Senate
15 September 1910

4^th Parliament · 1^st Session

PETITIONS
PRINTING COMMITTEE’S REPORT
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH RENTALS: PAPER
PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS
QUESTION
- APPROPRIATION (WORKS AND
COMMONWEALTH BANKING COMPANIES RESERVE LIABILITY BILL
- Third Reading
APPROPRIATION (WORKS AND BUILDINGS) BILL
PAPERS
PUBLICATION OF HANSARD
ADJOURNMENT
- Personal Explanation: Late Sitting

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

page 3135

PETITIONS

Senator VARDON presented a petition from twelve taxpayers of South Australia, praying the Senate to reject the Land Tax Assessment Bill.

Petition received.

Senator VARDON presented a similar petition from nineteen taxpayers of South Australia.

Petition received.

Senator VARDON:
South Australia

– I beg to present a similar petition from thirty-eight taxpayers of South Australia.

Senator de Largie:

– This has been well stage managed.

Senator VARDON:

– I move -

That the petition be received.

Senator de Largie:

– I rise to a point of order. I should like to ask your ruling, sir, as to whether this petition can be received. Is it in order for the Senate to receive petitions for or against a proposal which is not before it? I hold that before a petition upon any matter can be presented to the Senate the question with which it deals should at least be before Parliament.

Senator Stewart:

– This question is before Parliament.

Senator de Largie:

– As honorable senators are aware, no Bill dealing with a land tax has come before the Senate, nor has the Senate any cognisance of the existence of such a Bill. In the circumstances, I do not think we can receive petitions relating to such a measure.

Senator Chataway:

– I should like to direct attention to the fact that last session in another place a petition was received dealing with the question of unification, which was not at the time dealt with in any proposal before the House.

Senator Millen:

– If Senator de Largie’s argument, that we can receive only petitions dealing with matters that are before the Senate, were correct, it would be an intimation to the country at large that people could not petition Parliament to pass certain legislation. Surely it must be within the competence of the electors to approach the Senate with a prayer for the introduction of legislation which had not up to the time of the presentation of the petition been proposed? If it is competent for a citizen to ask us to do something which we do not at present propose to do, it must be competent for him to ask us not to do something which in future we might be disposed to do. The right “to petition against legislation should be as full as the right to petition for it.

Senator Rae:

– I fail to see the logic of Senator Millen’s argument. It is only in accordance with common sense that people should have the right to petition the Senate to do something which otherwise we might be indisposed to consider. It is a wellknown axiom of logic that it is impossible to prove a negative, and Senator Millen suggests a case that is in no wise analogous when he contends that there is an equal right to petition the Senate in regard to a matter which, so far as we are aware, is not in evidence.

Senator Sir Josiah Symon:

– I rise because I am sorry that there should be any tendency to restrict the rights of citizens of this country to petition Parliament. Unless there is some very strong reason given, or conclusive authority produced to the contrary, we should welcome any petition on any subject affecting the welfare of Australia or relating to proposed or contemplated legislation. It rests upon those who object to our receiving a petition to produce some conclusive authority in support of their contention. Our privileges are the privileges of the people who sent us here.

Senator Lynch:

– Suppose the measure petitioned against is not passed in another place ; what is the value of the petition ?

Senator Sir Josiah Symon:

– It places before the Senate the views of certain people upon a matter of public importance the subject of pending legislation. If that legislation be defeated elsewhere, we shall not be troubled with it. If we wait until the measure referred to is dealt with in another place it may not come before the Senate until the close of the session, and there might not be time for petitions for or against it in the interval between its presentment and passing in the Senate. Unless there is something in the petition under consideration which would justify the President in ruling it out of order, I can see no reason why it should not be received. The right to petition the Senate should be encouraged and upheld.

Senator McGregor:

– I hope that a lengthy debate will not take place on a question of this kind. Two or three similar petitions were introduced on a previous occasion, but no similar objection was taken to them. We had an intimation that fifty more such petitions might be presented, and I may say that the Government would not object if 100 more were presented. I do not think we should waste the time of the country in further discussing the matter. Petitions ought to be privileged above everything else.

The PRESIDENT:

– It is the privilege of any individual or body of individuals in the community to petition Parliament to obtain redress of grievances, or to ask it not to do something that is contemplated. Though a petition may be presented only in the Senate, it must be remembered that the Senate is a part of the Parliament. I take it that so long as a petition complies with our Standing Orders, is respectfully worded, and concludes with the usual prayer, it is in order, and can be received.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Petition received.

page 3136

PRINTING COMMITTEE’S REPORT

Report (No. 3) presented by Senator Henderson, and read by the Acting Clerk.

page 3136

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH RENTALS: PAPER

Senator SAYERS:
QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister representing the Minister of Home Affairs, upon notice -

What is the amount paid in rents by the Commonwealth in Melbourne ?
What is the amount paid in Sydney?
What is the amount paid in Brisbane?

Senator FINDLEY:
Minister (without portfolio) · VICTORIA · ALP

– I have pleasure in laying upon the table of the Senate the information desired by the honorable senator, in the form of a return.

Senator SAYERS:

– I move-

That the return be printed.

Senator Needham:

– May I ask whether Senator Sayers is in order in moving that the return laid upon the table by the Minister be printed? The honorable senator simply asked a question.

The PRESIDENT:

– Honorable senators sometimes ask questions, the replies to which are too long to be read by Ministers. The usual cpurse under, those circumstances is for the Minister of whom the question is asked to lay the information upon the table of the Senate in the form of a return. It is then open to the honorable senator concerned to move that the return be printed.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

ADJOURNMENT (formal).

Speech by Senator Clemons.

The PRESIDENT:

– I desire to in timate that I have received from Senator Long the following letter: -

Melbourne, 15th September,1910. To the Honorable the President,

I desire to give you notice that I will, on the Senate assembling for business this afternoon (Thursday), move the adjournment of the Senate to call attention to a matter of urgent public importance having reference to the following -

A serious reflection upon members of the Senate contained in a speech delivered by Senator Clemons, at Launceston, Tasmania, on the 12th instant.

J. Long.

Four honorable senators having risen in their places,

Senator LONG:
Tasmania

– I move -

That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn until to-morrow morning at 10 o’clock.

I have taken this course in order to bring under the notice of the Senate a speech delivered by Senator Clemons in Launceston on Monday the 12th instant, and reported in the Examiner, a newspaper published in that city, on 13th September. The speech is headed -

Federal Land Tax. Address by Senator Clemons. A Monstrous Levy. Ruin and Injustice. Tasmanian Incidence. Startling Examples. Labour’s Log-rolling. How Things are Fixed.

I intimated to the honorable senator this morning, by letter and verbally, that I intended to take this course. He was then good enough to pooh-pooh the suggestion that any such interpretation could be placed upon his speech as I placed upon it.

Senator Clemons:

– Is the honorable senator going to make use of a private conversation that I had with him?

Senator LONG:

– Will the honorable senator kindly allow me to proceed? ‘ He also stated to me that he did not think that the speech had special reference to Labour members, but that it also applied to members of Parliament who did not belong to the Labour party. Therefore the speech is to be regarded as a condemnation of members of Parliament generally.

Senator Millen:

– The honorable senator’s speech becomes a revelation of clubroom conversation.

Senator Clemons:

– Certainly it is. It is a novel procedure for an honorable senator to make use of a private conversation, whether he reports it accurately or otherwise.

Senator LONG:

– Does the honorable senator say that I am not quoting him accurately ?

Senator Clemons:

– Not for one moment ; but I am amazed that the honorable senator should report a private conversation, even though he does it with perfect accuracy.

Senator LONG:

– Let me now come to the paragraph to which I - and I feel sure others - must take strong exception. Dealing with the land tax, and giving his estimate of what it would probably realize, the honorable senator proceeded to ask what the Government were going to do with the money. He said -

Perhaps they will spend some of it on a trans-continental railway from Adelaide to ‘Western Australia, and some in acquiring the Northern Territory at South Australia’s price, and in building another transcontinental railway across one of the worst deserts in Australia. Both of these would be passed, and that by a system of bartering and traffic lower than was possible in the worst form of municipal government. Both had been fixed up by members of the Labour party, some of whom had agreed to vote for the one in consideration of receiving support for the other. That he knew from members of the Labour party who were disgusted at the business. Voices. - Name !

Senator CLEMONS:

– Do you want me to get into a row with some members of the party who are above that sort of thing - who want to be honest? It would not be decent to do so.

A Voice. - Be a man !

Senator CLEMONS:

– Why, that’s the small boy again - telling me to be a man ! (Loud laughter and uproar.)

Mr. Howroyd. ; I will write to Tasmanian members of the party and inquire about the matter.

Senator CLEMONS:

– You can do it. Do you disbelieve me?

Mr. Howroyd. No, I won’t say that for a moment, but I think you should be prepared to prove your statement; otherwise, you should not have made it. I shall write to members of the party and ask about it.

Senator CLEMONS:

Senator Long:

– Has the honorable senator’s attention been called to these words in the report -

Both of these -will be passed, and that by a system of baiter and traffic lower than was possible in the worst form of municipal government.

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– That is merely a figure of speech. On one hand, we are becoming terribly mealy-mouthed, and, on the other, we are becoming most awfully sensitive. I should have been turned to clay long ago if I had paid the slightest attention to things that have been said of me in the past. We have had, in the Senate, the charge of bargaining, huckstering, intriguing, and “log-rolling” in respect of this very Bill, in which reference is made to the two railways, without any protest.

Senator Rae:

– So long as the honorable senator gets his railway.

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

Is not that exactly what Senator demons said ?

Senator Long:

– No.

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– Let me read a word or two more. There was an interjection by Senator Pearce, who asked Senator Givens to mention names. Senator Givens then said -

I know what the opinions of some of them were before they supported the Bill.

Then there was -another interjection by Senator Pearce, and Senator Givens went on to say -

Senator GIVENS:

Senator PEARCE:

– The honorable senator said -

Further, let me say that when 1 get to Melbourne I shall ask two members of the Labour party for their permission to give you my authority for the statement. In any case, you can search the pages of Hansard and find it for yourselves. I should be amazed if you cannot discover it there.

At another part of the speech the honorable senator said, with regard to the acquisition of the Northern Territory and the building of the transcontinental railway, that -

Both of these would be passed, and that by a system of bartering and traffic lower than was possible in the worst form of municipal government. Both had been fixed up by members of the Labour party, some of whom had agreed to vote for the one in consideration of receiving support for the other. That he knew from members of the Labour party who were disgusted at the business.

Then a voice called out “ Name,” and Senator Clemons added -

Do you want mc to get into a row with some members of the party who are above that sort of thing - who want to be honest? It would not be decent to do so.

– Measures will be taken to enable Senator Clemons to put himself right with the Tasmanian public. I regret that he has not seen fit to take what I think was the proper course in this connexion’. I have always regarded him as a fair and square fighter politically, and if I have to re-adjust my views, the fault is, not mine, but his. I ask leave to withdraw the motion.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn. .

page 3157

PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS

Senator GIVENS:

– I desire to make a personal explanation. When I entered the Chamber this afternoon, Senator Symon was quoting a passage from a speech which is reported on page 2137 of Hansard of the present session. I do not know what he had said during my absence from the Chamber, and I do not propose to notice anything of which I have no personal knowledge. But the passage which he was quoting when I entered the Senate reads -

Is it a fact that there were certain South Australian senators who were not in favour of granting the concession to Western Australia, and had to be coerced into doing so? Will any honorable senator reply to that question ? Yet we rind that this spirit of huckstering and bargaining is pursued to such lengths that, in order to get support from all parties, entirely extraneous matter has been included in the Bill.

That quotation is extracted from a speech which I delivered on the Northern Territory Acceptance Bill, and I stand by every word of it.

Senator Millen:

– The “ honour of Parliament “ - “huckstering and bargaining.”

Senator GIVENS:

– I stand by every word of my statement, and I say that it was perfectly justified by the attitude of Senator Symon himself. It is well known that, were it not for an extraneous provision in the Bill, he would not be found voting for it.

Mr PRESIDENT:

– I would point out -that, in making a personal explanation, the honorable senator has a right to refer only to any statement which affects himself.

Senator GIVENS:

– Very well. My justification for the statement to which I have directed attention is the attitude of Senator Symon himself.

Senator LYNCH:

– By way of personal explanation, I wish to assure Senator Clemons that I very much regret having caused him temporary pain by claiming that I was not present, and did not vote, when the division was taken in this Chamber upon the proposal that the Commonwealth should make a special financial grant to Tasmania. The pair-book shows that I was not paired on that occasion, but the honorable senator is perfectly correct in quoting Hansard as showing that I had paired against the proposal in question. I am sorry that I should have caused him any temporary pain in that connexion. But, in regard to the remarks which I made, in reply to his accusation that the Labour party has been guilty of the worst form of bargaining in politics, I have no regrets. Indeed, if I had the chance of again referring to the matter, I would repeat them” with renewed emphasis.

page 3157

QUESTION

APPROPRIATION (WORKS AND

In Committee (Consideration resumed from 14th September, vide page 3072): Schedule.

Divisions 1 to 5 (Department of Home Aif airs), ,£469,541.

Amendment (by Senator Givens) again proposed -

That the item, “ Federal Capital at Canberra - towards cost of establishment, ^50,000,” be reduced by £1.

Senator BUZACOTT:
Western Australia

– Before the amendment is pressed to a division, I desire to make one or two observations upon the Federal Capital site question, as it is one of the questons upon which, during the recent election campaign, I refused to pledge myself. In reply, to inquiries which were put to me by electors, I said that from the information which was then in my possession, I believed that a mistake had been made in selecting Yass-Canberra as the site for the permanent Seat of Government, but that until I had been afforded an opportunity of personally inspecting the site, I would decline to pledge myself either for or against the re-opening of the question. Since then I have carefully studied the reports relating to the various sites which have been presented to this Parliament. I have listened attentively to the numerous speeches which have been delivered upon the question, and I have also visited YassCanberra. After weighing the whole of the evidence at my disposal, I am forced to conclude that that site is absolutely the best that has been submitted to this Parliament. The greatest objection which has been raised to it by the Givenites is that the water supply is inadequate. But the evidence which has been presented to the Senate during the course of this discussion proves conclusively that a supply can be obtained there which is ample for the requirements of the Federal Capital city for many years to come. The Cotter River, alone will assure a supply adequate for the requirements of 250,000 inhabitants. Outside the Cotter there are the Murrumbidgee and Molonglo rivers, the waters of which can be used for sanitary and for irrigation purposes.

Senator Millen:

– The supply available from the Cotter River alone is sufficient to meet the requirements of a population of 250,000, allowing that each individual consumes 100 gallons per day, whereas the residents of Sydney consume only 40 gallons per day.

Senator BUZACOTT:

– That circumstance has already been . emphasized, and there is no occasion for me to traverse old ground. As one who has been engaged in farming pursuits for the greater portion of my life, I say that the land over which I travelled during my inspection of the YassCanberra site was fair agricultural land. Senator Lynch has stated that the quality of the soil within the catchment area is of an inferior character, and that this is evidenced by the fact that it is valued at only 2s. 6d. per acre. But I would point out to him that it does not matter whether it be valued at 2s. 6d. or ;£io per acre,” because it can be used only as a catchment area. It is impossible to utilize it for reproductive purposes. I would also remind honorable senators that there are many matters which are absolutely dependent upon the settlement of this vexed question of the Federal Capital site. We have already agreed to an item providing for the establishment of a Military College in Australia. I would ask honorable senators where that college ought to be situated? I claim that it should be established at the Seat of Government, and if we’ delay the settlement of the Federal Capital’ site, it necessarily follows that we must delay the establishment of a Military College, and the training of our officers for the defence of Australia. Is it the intention of honorable senators that we should set up the Military College in Melbourne, where we shall have to pay twenty times as much per foot for land as we should be required to pay per acre for it at Y ass-Canberra ? The naval training school ought also to be established at the Federal Capital site.

Senator Ready:

– Are we to have our war-ships upon the Cotter River?

