Senate
28 September 1904

2nd Parliament · 1st Session



The President took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 4973

QUESTION

PACIFIC CABLE CONFERENCE

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:
Postmaster-General · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · Free Trade

– I desire to ask the leader of the Senate, without notice, if he will lay upon the table a copy of the instructions, which, were given to the Earl of Jersey, as the representative of the Government at the Pacific Cable Conference, to be held in London next November.

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– I ask my honorable friend to give notice of the question.

page 4973

SUPPLY BILL (No. 4)

Pacific Cable : Public Service Examinations : Post and Telegraph Employes.

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Motion (by Senator Sir Josiah Symon) proposed -

That the Bill be now read a first time.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:
Western Australia · Free Trade

– I regret that I was not able to give the Attorney-General sufficient notice of the question which I asked just now to enable him to answer it before the Senate adjourns. The question is one of great importance, and this Parliament has a right to know what instructions ware sent by the previous Government to their representative in London with regard to the Pacific Cable Conference to be held next November. I wish to correct some erroneous statements which have been circulated with regard to the Pacific Cable Company’s value and usefulness. It has been stated in an influential quarter that it is a burden to Australia, and valueless to the Commonwealth. I have no hesitation in saying that a full consideration of the whole facts of the case must lead one to the conclusion that such statements cannot in any way be substantiated. From 1869 to 1902 the cabling business of Australia was absolutely in the hands of the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company. For thirtythree years that company had an absolute monopoly of all telegraphic communication to Australia, and, with a capital of a little over ;£i ,500,000, made a profit, not altogether out of Australia, of ^6,500,000. Every honorable senator must .admit that that is beyond what may be called a fair trade profit, and that the company had become a great monopoly, which had to a considerable extent exploited the people of Australia for its own benefit. The cable rate which it charged was 9s. <;d. per word, including, of course, the address and the signature. That price whs so extortionate that it was only possible for a’ wealthy company or well-to-do persons to use that means of communication. Other persons were debarred from cabling, and had to resort to the slower process of communicating by letter. In that way a very great injury was done to Australia. and to commercial expansion. In every way this monopoly was proving very burdensome, expensive, and injurious to the people of Australia.

Senator Playford:

– Yes ; but the rate was lowered from 9s. 4d. per word before the Pacific Cable Company came into existence.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– Certainly.

Senator Higgs:

– - But not before the agitation took place.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– 1 shall prove to the satisfaction of my honorable friend the reason why the rate was lowered.

Senator Playford:

– Why did net the honorable senator say so? Why did he imply that the company charged 9s. 4d. per word?

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– If my honorable friend will only allow me to state my case, he will find that I shall do sp perfectly fairly, because I know all the facts. The construction of the Pacific Cable has caused the cost of cabling to be reduced from 9s. 4d. to 3s. per word. Senator Playford has said that that statement is not correct. Before the first Conference was held in London in 1887, but subsequent to the calling of it, the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company offered to reduce “the cable rate to 4s. 9d. per word, but that was done solely for the purpose of blocking the construction of the Pacific Cable. While there was no competition the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company not only insisted upon a high rate, but desired guarantees’ from the various States that its enormous profits should be maintained. Directly a joint proposal of various communities was broached, that another company should be started to compete with the monopoly,’ the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company tried to kill the movement by immediately proposing a large reduction in the rate. At the conference in London, in 1887, the Hon,orable Alfred Deakin made the following remarks: -

Whether the Pacific Company succeeded or not i.i entering upon active operations, it had already conferred a considerable benefit upon the Australasian Colonies bv bringing the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company to a much more - liberal frame of mind.

Mr. Deakin was a member of the Cabinet ‘ that came to an agreement with the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company, which was not ratified by the Senate on my motion. Speaking in July last year, Sir Edmund Barton said -

They maintained the higher rate whilst they had an opportunity of doing 50 in the- absence of competition ; and it is a fact which . must be placed’ to the credit account of the Pacific Cable that undoubtedly it was the expected competition of that cable which largely led to a reduction of rates on the part of the Eastern Extension Company.

I could quote . dozens of extracts from various speakers, Australians, Canadians, and others, to confirm that view. There is not the slightest doubt that the company would not have reduced its rate but for the fear of competition breaking up this monopoly, and its desire to strangle that effort in its very inception. . What has that reduction meant to the people of Australia ? Excluding press and Government messages, which go at a lower rate, considerably over 2,000,000 words are transmitted annually. So that the reduction means a> saving of considerably over £600,000 a year to the people of Australia, while Victoria alone benefits to the. extent of £ 250,000. That is the benefit which Victoria and the other States have directly received as a result of the construction of the Pacific Cable.

Senator Playford:

