff Board, except where the department has a complete precedent for their admission or rejection. When an application has been forwarded to the department, it is, before it is given to the Tariff Board, passed to the various investigation officers, in the States concerned and reported upon by them. It is then returned to the department and before being submitted to the board the department in all cases makes a recommendation. It has been found from experience that in almost every case the recommendation of the department has been acted upon by the board. Obviously, however, the board does not merely sign and endorse these recommendations. It is obliged to review the evidence and to spend a considerable time on this more or less futile endorsement work. It is, therefore, proposed, under the amending bill, to withhold those cases from the board, except at the discretion of the Minister, and also cases arising out of section 160 of the Customs Act dealing with valuations. Under that section valuations must, under certain conditions, be made arbitrarily by the Minister ; as, for example, when there is no clear guidance as to the cost of production or the value of the article in the country of origin. These cases, however, are not numerous. In future it is not proposed to send them to the board unless the Minister so decides.

Mr STEWART:

– They will be dealt with depart-mentally.

Mr GULLETT:

– Yes. It is proposed to leave to the consideration of the board what are known as interpretations and also cases arising out of the operation of the anti-dumping law. I am aware that there is a considerable demand at the present time for the removal of dumping cases from the board, so as to expedite their consideration, but even if a change were considered desirable, it could not be effected under this bill. Those cases are sent to the Tariff Board under the Industries Preservation Act, and do not come within the scope of the bill now before the House.

The alterations that I have outlined will, I think, be acceptable to all business interests concerned. They will be welcomed by both manufacturers and importers. I might say that all of these alterations have been approved by the Tariff Board itself. The bill contains little more than I have stated, except that there is an interesting provision under which the board will, if so directed by the Minister, be called upon to make reference to the Bureau of Economic Research which, as honorable members are aware, is to be created at an early date. The director of the bureau will not be concerned with the taking of evidence before the board, or the framing of its reports. He will when requested give advice upon the possible or probable, direct or indirect, economic results of any requests which may be before the board. Another minor amendment strongly advocated by the board is that it shall be given 60 days instead of 30 days, after the close of the financial year, in which to submit its annual report.

Mr Fenton:

– Will the Minister have power to refer to the Economic Bureau the question of the efficiency of an industry?

Mr GULLETT:

– There is no such provision in the bill. It empowers the Minister for Trade and Customs to obtain the advice of the director of the bureau on the economic aspect of any particular request submitted to the board.

The powers of the board are not substantially increased under the bill, and the Minister will still decide which cases submitted to him shall be sent to the board for investigation. There has been some criticism in the past because Ministers have not referred all cases to the board; but I can assure honorable members that, if they had, the work of the board would have been even more congested than it has been. The Minister should have discretionary power in this matter. The bill does not increase the powers of the board in regard to actions arising out of its reports. It will still report to the Minister, and it will be for the Government to decide what action shall be taken..

Mr Gregory:

– Does it provide that every report of the board shall be tabled?

Mr GULLETT:

– There is no alteration of the present procedure in that respect. We are not increasing the powers of the board beyond the definite proposals which I have outlined. I am not permitted to enter into a general discussion on tariff matters; but, before commending the measure to the House, I should like to sound a note of caution. I believe that the measure, when in operation, will greatly expedite the hearing of cases, and, therefore, be of increased service to our secondary industries and the commercial community generally. I regard the board as only one of a number of agents operating in the interests of a workable tariff. There is a general opinion- in Australia to-day that the solution of our present - transitory, I hope - depression, and the perfecting of a great national policy of protection, lies merely in more and still more customs duties. That opinion, which is too widely held-

Mr SPEAKER (Hon Sir Littleton Groom:

– I remind the Minister that, if he is allowed to .depart from the general principles of the bill, other honorable members will be entitled to a similar privilege.

Mr GULLETT:

– It was not my intention to enter upon a general discussion on tariff matters or to depart from the main principles of the bill. I merely wish to say that I believe that the board as it is to be constituted, will be the means of assisting tariff administration generally, and benefiting the industrial situation in Australia. I do not regard this measure or the Tariff Board as a cureall for the industrial and economic problems confronting the Commonwealth. The board should be able to do good work ; but if our economic and industrial position is to improve there must be wholehearted co-operation not only between those engaged in tariff work, but by all parties who support a national policy of protection.

Debate (on motion by Mr. Fenton) adjourned.

page 149

FINANCIAL AGREEMENT VALIDATION BILL

Motion (by Mr. Bruce) agreed to -

Thathe have leave to bring in a bill for an act to validate an agreement made on the 12th day of December, 1927, between the Commonwealth ofAustralia of the first part, and the States of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania of the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh parts, respectively.

page 149

DISTRESS ON BRITISH COALFIELDS

Investigations by the Prince of Wales.

Mr ANSTEY:
Bourke

.- I move -

That this House expresses its gratification at the courage of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, in visiting the povertystricken areas of the coal districts of Northern England, appreciates his broad humanitarianism, and regrets to hear that 300,000 men, women and children of Great Britain are confronted with want, misery, desolation and death, that six families are living in one hovel, that men are only earning 38s. for sixteen shifts of work, and this House shares the horror of His Royal Highness at such conditions, and expresses its determination that such conditions shall never prevail in Australia.