Senator BUZACOTT:

– That is a most impertinent interjection. I have already explained that a sufficient water supply is available at Yass-Canberra. Other honorable senators have quoted figures which fully bear out my statement. But, un, fortunately, they were not able to endow Senator Ready with the necessary intelligence to enable him to comprehend those figures. Many opponents of the YassCanberra site have made pitiful appeals to supporters of the Ministry to vote against the Government upon this question. I appeal to those members of the Ministerial party who are opposing the Government to support them on this occasion, because I maintain that no self-respecting Government can remain one hour in office if their financial proposals are defeated. Upon this particular proposal very much of the Government policy depends, and I hope that honorable senators will take that fact into consideration. I realize that we have now a Government in power whose members are prepared to give us that legislation for which I have been fighting for the past twenty years. Am I going to oppose them upon a small matter of this kind - because, after all, it is a small matter? What has been offered to us in lieu of YassCanberra ? Dalgety. In discussing Dalgety, in a report which was ordered to be printed on 6th July, 1904, Mr. Scrivener, whose reports have been quoted by the opponents of Yass-Canberra during the course of this debate, says -

At Dalgety the soil is less fertile than at any of the other sites, but on this account better foundations for large buildings over the whole area would be obtained.

In a capital site we require something more than a good foundation for our buildings. No more damning indictment has been made against Yass-Canberra than the one made against Dalgety by the surveyor whom honorable senators have been quoting throughout this debate. Referring to the land question, and the poorness of the soil at Yass-Canberra, is the position at

Dalgety any better? In a report on the whole of the proposed sites in the southern Monaro district, Mr. Scrivener says -

Southern Monaro is essentially a pastoral district; in earlier times wheat was grown for local use, but, with the advent of the roller mill and railway” communication, it was found to be more convenient to obtain flour direct from the Sydney market.

– Adelaide, or some other place ?

Senator CLEMONS:

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON (South Australia) [5.40]. - I agree with a great deal of what Senator Clemons has said, but I do not agree with his conclusion. We should certainly exercise caution in the expenditure of public money, and what the honorable senator has said has led me to believe that I should at the earliest moment make clear my view of what the amendment means. It proposes the reduction of the proposed vote of ,£50,000 by the sum of £1. That is a frivolous thing in itself, but it means more than meets the eye. It is a metaphorical amendment, and in order to ascertain its intention we must have some regard to what the mover of it has told us. If at the close of the speech which he has just made Senator Clemons had moved that the vote should be materially reduced and that only £5,000 or £10,000 should be voted for the purpose stated, I should have some hesitation in saying that I would not vote with him. I agree that in regard to expenditure on the Federal Capital, as well as other expenditure, we should go slowly. I think with Senator Givens that we should have some specific announcement from Ministers as to how the proposed vote is to be expended. If the amendment had been moved by Senator Clemons after the . speech we have just heard from him, it would have a very different significance. Senator Givens has not left us in any doubt as to what his amendment means. From the honorable senator’s point of view, instead of being worded as it is, his amendment might have been worded in this way : “ That the Senate is of opinion that the selection of YassCanberra as the site of the Federal Capital should be rescinded, and the Act dealing with the matter repealed, at the earliest possible moment.” Writ large, that is really what the amendment means.

Senator Clemons:

– It does not commit me.

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– I appeal to my honorable friend, after the exceedingly generous way in which he has spoken about New South Wales and the consideration which ought to be given to that State, to consider whether he is going to support an amendment which must necessarily be taken by the Government as a rescision of the selection which has been made. If by any means the question could be brought up for debate that it is premature to proceed with the construction of the Federal Capital, and that we ought to reduce the amount on the Estimates for that purpose, the issue would be a very different one, involving different considera tions. It may be that honorable senators who think that the Seat of Government should be transferred to Sydney would then have a clear field before them, and would not do any injustice to their clear conviction that Yass-Canberra, which has been selected, is the preferable site. Senator Givens, with the candour which usually inspires his speeches, has left his attitude beyond any doubt whatever. What he wishes to do is to destroy the selection of Yass-Canberra. No matter how we try to safeguard ourselves by our word, the consequence of it will be, if the amendment is agreed to, that Yass-Canberra will go. I cannot see any other alternative. Senator Givens has not said to the Government, “ I am moving this amendment so that you may consider whether you ought not to be content with a smaller sum at present.” He is proposing to defeat the Government policy by reversing the selection which this Parliament has made. He has left his meaning in no doubt.

Senator Givens:

– I do not usually leave my meaning in doubt.

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– My honorable friend is. always straight and plain. His speeches, which are an illumination to this Chamber, are always perfectly clear. In his speech on the 13th September he said -

I believe it is generally acknowledged that the Military College must be established on Federal territory in connexion with the Capital.

That is a proposition with which, I believe, honorable senators unanimously agree. The policy of the Government is that a Military College is to be established. Where is it to be established? They say, “ At the Federal Capital.” “ At the Federal Capital,” Senator Givens also says. In fact, he says -

I believe that every member of the Committee will agree that that is its proper place.

But if we defeat the selection to-day, we, at least, indefinitely postpone the fixing of the Federal Capital, and, consequently, we defeat the proposal of the Government in regard to the Military College. That is unquestionable. My honorable friend does not deny that proposition. In fact, he says -

To that extent, I have no objection to offer to the item.

He has no objection to putting the Military College at the Federal Capital. But the question arises : Where is the Federal Capital to be established ? May I ask him where the Military College is to be established, and when we are to settle this question ? We have tried for ten long years. We have had picnics to various localities. We all applied our ‘prentice minds to the consideration of various sites. We estimated their rival attractiveness and suitability. Now the Military College is to be established at Yass-Canberra. We are to have a Federal Capital at which to build it. If we have no Capital, we shall have no College. That is what it comes to.

Senator Givens:

– That argument is very ingenious, but it is not correct.

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– My honorable friend does not suppose that the Military College is going to be put up in the clouds, or that it will be located in an aeroplane. Where, then, is it to be? He went on -

I do not want to introduce any heat or irritation into the discussion, because this is a very important national question which ought to be discussed calmly.

We all agree to that -

From my point of view it is extremely important that Australia should pause and consider well before a site for the Capital is finally chosen.

When is it to be finally chosen? Is it to be hung up from year to year every time somebody can successfully - I do not say bargain or huckster, or anything like that, but every time any one can persuade some lukewarm members of Parliament - some Laodiceans - to vote for delay? My honorable friend went on -

Because such a decision cannot be reversed at the sweet will of this or any future Parliament.

But is not that what my honorable friend is trying to do? Is he not trying to reverse the choice, because he thinks there happens to be, I will not say a casual - because that would be against the honour of Parliament - but an accidental majority on his side -

We are definitely fixing upon a site for all time.

That is, if we agree to my honorable friend’s site. He wants us to agree to Dalgety.

Senator Givens:

– I said that I was not at all wedded to Dalgety.

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– My honorable friend sings songs of joy over the superior attractiveness of Dalgety.

Senator Givens:

– The honorable senator has only casually glanced at my speech.

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– I read every word of my honorable friend’s speeches. I take them to bed with me.

I study them most diligently. I have some of them . almost by heart -

Therefore it should only be done after the fullest consideration, and in the fairest and clearest possible way.

My honorable friend means to say that the choice was not” made in that way.

Senator Givens:

– The first selection was fair.

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– But the second was not? Surely that is a reflection upon the honour of Parliament ! -

Some persons have an idea that the Capital site is already fixed at Yass-Canberra.

I have thought so ever since the Act was passed.

Senator Givens:

– But did the honorable senator say so when Dalgety was chosen ?

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– Yes, I did. I suppose that my honorable friend refers to my having voted for Dalgety on the first occasion. I have heard an expression used about first love. It cannot be said that Dalgety was my first love, because it was one of those cases in which there was no love at all. ‘In affairs of love the bride is selected. But in this case the bride was chosen without the bridegroom having seen her. That may be a convenient practice in some countries, but it is not one which we usually pursue. I was beguiled into a choice when I voted for Dalgety on the first occasion. I formed my views on the opinions of other people. When the matter was reopened I made an expedition to Dalgety in order to see if I could justify my vote. I thought that was an honest thing to do. I inspected the site in company with a number of others. But I came to the conclusion that I could not face the people of my State or the people of Australia generally, and say that I was satisfied that I had voted for the right site for a Federal Capital. Canberra was not amongst the first group of sites, but it was in the second group. I made an arrangement to go and see it for myself in company with our friend, Mr. Staniforth Smith, who is now in Papua. We went apart from any parliamentary Committee, and were simply guided by a New South Wales surveyor. We got up very early in the morning, or rather in the middle of the night, and inspected the place carefully. I was satisfied that, amongst the sites that I had seen, Canberra was the proper one to choose. I have never since deviated from that view.

Senator Givens:

– That shows that the honorable senator had no qualms of conscience about departing from the Dalgety selection.

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– I should have had qualms of conscience if I had adhered to the Dalgety selection.

Senator Givens:

– So should I if I adhered to Yass-Canberra.

Senator Sir JOSIAH SYMON:

– There must be finality at some time. Any one might say that he preferred some other site to Yass-Canberra, but we cannot continue indefinitely expressing our preferences. I am further reminded that no agreement was entered into between the two Governments as to Dalgety. An agreement has been entered into with regard to Yass-Canberra. My honorable friend went on -

It is not any more definitely and finally settled now than it was before. Parliament has just as good a right now to reconsider this question and change its opinion as it had on the former occasion.

I quite agree. My honorable friend does not disguise that, by means of this amendment, he asks the Senate to rescind the Yass-Canberra selection. That is what our vote will mean. That being the case, on what grounds are we asked to do this? There is a sentence about Dalgety that I should like to quote from Senator Givens’ speech. He did not disguise that his amendment meant that we were asked to make a choice between Dalgety and YassCanberra. He said on page 2960 -

I must honestly say that I cannot regard Canberra as the best site for the Federal Capital. As a mere building site, I admit that Canberra is a very good site for a city.

So far, so good ; and then he proceeded to canvas the demerits of Yass-Canberra, and to say -

The advantage of establishing the Federal Capital on the Monaro tableland would be that it would practically add a new province to Australia.

The agreement made between the Commonwealth and the S’tate and set out in the first schedule to this Act is hereby ratified and confirmed.

The Seat of Government Surrender Act, passed by the New South Wales Legislature in December, 1909, similarly provides in section 5, that “ the agreement is hereby ratified and confirmed.” The view, therefore, is that finality has been reached, and that a definite contract has been executed by the Commonwealth and the State. I have mentioned these facts for the information of the Committee. _ Different statements have been made with respect to the impossibility of having up-to-date or modern harbor improvements at Jervis Bay. It has been pointed out that there has been little or no desire on the part of the New South Wales Parliament to meet ‘ the wishes of this Parliament in that regard. I find that on the 19th October last, Mr. Fuller, Minister of Home Affairs, telegraphed to the Premier of New South Wales, as follows -

Desirable ha%-e your assurance that your Government will offer no objection to the construction of such works at Jervis Bay as the Commonwealth may consider necessary for the purpose of forming a harbor.

The Premier of New South Wales telegraphed this reply -

We will offer no objection to works for harbor at Jervis Bay.

Sitting suspended from 6.30 to 7.45 -p.m.

page 3169

COMMONWEALTH BANKING COMPANIES RESERVE LIABILITY BILL

Third Reading

Motion (by Senator Walker) proposed -

That this Bill be now lead a third time.

Senator CLEMONS:

Senator WALKER:

Senator WALKER:

– I must congratulate Senator Givens upon the fact that, today, he has not made so much of the stentorian noises which, we are assured, emanated from the bull of Bashan. But he still resembles another kind of bull - the bull in a china shop which likes to knock everything down. However, he has been much more courteous to me to-day than he has been on former occasions. I hope that the third reading of the Bill will be carried by a substantial majority.

Question - That this Bill be now read a third time - put. The Senate divided.

AYES: 20

NOES: 11

Majority … … 9

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a third time.

page 3174

APPROPRIATION (WORKS AND BUILDINGS) BILL

In Committee (Consideration resumed, vide page 3168) :

Schedule.

Divisions 1 to 5 (Department of Home

Aftairs),£469,541.

Amendment (by Senator Givens) again proposed-

That the item, “ Federal Capital at Canberra - towards cost of establishment,£50,000,” be reduced by £1.

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

– Prior to the dinner adjournment, I mentioned that there was no record in existence that the Cotter River had ever ceased to. flow. I also mentioned incidentally that since the last vote on this question was taken here I have had an opportunity of visiting Yass-Canberra. During that visit I had many conversations with Mr. Scrivener, the Federal surveyor and the officer in charge of the survey camp. He informed me that there was a greater fall of water in the proposed Federal area than in any similar area in New South Wales. He also told me that he estimated that by the construction of a weir, at the expenditure of a very small sum, sufficient water could be stored in the catchment area to supply the inhabitants of the Capital for a period of two years if no rain fell during the period. Some honorable senators have called attention to the rainfall within the Federal area. The average rainfall is 25.5 inches, and the fall is distributed as follows : - Spring, 25 per cent. ; summer, 21 per cent. ; autumn, 25 per cent, j winter, 29 per cent. Further,, the annual rainfall in the Cotter catchment area, which comprises 170 square miles, or 108,800 acres, has been estimated at noless than from 40 to 60 inches. Leaving the water supply question, I want torefer to the possibilities of the land within the area. Senator Givens said, in support of his amendment for the reduction of the item by£1, that authorities could bequoted - as a matter of fact, he did quote a gentleman in the Legislative Council of New South Wales, which is a rather questionable institution in which to get authorities, so far as Democratic legislation is concerned - that much of the land would not feed a goat. If that were true, it would be an unpardonable sin on the part of any Government to locate the Capitalthere. But that statement is not borne out. by official figures and facts. Whatever our views may be with respect to any of the sites which we have from time to timeconsidered, we ought, at any rate, to befair with respect to each site. Last night,. Senator Gould obtained for me information which was procured from the Home Affairs Department in respect to the number of sheep and live stock within the area. Since that time, the head of the Department has been in communication with Mr. Scrivener, and has received confirmatory information, which was obtained from? the books of the stock inspector at Queanbeyan. After stating that on an area of 294,255 acres there- are 4,813 large stock: and 166,132 sheep, Mr. Scrivener goes on to say -

Allowing one head of large stock as the equivalent of eight sheep, the average capacity of the area dealt with is acres per sheep. Parts of Glenwood and Fairlight are outside Federal Territory ; on the other hand, there are numbers of small holdings carrying up to 500 or 600 sheep not included.

Some honorable senators have been anxious to know how far work has proceeded within the Federal area, and what amount of effort and money has been expended in connexion with the site. I have here a resume of the work which has been carried on since the site was definitely fixed upon by this Parliament. It reads as follows -

The ten square miles embracing the site which has been selected for the Federal Capital City have been covered by a contour survey with vertical intervals of five feet, the plan of which has been plotted, and lithographs of the same will be ready within the next few days. The demarcation of the territorial boundaries is in progress. The surveys in connexion with engineering proposals for water supply, sewerage, and railways have been made. A weir has been erected at the Cotter River, at which the actual discharge is determined by readings which are taken daily. The record thus obtained has confirmed the reports that have already been made that the capacity of the Cotter River is more than sufficient for the domestic and civic requirements of a population of two hundred thousand persons on a basis of 100 gallons each per diem. The quality of the water is excellent.

I am satisfied that the strongest opponent of the site who has had an opportunity of visiting it will confirm that statement - that -.the water of the Cotter River is of excellent quality.

Senator Needham:

– What about the quantity ?

Senator FINDLEY:

– I have already stated the quantity. Senator Pearce remarks that the water supply to the Federal Capital will be twice as much per head per annum as is allowed in Sydney.

Senator Walker:

– Yet one honorable :senator said that one could not wash a pockethandkerchief in the river.

Senator Needham:

– I still think that one could not wash a handkerchief in the Cotter trickle.

Senator FINDLEY:

- Senator Needham says he is satisfied that one could not wash a handkerchief in the Cotter River.

Senator Needham:

– No, in the Cotter -‘trickle.

Senator FINDLEY:

– I am satisfied that if the honorable senator got into the river “he would be washed into the Murrumbidgee, because in certain parts the fall of water is very rapid. The resume continues -

A phyisographical reconnaissance of the territory has been conducted, from which the model which is now in this Chamber has been constructed.