– The merchants get the advantage of the reduction, and the general public have to make it up.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– The merchants get the advantage of the reduction, but the development of trade and commerce benefits every individual. It benefits the merchants and stockbrokers directly, but it benefits all indirectly. The expenditure which Victoria has had to incur has been £10,000 a year in order to reap that enormous benefit of an annual saving of ,£250,000 to its people, -n. second advantage has been derived. When the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company reduced the rate from Australia to Great Britain to 3s. per word, it also had to reduce the rate from Australia to India, because the latter country is on the direct route, and situated about half way between Great Britain and Australia. Therefore the company reduced its rate from 4s. iod. to 2s. 6d. per word. So that another result of the construction of the Pacific Cable has been a considerable reduction in the cost of cabling between Australia and Asia. A third advantage has been obtained. The Cape Cable, via Cocos Island, was built simply as the result of the agitation for the .Pacific Cable. At the Jubilee Conference, held in London in 1887 to consider these matters, the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company, in order to kill the Pacific Cable project, made a proposal to lay a cable to Great Britain from Australia, via South Africa, if the people of Australia would give it an absolute monopoly for all time of cable communication with their country. That proposal was, of course, refused. Then the company made a second proposal. It said that it would lay a cable via South Africa if Australia would give a guarantee ito the extent of £100,000 a year. That proposal was also declined. Then the company started to work immediately to construct a line via South Africa with the intention of killing the Pacific Cable project. That line has given us direct cable com munication with that continent, and is of enormous advantage to Australia. At the Hobart Conference, held in 1895, the re:presentatives of the various Colonies agreed to guarantee the Eastern Extension Company to the extent of £227,000 a year. It must not be forgotten that the result of the construction of the Pacific Cable has been that we have done away with these guarantees and payments to the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company, and where we paid a certain sum to the Pacific Cable Company we benefit by stopping all subsidies to the other company. Another great advantage which will be appreciated by all Australians is that we now have direct communication with an)’ other continent. With North America, containing a population of 100,000,000 English speaking people, we must have enormous trade relations in the future, seeing that it is situated in another hemisphere and its seasons are, consequently, different from ours. Our trade relations in the future will be enormously greater with North America, with its 100,000,000 people, than with South Africa, with its 3,000,000 or 4,000,000 of white people and coloured races. What are these meagre polyglot populations, compared with the enormous populations in North America? That is another advantage which has accrued from the construction of the Pacific Cable, completing a direct chain of cable communication between Australia and every continent on the planet. If I might summarize the advantages, I would say that the people of Australia have been saved the annual expense of £600,000 as a result of reduced cable charges, that the rate to Asia from Australia has been reduced from 4s. iod. to 2s. 6d. per word, that we have direct communication with the continent of Africa, that we have wiped out the large subsidies and the large guarantees that we gave to the old company, that we have direct communication with the 100,000,000 people of North America, and that our trading relations with those people will increase enormously in the future. These are some of the direct advantages which we have gained from the Pacific Cable, which has been stated to be a burden to the Commonwealth, and absolutely useless. Three States are bearing the whole burden of any deficiency in the working of that cable, viz., Queensland, New South Wales, and Victoria, and as Australia’s share of t’he loss was about £30,000 last year, each State had to provide a third of that sum. The action of New South Wales in allowing the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company unfair trading competition with the Pacific Cable Company two or three weeks after it had signed an agreement to construct the Pacific Cable, and guarantee any loss thereon, was most extraordinary. New South Wales was one of the guarantors to the Pacific Cable Company against any loss which might be incurred ; but in spite of that fact, it allowed to the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company unfair privileges, which have the effect of decreasing the profits of the Pacific Cable Company, and necessitating the provision of a considerable sum to make up the deficiency. Whereas they got no benefit whatever from a monetary point of view from the Eastern Extension Company. If Victoria desired to do so, she could more than make up the loss that accrues as her share in the deficiency on the Pacific Cable. She could do that in connexion with the terminal and transit rates. The terminal and transit rates charged on cables sent both by the Pacific and Eastern Extension lines, are 5d. per word. But the division is different in each case. If a cable is sent from Victoria via the Eastern Extension Company, Victoria gets id. per word of that terminal rate, and South Australia gets 4d. per word. If a cable is sent from New South Wales that State gets id. per word, and South Australia gets 4d. Then cables sent from Broken Hill do not come through Victoria. But, with regard to the Pacific Cable, the terminal rates are divided between each State through which the message comes. If, a cable is sent from Victoria via the Pacific Cable, the fivepenny terminal rate is divided equally between Victoria, New South Wales, and Queensland. Therefore, for every word that is sent from Victoria via the Pacific Cable, the revenue of Victoria benefits to the extent, of practically fd. per word. New South Wales benefits to the extent of 2½d. on every message sent via the Pacific Cable because she divides the 5d. equally with Queensland. On the other hand, New South Wales receives only id. per word on every cable sent via South Australia. Therefore, if the eastern States liked to send their cables - or a fair proportion of them, and that is all I ask for - via the Pacific Cable, they would be able, not only largely to increase their internal revenue, but that plan would more than compensate for the loss they have to make up on the Pacific Cable. Victoria alone would benefit to the extent of more than double what she is paying now to make up the deficiency. She would not only increase her internal revenue, but those extra messages going via. the Pacific Cable would turn an annual deficit into an annual surplus, and make the Pacific Cable pay directly it got a fair proportion of the Australian cable business. It seems to me that the Pacific Cable has been very unfairly treated by the people of Australia, and by some of our Legislatures. I have no personal axe to grind in this matter. Western Australia does not benefit and does not lose by the Pacific Cable. She has nothing to pay in connexion with the deficiency, and she does not send £100 worth of cables across the Pacific line. The Western Australian cables go by the Eastern Extension, line, which lands at Broome and Fremantle. Western Australia gets no revenue from terminal rates from the eastern States, because no cables are sent via those lines, and she suffers no loss if the Pacific Cable does not pay even working expenses. It has been suggested that we should have what is called a joint purse; that all the revenue from the four cable lines - three belonging to trie Eastern Company and the Pacific line - should be put into a joint pool. That is to say, it is suggested that we should arrange a division of the total revenue. It has also been suggested that the Pacific Cable should be leased to the Eastern Extension Company - that is, that Aus: tralia should once more be placed in the octopus grasp of a company which would have an absolute monopoly of the cabling business of Australia.

Senator Higgs:

– That is the brilliant idea of the Age.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH.That would mean deliberately returning to the thraldom of the monopoly under which we have been suffering for thirty-three years, and which was never broken until a new cable began to compete for business. It would not only be unfair to our partners, who in good ‘ faith have joined with us in building this Britishowned cable line - unfair to New Zealand, Canada, and Great Britain - but if we look into the matter, we shall see that it would be a most unbusinesslike proceeding from an Australian point of view. It is not difficult to insure a fair division of the traffic of Australia for the Eastern Extension Company’s lines, and the Pacific Cable. I do not ask, and have never asked, for more than that. I have always recognised that the Eastern Extension Company, being the pioneer company, has spent a lot of money on the development of its Australian business, and that it came here on the invitation of the States. Therefore, it is impossible for us to say to that company that we will bundle it out of Australia, and not allow it to continue its cabling traffic.

Senator Higgs:

-That invitation was probably prompted by the company itself.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– But we are entitled to a fair share - I should say to a half share - of the cabling business of the Pacific Cable, and we could easily get that without allowing ourselves to be swallowed by the Eastern Extension Company. The working expenses of the Pacific Cable are only about one-third of the working expenses of the Eastern Extension Company. The working expenses of the Pacific Cable for the year ended 31st March, 1904, were £54,000. I have no later balance-sheet of the Eastern Extension Company than that dated December, 1902. But for that year their working expenses were in round figures , £139,000.

Senator Playford:

– Does that include India?

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– No ; but the working expenses of the company have been increased since then, because they have opened new offices, and have an army of canvassers, by whose means they are endeavouring to induce people to send their cables via the Eastern Extension Company. That company, in spite of the fact that it enjoys more than two-thirds of the total cable traffic of Australia, now complains that its Australian cables are run at a loss. When Mr. Hesse, the general manager, and the Hon’. Mr. Peel were here they told me that the cables running to Australia were worked at a loss. But whose fault was that? The company deliberately reduced the cabling charges to 3s. a word, at which rate, I believe, the traffic will not pay. The Pacific Cable Company did not make the reduction. It was the Eastern Extension Company that did it. Apparently, 3s. . 1 word is not now sufficient to enable both companies to pay. The Eastern Extension Company is increasing its working expenses in order unfairly to filch from the Pacific Cable the traffic that it is legitimately entitled to. The Pacific Cable is admitted to be one of the best laid cables in the world. It was opened on the 8th December, 1902, and from that day to this there has not been a single interruption of the line. There are, according to a return I saw, fewer mistakes per message made on the line than on the Eastern Extension Company’s line:, The Pacific Cable is less liable to interruption, because it does not cross any volcanic belts, as do the Eastern Extension Company’s cables.