I have no intention of occupying the time of the House in debating this motion. It speaks for itself. News has come to us to-day that the announcement that His Royal Highness intended inspecting the conditions existing at the collieries in South Wales, which are even more deplorable than those at the mines he has already visited, has caused the mineowners to become indignant, and to bring influence to bear to prevent him from making further inspections or publishing any more reports. It is therefore our duty to commiserate with these people, to express our appreciation of the humanitarianism which His Royal Highness has displayed and our indignation because the force of wealth in Great Britain is sufficiently strong to prevent His Royal Highness from seeing the conditions’ under which these unfortunate persons are living. I leave the motion for the consideration of the House.

Mr BRUCE:
Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT

– I suggest to the honorable member for Bourke (Mr. Anstey) and to honorable members generally, that as this is a matter which concerns the domestic policy of Great Britain it is extremely undesirable that it- should be debated in this Parliament. We should bitterly resent a discussion in the House of Commons of a motion relating to our domestic affairs. For these reasons I ask honorable members to oppose the motion, and move -

That the question be now put.

Question - That the question be now put - put. The House divided.

AYES: 38

NOES: 30

Majority . . . . 8

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Question - That the motion he agreed to - put. The House divided.

AYES: 30

NOES: 38

Majority . . . . 8

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

page 150

ACTS INTERPRETATION BILL

Second Reading

Mr LATHAM:
AttorneyGeneral · Kooyong · NAT

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of the measure is to amend the Acts Interpretation Act, which isdevised to facilitate the interpretation of statutes and the abbreviation of their language. The original act was passed, in 1901, and amending acts were passed in 1904 and in subsequent years. A general interpretation of words and phrases which occur frequently in statutes is of great convenience. The bill deals with four matters. Clause 2 providesfor the insertionof the following new section: - “ 15a. Every act, whether passed before or after the commencement of this section, 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.”.

This is a reproduction of a section of the Navigation Act for general application to the statutes of thisParliament. Because of the limited powers conferred by the Constitution, upon this Parliament,questions arise as to the validity of some of our legislation.. For instance, when a statute relates to a subject as to which power of legislationis conferred upon the Commonwealth Parliament in limited terms, and theState Parliaments also have certain powers of legislation, the validity of the Federal statute may be contested in the courts. It has been held by the court in several cases that when a provision whichis invalid is inseverable from the rest of the statute, the whole of the statute fails as invalid. The object of this provision is to lay it down as a general rule that all statutes of this Parliament are to be considered valid in so far as the court is able to hold them to be so, and that the rule is not to be applied that because one part fails the rest shall also fail. In 1910 the court held that where a valid and an invalid provision of an act were wrapped up in one expression, the whole act failed, and in other cases the court adopted this criterion: it asked whether the omission of the invalid portions of a statute produced a substantially different measure. For example, in the Union Label case - the State of New South “Wales against the Brewery Employees Union - it was held that the provision dealing with workers’ labels in the Trade Marks Act of the Commonwealth was invalid. The question then arose whether the invalid provisions infected the whole statute so as to render it invalid. In that case the court asked this question - Does there remain a complete intelligible and valid statute capable of being executed”, and conforming to the general purpose and intent of the legislature as shown in the act? There is also the well-known Whybrow’s case in which the court held that the provisions of the Arbitration Court in respect to the common rule were invalid. The same question arose there also, namely, whether the failure of the common rule provision made the whole act invalid. It had to be determined whether it would be a substantially different law after the invalid portions had been cut out. That, fundamentally, is a question of the intention of the legislature. The real question which the court had before it in those cases was whether it could reasonably be assumed that Parliament would have passed the law with the invalid portions omitted. This has been stated by -Mr. Justice Isaacs to be the position in other cases. When the Navigation Act was passed it was realized that there was room for dispute and difference of opinion over the extent of the navigation powers of the Commonwealth as part of its trade and commerce powers, and Parliament sought to save the position by the inclusion in the Navigation Act of a declaration in the terms of the second clause of this bill. This section announced the intention of Parliament that, notwithstanding the invalidity of part of the statute, Parliament intended that the rest should operate.

Mr Maxwell:

– Did Parliament anticipate that part of the Navigation Act would be declared invalid?

Mr LATHAM:

– Yes, Parliament anticipated that that portion of the Navigation Act which dealt with intra-state trade might be held to be invalid, and that anticipation was justified. Had it not been for the presence in the statute of the section which is now reproduced in this bill, the whole Navigation Act would probably have failed. By means of this section the interstate sections of the act and those dealing with foreign trade, were saved. The object of the present section is to apply in the case of all statutes the rule which was applied to the Navigation Act; that is, to declare the general intention, in the case of all legislation of this Parliament, that although parts of the statute may be held to be .invalid, the rest is to be treated as valid. That would leave a statute, a portion of which was declared by the court to be invalid, in this position: Parliament would know that certain sections were invalid; that part of the act would, therefore, be cut out, and would not be effective or operative; and it would then be for Parliament to determine whether the remaining and valid portions of the act should continue in force, or whether the act should be repealed or amended in some way. I commend this amendment to the support of honorable members as being likely to carry out the intention which honorable members have when they support any bill in this House. That is the first and principal provision of this bill.