A geological survey of the territory is now being carried out by Professor David and Mr. Pittman, the Government Geologist of New South Wales. The information which will be derived from their report will be of great value, and is expected within the next few weeks.

– If the money can be expended upon the items which have been enumerated by the Honorary Minister, well and good. But we ought not to appropriate more money than can reason ably be required during the current financial year. I again suggest that the. amounts which it is proposed to spend upon each item should be stated separately, so that honorable senators may be afforded an opportunity of reducing them. I shall be quite prepared to listen to any explanation of the different items, and to deal with each of them upon its merits. If it can be shown that £50,000 can be profitably expended during the remainder of the financial year, I shall offer no opposition to that expenditure. I desire to assist the Government to finally determine the question of the Federal Capital site at the earliest possible moment.

Senator DE LARGIE:
Western Australia

Senator STEWART:

– The New South Wales Government never ceased to intrigue against that site being adopted as the permanent Seat of Government. Yet Senator Walker tells us, in effect, that the New South Wales Government have carried out, not only the letter, but the spirit of the Constitution. I say that it has done neither one thing nor the other. If, when Dalgety was chosen, a Commonwealth Government with some backbone had been in power, that site would have been the Seat of Government; and we should now be meeting there instead of wrangling over this question as we are to-night, in Melbourne. But I was dealing with the question of Cabinet solidarity, which has a much more important bearing upon the proposal under consideration than honorable senators imagine. My information is that the voting upon this question to-night will be equal. Upon the Government benches there are four gentlemen - three Ministers and the Government Whip - who intend to oppose Senator Givens’ amendment. Yet, on more than one occasion, each of them has declared in the strongest possible terms against the site for which they now intend to vote. If they were to register their votes to-night in accordance with their previouslyexpressed convictions, Yass-Canberra would be rejected.

Senator de Largie:

– We voted for that site on the last occasion that the matter was before the Senate.

Senator STEWART:

– I have read speeches delivered by Senator de Largie, which were very derogatory to YassCanberra, and the Yass-Canberra of to-day is the same as the Yass-Canberra of a year or two years ago. There has been no change in that site - the change has been in Senator de Largie himself. Circumstances alter cases. I propose to read a number of short extracts from the speeches of honorable senators who intend to vote tor Yass-Canberra. On 28th October, 1908 - as will be seen by reference to Hansard, Vol. XLVIII., page 1577 - the Minister of Defence said- .

Senator Sir Josiah Symon:

– Is the honorable senator going to read the whole of those speeches?

Senator STEWART:

– I am not going to read very much. Upon that occasion Senator Pearce said -

I regard Yass and Lake George as being, quite out of the question. I hold that nothing can be brought forward to show that the conditions of Canberra are equal to those at Dalgety. I admit that if we compare the soil of the little flat at Canberra with the generality of the soil at Dalgety town site the former is superior ; but, as I said before, we want te build a city, and not to make a garden. We do not want a good soil for a city.

Senator W RUSSELL:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– We want some farms.

Senator PEARCE:
ALP

– There is plenty of room for farms. Any one who has been to Canberraknows that, whilst there is a supply of good soil at Canberra itself the outside country is rugged and mountainous. If the honorable senator will glance at the map he will see that the site will comprise all the good land of the’ locality, because it is surrounded by low hills in the immediate vicinity, and by mountains in the distance. But when we take out the site at Dalgety we have not touched the good land.. We have only taken good building land, andthere we can get a perfect water supply at a cheap price and capable of yielding a magnificent supply of electic power. In the basaltic- country at the back of Dalgety there is some of the best land to be found in New South Wales, and it is favoured with a certain rainfall and enjoys good seasons. Honorable senators may inquire why more farming has not been carried on in the Monaro district.

Senator W RUSSELL:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– Owing to land monopoly.

Senator PEARCE:

Can any member of the Commonwealth Parliament point on any map of Australia or of New South Wales to any place called “ Yass-Canberra.” I have never previously heard of such a place. I went to school when I was young, and since I arrived in Australia I have heard of Yass, of Canberra, of Lake George, of Tumut; but in no school book and on no map of New South Wales or Australia is there such a name as “ Yass-Canberra “ to be found.

Senator McGregor wenton to condemn the site in most unsparing language. There is one portion of his speech that I should like to read, and I may say that I agree with every sentiment he uttered on that’ occasion. Referring to the necessity for a Federal port, he said -

We should have a neutral port belonging to the Commonwealth at Twofold Bay, where the trade and commerce of every State would be connected with the heart of the Commonwealth. Vessels would come direct from Launceston, from Hobart, from Adelaide, from Perth, from Brisbane, and from other parts of the Commonwealth to the Commonwealth port at Eden.

Senator Stewart:

– That is what the Sydney people do not want.

Senator Walker:

– Vessels would come in just the same way to Jervis Bay.

Senator MCGREGOR:
ALP

– - Both of those inter.jections are pertinent. The one fits into the other. Senator Stewart is quite right. The Sydney people do not want the port at Twofold Bay to be developed. I should like Senator Walker to consider for a few minutes the geographical character of the country between either Yass or Canberra and Jervis Bay. Has he ever been over it? Has he ever thought about it? Has he ever seen it? Has he ever imagined what it is like? Has he ever talked with any one who has travelled over it?

Senator Walker:

– Yes, I have.

Senator MCGREGOR:

– It must have been in his dreams then, because I am positive that the honorable senator has never travelled over the country himself. One who has travelled there has only to reflect to recognise that the country is cut by the very backbone of the Dividing Range. There are not only stupendous mountains to be crossed, but also deep ravines and river beds to be bridged, and a much longer distance to be traversed than from either Bombala or Dalgety.

Strange to relate, Sir Joseph Carruthers has exactly the same opinion as Senator McGregor has with regard to Jervis Bay and its connexion with Yass-Canberra. Speaking in the New South Wales Parliament, he said it would be just as possible to establish communication between Yass-Canberra and Mars as between Yass-Canberra and Jervis Bay. We have, therefore, two great authorities, Sir Joseph Carruthers and the Vice-President of the Executive Council, in agreement on this very pertinent point; and if we cannot have direct communication with the sea, Yass-Canberra ought not to be fixed upon as the Federal Capital site. In that grudging, carping, huckstering spirit, which has characterized every action of the New South Wales Government, they absolutely refused to give the Commonwealth Government any conveniences whatever at Jervis Bay. Yet we find honorable senators willing to accept the terms ; but so far as I am concerned I am not willing. Senator Findley, speaking on the 4th December, 1908, was equally emphatic, and regarded Cabinet solidarity as a very funny thing. He said -

I always thought that a decision was arrived at by majority rule ; that if a majority favoured a certain course of policy, it carried the day, and the minority had to be loyal to the decision….. Those who have unbiased minds admit that it is the least suitable of all the sites in that respect. It has not a water supply worthy of the name. The stream which is dignified as “ the Cotter River “ is not a river at all. It is a mere creek. The water running in it is nothing but a polluted trickle. On the other hand, the Snowy River, at Dalgety, is a pellucid never-failing stream.

Senator Millen:

– The honorable senator cannot produce any authority for his first statement.

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Walker:

– What ; the honorable senator’s leader?

Senator NEEDHAM:

– Yes, my leader in this Chamber. It is quite evident from his interjections that he wishes to make this a laughing matter. I propose now to quote from the report by the Commissioner appointed to investigate the claims of various sites to be the Seat of Government of the Commonwealth, which was ordered to be printed by the New South Wales Legislative Assembly on 30th October, 1900. The Commissioner says -

In regard to water resources, if Goulburn has to be supplied by gravitation, its position is rather low on the comparative list prepared by Mr. Broomfield, having been placed by me between Queanbeyan and Cootamundra. On the other hand, Yass, if supplied by a pumping scheme from the Mumimbidgee, nas been assigned a somewhat similar position beyond Wagga and Junee. But subsequent to Mr. Broomfi’Id’s inspection, it has been claimed in favour of Yass that the Michalong catchment can provide Yass with an effective gravitation scheme.

He goes on to say -

That scheme is, in consequence of the length nf the pipe line and other circumstances, an expensive one - ^275,000 being required for piping alone. The upper Wollandilly has not een, it must be admitted, thoroughly examined for a gravitation supply for Goulburn, but even if the water resources of Goulburn were equal to those of Yass, neither are promising.

Senator- McGregor. - Yass is several hundred feet higher.

Senator NEEDHAM:

– I know perfectly well that if Yass and Canberra had not been bracketed together, this Parliament would not have selected YassCanberra as the site for the Federal Capital. But when there was a danger of Canberra being defeated Yass was tacked on to it. It, therefore, behoves us to be very careful in determining the site for the permanent Seat of Government.

Senator E J RUSSELL:
VICTORIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– I realize to the full that as the result of the division which will be taken this evening we shall probably never be afforded another opportunity of saying a few words upon one of the biggest questions which we have ever had to answer for Australia. An honorable senator tells me that during the next quarter of a century items relating to the Federal Capital will appear upon the Estimates. I am aware of that, but my reply is that there will not be any item which, like that now before us, will enable Australians to fix for all time the site of the Australian Capital, and to select a spot where experiments may be conducted in regard to one of the biggest reforms that the world has ever known. I do not know of any Federal city that has been established under conditions permitting of complete experiments in regard to the land problem, and under circumstances enabling the unearned increment attaching to the land as the result of public expenditure to be shared by the people. Recognising these facts, surely we must admit that the question is one ot the greatest importance, and not one upon which a catch vote should be taken. It is far too important to be dealt with in that way. It is not our fault that a vote has not already been taken upon this question. Surely if those who support the selection of Yass-Canberra have the right to choose the moment when a vote should be taken, we, being equally sincere and equally desirous that a wise selection should be made, possess the same right. I wish’ to plead guilty to being an idealist in regard to the future Federal Capital. _ I have never dreamt of the Administration of the Commonwealth of Australia being conducted from the middle of a desert - from a centre such as that which we are now asked to select. Honorable senators may say that Yass-Canberra is not a desert ; but will any one say that the land in that district is first-class? We cannot hope to secure first-class land for the Federal Capital, but will any honorable senator assert that the land of the Yass-Canberra district is even of second-class or thirdclass quality?

Senator Stewart:

– The blacks would not camp there.

Senator E J RUSSELL:
VICTORIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– It has been said to-night that the land will carry a sheep and a-half to the acre, but no one has said that it is capable of doing that all the year round. No reliance is to be placed on a statement that a given area will carry in the spring a certain number of sheep to the acre. I have viewed this territory, and as one who knows something of the pastoral lands of Australia I ridicule the idea that land in the YassCanberra district will carry a sheep and a-half to the acre all the year round.

Senator Vardon:

– I saw plenty of feed there in March.

Senator E J RUSSELL:
VICTORIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– I have seen Yass-Canberra at two different seasons. 1 spent a week there. I roamed all over the district, visited the catchment area, walked to a point beyond the weir, and made a general inspection of the country, with the result that I have no hesitation in saying that the land does not, and never will, carry a sheep and a-half to the acre all the year round, unless Nature deals with it more bountifully than it has done. 1 view this question from only one standpoint. Too large a proportion of our population is congregated in our cities. Is it the desire of honorable senators that we should have large aggregations of our population dumped down in our cities, and dependent upon city occupations for their maintenance? Surely the desire is that the population shall be apportioned between city and country as nearly as possible in accordance with the determination of Nature. Australia suffers from a congestion of population in her cities, and in some of them I he housing problem is a very serious one. Health inspectors almost unanimously condemn the conditions that exist in some of our cities. Do we desire to bring about a state of affairs that will induce even a moderate proportion of our population to be absolutely dependent upon the expenditure of public moneys? Who will live at Yass-Canberra? Will any one reside there because of its scenic beauties? Will any one go there because of the richness of its soil, or because of its possibilities from an agricultural point of view? Even on the figures that have been submitted to-night, will any one be induced to settle there because of its pastoral resources, or its mineral possibilities? In each of these respects it offers no inducement to settlement. Then, again, there are no beaches, no stretches of river that might form a pleasure resort for tourists. An ; honorable senator smiles. I could not imagine his enjoying a swim in the Cotter River. The Cotter is merely a trickle; and what sort of country is the catchment area? When on a visit there it was my misfortune to be lost for a time, together with a representative of one of the leading newspapers, and a gentleman who is shortly to join the expedition to the South Pole ; and yet, in spite of all the scientific instruments which the latter had brought with him, to assist him in the performance of his professional duties, we could not find a way out for a considerable time. We found that Queanbeyan was the second driest district in the whole of New South Wales ; and yet to-night we are informed that the rainfall there is equal to that of Melbourne. Mr. Wade, the Premier of New South Wales, who is responsible to a large extent for the present position, was not ‘ above casting aspersions on Mr. Scrivener the surveyor, because he gave a very unfavorable report on the locality, although that gentleman has been professionally employed in similar responsible work for many years. Senator McDougall is quoted as an authority on the value of the Cotter River, although, as a matter of fact, he had the misfortune to be capsized in the Murrumbidgee, and never reached the Cotter.

Senator Long:

- Senator McDougall had seen the Cotter before the incident to which the honorable member refers occurred.

Senator E J RUSSELL:
VICTORIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– I accept the assurance that the honorable member did see the Cotter. We were told of a magnificent weir on that stream, but we found that it had been constructed with one load of bricks and a barrow of cement, and the whole volume of water flowed through an opening 2 ft. 6 in. across, with practically no force behind it. Yet it has been said that there is a supply for a population of 200,000, and twice as great as that which Sydney now enjoys. We were told that, even if the Cotter were to fail, there was another creek from which a supply could be obtained, and in it we found a trickle not more than eighteen inches wide after a week’s rain. As a matter of fact, the Capital, if built at Canberra, can_ be supplied only by a pumping scheme.

Senator Pearce:

– There are nine lifts in the Coolgardie water scheme.

Senator E J RUSSELL:
VICTORIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator E J RUSSELL:
VICTORIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– If we compare the quantity of wind that the VicePresident of the Executive Council has controlled during the past few years with that which I have controlled, it will be found that where I have been a soft zephyr, he has been a cyclone. If, notwithstanding all its disadvantages, we still adhere to Yass-Canberra as the future Seat of Government I shall wish it godspeed, because I entertain nothing but good wishes for any place which becomes the Federal Capital of Australia.

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– At this advanced hour I feel sure that the Government will not raise the slightest objection to an adjournment of the debate. I would point out that human endurance has its limits. Honorable sena- tors are only flesh and blood, and we naturally look to the early hours of the morning for an opportunity to recuperate after our labours of the previous day. I hope that the Vice-President of the Executive Council will lend a sympathetic ear to my suggestion.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Henderson:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I will point out to the honorable senator that the question before the Chair is ‘ ‘ that the item be reduced by £1.”

Senator LYNCH:

– Quite so. But with a view to facilitating the transaction of business I am appealing to the VicePresident of the Executive Council to accede to my request for an adjournment of the debate.

I do not know the source from which Senator Gould obtained his figures, but in the report of Mr. Oliver we are told that a railway of only 60 miles would require to be built to connect the Federal Capital on the Eden-Bombala site with the existing railway system. If Senator Gould’s statement is correct the cost per mile would be £50,000. Was it right for the honorable senator to make such a serious statement without citing his authority? Whilst there may be serious engineering difficulties to be surmounted on the route, I venture to say that, notwithstanding the deep cuttings which had to be made in New South Wales in crossing the Blue Mountains, and in Queensland in getting over the Range, and also on the Cairns railway, there was not a mile of line which cost anything near £50,000. Lest there should still be any doubt in the minds of any honorable senators as to the capacity of the Dalgety site to provide a suitable water supply, let me quote what Mr. Oliver said on that subject. In the beginning of his report, he admitted that he had been placed in a very delicate position, but when he was called upon to express an impartial opinion on the merits of the rival sites, he placed at the head of the list Dalgety, or Buckley’s Crossing. On page 27, he says -

Buckley’s Crossing is decidedly the best. The supply is unlimited; the distance which the water will have to be brought is small, and provision could easily be made for generating electricity at the place where the water supply would be taken off, as the fall in the river is very rapid.