Senator Playford:

– There is no volcanic belt between here and South Africa.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– No, but two of the company’s cables stretch over some of the worst volcanic country in the world, and there are continual interruptions. The Pacific Cable is the quickest means of communication between Australia and the old country. As a proof of that statement, I may say that, when the” last great cricket match was being played between the English and Auslralian elevens in Sydney, the result was sent home via the Pacific Cable in three and a half minutes, which is a world’s record when the lines have not been cleared for any particular message. It is a record which I believe the Eastern Extension Company has never approached, unless it has cleared all its lines for a message. The great difficulty with the Eastern Extension Company’s messages is that after 12 o’clock messages sent from Australia by that company are delayed at’ Singapore by the enormous amount of Asiatic traffic, which clogs the line’s for hours at a time. When messages with regard to important horse races, or cricket matches, in Australia are sent home, in order that they may reach England as soon as possible, t’hev are, I believe, sent by the Pacific Cable. I am saying this in order to point out that the Pacific Cable offers equal, if not superior, advantages to those offered by the Eastern Extension Company, while it is worked at about one-third of the cost. Yet it is proposed that we should have a joint purse, so that the enormous loss on the Eastern Extension Company’s business should, be borne by the people of Australia. If there were a’ joint purse, the loss to Australia on the Pacific Cable would be infinitely greater than it is at the present time. Any one who looks at the facts must see that that must be the case. All that I desire is that the same facilities shall be granted to the Pacific Cable as are granted to the Eastern Extension Company, and that the people of Australia shall have a perfect rightto send their messages by which cable they please.

Senator Playford:

– If people do not state1 which cable they wish their messages to be sent by, they are now sent by the Pacific Cable

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– People can say which cable they desire to have their messaged sent by.

Senator Playford:

– And they are sent by the Pacific Cable if. people do not say which.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– But almost in every hotel in Australia at the present time there are bundles of telegraph forms placed there by agents of the Eastern Extension Company, upon which forms there is printed in not too large letters, “via Eastern Extension Company.”

Senator Playford:

– That is business, is it not?

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– It is not unfair for the Post Office to send messages by the Pacific Cable if the Eastern Extension Company adopts such tactics. What I should like to see is an equality of opportunity between the Pacific Cable and the Eastern Extension Company in allowing people to send bv whatever line they please. That would be a fair deal. But if the Eastern Extension Company is going to keep open offices, and go to an enormous expense to attract business, and if it is going in for cut-throat competition, which will necessarily increase our working expenses, we have a simple remedy, and one which I think would be very effective. Article 10 of the Berne Convention of 1903 allows each State in Europe to fix differentia] terminal and transit rates. That applies equally to Australia. Australia can be divided into different zones with different terminal rates. In fact, at the very inception of this Pacific Cable, the British authorities wrote out suggesting that we should have differential terminal rates in each State. . Now, if the Eastern Extension Company persists in its present policy, all that we have to do is to divide Australia into two zones - Western Australia and South Australia being in one, and Queensland, Victoria, Tasmania, and New South Wales being in the other.

Senator Playford:

– Rather lopsided zones !

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– I am merely explaining the powers we can exercise if the Eastern Extension Company adopts unfair tactics. What would be the result ? There would be a fivepenny terminal rate in each zone. If a person wished to send a message from Victoria,

Queensland, or New South Wales, via the Eastern Extension Company, there would be a fivepenny terminal rate in the first zone, and a fivepenny rate in the second zone. That would mean the payment of tenpenny terminal rates on a message via the Eastern Extension Company, and a fivepenny terminal rate via the Pacific Cable. I metion this to show what our powers are, and what we ought to do if the Eastern Extension Company adopt the tactics of unfair competition.

Senator Playford:

– Where is the unfairness?

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– In going to enormous expense in opening offices when they have the same facilities ‘ as the Pacific Cable Proprietary has of receiving messages through the Post Office. The Eastern Extension Company wishes to put the Pacific Cable Company to the same expense in opening new offices, and employing canvassers.

Senator Playford:

– For the convenience of the public.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH.Convenience be hanged ! Where is the convenience to ‘the public? What inconvenience do the public suffer when they can send a telegram from any part of Australia to the old world by means of the Post Office? I am concerned with the interests of the people of Australia, and am endeavouring to conserve those interests. I admit that to adopt such a zone system would mean a great loss to South Australia, which at the present time reaps an enormous benefit on every cable word, amounting to considerably over a million words per annum. South Australia receives 4d. on every cable word that is sent via the Eastern Extension Company.

Senator Playford:

– The Pacific Cable has caused us a loss of tens of thousands of pounds.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– I admit that. But, as the eastern States assisted South Australia to maintain the telegraph line from Adelaide to the Northern Territory, it would be equally competent for the Commonwealth to contribute towards the loss of revenue to South Australia on account of the decrease in her cable revenue. We must have a fair division of the existing traffic of Australia between our own British Cable, and the Eastern Extension Company ; and it is just as well to know what our powers and rights are if the Eastern Extension Company will persist in opening offices in the various States, and in going to enormous and unnecessary expense in granting facilities which are not required by the people.

Senator Playford:

– The people . use them at all events, and that shows that thev are necessary.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– They use them, certainly. If I came with a four - in - hand drag and . offered to drive Senator Playford to Parliament House every day, his acceptance would not prove the necessity of the offer. Every reasonable facility is given by the Post Office ; and Victoria is bemoaning a loss of £10,000 a year, which could be prevented, while the internal revenue could be enormously increased by sending onehalf of ‘the messages bv the Pacific route. New South Wales would benefit to a much larger extent, and Queensland would divide with New South Wales and Victoria the whole of the advantages from the terminal rates.

Senator Playford:

– Who is going to bear the loss?

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– South Australia ; but it would be quite competent for the Commonwealth to contribute towards any loss sustained by that State in the erection of the telegraph line from Adelaide to Port Darwin. I want to be perfectly fair to every State. I object to the Eastern Extension Company monopolizing two-thirds of the traffic, and using every means consistent with honesty - because I never accused them of doing any business that was not honest - for the expansion of their business. But the Eastern Extension Company are using their influence as a private concern to make the Pacific Cable unpayable, and suggestions are made in influential quarters that that company should be allowed to acquire the Pacific Cable, and thus clinch their monopoly in Australia.

Senator Guthrie:

– That is “private enterprise.”