The next is contained in clause 3, and is very simple. It proposes to define the phrase “ Territory of the Commonwealth “ or “ Territory under the authority of the Commonwealth “ so that those phrases shall include the mandated territory of New Guinea. .That is an obviously desirable amendment, as it dispenses with the necessity of making special mention of the mandated territory as it is now necessary to do in a number of our statutes.

The third provision is a general one dealing with the administration of acts. The Constitution, in section 64, provides that departments of State shall be administered by Ministers of State appointed by the

Governor-General, and the GovernorGeneral is able to assign the administration of departments to particular Ministers. From time to time orders in council are made declaring that certain acts are under the administration of certain Ministers. Honorable members will find them published in Hansard, so that they may ascertain which Minister has the administration of any particular act. There are some statutes, however, concerning which it is specifically provided that they shall be administered by a particular Minister. The Navigation Act, for instance, lays it down that it shall be administered by the Minister for Trade and Customs. The distribution of duties between members of a Ministry is a matter of administrative convenience, and, except in one or two very special cases, can be arranged by the GovernorGeneral. The object of this provision is to enable the Governor-General to assign the administration of particular statutes and departments to any Minister as may be thought fit.

The fourth substantive provision of the act is to be found in clause 5. This will be a very useful clause, and will save a great deal of trouble in drafting. It provides that where a term is found in a statute, that term shall have the same meaning in any regulations made under the statute.

Mr Maxwell:

– Does that not necessarily follow?

Mr LATHAM:

– The law does not provide for it, and a term would, as the law now stands, have to be re-defined in the regulation. The object is to make the position clear.

Debate (on motion by Mr. Brennan) adjourned.

page 152

ADJOURNMENT

Distress Caused by Unemployment.

Motion (by Mr. Bruce) proposed -

That the House do now adjourn.

Mr MAKIN:
Hindmarsh

.- This afternoon the Prime Minister intimated that it was not desirable to pass a resolution submitted by the honorable member for Bourke because if dealt with matters which were not within the domestic concern of this country. I wish now to bring under the notice of the Prime Minister a matter which, if not exactly parallel to that raised by the honorable member, for Bourke, is at least very similar to it; I refer to the deplorable condition of poverty under which many families in industrial areas are now living in South Australia. In Port Adelaide, independent authorities have conducted investigations, and have published statements to the effect that the conditions are absolutely harrowing. Not only are adults suffering, but in many cases children are literally starving. Many public spirited persons have contributed towards the relief of these sufferers, and appeals have been made by authorities to the general public, but something more needs to be done. I ask the Prime Minister to realize that it is a matter of national importance that some relief should be afforded to those in need. The State Government has been so moved in the matter that the single men who have been sleeping on the banks of the Torrens River have been given shelter in the Exhibition building. There are many married men, however, who have been compelled to sell practically every piece of furniture out of their homes, and are now living under conditions of the greatest hardship, and without the ordinary necessaries of life. Not only are parents and their children being affected, but the distress which prevails will have a most harmful effect upon the children not yet born. The Prime Minister may saythat this is a case for State action; but I submit that it is of national concern that many of our people are starving. There is a precedent for the Commonwealth Government granting relief in such circumstances.When Sir Joseph Cook was Treasurer he granted £1,000 to relieve distress in the division of Grey at Port Pirie, and said that, if upon investigation it were shown that the amount was insufficient, he would be prepared to grant more. Many of the people in Port Adelaide have reached the point of desperation, and something should be done immediately to relieve them from the pangs of hunger. This applies particularly to the unfortunate children.

The State Government provides destitute rations, but these are on the meanest scale, and do not provide for the essential needs of children and infants.

There is another way in which the Commonwealth Government could relieve the situation. Many of the men to whom I have referred are returned soldiers in Occupation of war service homes, and their payments are considerably in arrears. Hitherto the department has dealt with them in a sympathetic manner; and I trust that the Government will take some step to ensure that they will not be embarrassed because they cannot meet their payments on the due date. I do not desire to go into details in the matter; I know that every feeling of sympathy and humanity which honorable members possess will go out to these people. I trust that the Government will act immediately to meet their dire and urgent need.

Mr BRUCE:
Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT

– Every honorable member must deeply deplore that conditions such as those referred to by the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Makin) should exist. I do not say that the Commonwealth Government ia not concerned with such happenings; but that the primary responsibility for providing relief cannot be assumed by it. If we were to assume such responsibility in this case we should have to do so in every other similar case. I shall cause an examination to bp made into the circumstances, and, if it is thought proper that the Commonwealth should take some action to assist in relieving the distress, that will be done, but not because this is an obligation which the Government should assume.

I was glad to hear the honorable member say that returned soldiers were being treated with consideration and sympathy by the department. On this aspect of the subject I shall confer with the Minister for Repatriation, to see that the fullest possible consideration is extended to them.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned at 4.4 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 8 February 1929, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1929/19290208_reps_11_120/>.