Of all the southern sites, including YassCanberra and Queanbeyan, no site found more favour with Mr. Oliver than did Buckley’s Crossing, or Dalgety. In his opinion, it was superior to Orange, Goulburn, Cootamundra, Carcoar, and even Bombala. What has he. to say in reference to the water supply in the Queanbeyan district, which is very close to the YassCanberra district, and which it is suggested should be included in the Federal territory ? -

Queanbeyan has a large available supply both from the Cotter and the Murrumbidgee Rivers. The former would give a very good and pure supply, but the expense would be large.

We can ill afford to lose sight of the important question of expense. There may come times of stress, when the electors of the Commonwealth may find it very difficult indeed to make ends meet. We know of States which were very prosperous for many years, but whose people, from a combination of circumstances, found themselves so overtaxed by industrial and economical depressions that they could hardly make a livelihood. In Australia, we are accustomed, unfortunately, to alternate spells of depression and prosperity. Let me recall the extraordinary circumstances which at one time prevailed in Queensland in order to bring home to honorable senators the necessity of looking to the needs and exigencies of the future, keeping an eye on the lean times as well as the prosperous times, and, above all, providing for such a system of wise control in the management of industrial” enterprises as will lean as lightly as possible upon the shoulders of the taxpayers. Are we doing that on the present occasion? My experience of Queensland dates back twenty-five years. I remember the time when able-bodied men in that State were able to engage in contracts that were highly remunerative to them.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I am allowing the honorable senator a considerable amount of latitude, but his present remarks are rather irrelevant.

Senator LYNCH:

– In the same State, to my own knowledge, those able-bodied men were afterwards compelled to work for £1 per week and find themselves. If we have any desire to preserve the material well-being of future generations we must be circumspect, and avoid schemes which will inevitably lead to extravagance in the conduct of our industries. In the YassCanberra district there is, I admit, a water supply sufficient for a city of 25,000 inhabitants. And if we contemplate no more imposing Seat of Government for the Commonwealth than that, the site favoured by the Government is suitable enough. But we have to be guided by past experiences. The lamp of experience is the only guide as to what shall be done in the future. The man who ignores that light must be blind to the lessons of history. When we consider the beautiful scenery that surrounds Dalgety, we ought to have no hesitation about the selection of it. We can point there to beautiful, snow-clad mountains in the distance, and show the European visitor a landscape at the beauty of which he will be amazed. But what have we to show at Yass-Canberra? Nothing but sunbaked plains where willy willies swirl, gathering the rubbish and depositing it upon the scanty water supply of the district. There is not one redeeming feature in its favour. Of course, remarks have been made concerning the capabilities of its soil and the number of stock it will carry. But stock carrying capacity is no qualification in a site for a Capital city. Some of the most prosperous cities in the world have been founded in localities where stock would not thrive. In times when the means of access to rich producing areas are easy the productive capacity of the soil of a great city is of no consequence. The City of Melbourne obtains its supplies of potatoes from Tasmania, and its fruits from distant part of the State of which it is the capital. As showing the true position of affairs, I should like to indicate what occurred in the selection of Washington as the capital of the United States. The trend of feeling in that country at the time when Washington was selected is brought out in a paper on “The City of Washington,” by John Addison Porter, in Studies- in Historical and Political Science. He says -

The list of a score or more places, which were “ named for the honour “ (some of them in the merely complimentary sense in which “ favoured sons “ of States are nowadays named for the Presidency) is chiefly remarkable for the number of insignificant names which it contains. New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore were indeed there. But there were others then unknown to fame, and which it is now not easy to find upon the map.

That is truly representative of the present position. A number of sites that many of us had not heard of before were offered by New South Wales to the Federal Parliament -

Whatever errors Congress committed, the patriotic reader may be profoundly thankful for some things which they did not do in the location of a Capital.

During the seven years when the subject was under serious discussion, i.e., between 1783 and 1790, the States of New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, and New Jersey were actively represented in the competition.

I am as anxious as any one can be to see the Federal Capital established, but I desire to see it erected on a site that will do justice to the good sense and the patriotism of 5 the Australian people. There was no “ Ma “ State there. No claim to the Federal Capital was put forward by the State of Pennsylvania, which, in respect of the Federation, occupied a position similar to that of New South Wales in respect of the Commonwealth. Several of the States were competitors for the prize -

Memorials were received from the Legislatures of New Jersey arid Pennsylvania favouring some position on the banks of the Delaware. Afterwards, the Susquehanna was hotly urged in place of the Potomac, named at an early date by the Virginians. Trenton and Annapolis, which had been tried and liked by the Continental Congress, were formally offered and as quickly refused.

It was all a case of offering there, not a matter of refusing, as has been the case with New South Wales -

Maryland in 1778, and Virginia in 1779, generously agreed, through their representatives in Congress, to cede any district ten square miles within their borders which Congress might desire to occupy as the permanent Seat of Government. Virginia asked the cooperation of Maryland in inducing Congress to accept the grant, and pledged herself to furnish a sum not to exceed $120,000 for the public buildings, provided Maryland would raise at least two-fifths of the total amount.

There we have the small State of Maryland offering to pledge herself to the extent of $48,000 to provide buildings for the Federal Capital - ‘

Through the early debates of Congress on this subject there was an evident concurrence that the State or City which received the Capital should do something to promote its prosperity. Thus Monroe moved that Maryland and Virginia should pay for the first Government buildings if Georgetown was chosen; Pennsylvania and Maryland were to guarantee the clear navigation of the Susquehanna in case the latter region should be preferred; Delaware and Maryland were likewise to open a water communication between the Chesapeake and the Delaware. New York and Philadelphia offered their public buildings for the accommodation of the Government, and Baltimore started a subscription for new ones, payable if the Government came there.

But what are the conditions here ? We are paying rent for every building that wc occupy in Melbourne, except the parliamentary buildings which shelter us. I repeat that, in the case of the United States, there was no “Ma” State which desired to browbeat the Federal Government. On the contrary, all the States evinced an eagerness to assist that Government. What a contrast between that Federation and our own -

The attractive country near Philadelphia seemed to fulfil these requirements. On 27th September, 1789, a motion to place the Capital in a district ten miles square, at Germantown Pennsylvania, passed both Houses of Congress, and was finally lost only because the Senate adjourned before having time to consider a slight amendment which the Representatives had offered to the original Bill. At the busy session in the spring of the following year, at New York, the complexion and temper of. both Houses were considerably altered, and the choice, which the Pennsylvanians had reason to expect was lost to them for ever.

In other words the choice of the Federation was absolutely untrammelled. No attempt was made to thwart it by the Congresses, of the thirteen States. The author continues -

The decision of Congress, while unpopular for a while, was soon regarded with indifference. The disappointed members loudly declared that they would rather not attend the sessions than go so far -

Sir William Lyne has made a similar declaration in regard to the selection of Bombala -

Lampooners described the spot on the Potomac as a howling malarious wilderness. But, as it was yet a paper city, the feelings of the inhabitants were not hurt. Meanwhile, the gay and populous city of Philadelphia was temporary Capital of the United States.

So that the very men who are doing an injustice to the Dalgety site by declaring that it is blizzard-swept had their counterpart in the individuals in the United States, who described Washington as a “howling malarious wilderness.” The history of that country in respect of its choice of a. Federal Capital has practically been repeated in Australia. In each case the Federal Parliament made its selection. But after the Parliament of the Commonwealth had chosen a site for the permanent Seat of Government the New South Wales Government came forward and said, in effect, “ You are not to make a choice. I am the boss here, and I countermand what you have done, and will deny you the site at Dalgety.” I strongly object to the assertion of supremacy by the New South Wales Parliament over the National Parliament. The action of the electors in regard to the Financial Agreement clearly indicates that the will of this Parliament should be supreme in the matter of the selection of the Federal Capital site. I am sorry that we are about to take a course which willi not redound to our credit, and that future generations, when they come to count up their gains and losses, will be forced tothe conclusion that we were blind to our own requirements, and to the highest wellbeing of the people. I ask honorable senators to brush the scales from their eyes, so that, in die interests of the countless generations yet unborn, they may sec that it is our duty to select a site which will reflect credit upon our judgment and patriotism.

Senator BLAKEY:
Victoria

– At this early hour of the morning, I should be practically beating the air if I attempted to analyze the various reasons; which have been advanced in favour of the selection of Yass-Canberra as the site of the Federal Capital. I have listened very attentively to the cogent arguments which have been urged by the two previous speakers in opposition to the proposal of the Government to expend £50,000 upon the establishment there of the Federal Capital. Before determining the location of the future Capital of the Commonwealth, this Committee should weigh the mattervery seriously. It has been the cause of the discussions which have caused so much disturbance in this Committee this morning, and has seriously disturbed the minds of the thoughtful people of Australia. We are justified in availing ourselves of every opportunity to prevent the establishment of the Capital on a site that is certainly undesirable.

Senator Ready:

– We are having quite a night out.

Senator BLAKEY:

– I shall be pleased to have several nights out in dealing with a. question of this magnitude. Senator Lynch has pointed out how Rome was built upon her seven hills, and how the people of the United States took many years to determine the site of their capital. He has alluded in eloquent language to the discussions in Congress on a question similar to that which is engaging the attention of Australian politicians to-day. The seed that was sown by the framers of the Constitution is now bearing fruit, and I am afraid that honorable members of another place have agreed to a proposed vote to be expended on a site which those who laid the foundation stone of the Commonwealth edifice would regret to see selected. Under section 125 of the Constitution it is provided that the Seat of Government shall be determined by the Commonwealth Parliament, and. as Senator Lynch has pointed out, the narrow-minded non-Australian attitude of New South Wales in this respect is in striking contradistinction to the broadminded, liberal spirit displayed by the States of America in dealing with the Capital site question. The Parliament of New South Wales tried to deprive Australia of its first love. It endeavoured to block the acquisition of land near Dalgety,’ which I do not hesitate to say, after a visit to both places, is infinitely superior to YassCanberra.

Senator McDougall:

– The honorable senator did not say that when he was there.

Senator BLAKEY:

– I said that from a purely selfish point of view I should prefer to reside in Yass-Canberra, and in coming to that conclusion I was no doubt influenced by the fact that we saw that site under the most favorable conditions, whereas we visited Dalgety on a bleak and dismal day. But viewing this question from a purely Australian stand-point, I am satisfied that Dalgety, having regard to its possibilities of development and its proximity to Twofold Bay, is immeasurably preferable to Yass-Canberra. The selection of this site will affect generations yet unborn, and I therefore protest against this vote being carried. I do not wish to vote against the Government, whose platform I am pledged to support, but I shall do my utmost to oppose the selection of Yass-Canberra. I appeal to the advocates of that site to give play to their consciences and better judgment and not to be induced to vote for a site which I am convinced some of them do not in reality favour. Yesterday I quoted from a report issued by Mr. Scrivener on the 26th May, 1909. Since then I have had an opportunity to examine earlier reports by the same gentleman, which amplify his condemnation of Yass-Canberra. Senator de Largie invited Senator E. J. Russell to point to a city which was dependent upon water supply for power, but nearly every city of which I know is dependent not only for power, but for health, cleanliness, and even life itself, upon the purity of the streams adjacent to it. On the 25th February, 1909, Mr. Scrivener reported that the water supply of YassCanberra would have to be drawn from the Mumimbidgee or from certain of its tributaries. He declared that the Mumimbidgee itself was an undesirable source of supply, because it was frequently charged with earthy matter and consequently discoloured, whilst there must be considerable contamination of the water owing to the sewage matter carried into it from towns and settlements along its course. When Senator McDougall spoke of having bobbed up and down like a cork upon the waters of a certain stream he led us to believe that he was referring to the Cotter, when as a matter of fact he was referring to the Murrumbidgee. He said that he had bathed in its waters, and that, like John the Baptist, after being immersed, came out a better man. The reports of Mr. Scrivener, an unbiased expert, were sufficient to condemn the Yass-Canberra site from the water supply point of view.

Senator Story:

– This speech is so interesting that I think more senators ought to be present. [Quorum formed.”]

Senator BLAKEY:

– The Cotter River has been variously described; but Mr. Scrivener says that the stream does not afford any facilities for the construction of weirs to impound any large quantities of water. As I said previously, having regard to the actual proposed site of the city, I should prefer Yass-Canberra to Dalgety as a place to live at; but, as it is our duty to secure the best site obtainable, I have to vote against any further expenditure on the former area at the present juncture. I want to have settled this vexed question, which has been agitating the minds of the people and of the Parliament since the beginning of Federation, but it is my duty, not only to the people of Victoria whom I represent, but also to the people of the other States, to delay its settlement now, pending the supplying of fuller information than we at present possess. Should our choice fall on Yass-Canberra, future generations will have reason to curse us. A healthy city must have an efficient sewerage system, and according to Mr. Scrivener the sewering of Canberra will present some difficulties. No one with a knowledge of the two sites could honestly say that the facilities of Canberra in that respect equal those of Dalgety. Then, as to building stone and foundations, one of the first things to strike a visitor to Canberra is the absence of stone suitable for buildings such as should grace the Capital city of the Commonwealth.

Never, I hope, ‘neath Australia’s skies, shall a city be planned and built

In the dreary place of a traitor’s lie, To tell of a Statesman’s guilt ;

Yass-Canberra fulfil these conditions? T believe that a water supply can be obtained there for domestic and civic purposes sufficient to meet the requirements of a population of 100,000. But it is doubtful whether such a supply would always be forthcoming, because, according to the New South Wales Statistical Register, the rainfall at times is very low. At Queanbeyan, which is only 6 or 7 miles distant, in 1902, the rainfall recorded was only 11 inches.

Senator MCGREGOR:

– Queanbeyan is not within the catchment area.

Senator GIVENS:

– I contend that we must judge the site by its minimum rainfall, because the Federal Capital cannot be removed when bad years are experienced. lt will have to endure the arid conditions which then prevail, and, if it carries a large population, it may suffer a water famine. What has occurred, I maintain, is always liable to recur. Fortunately, since 1902, we have been blessed with good seasons. But we cannot guarantee that those seasons will continue. In the past we have experienced cycles of drought, and they will assuredly he experienced again. An adequate supply of water is, therefore, one of the essentials. Melbourne was not blessed originally with natural advantages for the foundation of a great city. Yet it is a beautiful spot. Around if are places which four or five years ago were a howling wilderness, but which to-day are spots of beauty. The people of Melbourne have been able to lay out splendid parks, because they have an adequate water supply. But if the place possessed only the limited supply which is available at Yass-Canberra, it would be a dry and arid city instead of the beautiful city that it undoubtedly is. The one river upon which we are told we. must rely at Yass-Canberra is quite unworthy of that appellation. In good seasons a sufficient volume passes down the stream to serve the requirements of a population of 100,000. But we do not know what would happen in a dry season like that which was experienced in 1.902. Under the most favorable conditions the supply available at Yass-Canberra is sufficient to meet the requirements of, perhaps, 100,000 inhabitants. Compare such a supply with that which would be at our command in the Monaro district through which the magnificent Snowy River flows. The beauty of that stream is that it flows fastest and strongest during the dry summer months.