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– The Pacific Cable is one of the greatest socialistic enterprises the world has ever seen. Four nations have come together in a joint commercial undertaking, and I desire to see that undertaking a success. I am a Socialist to the extent that I believe in nationalizing dangerous monopolies, such as that which the Eastern Extension Company have enjoyed in Australia for thirtythree years. The Pacific Cable has broken that monopoly, and most strenuous efforts are being made by the Eastern Extension Company to make the former unpayable. They are conveying messages at a loss, and sacrificing their own profits in order to make the Pacific Cable so burdensome to the eastern Stares that the control of the rival line may be handed over, and the old monopoly re-imposed. I am sorry that the leader of the Senate was not able, in consequence of the short notice, to give a reply to my question as to the instructions sent to the representative of the Government at the Conference to be held in London in November next. This Parliament, and the people of Australia, who own one-third of. the Pacific Cable, have a right to know what has been communicated ; and I hope that when Parliament meets again’ the AttorneyGeneral will be able to lay on the table information which will show that the instructions (end to conserve the interests of Australia, and provide for fair play between the partners in this great enterprise.

Senator HIGGS:
Queensland

– I am glad that Senator Smith has brought up this matter, and’ I hope the leader of the Senate will allow his Australian nationalism, to guide him in dealing with it. If there is one thing to admire about the leader of the Senate it is his Australian sentiment, to which he now has an opportunity to give practical effect. The suggestion which appeared in last Monday’s issue of the Melbourne Age is no doubt prompted by the self-interest of that and other newspapers which control the Cable “ring.”

Senator Walker:

– Surely the honorable senator does not think that the Melbourne Age is selfish !

Senator HIGGS:

– I give the Age every credit for the work it does. No doubt that newspaper does a great deal of good in. the interests of the people of Victoria, and of the Commonwealth generally, and more particularly in the interests of the people of Melbourne, by the publication of articles regarding the adulteration of food, and matters of that kind.

Senator Styles:

– The butter bonus !

Senator HIGGS:

– As the honorable senator interjects, the Age has done good work in connexion with the doings of the people who control the butter business.

Senator Findley:

– The Age advocated the appointment of a Royal Commission, and then desired that the proceedings of the Commission should close before the business was half over.

Senator HIGGS:

– The Eastern Extension Company represents a dangerous monopoly. I cannot for one moment understand why newspapers which cry out against trusts and combines should favour such a proposal as that to which I refer, unless it be in their own particular interests. It seems to me that the Eastern Extension Company play into the hands of certain sections of the press” of Australia, and that the press plays into the hands of the Eastern Extension Company.

Senator Playford:

– That is all right - “ Scratch my back and I will scratch yours”.

Senator HIGGS:

- Senator Playford, in his anxiety to protect the people of South Australia in connexion with the miserable little expenditure which they may be put to if the Pacific Cable be a success, can see no fault with any of the business methods of the Eastern Extension Company. But I take very great exception to their methods.

Senator Playford:

– Tell us what the methods are.

Senator HIGGS:

– Having read something of the doings of the Eastern Extension Company, it is my opinion that they are willing to resort to any method, short of murder, to carry out their designs.

Senator Staniforth Smith:

– One thing that the Eastern Extension Company does, is to give repetitions free of cost, no matter whose fault the mistake may be ; and that is contrary to the spirit of the agreement.

Senator HIGGS:

– What was it possible for the Eastern Extension Company to do in the old country? They were able to obtain from an official in the British Civil Service an expert report to the effect that it would be impossible to lay a Pacific Cable, because the depth at some points was not less than ten miles, but when the ground was gone over it was found that the greatest depth was three miles. The Eastern Extension Company were even able to move the British authorities in such a way as to cause the removal of a vessel which was supposed to be making a trial survey, and the fact was not known to the public until some four years had elapsed.

Senator Givens:

– How is it managed - by bribery ?

Senator HIGGS:

– As a man of the world, Senator Givens ought to know that this sort of thing can be done only in one way ; unless physical violence is resorted to, these results must be brought about By the use of a well-filled purse. I do not pro pose to “ beat about the bush,” and if Senator Playford asks me a direct question, I shall say that the company would resort to such means to gain their ends. What is meant by the vast expenditure in which the Eastern Extension Company indulge on social entertainments to people who are likely to aid them? What is meant by the use of free cables to certain individuals ? Does Senator Playford deny that certain gentlemen who have been useful to this company, get their cables sent free across their lines?

Senator Guthrie:

– Who are they?

Senator HIGGS:

– I am not going to say.

Senator Guthrie:

– Give us all the information, now that so much has been said.

Senator Playford:

– Who are they?

Senator HIGGS:

Senator Playford may be able to get the information if he tables a motion.

Senator Playford:

– I know one - Charles Cameron Kingston.

Senator HIGGS:

– I shall not mention any names. If Senator Playford can give us one name, I clare say he can give us a number. I have seen the success that has attended the efforts of the Eastern Extension Company. Let honorable senators read the very interesting work entitled, The All Red Line, and -they will realize the success which has been achieved by this very clever company and their representatives. Before I leave the subject of the Cable “ ring,” let me draw honorable senators’ attention to the fact that it is impossible for any company or person in, say, the city of Melbourne to start a newspaper without the consent of the Melbourne Age, Melbourne Argus, Sydney Daily Telegraph, Sydney Morning Herald, and other newspapers, which have entered into an arrangement with the Eastern Extension Company.

Senator Findley:

– Permission need not be asked to start a newspaper, but a new newspaper would not be able to get cable messages.

Senator HIGGS:

– What is the use of a newspaper unless it can furnish its readers each morning with reliable cable news?

Senator Findley:

– This shows the inconsistency of the Melbourne Age, which published articles attacking monopolies, and yet is involved in one of the biggest monopolies in the Commonwealth.

Senator HIGGS:

– Will honorable senators believe that some time ago, a gentleman in Tasmania wrote asking me whether it was possible for him to obtain press cable news, and suggesting that some newspaper proprietor in Queensland might join him in an endeavour to get press messages at the usual rates. This gentleman had found that in Tasmania it was impossible, owing to the huge “ring,” to get press cable messages. We talk about fair play, and equal opportunity for all - we talk about the Berne Convention, and its decision that everybody shall be able to send press messages, over the wire at uniform rates - and yet there is in Australia this infamous “ ring.” I can characterize it as nothing but an infamous “ ring “ of newspaper proprietors, whohave combined with the Eastern Extension Company to block any competition. If honorable senators desire that Australia shall go ahead, and that the public of the Commonwealth shall obtain reliable cable news, instead of the wretched twaddle at present sent here, they will support the Pacific Cable.

Senator Playford:

– If the Pacific Cable is available for everybody, why have not press messages been sent by that line?