Senator Long:

– Then we should experience a drought- in the winter there r

Senator GIVENS:

– No. lt always flows strongly, but the greatest volume of water comes down that stream 111 the summer, because the snows on the mountains in which it has its source are then melted. There is no other river in Australia which possesses that feature. This is an advantage which ought not to be ignored by us in selecting a site for a Capital. We had the whole of the magnificent tableland through which the Snowy flows in which to select a site, and yet we were not permitted to make a choice there, merely because the district is too far from Sydney and too close to Victoria. Why should we take cognisance of such flimsy State jealousies - jealousies which are fostered by a small section of the people of Sydney, of which the daily newspapers of that city are the mouthpiece? With regard to the quality of the land, it is not necessary to have good land for a building site, but there should be good land in the vicinity of the Capital. The best land at Yass-Canberra would be occupied by the buildings of the Capital, and the land surrounding the site is of very little use. Although the district has been settled almost since the foundation of the State, and is connected with Sydney by rail, there is scarcely any cultivation worthy of the name to be seen there. While there is a limited area of fairly good sheep country, the less said about the rest of the land the better. It was admitted by Mr. Hughes, in the Legislative Council of New South Wales, that 565 square miles, or considerably more than half of the proposed Federal Territory, is not fit to feed a goat. So that in the second requirement of a good site, Yass-Canberra utterly fails. I have shown that the water supply to be obtained there, would be sufficient only for the domestic purposes of a comparatively small population. We could not secure cheap water power to run machinery, . for electric lighting, or to run electric trams. There is no coal in the immediate vicinity of Canberra, and the only factories likely to be established there would be those controlled by the Commonwealth Government, and they would have to be run at a great disadvantage. If there is no good land in the vicinity of the Capital on which people may settle, and no facilities for manufacturing, the finger of scorn is likely to be pointed at the Federal Capital of the future, -as a city of politicians and officials. lt is hopeless to expect that we shall have there a Capital worthy of a great nation. I have stated the conclusions at which I have arrived after reading the reports, and I am glad that so ardent an advocate of Canberra as Senator McDougall, has admitted that I have been fair in my statement of the case. But I do not ask honorable senators to accept my word, and I propose to show what the expert officials think of the matter. I admit the accessibility of Canberra, but there is no other place in the State which might not easily be made as accessible. The gentleman charged with the work of investigation in the district was Mr. Surveyor Scrivener. I met him only on two occasions, for brief periods, but it is to be presumed that those who intrusted him with this responsible duty, were satisfied as to his competence to discharge it, and the Committee should be willing to be influenced by what he has to say. In reporting to the Minister of Home Affairs upon sites within the YassCanberra District, on the 25th February, 1909, he says, amongst other things, that if the city is to be beautified by a water service, it should be by means of streams within the Federal Territory, and under the control of the Commonwealth Government. He further says, that the water supply of Canberra must be drawn from the Murrumbidgee River, or its tributaries. He goes on to point out that the Murrumbidgee is an undesirable source of supply, because it is frequently heavily charged with earthy matter, and he says that the same objection applies . to the Queanbeyan and the Molonglo rivers. So that three of the principal rivers of the district are ruled out as unsuitable by Mr. Scrivener. He explains that the Gudgenby River is useless for a water supply, because it is, at times, lost altogether in its sand bed. Speaking further of these rivers, he says -

Both the Queanbeyan and Molonglo rivers below the junction cease to run in very dry seasons. The only rivers that afford a good and pure supply are the Goodradigbee with its tributary the Micalong Creek, and the Cotter River; from the Goodradigbee or the Micalong the supply would be drawn for any site near Yass, the length of pipe line from the Micalong weir, at a level that would afford a gravitation supply, would be approximately 40 miles, varying somewhat with the particular location of the Capital. I should not regard Micalong Creek, with a catchment area above the take off of only 37 square miles, as sufficient to meet the possible future requirements of the Capital, in which case, water would be drawn from the Goodradigbee. The bed of this river, hovever, rises very slowly, and at 20 miles above Wee Jasper, which by road is 30 miles from Yass, the level of the river bed is only 1,650 feet, or 24 feet above Yass Railway Station. Clearly, a gravitation supply from this river would be extremely costly, and the best that could be done would be to pump from the river near Wee Jasper, where the level of the river-bed is roughly I,200 feet; this would involve a lift of at least 800 feet, and a pipe-line of not less than 30 miles.

The idea of a pumping scheme to lift the water 800 feet, and a pipe line of not less than 30 miles is unthinkable.

Senator Lynch:

– That would not lift the water to the highest point on Canberra.

Senator GIVENS:

– That is Mr. Scrivener’s statement, and I wish to let it go almost without comment to the Committee. He continues -

The Goodradigbee is the best river of the system within the Yass-Canberra district, because of the volume ; when inspected at the latter end of January, the flow was not less than 80 cubic feet a second ; the water is rarely discoloured, and then for only very short periods, while the discharge is said to be fairly uniform, and no doubt power could be obtained by the erection of suitable weirs; but a detailed examination and survey of the river would be necessary before an estimate of the amount of power could be made ; in any case, the power station would be, by road, about 50. miles from Yass, or in a direct line, about 40 miles.

Now we come to the source of supply about which so much has been made. Mr. Scrivener says -

The Cotter River is available for any of the eastern sites other than Lake George. This river was inspected two days after a heavy thunderstorm, the water was then dark in colour, due, no doubt, to minute particles of charcoal brought down from the steep hill sides, where there had recently been bush fires; on the following day, the water had almost resumed its normal condition. This river is a narrow mountain stream for many miles, having a width of about 40 feet, the gradient of the bed fairly uniform; it flows through a deep valley practically unoccupied, and, as no ring-barking has been done of any moment along its course, it is therefore unlikely that the water would be at any time discoloured for a longer period than a few days. If a gravitation supply is desired for the eastern sites, taking Canberra as an example, the length of pipe-line would be approximately 30 miles. A survey has been made by the Department of Works, with the object of obtaining a line, from a weir site at a level of 2,267 feet, for an open channel to the junction of the Cotter with the Murrumbidgee River. The length of this line is approximately 18 miles, and it would be probably not less than 12 miles from the terminal point of the channel to the Capital Site.

The measured average flow of the Cotter River from the 6th February to the 16th September, 1908, is stated, by Mr. E. M. de Burgh, to have been 33,000,000 gallons daily, or about 5,280,000 cubic feet, equal to a discharge of 6s. 12 cubic feet per second. The gauge is, however, fixed near the confluence of the Cotter with the Murrumbidgee, and the record is for the wetter months of the year; therefore, to arrive at the actual quantity available, either for a gravitation scheme of water supply or for power, certain deductions must be made.

By constructing a weir at a gravitation level, the area of the watershed is reduced from 170 to no square miles; and if it be assumed that the flow measured during the rainy months is maintained throughout the year, and that the rainfall over the whole watershed is uniform (these are compensating assumptions), then the quantity of water passing the weir site at the 2,267-feet level would be 22,000,000 gallons approximately, or n-i7ths of the recorded flow, and in cu. sees, the quantity would be 40.7 instead of 61.2. Even this discharge is only available under certain conditions, which presuppose the ability to impound all the water that flows down the river.

That is another important factor, because if the stream does not provide facilities for impounding any large quantity of water, then the Capital, if situated in Canberra, would always have to depend upon the actual rainfall at any given time.

This is rarely possible, because a fall occurring when the reservoirs are full, if beyond the amount required for daily use, must be lost.

As a source of water supply, the Cotter River is equal to all demands that may be made upon it, even by a population of 200,000, with aper cafila consumption of not less than 100 gallons per diem ; but as a source of power supply, it is not promising, for the reasons adduced; and further, because while the demand for power would be an increasing quantity, . the supply must diminish in proportion with the increase of population, and the need of providing a greater water supply.

It may prove to be economical to carry out the scheme as an initial work, and look farther afield for power as the supply from the Cotter diminishes.

The Cotter does not afford any facilities for the construction of weirs that will impound very large quantities of water. The valley is narrow, and, consequently, the impounding capacity of any weir will be relatively low per foot of height.

Mr. de Burgh shows that a pumping scheme would be, as far as water supply is concerned, much cheaper than a gravitation, and in that case, only a low weir would be necessary near the mouth of the Cotter. If a large supply of power is required at a moderate cost, it can be obtained from the Snowy River,where there is scarcely any practical limit Co the amount available, with suitable works, and no where else can better weir sites, combined with a rapid fall in relatively short distances, be obtained ; while a uniform flow of not less than 500 cubic feet per second could be maintained.

The Molonglo River is also worthy of careful examination as a source of power. Mr. Gipps

C.E., who spent some time in the locality, states that a reservoir with a capacity of nearly 7,000,000,000 cubic feet can be obtained by the construction of a weir in a gorge, through which the river passes after leaving Molonglo plains. This storage would be at a level of about 2,400 feet, or about 500 feet above the town of Quean- beyan, and if the reservoir were full, a supply of 200 cubic feet per second might be drawn off for a year before the supply was exhausted. As the catchment area is only 170 square miles, this flow would not be maintained, but the river should be surveyed.

The weir, in a direct line, would be g miles from Queanbeyan.

I have read faithfully all that Mr. Scrivener had to say with regard to the water supply of the proposed Capital Siteat that date, and let it go practically without any comment. But there is a comment which I desire to make, and that is that, even that water supply, unsatisfactory as it is according to his report, can only be made available for the proposed site by a most expensive pumping scheme. From the take-off at the proposed wier on the Cotter to the reservoir, the distance is about ten miles, and in that distance there is a rise of 850 feet. Every one who knows anything about engineering in connexion with water supply knows thatthe distance which water has to be pumped is , a very important factor, because the whole force of friction of the water travelling through the pipes in that distance has to be taken into account. The friction of the water is very great, and, in addition to pumping the water 850 feet, which is a very high lift for any class of pump, that friction will have to be overcome. Therefore, this supply, limited and unsatisfactory as it is, can only be obtained by a very expensive pumping scheme. From that point of view, the Committee should hesitate very seriously before they commit the Commonwealth to such an expenditure. We have been told that there are hundreds of cities which suffer under similar disadvantages. That is quite true, but that is simply because they cannot help themselves. Theygrew,and had to find water where they could. But the same conditions do not face us. It would be wise for us to fix our Capital alongside, or as close as possible to, one of the best rivers of the Commonwealth. Those who argue that we should not trouble about this matter because Chicago and other places are suffering from the same disadvantages, are absolutely childish. We should profit by the experience of other cities, otherwise we shall be in the position of those fools who will only learn by their own experience, and sometimes not even then.. From considerations of health and beauty, and from every other stand-point, there is no blessing which a city can have so great as an unlimited and pure supply of water. Why should we deliberately choose a place where that advantage will be for ever denied to us, except at a prohibitive cost? We are told, and it is quite true, that we can bring the water from the Snowy River, a distance of ninety miles. But why should we lay ourselves open to the necessity for doing that when we can, within a large scope of country, choose a site which is alongside that beautiful river? Is it not the most futile argument ever brought forward to say that we need not trouble, because, if the necessity arose, we could bring the water from a distance of ninety miles? Having discussed the disadvantages of the Canberra site, according to the surveyors, I think it will be permissible if I discuss the advantages of some alternative sites. Honorable senators do not seem to be very much disposed to pay too great heed to what any one says. Therefore, I do not propose to ask the Committee to take my word for anything in this connexion, but to direct attention to the report of an independent body. In 1903 a Commission was appointed by the then GovernorGeneral, Lord Tennyson, consisting of Mr. John Kirkpatrick, Mr. J. W. Howitt, F.G.S., Mr. Henry C. Stanley, M. Inst. C.E., and Mr. Graham Stewart, to examine and report upon certain sites at which the Federal Capital might be located. Amongst other sites, they reported on Dalgety. In this document, the Commissioners point out that the Snowy River, which for some miles has a course almost easterly until nearing Dalgety, turns sharply to the south about halfamile above that village. The views from the site to the north-east, east, and southeast were represented as being extensive and picturesque, whilst from the hill on the western boundary the view up the valley of the Snowy with Kosciusko and the other summits of the Australian Alps in the background, is very grand. The Commissioners point out that the fall of the land permits of easy drainage; and whilst they admit that the site is almost destitute of timber, nevertheless local witnesses were unanimous in their belief that all the trees adapted to temperate climates could be grown, particularly if hardy trees like Pinus insignis were used for shelter from the high winds. Regarding the climate, the Commissioners pointed out that the mean annual rainfall at Boloco, a raingauge station, during 1902, was 26.37 inches, whilst records taken at Dalgety itself gave an average of 19.09 inches. The temperature was reported to be genial, and the Commissioners pointed out that the sunny days which often follow frosty nights in winter were warm and pleasant. They observed that fogs were rare and falls of snow slight. It is true that they pointed out that cold winds were experienced, particularly in the spring, and occasionally hot winds in the summer. But that remark is equally true of Melbourne. We have had remarkable changes of temperature in this city within the last few days, whilst in the summer time the “ brickfielders “ are trying even to those who have experience of hot climates. But nevertheless, these windsare not disastrous to Melbourne. The Commissioners pointed out that, according tomedical evidence, the district is a marvellously good one from a health point of view. They published an instructive table as to its productiveness, showing that the average yield of wheat per acre was 12.3 bushels, of barley and oats 18 bushels, and of potatoes 3.1 tons. So that evidently the Dalgety district is not so barren as some people would have us believe. Local evidence, according to the Commissioners, shows that wheat can be grown very well. So also can oats and barley, but maize is not grown, the district being too cold. These are the facts put forward in a plain unvarnished way, and they absolutely refute the idea which some interested persons have endeavoured to foist upon us. The report says -

Vegetables grow well, and fruits of various kinds, particularly apples, pears, cherries, apricots, peaches, and all small fruits, though late frosts sometimes do considerable damage to the fruit crops. Grapes are successfully produced at Cooma.

These are the statements made in the report, notwithstanding which Senator Millen pointed out only a little while ago that dairying could be carried on there during only four months of the year.

Senator Millen:

– I say so now.

Senator GIVENS:

– But the Commissioners put forward their statement as a fact, to which they have subscribed their names. They say -

At Jindabyne, a butter factory has been established, and is said to be very successful, notwithstanding that it is over 40 miles to the nearest railway station, at Cooma. It is not intended to continue operations during the winder, though it is said that this is being done at Adaminaby, where the cows are rugged.

Are not cows rugged in Melbourne, although dairying is very successful here ? With regard to the important factor of building material, they say that There is an abundant supply of limestone and sandstone. They also remark -

There is plenty of basalt and bluestone. The best quarry of the latter is at Hazeldene, about 20 miles from the site, where the stone is a very light blue, more like trachyte, and is harder than the Melbourne bluestone.

This is an eminently satisfactory report. They proceed -

The largest outcrops of limestone are about 6 miles north of Cooma. The stone from this place produces a good lime, which is said to be stronger than at Marulan. Abundance of clay suitable for brickmaking is obtainable in various parts of the district, and excellent hand-made bricks have been produced.

In respect of timber, the report says -

Extensive supplies of messmate, box, and mountain ash are to be obtained at distances from 15 to 30 miles from the site, and some of these timbers, particularly grey and yellow box, are plentiful nearer at hand, in the ranges forming the western watershed of Matong Creek. The 1]or timbers are chiefly cut for fencing purposes, for which the silver gum, which grows in the Dalgety district, is also used.

That is more than can be said for YassCanberra. It is imposible to obtain timber within 50 miles of that site. The reportadds -

There are saw-mills at Jindabyne, about 21 miles distant, and at Nimitybelle, about 30 miles, from either of which hardwood is delivered at Dalgety for 17s. to 18s. per 100 feet.

The report also says that plenty of fuel is obtainable. The Commissioners say that there is one drawback to the site, namely, the cost of establishing railway communication. In this connexion they observe -

In considering the prospective means of communication with Dalgety as the site for the Federal Capital, the first essential is a connexion with the railway system by an extension of the Goulburn-Cooma railway. One of the surveys already made between Cooma and Bombala, by what is known as the western route, passes near Bobundara, within about 10 miles from Dalgety. An officer of the Railway Construction Branch of the Public Works Department (Mr. McDonald Stuart) states that there would be no difficulty in carrying a line from that point to the Dalgety «ite. The same officer, who made an examina-tion of the country with a view to a possible future connexion between the railway systems of New South Wales and Victoria, from Cooma, via Dalgety, to Delegate or Bendock, from which latter place surveys to Bairnsdale have already been made by the Victorian Railway Depart.ment, gave evidence to the effect that the only difficulty to be encountered in constructing a line by this route would be between the crossing of the Snowy River and the Dividing Range, lying to the south of 11. This would involve about 3 miles of costly construction, including a large bridge over the Snowy River, and in all about a mile of tunnelling. Mr. Stuart considers that a ruling grade of r in 50 could be obtained between Cooma and the Victorian border, and that no curve under 12 chains radius would be necessary. No actual survey has, however, been made beyond Bobundara, and, therefore, no reliable estimate of cost is available ; but Mr. Stuart gave the approximate cost of construction between Cooma and Dalgety at ^127,000 (exclusive of provision for a terminal station), and between Dalgety and Bendock at ^’312,000. On the Victorian side, the route between Bendock and Bairnsdale is reported by the Engineer’s Department as less costly to construct than that via” Delegate, but by either route grades and curves would be less favorable than the route from Bombala, via Bondi and Orbost, to Bairnsdale, and the latter is considered to hold out the best prospects of local traffic. The comparative through distances and approximate estimated cost of the alternative lines between Cooma and Bairnsdale are as under : - Cooma to Bairnsdale, vid Bombala and Bondi, 233 miles, estimated cost, ,£1,518,000; Cooma to Bairnsdale, vid Dalgety and Bendock, 198 miles, estimated cost, £1, 466,000.