Senator HIGGS:

– For the reason’ that cabling is a very expensive item. The press rate is somewhere about is. a word, and the charge for 1,000 words is what a struggling newspaper cannot stand. There is no speculation or industrial enterprise1 in which a fortune can be sunk more quickly than a newspaper, and that is owing mainly to the excessive cost of cabling.

Senator Clemons:

– Is that not due much more to the newspapers than . to the Cable Company ?

Senator HIGGS:

– The Eastern Extension Company have an arrangement with certain newspaper proprietors.

Senator Clemons:

– I know all about that.

Senator HIGGS:

– The newspaper proprietors, having made that arrangement, are not going to allow any other individual to start a newspaper in opposition to them if thev can help it.

Senator Clemons:

– Ought the blame not, as a matter of fact, to fall on the newspapers?,

Senator HIGGS:

– The blame does fall on the newspapers, but there are two parties, to the agreement, and the chief partyis “the man behind the gun” - the man behind the Eastern Extension Company.

Senator Playford:

– The Eastern Extension Company will take anybody’s message.

Senator HIGGS:

– Yes, at full rates. .

Senator Guthrie:

– They charge newspaper rates.

Senator HIGGS:

– The company charge full rates to an individual. ‘All the principles underlying our post and telegraph services are rendered nugatory by the fact that, the Eastern Extension Company have made arrangements with the newspaper “ring,” and in consequence those newspapers can get cables at a cheaper rate than can the man in the street.

Senator Clemons:

– But it is those newspapers which shut out a new newspaper - it is not the Eastern Extension Company.

Senator HIGGS:

– When we see an article in the Melbourne Age, as we did on Monday morning last, making the most of the loss on the Pacific Cable, and suggesting that that cable should be let to the Eastern Extension Company - an article which attacked Sir Sandford Fleming, who, after some twenty-five years of fighting has almost beaten the Eastern Extension Company - we know very well that it is written in the interests of the newspaper “ ring “ and the Cable Company. My view is that we ought to keep Victoria and Queensland as a close preserve for the Pacific Cable. If we did so we could make that cable a financial success, but if we allow the Eastern Extension Company to come in and exploit the ground, they will adopt their own methods. The Eastern Extension Company will make secret arrangements with business people.

Senator Playford:

– “ Allow the company to come in “ ! The company was here before the Pacific Cable was laid.

Senator HIGGS:

– The honorable senator knows that there is a section in the Post and Telegraph Act enabling us to exclude the Eastern Extension Company from Victoria if we wish. That company were only able to get permission to come into Vic* toria through the Government to which the honorable senator belonged.

Senator Staniforth Smith:

– The company were allowed to come into Victoria by an evasion of the Act ; they have no right to have an office in this State.

Senator HIGGS:

– They came into Victoria by an evasion of the Act - by acting unfairly to the partners in the Pacific Cable. The arrangement is discreditable to the Barton Government, of which Senator Playford was a member.

Senator Playford:

– I was not a member of that Government.

Senator HIGGS:

– I beg the honorable senator’s pardon.

Senator Drake:

– It is only an assertion, that there has been an evasion of the Act.

Senator Staniforth Smith:

– The Eastern Extension Company availed themselves of the clause which was not put in for that purpose at all, as I can prove from the remarks of Senator Drake, as ‘ reported in Hansard.

Senator HIGGS:

– I was here when that clause was discussed and passed, and it was inserted simply to enable certain station proprietors to erect telegraph lines from one station to another. If the Government entered into an agreement with the Eastern Extension Company under that section, they have distorted the Act. The Eastern Extension Company, if allowed to come into Victoria, will, as I say, adopt their old methods. They will go secretly to business people, and arrange to take cables at a lower rate than that charged by the Pacific Cable. Senator Playford must know that the Pacific Cable being a national concern, promoted in the interests of the people, is bound to charge everybody equal rates. It is not likely that the managers of the Pacific Cable will go to one merchant, and, on consideration of his sending all his messages by that line, offer to charge him so many pennies per word less than are charged to his competitors. But the Eastern Extension Company is prepared to do this, and I believe they are doing it at the present time, and it may shortly be too late for the Pacific Cable to make up the ground. With reference to the loss which Senator Playford fears South Australia will suffer, it is the duty of the Commonwealth, if the fears be realized, to bear that loss, -because the Pacific Cable is a national concern. Merchants and other cable users of Australia are at the present time reaping an advantage of something like £750,000 per annum by the construction of the Pacific Cable.

Senator Clemons:

– Does the honorable senator also suggest that the Commonwealth ought to bear the loss which Tasmania may suffer ?

Senator HIGGS:

– If, through the act of any legislators in Tasmania, unfair arrangements have been entered into, it is the duty of the Commonwealth to remedy the wrong as far as possible.

Senator Clemons:

– That can easily be done by paying up.

Senator HIGGS:

– It would, financially, be a better business transaction for the Commonwealth to “ clip the wings “ of the Eastern Extension Company, and make the Pacific Cable a success, than to continue to pay ,£30,000 per annum, and perhaps more, owing to the Eastern Extension Company absorbing business which rightly belongs to the other line.

Senator GIVENS:
Queensland

– I wish to bring under the notice of the AttorneyGeneral a matter which, though small as compared with the Pacific Cable question, is very important to the men concerned. I hold that it is no part of the duty of this Parliament to inflict any injustice or hardship on any citizen, and that, above all, the Government in its dealings with citizens should be not only fair, but also courteous I have in my hand a letter containing statements which I have taken an opportunity to verify, and which show that a great deal of discourtesy, hardship, and unfairness is displayed towards certain persons bv the Commonwealth. In .the latter part of 1902, the Public Service Commissioner advertised that a competitive examination would be held to fill twenty-eight vacancies in the clerical division in Queensland, and invited persons to compete .for the positions. An examination was held in April, 1903,’ and it was passed by fourteen candidates, but not one of them has yet received an official intimation that he has been successful, or whether his services will be required immediately or in the future.

Senator Findley:

– How did these lads know that they were successful in passing the examination ?

Senator GIVENS:

– The results were announced at the time, but no official intimation has yet been sent to the successful candidates, who have been hanging on in the hope of getting the employment which they were led to believe would be given to them by the Commissioner when they had passed’ the test. What is the result of this system ? In the case of these fourteen successful candidates, over eighteen months of the best portion of their lives have been wasted, while thev have been waiting for billets which apparently are never going to come to them. That is manifestly unfair and unjust. When these youths were invited to go up for this competitive examination they had to pay a fee of 15s. each, and after having passed the examination they find that there is no work for them to do in the Public Service. Unless that money is refunded, I hold that it was obtained by the false pretence” that if they succeeded in passing the examination a situation would be available for them. It is grossly unfair and unjus’t that the money of these youths should be taken in that way, and that they should be kept hanging on as they are. I should like to receive some definite information from the Attorney-General, so that they may know where they stand. I hope that this injustice will be quickly rectified. I do not know whether it has been applicable to all the States, but in Queensland a new rule has been enforced in the Post and Telegraph Department. Letter sorters, although they have worked their full time, are generally expected in an emergency, such as the arrival of an English mail, to come on again and work overtime. For thirty-five years in that State they have received payment for the overtime, but, following a pennywise and pound-foolish policy, an instruction was issued on or about the 27th July last - I do not know by which Government - that it should no longer be paid.

Senator Clemons:

– That must be the Government to which the honorable senator was partial.

Senator GIVENS:

– It may have been issued by that Government, or it may Have been a continuation of a policy initiated months before it took office. If the honorable and learned senator knows anything about the methods of administration, he ought to be well aware of that. At any rate, we find that the leader of the present Government has had to take advantage of something done by his predecessor, in order to protect his own reputation. Is that not so?

Senator Sir Josiah Symon:

– Do not go into that matter.

Senator GIVENS:

– It was not my fault that it was introduced.

Senator Clemons:

– Why this heat? Surely it was a harmless remark !

Senator Findley:

– It does not matter which Government is responsible for the instruction; it is wrong.

Senator GIVENS:

– Whether it was issued by a Labour Government, or by any other Government, the payment for overtime should not be stopped. By this miserable cheese-paring policy, the Government will save from £2,000 to £2,500 a year in Queensland. At whose expense will this great saving be effected? If it was to be saved at the expense of highly-paid officials, who could very well submit to a little cheese-paring, the position would be different, because they would not be deprived of any of the comforts or luxuries of l’fe. But it is to be saved at the expense of the hardest worked and poorest paid class in the Public Service. Letter sorters get very small salaries, compared with the nature of their very arduous work. It must be patent to anybody that if a man does more than the regular work for which he is paid, he is entitled to be paid for overtime, and if he is not, his employers are taking an undue advantage of his complacency in submitting to be called back to do certain work which he did not agree to do. The Department expect the men to work for certain hours, and to be always available in those hours. I contend that when a man has done his work, his time should be his own, and that if the Department wish to make a further claim on his time, it should be prepared to pay.

Senator Findley:

– The Department ought to put on casuals. There are any number of men out of work.

Senator GIVENS:

– That is a proceeding which would meet with my approval at any time. If men are available for. the work, they should be engaged rather than the regular hands, who have done a very’ large amount of work, and who, in many instances, receive’ very scanty pay. I hope that neither this nor any other Government will go in for a miserable cheese-paring policy of that kind, in order to save in one State £2,000 or £2,500 at the expense of a poor, badly paid, hard worked class of civil servants. It is not in consonance with the dignity of the Commonwealth that it should go in for such a cheese-paring policy at the expense of poor people.

Senator STEWART:
Queensland

– It is a very extraordinary thing that the Public Service Commissioner, after advertising that there were twenty-eight vacancies to be filled by competition, has not had the courtesy or the consideration to inform the fourteen successful candidates that their services will not be required. I wrote a letter to him recently on the subject, but I have not yet received a reply. I understand, however, that the reason why not one of these young men was appointed was because of a request received from the State Government that no further expense should be incurred. That may or may not be the position. But, in any case, one would imagine that ordinary feelings of consideration for the young men, whose time was being wasted, would have prompted the Commissioner to intimate to them that their services would not be required. His omission to do so was a distinct act of discourtesy on his part, and the Senate ought to express its disapprobation at such treatment, and to express a hope that it will not recur.

Senator de Largie:

– Was there a promise made to the young men that they would get employment if they passed the examination ?

Senator STEWART:

– A notification was published in the Commonwealth Gazette that there were twenty-eight vacancies to be’ filled, and that an examination of candidates would be held.

Senator de Largie:

– -Does not the honorable senator think that the complaint should be made against the State Government ?

Senator STEWART:

– We owe no responsibility to the State Government, . and the Commissioner is not bound to accept its advice or comply with its request.

Senator de Largie:

– Was it the State Government that requested that no further expense should be incurred?

Senator Guthrie:

– The State Government did not ask the Commissioner to be discourteous, anyhow.

Senator de Largie:

– Does the honorable senator expect the Commissioner to stuff the service^ whether the men are required or not?

Senator STEWART:

– What the young men complain of chiefly is that they have received no official intimation that their services will not be required.

Senator Guthrie:

– The Commissioner is now advertising that it is intended to hold another examination.

Senator STEWART:

– Under the old regime in Queensland a certain branch in the Post Office was classed in the clerical division, and the work was done by young men who had passed the regular Civil Service examination. The Commissioner has put this work into the general division, and decreed that these young men, although they have passed the Civil Service examination, shall receive only the increases of pay prescribed for the general division. That, 1 maintain, is not only a distinct breach of faith with the young men, but also illegal, because the Constitution expressly reserves to every civil servant whatever rights he possessed at the time of his transference to the Commonwealth. These 3’oung men were doing clerical work for Queensland, had passed their examinations, and were getting exactly the same increases and promotions as other clerical employes. They are now classed in the general division, and the Commissioner has informed me in a letter - and I suppose he thought he was acting very graciously towards them - that while allowing them to retain their clerical status he is giving them only general division increases and promotions. So that to all intents and purposes they are relegated to the general division, and will be there until, in the course of time, as vacancies arise, they will be drafted into the clerical branch. I submit that if these young men are employed on general division work that is not their fault, but the fault of the Department. Having- passed their examination, they are classified servants, and are entitled to the same increases and promotions as other classified servants. I specially ask the attention of the AttorneyGeneral to this matter, because it appears to me that the legal “rights pf these young men are being interfered with. There seems to be a great deal of nagging going on in the Public Service. Parliament has been doing its level best to do away with any injustice which may have existed with regard to this branch. But in some way or other, every effort of Parliament seems to be thwarted by some authority. I do not know how it happens, but every possible obstacle is put in the way of the abolition of grievances. ‘ Take, for instance, the case of letter-carriers. Some time ago the Commissioner decided that their hours of employment should be’ 84 per fortnight ; then he increased the hours to 93, and now a ruling has been issued that these men have no definite hours, as they are not under supervision. Honorable senators can easily understand the feelings of the men in these circumstances. They do not know what their hours are to be. They may be asked to work 83 or 93, or 103 hours per fortnight. The position is an extremely unsatisfactory one to them. I have asked the Commissioner to give a ruling on the matter, but he has not done so, and I think that the Government ought to intervene. If he is to be supreme ih these matters, it is the duty of Parliament to see that he does not abuse his authority, or do anything contrary to the spirit which seems to pervade Australia with regard to its employes. Again, after mail money had been paid for thirty-five years in Queensland, it has been abolished by order of the Commissioner, with the result that a large number of poorly-paid officials have had their salaries practically reduced by from £18 to £26 per annum. I find, however, from a classification list that large increases have been given to a number of the more highly-paid officials. It seems to me that the Commissioner is addicted to the rule which has hitherto been applied very freely in the Civil Service -

Unto every one which hath shall be given, and from him that hath not even that he hath shallbe taken away.