Senator Rae:

– Does the honorable senator know that a beginning is now being made in the construction of a railway for a portion of that distance?

Senator GIVENS:

– Yes. I say that if the Federal Capital is never built in that territory, a railway through it is well worth an expenditure of £1,500,000. Why everything should be dragged through it to Sydney, when there is a port within 60 or 70 miles, namely, Twofold Bay, I cannot understand. If the Federal Capital were established there, undoubtedly Twofold Bay would become a thriving seaport. We should add practically a new province fo Australia ; we should fill our great empty spaces, and increase the populationcarrying capacity of the country, which, .from the stand-point of defence, would be especially valuable. We require population in the country, and the way to secure it is to open up the fertile areas which are now practically a wilderness, and make them blossom like the rose. Some honorable senators have urged that a Federal Capital site in the New England district would be about the best possible site we could choose, and I am inclined to agree with them.

But I know that there is no chance of such a site finding acceptance with this Parliament. I would remind the supporters of a site in the New England district that the report from which I have been quoting says that the climate of Armidale is similar to that of Dalgety. The Commissioners, in speaking of Dalgety, say -

With regard to climate, in our opinion, it may be ranked as somewhat better than Bombala, but not equal to Armidale.

Senator READY:

– When the sitting was suspended, some question had been raised in regard to the fertility of the soil in the neighbourhood of YassCanberra. I do not pose as an authority upon this phase of the matter, and therefore I propose to quote an extract from the report of Sir John Forrest, who is a recognised authority upon thf land question.

Senator Vardon:

– He is a recognised explorer, but I do not know that he is a recognised authority upon ‘land.

Senator READY:

– I believe that he has a very intimate knowledge of questions affecting land. The honorable gentleman writes -

In accordance with a promise I made to the Premier of New South Wales to inspect Canberra, and express an opinion upon it as to its suitability as a site for the Seat of Government of the Commonwealth, I visited this locality on Tuesday, 4th June. The weather was fine and bracing, and I had a good opportunity for inspection. I have already inspected and reported on the following sites, namely, Delegate, Bombala, Dalgety, Coolringdon, Lyndhurst, Tumut, and the suggested sites in its neighbourhood, namely, Wyangle, Toomorroma, Gadara, and Batlow, and have reported that, ir» my opinion, Dalgety, on the Snowy River, is the most suitable site of those I have examined: for the Federal Capital City. In reporting uponthe present site, it therefore only becomes necessary to compare it with Dalgety in order toascertain whether Canberra has any advantageswhich would justify me in preferring it to the Dalgety site. In my former reports, I have- based my conclusions upon nine factors, namely - (a) distance from Sydney to be not less than a hundred miles, and height above sea-level not less than 1,500 feet; (b) abundant water supply from a perennial source; (c) good climate, summer and winter;(d) accessibility by railway from Sydney and Melbourne; (e) great water power for electric light and power and other applications of electricity; (/) water frontage for recreation, sport, and beauty, good approach and commanding view;(g) commanding sites for public buildings, and suitable ground for laying out, constructing, and draining a Capital City; (h) fertile territory and other natural resources surrounding and adjacent to Capital site ; (i) surrounding and adjacent scenery with great natural features and within convenient distance. I propose to deal with Canberra on the same basis and in the same manner ; as, by the application Of these factors to both Dalgety and Canberra, a just estimate of their comparative merits may be arrived at.

Under the heading of “ Water frontage for recreation, sport, and beauty ; good approach, and commanding view,” Sir John Forrest writes -

Canberra is distinctly inferior to Dalgety. It has no water frontage, except the Molonglo River, which is almost dry in summer. It might be possible to conserve water in the Molonglo by artificial means, though even then the inflow would cease in the summer. There could not be any large expanse of water for boating, &c, without immense expenditure.

There are no rising knolls suitable for public edifices, and the rising ground is only found on the spurs of the Mount Ainslie range, which separates the two plains. Public buildings would have to be built on the plains or on the spurs of the range. Even the pretty church with spire and the parsonage are built on the level grassy plain.

Senator Millen:

– This new expert who as quoted by Senator Ready makes no mention of the Cotter River.

Senator READY:

– I am not dealing with the question of the water supply at Yass-Canberra.

Senator St Ledger:

– The honorable senator is filling up time very well.

Senator READY:

– I am evidently a very poor imitator of Senator St. Ledger. Coming to the heading, “ Fertile territory and other natural resources surrounding and adjacent to Capital sites,” Sir John Forrest writes -

Canberra is, i think, very similar to Dalgety. The land is fertile, consisting of wellgrassed, open, plain country, apparently well suited for agricultural and pastoral settlement, and on which timber grows well

From the foregoing it will be seen that, in my judgment, Canberra does not favorably compare with Dalgety in the factors of abundant water supply ; in water power for generating electricity for light, for railways and tram”ways, and for all mechanical appliances; in water frontage to a perennial river capable of being made into a deep lake 10 miles long of ever- running water; in commanding approach and sites for public buildings; and in being within 40 miles of the highest range on the Australian continent, which culminates in Mount Kosciusko, 7,238 feet above the level of the sea. The only objection to Dalgety that I have heard is that it is too cold in winter, and a comparison of its temperature and rainfall with some of the great capital cities of the world may, therefore, be worth recording. I may point out that it is not so cold as London, Paris, Washington, Ottawa, Vienna, Berlin, Madrid, and St. Petersburg, as an inspection of the table hereunder will show. It should also be borne in mind that, with the exception of Hobart, all the capital cities of Australia are too hot in summer, and those who can afford it go away for a time to a colder climate. If the Federal city were situated at Dalgety, and Parliament were to meet from November to March, all those requiring a cooler climate would visit the Federal city with their families, either as members of Parliament or as tourists, with the result that it would become a fashionable tourist resort.

Senator Vardon:

– The author of that report absolutely contradicts the honorable senator’s statement, because, in summing up, he does not condemn the agricultural quality of the land.

Senator READY:

– I also propose to read a statement which was published in the press at the time this question was under consideration in another place. Mr. Dugald Thomson, whilst occupying the position of Minister of Home Affairs, in the course of an official communication to the Premier of New South Wales upon the subject, wrote -

After some years of inspecting, reporting, and discussion, both Houses have, with much difficulty, reached a common decision.

Were the Parliament of the Commonwealth willing to reverse that decision, there would probably be still greater difficulty in obtaining unanimity as to another site.

The reasons given by you for excluding Dalgety seem to need some remark and correction, 1. “When first submitted to the Federal Parliament, it failed to command a single vote.”

It must be remembered that the Monaro sites - among them Dalgety - were all included with Bombala. Those of Gadara and Batlow were included with Tumut. The title meant the district, not the town, and the first choice of the district did not preclude any part of it being taken for the site.

” The Federal Parliament had not sufficient evidence before it to make a selection based on all the material facts.”

The Parliament went to much trouble and expense in expert Commissions and visits to the sites in search of information. In the information now given by you, I see nothing that is not in one of the Commission’s reports, or the Commonwealth Parliamentary debates - except that the returns of crops in the districts are taken up to a later date than the publication of the reports. In fact, the descriptions seem copies of one or other reports.

” That the soil is not of great productive value, nor suitable for irrigation.”

This shows that the Commonwealth has not by its choice proposed to take some of the most productive land of the State. It may also be pointed out that the large area asked for, in excess of 100 square miles, embraces mostly poor, rough, mountainous land, useful mainly to secure water supply.

From the point of view of the quality of the country adjacent to Yass-Canberra, I hold that that site is not one which we can reasonably accept. It cannot be shown that it is capable of supporting a large population. No manufactories can be established there, because there is neither coal, wood, nor water available for motive purposes. The natural inducements of a suitable site are lacking, and for that reason, if for no other the Commonwealth Parliament ought to reject it.

Senator GARDINER:
New South Wales

Senator McCOLL:
Victoria

– The discussion of the last three or four days gives force to the contention that this question should not be rushed through at the present time. Some effort ought to be made to reconcile the conflicting statements we have heard, in order that the public may be informed as to the nature of the site that is to be selected for the Federal Capital. It is humiliating that a great question like this should be dragged through Parliament in this fashion, and should be decided, perhaps, by one vote. I say that before the question is finally settled there should be something like practical unanimity as to the superior advantages of the site chosen, and it should be the choice of a substantial majority” in this Parliament. The way in which the question is being dealt with is not creditable to this Parliament. I have seen no reason why I should not still prefer Yass-Canberra to Dalgety, but there may be much better sites than either in the Southern Monaro district which I did not see. Twenty-five per cent, of the members of this Parliament are new members, and they should be given a voice in the selection of the site. It is most important that a suitable port should be attached, to the Federal Capital., and we ought to know what land will be given to the Commonwealth at the port and what our position will be in providing shipping accommodation. I object to a settlement of the question now, because in view of the expenditure referred to in the Budget and to which it is proposed to commit this Parliament, it is not wise that we should now rush into’ expenditure upon a Capital. For the reasons I have given I intend to vote for the amendment.

Question- That the item “ Federal Capital at Canberra - towards cost of establishment. , £50,000 “ - be reduced by f.1 (Senator Givens’ amendment) - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 0

NOES: 0

AYES

NOES

Aves … … … 15

Noes … … …15

Question so resolved in the negative.

– At the request of the VicePresident of the Executive Council and of my leader, and after the full explanation made by the Government, I am quite content to withdraw my amendment. I quite understand that the position will not be prejudiced by my doing so.’

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Senator STEWART:
Queensland

– No doubt the statement made by Senator Findley and by the Vice-President of the Executive Council is very satisfactory, but every honorable senator knew perfectly well that a Railway Construction Bill would have to be introduced. We all knew, also, that every honorable senator would be able to vote as he pleased on that Bill. Consequently, the assurance of the Vice-President of the Executive Council was altogether unnecessary. But the item ought to say exactly what is meant. The wording is “ towards cost of construction.”

Senator Millen:

– Does the honorable senator doubt the word of the Minister?

Senator STEWART:

– I do not doubt anybody. 1 simply say that we have to take the Bill as presented. It would be quite easy to alter the wording of the item. .We know that a railway cannot be constructed without the authority of Parliament, and it is ridiculous to use the words “ towards cost of construction,” when no authority to construct has been given. 1. also think that we ought to have an explanation from the Government with regard to item 5, “ Erection of Commonwealth Offices in London, towards cost. ^1,000.” Some time ago the Govern ment then in power made an attempt to acquire land in London upon which to erect palatial buildings. What is intended in the present instance?

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

– The intention of this vote is to enable steps to be taken to acquire land for the erection of a building in London for the housing of the High Commissioner, and, we hope, ultimately for the accommodation of the Agents-General of the States. No buildings will be erected, however, until Parliament has definitely approved of a site. Further than that, I am informed by the Minister of External Affairs that communications have been opened up with the States Governments with a view of inducing them to co-operate with the Commonwealth. I understand that there is a disposition on the part of South Australia to work hand in hand with us. There is also a likelihood of Victoria joining, whilst New South Wales is considering the subject. The only State that so . far has definitely declined to co-operate with the Government is Queensland, and the reason in that case is that the State has an extended lease of premises in London. I believe that the term will not expire for three decades. None of this money will be expended until a site is approved, and Parliament will have ample opportunities of discussing the matter.

Senator McCOLL:
Victoria

– When we were dealing with the item relating to the Federal Capital, we were assured that by passing it we should be irrevocably committed to the site at YassCanberra. It appears to me that if we agree to item 5, we shall be irrevocably committed to whatever the Government choose to do in regard to the erection of Commonwealth offices in London. I am, therefore, of opinion that we ought not to pass the item in the form in which it is presented. I move -

That the item “ Erection of Commonwealth Offices in London, Towards Cost, £1,000,” beamended by inserting after the word “ cost “ the words “ of inquiry.”

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

– The Government cannot accept the amendment. We are simply doing what was done by a previous Administration. In that case the Government chose a site in London, and Parliament did not approve of it. Consequently the negotiations fell through.

Senator McColl:

– The previous Government did not submit an item like this.

Senator FINDLEY:

– There was, I think, an item on the Estimates. After the long sitting we Have had we need not quibble about words, which, after all, mean nothing so far as the cost of constructing offices is concerned. The word “cost” means practically nothing. Parliament will have ample opportunities of discussing the matter when a selection has been made. The impending vote will really be in the nature of a test vote which will decide whether or not the Committee desire the establishment of Commonwealth offices in London.

Senator VARDON:
South Australia

– If, as tile Honorary Minister has stated, no site for Commonwealth offices in London is to be selected until it has received the approval of Parliament, it is obvious that the £1,000 which we are asked to vote in this connexion cannot be expended during the current financial year.

Senator Pearce:

– We may bring an agreement forward before the close of the financial year.

Senator VARDON:

– That would not affect the position. I understand that we are now being asked to affirm the desirableness of establishing Commonwealth offices in London.

Senator Findley:

– The amount on these Estimates is intended for building purposes when the site has been approved by Parliament.

Senator Millen:

– What is the use of voting money for bricks and mortar until Parliament has approved of the site?

Senator VARDON:

– We ought to discuss the whole question when the proposal for the purchase of a site is submitted for our consideration. I am not opposed to the Commonwealth acquiring offices in London, and I think that the idea of centralizing the whole of the State offices in the same building is a good one. But we are not warranted in agreeing to this item until the Government have something definite to lay before us in regard to the acquisition of the site.

Senator MILLEN:
New South Wales

– I am not inclined to scrutinize too closely an item for £1,000 in connexion with the establishment of Commonwealth offices in London, because I believe we can safely trust the Government with the handling of that money. But from the statement of the Honorary Minister I understand that it is intended to spend the proposed vote in building operations, and that later Parliament will be afforded an opportunity of approving a site which, so far, has not been acquired. As the site is not yet the subject of negotiations, it is obvious that Parliament cannot be asked to approve of it until, probably, the middle of next year. Consequently it is unnecessary to pass this item now. I am inclined to think that the Honorary Minister has fallen into a slight error, and that this amount is really required for the purpose of defraying the cost of preliminary work, such as obtaining valuations and reports upon the site. In previous negotiations for the acquisition of a site for Commonwealth offices “in London it was found necessary to obtain the reports of professional valuators. If the .proposed vote is required in that connexion I see no objection to it. But it is ridiculous for the Commonwealth to vote money for bricks and mortar in connexion with a site which has not yet been selected.

Amendment negatived.

Senator RAE (New South Wales [11.37 a.m.] - I wish to make a few remarks upon the well-worn subject of the Federal Capital site. I owe no apology either to the Government or the press of New South Wales for the attitude which I assumed upon that question. Nor do I think there is any valid reason for an honorable senator accusing other honorable senators of having been guilty of a breach of good faith merely because they followed the course which I, amongst others, followed. Every honorable senator who spoke upon the Government proposal from the opposite point of view to myself, admitted that if the emergency were sufficiently grave he would feel justified in departing from the agreement which had been entered into between the Commonwealth and the Government of- New South Wales. All these honorable senators affirmed that except in circumstances of the gravest emergency, it would not be right to depart from the agreement between the two contracting parties. Upon that statement I am content to rest my case. The emergency in this instance I considered sufficiently grave to warrant me. in the interests of the people of Australia, in taking up the attitude which I did. I occupy a somewhat different position from that occupied by any other member of this Chamber, inasmuch, as I am the only representative of New South Wales who opposed the Government proposal to spend ,£50,000 on. the Federal Capital site at YassCanberra. Whatever contumely may be cast upon me on that account, I feel certain, as the result of a recent and prolonged tour of New South Wales, that the people of that State are not behind the YassCanberra selection with- anything like unanimity. The commercial interests of Sydney, and the press interests of that city, are behind it, and those politicians who, fear the power of the press have suchcumbed to that influence. Personally, I think that thousands of the electors of New South Wales will believe that I voted as honestly in their interests as did others who voted in an opposite direction.

Senator Millen:

– It is not the honorable member’s honesty, but his wisdom, which is in question.

Senator RAE:

– I am satisfied that a very large percentage of the electors of New South Wales will indorse my vote upon the Government proposal, on the score of judgment, as well as of honesty. Upon important matters I have always been prepared to take up a certain stand, and to face the consequences of my action. I believe that by the vote which was taken this morning the establishment of the Seat of Government at Yass-Canberra has been irrevocably determined. Whilst I do think that an exceedingly grave mistake has been made, I shall be glad, in future, to discover that my prediction has not been fulfilled. But from the stand-point of both judgment and of honesty I believe that in the recent division I voted upon the right side.

Senator BLAKEY:
Victoria

– I wish to make my position upon this question perfectly clear. I have already, both by my voice and my vote, opposed the establishment of the Seat of Government at Yass-Canberra. But I am distinctly in favour of the proposed expenditure upon the establishment of a military college, upon a naval training school, upon the erection of the Commonwealth offices in London, and upon the construction of the Kalgoorlie to Port Augusta railway, which are the other items embraced in subdivision 3. Therefore, I shall be compelled to vote for the subdivision, although it goes very much against my grain to sup port the proposed expenditure upon the Federal Capital.

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– I intend to support the whole of the items enumerated in subdivision 3 of these Estimates, and particularly the item relating to the Federal Capital. I am prepared to accept the inevitable. The opponents of the Yass-Canberra site have been defeated after what I consider was a fair fight. I will, therefore, support not only the amount of ,£50,000, which is set down on these Estimates in that connexion, but any further amount - however liberal it may be - for which the Government may deem it necessary to ask, to secure the establishment of the Seat of Government at Yass-Canberra without delay. I hope that the Ministry will place upon the Estimates, from time to time, such substantial sums as will permit of the Commonwealth Parliament being installed in its new home in the Federal territory, with all possible expedition.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– 1”, too, intend to support the whole of the items in this subdivision, including the item relating to the expenditure of £50,000 towards establishing the Federal Capital at Yass-Canberra In supporting the whole of the subdivision, I am giving the supporters of the Yass-Canberra site the benefit of the negative victory they have obtained.

Senator GUTHRIE:
South Australia

– I direct the attention of the Minister to the item under the heading “ Trades and Customs, South Australia, Launch, £1,000.” I should like to know whether this vote is for the purchase or construction of a launch for Customs purposes, and to have any particulars the Minister is able to give in connexion with the vote ?

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

, - I am informed that the vote is required for the building of a powerful seaworthy launch, 70 feet in length, 14 feet beam, and 7 feet depth of hold. The launch is to have a speed of 9 knots ordinary, and is to be capable of running up to 11 or 12 knots in an emergency. At present the Trade and Customs Department is paying for the hire of the launch now in use, and, in view of the transfer of the Quarantine Department to the Commonwealth, the launch provided for in this vote has become an urgent necessity.

Senator Guthrie:

– Have tenders been called for the building of the vessel?

Senator FINDLEY:

– Nothing has been done, pending the appropriation.

Senator Keating:

– Will the vote proposed complete the cost of building the launch ?

Senator FINDLEY:

– It is expected that this vote will cover the complete cost of the launch.

Senator GUTHRIE:
South Australia

– I should like the Minister representing the Minister of Trade and Customs to give the Committee some information with respect to the proposed vote of £3,000 towards cost of new quarantine stations for South Australia. The honorable senator might say where the new stations are to be, and .give particulars as to the buildings, and so on. Is it proposed to establish a quarantine station on the site of the old quarantine station ?

Senator CHATAWAY:
Queensland

– I should like to ask the Minister representing the Minister of Trade and Customs what steps are to be taken in connexion with the quarantine station, which, I am given to understand, is to be established at Somerset Island, to the south-east of Cooktown ?

Senator KEATING:
Tasmania

– I should like to know what is being done, or is intended to be done, under the proposed vote, “ Tasmania - New quarantine stations, including acquisition of land at Triffitt’s Point, towards cost, £1,300.” Is the Minister aware that Triffitt’s Point is higher up the Derwent River than is the city of Hobart? If a quarantine station is established there it will be necessary to take quarantined persons past the capital city of the State. Are the officers of the Department aware that there has been a quarantine station in existence for many years at Barnes’ Bay, on Bruni Island, 12 or 14 miles south of Hobart, where the establishment of a quarantine station would not be a menace to the health of the inhabitants of Hobart? More than one protest has been made officially, privately, and by Tasmanian representatives generally, against the establishment of a quarantine station higher up the river than the city of Hobart. Perhaps the Minister will be able to say whether those protests are to be disregarded, and whether the Department

[“53- 2

still intends to establish a quarantine station at Triffitt’s Point.

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

– I may say that it is quite true that protests have been made against the expenditure of any money in the establishment of a quarantine station at Triffitt’s Point.

Senator Keating:

– It would be the same as establishing a quarantine station for Sydney at Parramatta.

Senator FINDLEY:

– I am not familiar with the locality, but the Minister of Trade and Customs informed me that, not long since, a deputation waited upon him, protesting against the establishment of a quarantine station at this place. I understand, however, that it has been recommended by the Health Officer. The Minister promised the deputation to give consideration to their representations. He also gave an assurance to the honorable member for Franklin in another place that, despite the reference to Triffitt’s Point in the vote, that should not prejudice the selection of any suitable site approved by the Health Officer. I hope, in the circumstances, that Senator Keating will offer no opposition to the vote. If it is found that Triffitt’s Point is unsuitable as a place for a quarantine station, some more suitable place ‘ will be selected.

Senator Keating:

– Am I to understand that no expenditure for a quarantine station at Triffitt’s Point will be made until further consideration is given to the matter?

Senator FINDLEY:

– The Minister of Trade and Customs, in another place, said that the Department would consider any other site which the local authorities would regard as better for Hobart, the people of.’ the mainland and oversea traffic, and that,, although the words “at Triffitt’s Point”’ were included in the description of the vote, that would not commit the Department to the establishment of a quarantinestation at that site, or prejudice the selection of any other.

Senator Long:

– That is not the latest information.

Senator FINDLEY:

– It is the latest information I have. With regard to Senator Chataway’s inquiry respecting proposed new quarantine stations in Queensland, the proposed vote is £2,500, but the total estimated cost of the new quarantine stations is £7,380. This amount will cover the cost of buildings and fumigating plant at Brisbane, additions and improvements to the station at Townsville, a quarantine station and fumigating plant at Hammond Island, and additions and improvements to the animal quarantine station at Lytton. Senator Guthrie asked for information with respect to the vote proposed for new quarantine stations in South Australia. The proposed vote is £3,000, but the total estimated cost is £4,300. This will cover the cost of the erection of a marine isolation block, water supply and drainage, fencing, additions to shed, extension of tramway, roads, fumigating chamber, and luggage sheds at Torrens Island j also a new building, roads, and fencing at the Animal quarantine station, and shed and fence at the Plant Quarantine Depot.

Senator HENDERSON:
Western Australia

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

– The elimination of the words “at Triffitt’s Point” from this item would really mean striking out that item altogether. I will explain why. In response to the wishes expressed by the deputation which waited upon the Minister, the quarantine officer for Tasmania, Dr. Purdy, received instructions from the Department to visit all the suggested sites for the quarantine station, and report. He carried out those instructions to the ‘letter, and in his report to the Minister, dated 2nd September, said -

I have no hesitation in saying that I am unacquainted with any other quarantine station which as to site is so well adapted for the purpose either in England, Egypt, the Sinai Peninsular, South Africa, or New Zealand, in all of which countries I have had direct administrative experience of public health work, more especially with regard to quarantine.

The officer reported further -

I would be willing to meet the people of the district of Claremont, and consider that if I placed the facts re quarantine fairly before them they ought to realize how exaggerated have been their fears of having a quarantine park for cattle and a station for human quarantine in their neighbourhood. As a matter of fact, a very well equipped quarantine station with well-kept grounds and suitable plantations would add to the appearance of this locality, and one cannot realize that any neighbouring property would be depreciated in value as a residential area. The fact that the quarantine station for the port of London is situated at Gravesend, actually on the bank of the Thames, probably having within a radius of 10 miles a population in excess of that of the whole of

Tasmania, and within half-an-hour’s run up the river a population of over 5,000,000 ought to have some weight as an argument.

Further on in his report Dr. Purdy said -

With regard to the depreciation of the value of land there is an object lesson in Hobart itself, where it was alleged that the use of Vaucluse as an isolation hospital in Macquariestreet, one of the main streets of the city, would lessen the value of property in the street. No one however, seems to worry about that now; the value of the land has not decreased and there have been no cases of infection occurring in the neighbourhood. I suppose there are more people on Manly Beach, Sydney, in one day sometimes than visit Claremont in five years, yet, although the quarantine station is practically next door, no one seems seriously to worry about it as a focus of inspection.

He said, in conclusion -

Whilst I can recommend Triffitt’s Point without reservation or equivocation, I cannot honestly suggest any alternative site which would fulfil the conditions required for a suitable quarantine station for the first port of entry through Tasmania.

I think that report should be convincing to honorable senators.

Senator Lt.-Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD (New South Wales) [12.24 P-m-] - The matter under discussion seems to be one of considerable moment to the residents of Hobart, and the views expressed by honorable senators are worthy of careful consideration before the Government finally determine on the site at Triffitt’s Point. The comparison with the quarantine station near Manly is not a good one. The quarantine station there is situated at North Head. Next to it is the Cardinal’s palace, with its extensive grounds ; then comes Manly beach. So that there is a considerable area of land between the quarantine station and Manly beach. The quarantine station in Hobart, however, is to be quite close to a centre of population. I really think that the Tasmanian people ought to have an opportunity of pointing out where a more suitable station could be selected. Would it not be a wise thing to afford them an opportunity of hearing what Dr. Purdy has to say to them ? Surely another site could be found that would not be open to such objections. The Government, of course, have to accept responsibility, but they should not ignore the wishes of the inhabitants.

Senator READY:
Tasmania

Senator Pearce:

– What, not in connexion with the acquisition of land ?

Senator MILLEN:

– I am speaking of the expenditure of money.

Senator Pearce:

– For Federal purposes we may acquire land anywhere by passing an Order in Council.

Senator MILLEN:

– The persistency of the Minister indicates a determination to adhere to the decision which has been already announced, irrespective of what his inquiries may reveal. I ask Ministers to say whether it is not possible for them to accept this amendment, which will have the effect of enlarging their liberty. I should not have risen but for the fact that I was impressed by the statement which has been made by the representatives of Tasmania in this Chamber, irrespective of the political party to which they may belong.

Question - That the words proposed to be left out be left out (Senator Long’s amendment) - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 15

NOES: 14

Majority … …1

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment agreed to.

Senator VARDON:
South Australia

– I wish to direct attention to the item “ Adelaide - Military Headquarters Offices - Site and Buildings - towards cost, . £450.” I wish to know if any site has been selected, and, if so, where it is, and what is to be the cost?

Senator GUTHRIE:
South Australia

– Under the defence vote for South Australia, I notice an item “ Stabling and other building, for military horses, towards cost, , £250.” This is a new service, and the total estimated cost is£2,600, yet for the military headquarters offices a vote of only£450 is asked for, though the present building is in a disgraceful condition. The Minister of Defence, when occupying the same position in a previous Government, ‘ made an inspection of the military head-quarters at Adelaide, and expressed the opinion that they were insanitary, and unfit for the purpose for which they were used. Instead of wasting money on the existing buildings, it would be better to sweep them away altogether, and . make -provision for new offices. There is a vote of£53 down for land for quarters for married noncommissioned officers at Fort Largs. A similar amount was voted for the same purpose last year, and only £2 was spent.

Senator PEARCE:
Western Australia · Minister of Defence · ALP

– It is perhaps unnecessary that I should reply to Senator Guthrie’s queries, since he appears to know all about the matter. With regard to the information asked for by Senator Vardon as to the military headquarters offices, the facts are that, when I occupied this position in a previous Ministry, this matter was brought under my attention. , I visited the head-quarters at Adelaide, and was convinced of the utter uselessness of spending any further money on the existing buildings. I set inquiries going to secure a suitable site for military head-quarters. I was met with a sudden interruption, and was not allowed to proceed with the inquiries. I have now taken up the matter again, and I hope to be able to leave this afternoon with the Minister of Home Affairs, for Adelaide, in order to meet the Premier of South Australia, and see whether some satisfactory arrangement cannot be arrived at. The site on which the buildings are situated is altogether too small for our purposes. We have a number of isolated sites in Adelaide, and our idea is to see whether some arrangement cannot be made with the State Government to secure a suitable site for the head-quarters staff. We propose to erect a new building for the purpose, but, as all this will take some time, it is necessary to include in these ‘Estimates only a sum of money sufficient to authorize the construction of the building. Plans will have to be prepared after the site is chosen, and then tenders will be called for, and the work proceeded with in the usual way. There will be no delay in the matter. We have not lost sight of the fact that something must be done in the meantime, and one of the objects of our inquiry will be to visit some places that are under offer which might be rented for our militia officers who use the head-quarters building, and in this way we might leave room for the head-quarters staff ; or we might rent a place for military head-quarters, and hand over the present head-quarters building to the militia staff. We propose to expend on stabling for military horses £2,600. The vote of £250 asked for in these Estimates is to enable us to commence building. This stabling is to be erected at the depot for field artillery. The vote is related to the proposal to have horses for field artillery. As we shall not be providing a permanent battery for South Australia this year, nor militia field artillery, the vote asked for is all that will be needed to secure a suitable site, and commence the erection of the stables, as we hope to be able to do towards the end of the financial year. In regard to the land at Fort Largs, the £53 asked for is to complete a contract already entered into.

Senator MILLEN:
New South Wales

– For the first time since I have been in Federal politics I take advantage of the Estimates to bring under the notice of Ministers a matter which is of local concern. I refer to the entirely inadequate accommodation at the Parkes post and telegraph office. I should not have mentioned the matter here had I not, in reply to correspondence with the Department, received a stereotyped reply that the Minister had inquired into the matter and found that everything was for the best in this best of all possible worlds. I am able from personal inspection to speak of the want of accommodation at this post-office. The building is far too small for the work done in it. No one can move in the room in which the mails are sorted without disturbing the man who is sorting the letters.

Senator Lynch:

– We have a host of similar grievances.

Senator MILLEN:

– I have said that I am offending in this way for the first time.

The public telephone bureau at this office is a farce. Any one who goes into the office to get a letter can hear all that is being said in the telephone bureau.

Senator McGREGOR:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · South Australia · ALP

– As we have proceeded so far, and there are not many other items that are debatable, and in view of the fact that honorable senators have bene sitting so long, I have made inquiries, and found that a number of the members of the Committee are prepared to continue sitting until we have finished this business so that we may adjourn until Tuesday next. I therefore move -

That the Sessional Order governing the suspension of sittings be suspended, to enable the Committee to continue sitting.

The CHAIRMAN:

– Under, the Sessional Order I should suspend the sitting at 1 o’clock. If the Committee is to continue sitting that Sessional Order must be suspended.

Motion agreed to.

Senator MILLEN:
New South Wales

– I do not intend to go further into the details of the matter to which I have referred. I have no hesitation in saying that the accommodation provided for the people of Parkes is a reflection upon the Department, and the opinion of the officer who affirms that it is suitable for public purposes indicates a very poor estimate of what the public are entitled to from our great Postal Department.

Senator VARDON:
South Australia

– I wish to make a complaint with respect to the post-office at Gladstone, in South Australia. It is in a similar position. Everything which is said in the telephone bureau can be heard. There ought to be some privacy secured. The office is both undermanned and very inconvenient.