A man formerly getting £600 or £700 a year gets ,£800 ; a man formerly receiving ^£150 a year has £25 taken off. I do not think that the Parliament of the Commonwealth desire’s that this sort of thing should continue; and if the Public Service Commissioner continues to act in this manner, I think we shall have to take steps. That is just about the size of it. We will not threaten the Public Service Commissioner, but we desire to tell him very plainly what Parliament desires him to do. I should like to read to honorable senators an .extract which appeared in a Brisbane newspaper, and which details the work done by these letter-carriers. They commence duty on English mail mornings at 5.30 a.m. Many of these men live in the suburbs and have to get up at about 4.30 a.m. for breakfast, in time to deal with the 5.30 a.m. mail. There are no trams so early in the morning. They are not in a position to take cabs, and very few of them, I suppose, ride in’ their own carriages -

On other mornings they go on duty at any time before, but not later than, 7 a.m. as required. Up till 8 a.m. their time is occupied in sorting mails and arranging correspondence for their deliveries. The first delivery takes from 8 a.m. till 10.30 a.m. till in some cases 1 p.m. . . . They must breakfast at home, and, as most of them live in the suburbs, this means at 4.30 a.m., and sometimes no breakfast at all, if they unfortunately sleep too long, as they are liable to fines if not present at roll call. If required, they must be in attendance t-> sort steamers’ mails between deliveries, and also attend in turn at any time from 5 p.m. to 10 p.m.

Here are men who have to be at work at 5.30 in the morning, and’ are liable to be called on at any time, and yet they are treated in this fashion -

They have the usual inside work, and one delivery on all holidays, except Good Friday and Christmas Day. For thirty years they have been paid English mail allowance, to cover all claims for overtime and holidays. This being a fixed amount, was an incentive to diligence and a preventive of loitering. If a man was absent on English mail morning he received no allowance for overtime or holidays worked during the week. To deprive the poorest paid of postal employes of the sum of £18 per annum is .retrenchment of a very drastic kind. The Commissioner overlooks the fact that the conditions of labour in the Queensland Postal Department are not the same as in other States of the Commonwealth. If more money is paid in Queensland for overtime than in the rest of the States, more is demanded from the employes, lt is worthy of note that, even in times of the greatest financial depression and consequent retrenchment in Queensland’s Public Service, this allowance was never interfered with.

That shows pretty clearly the conditions to which these men are subjected. If the English mail money is not restored some equivalent provision should be made. The practical result of the abolition of this aliowance has been to reduce the wages of the men from £18 to £26 a year.

Senator Lt Col NEILD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

-Col. Neild. - It is a very serious reduction in the wages of men receiving small pay.

Senator STEWART:

– It is indeed a serious reduction on small salaries. The attention of the Public Service Commissioner ought to be called to it.

Senator Lt Col NEILD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

-Col. Neild. - And of the Minister.

Senator STEWART:

– And of the Minister, certainly. There were a number of other matters to which I intended to allude, but I will keep them for another occasion.

Senator Lt Col NEILD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

-Col. NEILD (New South Wales).. - I wish to mention one matter while the Post and Telegraph Department is under discussion. I urge as strongly as I can that if it is not possible to make fortnightly payments of salary throughout the Commonwealth service, at least it should be granted in the Post and Telegraph Department. [ have recently had opportunities to get some knowledge on the subject, and I know that it . would be very much in the interest of the service, and of the persons employed. Therefore, I take the opportunity to urge upon the Government an early consideration of the matter, in the hope that they will give effect to the wishes that I have expressed.

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:
Attorney-General · South Australia · Free Trade

– I shall take an early opportunity to communicate to the proper quarters the observations which have just been made by my honorable friend, Senator Neild, and also the other matters to which attention has been directed by Senator Givens and Senator Stewart. Senator Stewart has referred to the general and clerical divisions of the service, and Senator Givens has alluded to the examinations which have taken place in Queensland, involving the passing of fourteen candidates out of twenty-eight, and the absence of notification. He has also referred to the fee of 15s. All of these matters are under the control of the Public Service Commissioner, and having listened to the forcible remarks of honorable senators, I will take care that due attention is . paid to them. But I would point out that the great objeqt in appointing the Publicl Service Commissioner, and setting up the present system, was to keep all matters of detail affecting the service under the control of the Commissioner, and not unnecessarily to interfere. But my honorable friends have pointed out matters which they urge are grievances requiring attention, and, as I have said, I will take care that they are communicated to’ the proper quarter. With regard to the much larger question, in one aspect, referred to by Senator Smith and Senator Higgs, I will only say that there can be no doubt whatever that those honorable senators have studied it carefully. Thev will recognise that the moment competition on the part of the Pacific Cable was threatened, there was a reduction in the rates charged by the Eastern Extension Company.

Senator Staniforth Smith:

– It was a case of “ Don’t shoot, colonel, I’ll come down.”

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– Nothing could more effectually prove the great public benefits that accrue from competition, which is the life of trade. The subject has been discussed at length, greatly to the instruction of the Senate. I am sure that what has been said by my honorable friends will be of advantage, and I thank Senator Higgs especially for his remark that the test is as to what is best for Australia, for Australian trade, and for the Australian community-

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill -read a first time, and passed through its remaining stages.

page 4986

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Private Business

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON (South

Australia - Attorney - General). - I move -

That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn until Wednesday,12th October.

I have made all the inquiries possible, with a view to meet the convenience of honorable senators, so as not to call them together when there will be no business to transact. The debate which is now proceeding in another place, involving the fate of the Government, is not likely to close this week, and possibly may continue to an uncertain time next week.

Senator GIVENS:
Queensland

– I shall oppose the adjournment of the Senate for so long a period. I fail to see why we should adjourn for a fortnight, considering that there is any amount of business to proceed with”. It does not matter whether the existence of the present Government is about to end or not, the people of Australia have their requirements which need to be attended to.

Senator Sir Josiah Symon:

– If the Senate will pass a vote of confidence in the Government we will go on with business.