Senator SAYERS:
Queensland

– Owing to some delay in the delivery of a telegram, I interviewed the Deputy Postmaster- General for Tasmania, and left with him a letter which I had received from the postmistress of a small centre. I asked him to deal with’ the matter, and let me know the result of his inquiries, but although two months have elapsed, I have not yet had the ordinary courtesy of a reply. I also mentioned the matter to the Deputy Postmaster-General in Melbourne, and received from Mr. Bright a reply which is altogether inadequate, and simply farcical.

If members of this Parliament cannot get more satisfaction from the Department, what sort of treatment can the general public hope to receive ? But for the all-night sitting, I should have held up the Estimates for the Department. I have shown to several honorable senators the reply which I received from the Central Office in Melbourne, but it simply burked the whole question. They asked me to read the reply to the Senate when the Estimates were brought under consideration.

Senator Lynch:

– Was the honorable senator’s communication in any way discourteous ?

Senator SAYERS:

– No. There was an affliction in my family, and T. sent a telegram, and there was some delay. Unless I receive a reply to my complaint before the .Estimates-in-Chief are reached, I shall endeavour to get one here.

Senator FINDLEY (Victoria - Honorary

Minister) [1.5 p.m.]. - I shall take the earliest opportunity to convey to the PostmasterGeneral the. views which have been expressed here to-day by the Leader of the Opposition in regard to the inadequate accommodation at the Parkes Post Office in New South Wales, and also the condition of the telephonic service there. I give a similar assurance to Senator Vardon. I have made a note of Senator Sayers’ complaint, which will be brought under the notice of the Postmaster-General with the other matters.

Senator Sayers:

– -That is satisfactory.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 6 (Postmaster-General’s Department), £688,000.

Senator VARDON:
South Australia

– Under the head of South Australia, on page 23, I notice an item of £33,000 for the construction and extension of telephone lines, instruments, and material, including construction of conduits and placing wires underground. On several occasions I have brought under the notice of the Postmaster-General the need for establishing a telephone service to Loxton, in that State. It is a rising neighbourhood, and such communication is very urgently needed. I am satisfied that if it were provided it would be profitable to the Department. I ask the Minister to make further inquiry, and see whether some provision for the district cannot be made out of this item of £33,000.

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

– From what I can gather, no provision is made on these Estimates for a telephonic service to Loxton, but I undertake to bring the honorable senator’s representation under the notice of the Postmaster- General.

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– I desire to bring under the notice of the Minister the fact that, although a sum was voted on the last Estimates for the duplication of the line from Port Hedland to Peak Hill, in Western Australia, yet, for some reason or other, the work has not been proceeded with, and consequently the volume of news from the western portion of the State, as well as, I believe, in some instances, the news from the Old Country, has to travel along a coast line which is very much exposed and liable to many interruptions. In the interests of not only Western Australia, but also the eastern States, it would be we;U to put this work in hand without further delay. The necessary provision is, I suppose, wrapped up in the vote of £36,000 for construction and extension of telephone lines in Western Australia. I would impress upon the Ministry the necessity of pushing forward without undue delay the works for which money has been voted in the past. This is not a small matter which t now bring under his notice. I have received from different bodies representations pointing out the need for a duplicate line in order to avoid the interruptions which have been very much in evidence lately, and have caused considerable inconvenience in the transmission of news from the northern portion of Western Australia to other parts of the Commonwealth, as well as of news which comes from Europe and reaches the public in the eastern States. I think it is only necessary, without wasting further time, to remind the Minister of the need for pushing on with works when the necessary money has been voted.

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

– On these Estimates provision is made for the expenditure of £13,700 on the construction of a telegraph line from Peak Hill to Nullagine. I agree with Senator Lynch that there ought to be a disposition on the part of honorable senators, to see that these works are proceeded with as rapidly as possible. It was regrettable to the Ministry that they were not able to get these

Estimates passed in globo. The result of a division taken a little while ago will be that the carrying out of these as well as other works, whenever they are commenced, will be delayed for a week or two.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Divisions 7 and 8 (Treasury), agreed to.

Divisions 9 to n (Department of Defence), £1,159.645-

Senator MILLEN (New South Wales) £1.14 p.m.]. - It is a little unfortunate, I think, to any one who desires the Senate to keep in close touch with the financial proposals of the Government that three items for the establishment of factories should be presented to us in the circumstances with which we are confronted. We have heard that these items represent a distinctly new departure in connexion with the Defence Department. There are three distinct new proposals for the extension of Government enterprise. Whether honorable senators believe in the extension of Government enterprise or not, we ought to have an opportunity of considering the business side of this policy. I wish to make it clear that I do not approach this item in a spirit of opposition to the Government undertaking, for its own purposes, any enterprise of this kind, where it can be shown that it is desirable and profitable to do so. But I am going to ask the Socialists, who may dissent from my proposition, whether they think it advisable for the Government to. undertake to perform functions, unless there is a prospect of their proving profitable to the Government ?

Senator Lynch:

– Why does not the honorable senator assail the cordite factory?

Senator MILLEN:

– Because at present we have to import cordite, as we import small arms, from abroad, and in time of war it would be impossible for us to obtain them. I say, again, that I am not assailing these items, and I admit that we have no opportunity to-day to ascertain whether or not it is desirable to go into these enterprises. That there are branches of enterprise which it is not desirable for the Government to enter into, was admitted by Senator Pearce the other day, when he was asked why a boot factory was not to be established. He replied that, at the present time, the demands of the Government would not provide sufficient work for the efficient running of a good factory. .

Senator McGregor:

– But the Minister is satisfied that the enterprises now proposed are all right.

Senator MILLEN:

– I do not know that honorable senators ought to proceed merely on the assurance that Senator Pearce is satisfied. We have a right to know on what basis he is resting his policy. We should be furnished with particulars as to the probable capital required, the probable number of hands to be employed, and, above all, whether there is a reasonable probability of the Government providing continuous work for the staff of men to be employed. Because there would be nothing more deplorable than to start a factory, employing a number of men, and then to find that there was only work for them during six or seven months of the year. Neither this nor any other Parliament would stand by and see a number of Government employes thrown on the streets to starve. All these are factors which would determine whether or not we are justified in assenting to this policy. So far we have not had an opportunity of looking into the particulars. I ask the Minister whether it is unreasonable that, before we decide whether the Government should enter into these enterprises, we should be furnished with details, to enable us to determine whether they are justified or not. If- we were invited to put our own money into such affairs, should we be willing to do so on the assurance that we could find the money.. first, and discuss the advisableness of the ‘ investment afterwards? The Minister will himself see, however, that the mere furnishing of the information now will not enable any of us to give that consideration to the subject which is essential, and which we should demand, if we were spending our own money. I do not think that Ministers were responsible for the Senate sitting up all night. Had Ministers been allowed to conduct their business as they wished, it is possible that we might have been furnished earlier with the information that I desire, and, consequently, we should have been able to look closely into it.

Senator PEARCE:
Western AustraliaMinister of Defence · ALP

– I will proceed at once to furnish the details which have been asked for by Senator Millen. They will, of course, be published in Hansard, where honorable senators. can study them at their leisure. I commence with the figures with regard to the establishments for the manufacture of woollen cloth, uniforms, harness, saddlery, and leather accoutrements. They are as follow -

I may explain that the meaning of the terms “capital expenditure unavoidable” and “capital expenditure avoidable,” in that table, is as follows: - If, for instance, it is decided that these factories shall be established at the Federal Capital ultimately, but that they shall be temporarily located somewhere else, the machinery and stock would be purchased, and that would be “ unavoidable expenditure” ; but “ avoidable expenditure” occurs if we have to lease buildings and to pay for power. So that there is a contingent vote. If we erect our own buildings in the Federal Capital, and use our own power there, the expenditure thereon becomes “ unavoidable expenditure.” But, if we rent buildings and pay for power, the expenditure on power, plant, and buildings is “avoidable expenditure.” The following is an estimate of the total cost of establishing factories for the manufacture of cloth, uniforms, harness, saddlery, and leather accoutrements, together with a statement of the estimated annual output, the number of employes, and the annual expenditure in wages : -

As to the cloth factory, the estimated annual requirements for cloth for m111- tary uniforms in the future are over 200,000 yards of cloth, in value at present prices between £50,000 and £60,000. Assuming that buildings are rented or otherwise provided, and that “power,” electrical or other, is not included, the machinery, fittings, and working stock will cost new practically £40,000. This estimate is based upon working one shift per day, and the cost would be reduced by nearly £10,000 if it were decided to work two shifts. As to the clothing factory, the cost of uniforms will, after the year 1910-11, be over £50,000 per annum, exclusive of cost of cloth. Assuming that buildings be at first rented for- the purpose, the capital cost required for plant would be about £5,000 for the commencement, exclusive of “ power.” It is assumed that the work will commence with the main supplies of garments, which have few variations in pattern. To eventually add the manufacture of all uniform garments, including officers’ and perhaps those of other Departments, a few additional machines will be required, not exceeding in cost about ,£2,000. As to the harness and saddlery factory, during the next two years harness and saddlery to the amount of £96,000 are included in the material required to complete the existing organization for war. During subsequent years the annual requirements of such equipment, to provide for annual increase under the scheme and replacements, will amount to between £25,000 and £30,000. Excluding buildings and “ power,” the machinery and tools required for an annual out. put of £50,000 worth of such stores will be £2,500. The same plan has been adopted in regard to the clothing factories, and the Estimates before honorable senators are based on the actual cost in Victoria of similar factories.

Senator ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

-Colonel Sir Albert Gould. - Have the men who furnish these Estimates had any experience ?

Senator PEARCE:

– One of them has had considerable experience.

Senator ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

-Colonel Sir Albert Gould. - In the running of a factory? Senator PEARCE. - No. He was charged with the task of ascertaining the machinery required in connexion with a certain output, the cost of that machinery, the number of employes needed, and the amount of their wages. Upon that information these Estimates have been compiled. When Senator Millen expresses a fear that State enterprise will not be payable-

– That is just the difficulty. They are to supply the material “if required,” but no notice is given them of the quantity of cloth that will be required at a particular time. I think the conditions at present imposed by the Department have a tendency to restrict the number of tenderers, and to increase the price charged to the Government. I can speak from personal experience of the difficulty of supplying goods from a mill from time to time, as required. The Government will require cloth not only for military uniforms, but perhaps for police uniforms, and for the uniforms of postal officials, and I think the Minister has given a fairly correct estimate of the output required of the proposed Government factory, and of the cost of the machinery it will be necessary to install in a mill of the capacity contemplated. I have some doubt, how ever, as to the accuracy of the estimate for buildings and land. The estimated cost of the buildings for the factory which I have in mind at the present time was much in excess of the departmental estimate. I think the Minister has also under-estimated the cost of working stock. Wages will also have to be provided for from another vote. It would be well if, before taking action, the Minister took steps to find out whether it would not be possible under improved conditions of contract to continue to obtain woollen cloth from private manufacturers. I doubt very much the wisdom of establishing the proposed woollen factory, as an enterprise carried on by the Government. I do not intend to take any present action hostile to the proposed vote, but I trust the Government will consider the matter well before they commit themselves to the. large expenditure, present and prospective, which must be entailed by the establishment of a factory of this kind.

Senator Givens:

– Does the honorable senator intend to take a vote on these items ?

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

– No.

Senator Givens:

– Then why waste all this time?

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

– There is no necessity for the honorable senator to remain unless he pleases. But I shall not detain the Committee any longer, because I am aware that honorable senators are anxious to pass these Estimates as speedily as possible and to catch their trains.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Postponed clause 2 and title agreed to.

Bill reported with an amendment; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 3242

PAPERS

Senator FINDLEY laid upon the table the following papers : -

Lands Acquisition. Act 1906. - Pennant Hills, New South Wales : Wireless Telegraphic Station. - Notification of the Acquisition of Land for Site.

page 3242

PUBLICATION OF HANSARD

The PRESIDENT:

– I have been asked to intimate to honorable senators that, owing to the long sitting, the debates of Wednesday will be issued to-morrow, and that the debates of the present sitting, that is Thursday, will not be issued until Monday afternoon. Honorable senators are specially asked, in order to facilitate the work of the Hansard staff, to forward not later than 1 p.m. to-morrow their corrected proofs.

page 3243

ADJOURNMENT

Personal Explanation: Late Sitting

Motion (by Senator McGregor) pro posed -

That the Senate do now adjourn.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– At the end of a sitting lasting twenty-four and a half hours, I desire to remove any false impression which may exist in the mind of one honorable senator so far as I am concerned.

Senator Findley:

– Never mind about that. It is all right.

Senator NEEDHAM:

– Senator Findley approached me this morning and said that I had used words that were unintentionally unjust to him. I take this opportunity to quote the statement I made -

It is a fact that when Senator Could was short of informution it was supplied by Senator Findley.

I made use of those words, believing that what I said was true. But I did not overhear Senator Gould’s interjection, “ At my request.” This morning I said to Senator Findley that, if I found such a statement in my Hansard proof, I would make the amende honorable to him. I regret to say that, unintentionally, I did the honorable senator an injustice. I did not intend to impute anything unfair to him, and the compact I made with him has been kept.

Senator Findley:

– That is all right.

Senator McGREGOR:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · South Australia · ALP

– I hope that any little warmth which may have been engendered during this sitting will very soon be forgotten. Every member of the Senate believed that he had a duty to perform, and endeavoured to do it; and if one honorable senator may have said unpleasant things to another in the course of performing his duty, I hope that they will be forgotten, and that we shall have the same good fellowship here in the’ future as we have had in the past I thank every honorable senator very heartily for the way in which the Appropriation (Works and Buildings) Bill has been passed.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senate adjourned at 3.2 p.m. (Friday).

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 15 September 1910, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1910/19100915_senate_4_57/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate15 September 1910

PETITIONS

Senator VARDON:South Australia

Senator de Largie:

Senator VARDON:

Senator de Largie:

Senator Stewart:

Senator de Largie:

Senator Chataway:

Senator Millen:

Senator Rae:

Senator Sir Josiah Symon:

Senator Lynch:

Senator Sir Josiah Symon:

Senator McGregor:

The PRESIDENT:

PRINTING COMMITTEE’S REPORT

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH RENTALS: PAPER

Senator SAYERS:QUEENSLAND

Senator FINDLEY:Minister (without portfolio) · VICTORIA · ALP

Senator SAYERS:

Senator Needham:

The PRESIDENT:

The PRESIDENT:

Senator LONG:Tasmania

Senator Clemons:

Senator LONG:

Senator Millen:

Senator Clemons:

Senator LONG:

Senator Clemons:

Senator LONG:

Senator CLEMONS:

Senator CLEMONS:

Senator CLEMONS:

Senator CLEMONS:

Senator Sir Josiah Symon:

Senator LONG:

Senator Sir Josiah Symon:

Senator Millen:

Senator LONG:

Senator Clemons:

Senator LONG:

Senator Clemons:

Senator LONG:

Senator Barker:

Senator LONG:

Senator Clemons:

Senator LONG:

Senator LYNCH:Western Australia

Senator Clemons:

Senator LYNCH:

The PRESIDENT:

Senator LYNCH:

Senator Clemons:

Senator LYNCH:

Senator Millen:

Senator LYNCH:

Senator ALBERT GOULD:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

The PRESIDENT:

Senator ALBERT GOULD:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator LYNCH:

Senator Fraser:

Senator LYNCH:

Senator READY:Tasmania

Senator Blakey:

Senator READY:

Senator Millen:

Senator READY:

Senator NEEDHAM:Western Australia

Senator O’KEEFE:Tasmania

Senator Clemons:

Senator O’KEEFE:

Senator Long:

Senator O’KEEFE:

Senator ALBERT GOULD:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator CLEMONS:Tasmania

Senator Long:

Senator CLEMONS:

Senate
15 September 1910

Senator VARDON:
South Australia

Senator SAYERS:
QUEENSLAND

Senator FINDLEY:
Minister (without portfolio) · VICTORIA · ALP

Senator LONG:
Tasmania

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

Senator ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator READY:
Tasmania

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

Senator O’KEEFE:
Tasmania

Senator ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator CLEMONS:
Tasmania

Senator GARDINER:
New South Wales

Senator DE LARGIE:
Western Australia