Senator GIVENS:

– We, in the Senate, are much more likely to pass a vote of noconfidence in the Government. I have had a motion on the paper for a considerable time. It concerns a matter of great consequence to the whole Commonwealth. At the suggestion of the Attorney-General I postponed it when it first appeared on the paper. But honorable senators must be aware that if one does not take advantage of the date when one’s motion has precedence it is quite possible that that motion may never be reached. I find that my motion is set down for the 6th of October, that is, to-morrow week. It has precedence on that day. If, however, the present motion of the Attorney-General is passed, and the Senate adjourns for a fortnight, I shall lose my opportunity. If the Government do not wish to proceed with their business, why should not private members be allowed to go on with theirs? We are sent here to transact the business of the Commonwealth, and many of us are doing so at considerable personal inconvenience and much financial loss. But when we attend we are asked to adjourn week after week. Cannot the Attorney-General see his way clear, under present circumstances, to move for an adjournment for a week ?

Senator Clemons:

– Does the honorable senator want to bring us all back?

Senator GIVENS:

– We are elected to attend here, not to stay away. Senator Clemons would look black if his constituents did not ask him to again represent them. The honorable senator was sent here to do the people’s business, to which he is expected to attend. Some of us live so far away from Victoria that we could not visit our homes, even if we adjourned for a month.

Senator Guthrie:

– And, therefore, the honorable senator wants to make “ the other fellow” attend?

Senator GIVENS:

– Does that interjection mean that honorable senators object to come here to do the people’s work? . If honorable senators cannot find time to attend this Chamber, their constituents should see that they get representatives who can ? I take a severe view of the duty of the parliamentary representatives of the people. Senators may say that they are masters of the situation for the period for which they are elected, but unless they attend to the wants of their constituents they ought to be relieved of their parliamentary duties. I intend to carry my protest so far as to call for a division ; or; perhaps, the better way would be to move an amendment. I move -

That the words “ Wednesday, rath October “ be left out, with a view to insert, in lieu thereof, the words “ Thursday, 6th October.”

Senator HIGGS:
Queensland

– I am not satisfied that we are increasing our prestige as a Senate by these frequent adjournments. At the same time, I think that some consideration should be given- to those who, if they are brought back next week, will be deprived of a visit to their States, which are a thousand miles nearer Victoria than is Queensland. It occurs to me, however, .that inasmuch’ as the other House has on, at least, two occasions paid no attention whatever to motions of want of. confidence carried by the Senate, there is no reason why we should’ not go on the even tenor of our way, provided the AttorneyGeneral and the Vice-President of the Executive Council are willing to conduct the business.

Senator Lt Col Neild:

– But supposing those Ministers absent themselves ?

Senator HIGGS:

– If Ministers were to treat us with such disrespect, we might carry on the business in their absence. I venture to think, however, that neither the Attorney-General nor the Vice-President of the Executive Council would act in that way.

Senator Sir Josiah Symon:

– No.

Senator HIGGS:

– No doubt there is a certain amount of business which we could do while the discussion is going on in another place. We could discuss motions of the character of that of which’ Senator Givens has given notice ; indeed, we might even proceed with the consideration of the Conciliation and Arbitration Bill. Let us continue our business until such time as the Government is turned out, when we could adjourn to allow another Government to take office, or an appeal to be made to the electors. I sympathize with those honorable senators who are anxious to do some business. We have been here for six months, and so far as I can remember,’ the only Bill we have passed is that dealing with the ‘ Federal Capital site. I feel bound to support the amendment of Senator Givens, on the ground that the other House does not pay this Chamber sufficient respect, and ‘ further that we should do more for ourselves and the country by ignoring the little squabbles in an: other place.

Senator STYLES:
Victoria

– When Senator Givens took a similar stand on another occasion, I supported him ; but I am afraid I cannot vote for the amendment he has submitted. On the last occasion notice only of a motion of want of confidence had been given; but now that motion is being discussed, and may terminate at any time. The division may be taken between now and next Wednesday ; and as we in this Chamber are unanimously of opinion that the- Government will be defeated

Senator Sir Josiah Symon:

– The honorable senator means that he is individually “ unanimous.”

Senator STYLES:

– If the Government be defeated between now and Wednesday, what is the use of calling together honorable senators ‘ when no Government may be in power? However, badly this Chamber be led, we had better be led by some one than no one.

Senator Sir Josiah Symon:

– The honorable senator surely does not mean that?

Senator STYLES:

– Under the circumstances, I ask Senator Givens not to. press his motion.

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– I ask Senator Givens not. to press his amendment for reasons which I shall show in connexion with his own important notice of motion. It was with a view to giving the honorable senator a clear day on -which the’ matter could be debated ..that .the motion was -placed on the notice-paper Ibr1 the 6th October’. And’ the honorable- senator must see that it is a proposal; ‘which, although made by a private member, is one on which the Government- if there be a Government in power, responsible for the business of the country - must express some opinion. No Government who are the subject of a no-confidence motion, which may terminate, as those Who moved it seem to hope, though not very s anguinely-

Senator Styles:

– Oh, yes !

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– There is a kind of despairing hope that the motion may eventuate adversely to the Government. Those hopes are not likely to be realized, but there is no objection to their being entertained, and if they are realized by any mischance some other Government will be responsible.

Senator Givens:

– If the AttorneyGeneral still holds office will he promise to. give me a day for this motion?

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– I have just ascertained the position of matters, and I am sure the honorable senator does not impute to me any desire to throw obstacles in the way of his motion. When we meet on the 12th October, it is hoped there will be a- clear field, whatever the eventualities are in respect to the motion of want of confidence. All the motions will be on the business-paper, and, beginning with Thursday, 13th, the business may be arranged for each subsequent Thursday. The honorable senator will, therefore, be in a better position to make sure of the time when the motion will come on than be would be if we met next week, when it would be impossible, at any rate, with a view to pledging the Government to any particular action, to discuss a proposal of the kind. As to Senator Higgs’ remarks, I may say I find my position in. not being able to carry on the business of the Senate most embarrassing. If honorable senators were’ to adopt a mo; tion to adjourn until only next week, and agree that that motion should be treated as one of confidence in the Government, and as an inspiration to me, I should favorably consider the propriety of carrying on the business. However, I do not think that that is the intention, and I ask Senator Givens not to press his amendment.

Senator Givens:

– In view of what the Attorney-General has said, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 4988

PAPERS

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON laid upon the table the following papers: -

Amendment of regulations, Naval Forces, Statutory Rules, 1904, No. 39.

Amendment of financial and allowance regulations, Naval Forces, Statutory Rules, 1904, No. 60.

Amendment of regulations, Military Forces, Statutory Rules, 1904, No. 61.

Addition to financial and allowance regulations, Military Forces, Statutory Rules, 1904, No. 6a.

Senate adjourned at 4.20 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 28 September 1904, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1904/19040928_senate_2_21/>.