View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate
10 November 1910

4^th Parliament · 1^st Session

PRINTING COMMITTEE
PAPERS
QUESTION
- CASE OF WARDER WISE
QUESTION
- WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY
QUESTION
- VANCOUVER MAIL SERVICE
ORDER OF BUSINESS
POSTAL RATES BILL
- Second Reading
SEAT OF GOVERNMENT (ADMINISTRATION) BILL

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

page 5891

PRINTING COMMITTEE

Report (No. 4) presented by Senator

Henderson, and read by the Acting Clerk.

page 5891

PAPERS

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

-I beg to lay upon the table of the Senate-

Papersrelating to berthing accommodation for the new torpedo hoat destroyers.

As I understand that it is possible that the Printing Committee may not meet again before the end of the session, and as several honorable senators have made inquiries for these papers,I move -

That the papers be printed.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 5892

QUESTION

CASE OF WARDER WISE

Senator NEEDHAM:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I desire to ask the Minister of Defence, without notice, whether he has received a reply from the Premier of Western Australia with regard to the dismissal of Warder Wise from the Fremantle prison on account of his refusal to resign his membership of the Commonwealth Military Forces ; if not, will the Minister send a further communication by telegraph to the Premier of that State, calling his attention to a petition signed by twenty-one warders of the prison, stating that the duties of Warder Wise were not interfered with through his attendance at drills and parades ?

Senator PEARCE:
ALP

– In reply to the first part of the honorable senator’s question, I have to say that we have not received any reply from the Premier of Western Australia. As to the second part of the question, of course we have not received a petition from the warders at the Fremantle Gaol.

Senator Needham:

– It is public property that they have signed a petition.

Senator PEARCE:

– I will have the honorable senator’s statements as they appear in Hansard forwarded to the Premier of Western Australia, with a request that his reply shall be expedited.

page 5892

QUESTION

WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY

Senator GIVENS:
QUEENSLAND

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

For how many wireless telegraph stations have contracts been let?
On what date were such contracts let?
Is it the Telefunken system which is to be installed at the various stations for which contracts are let?
Is it not a fact that the Telefunken system has been discarded by the German Admiralty? 5.Is it not a fact that the vessels of the British squadron stationed in Australia, and also the Australian torpedo boats, are fitted with the Marconi wireless system ?
Was Admiral Poore consulted before contracts were let for the installation of the Telefunken system in the Commonwealth; and, if so, what advice or opinion did he give on the matter ?
Is it not a fact that the only vessels trading to Australia fitted with the Telefunken wireless system are the German mail boats?
Can proper and efficient communication be maintained between vessels fitted with the Marconi system and land stations at which the Telefunken system is in use?
What were the reasons why the Telefunken system was adopted for Australia instead of the Marconi?

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

– The answers to the honorable senator’s questions - which, I may state, relate to the Post and Telegraph Department, and not to the Department of Home Affairs - are as follow -

Two.
4th April, 1910.
Yes.
The Minister has no such information. The records’ available show that the great majority, if not all, of the ships of the German Navy are fitted with the Telefunken system, and that over 40 per cent, of the wireless stations of the world are fitted with this system.
The ships of the British Squadron stationed in Australia are understood to be fitted with the special Admiralty system of wireless, which is not identical with the Marconi. The Australian torpedo boats are being fitted with wireless apparatus by the Marconi company.
No. Admiral Poore, personally, was not consulted. The Admiralty, however, was consulted, and nominated the officer then in charge of wireless for the Squadron to act as member of a Conference which considered the tenders. It was on the advice of this Conference that the tender for the Telefunken system was accepted.
Not so far as the Postmaster-General is aware.
Yes.
Because the price asked for the Marconi system was considerably in excess of that asked for the Telefunken system and because the Conference referred to in (6) reported that there did not appear to be any sufficient reason why the tender for the Telefunken system should be rejected.

Senator GIVENS:

– Arising out of the Minister’s answer, I wish to inquire whether he can tell us if contracts for the erection of the wireless telegraphy stations have yet been let, and the sureties for the proper and due carrying out of the contracts signed ?

Senator FINDLEY:

– Contracts for the erection of stations at Sydney and Fremantle have been let. . Whether they have been signed,I am not, for the moment, in a position to say. I ask the honorable senator to give notice of the latter part of his question.

Senator GIVENS:

– By leave of the Senate, I should like to give notice now.

Leave granted; notice given.

page 5893

QUESTION

VANCOUVER MAIL SERVICE

Senator CHATAWAY:
QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister representing the Postmaster-General, upon notice -

In regard to the Vancouver mail service, is the Government pressing upon the Canadian Government the necessity of the steamers calling at Brisbane?

Senator FINDLEY:
ALP

– The answer to the honorable senator’s question is as follows -

Full consideration will be given to the question of making Brisbane a port of call for the Vancouver steamers under the new contract.

Senator CHATAWAY:

– Cannot the Minister state more definitely whether the Government have had any communication with the Government of Canada, and whether they are pressing the Canadian Government as to the necessity of making Brisbane a port of call?

Senator FINDLEY:

– The _ Government have entered into communication with the Canadian Government, and have impressed upon them the necessity of the steamers calling at the port of Brisbane.

page 5893

ORDER OF BUSINESS

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

– - I might be permitted to make a short statement in connexion with the order of business. Under existing conditions, it must, of course, be understood that private members’ business cannot take precedence of Government business on the paper; but I think that it is desirable that the private members’ motion having reference to the census regulations should take precedence of any other private business on the paper.

Senator Lt.-Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD (New South Wales) [2.46].- I agree with the Vice-President of the Executive Council in thinking that the motion dealing with the census regulations should be considered before other private business on the paper. I have no doubt that Senator McColl, as well as myself, will be willing to postpone the business in our names until that motion has been considered.

The PRESIDENT:

– When the time has come to deal with the private business on the paper, honorable senators in charge of it will be able to move that its consideration be postponed until after the consideration of other private business as they think fit.

Senator MILLEN (New South Wales) to the motion dealing with the census regulations-

The PRESIDENT:

– I point out that the discussion is entirely out of order, and the honorable senator can only continue his remarks by leave of the Senate. ls it the desire of honorable senators that Senator Millen should have leave to continue his remarks?

Honorable Senators. - Hear, hear.

Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– I wish to raise a point as to the procedure which should be followed in the Senate. I submit that the motion dealing with the census regulations ought not to be regarded as private members’ business in the ordinary sense. It deals with the law of the land, although’ the motion is brought forward by a private member of the Senate.

Senator Pearce:

– It is private business.

Senator MILLEN:

– If such a motion is to be regarded as private business, and must take all the chances of private business in the ordinary way, our law with respect to the discussion of regulations hecomes only so much waste paper. Since they can only be discussed by the good-will of Ministers, there should be some means under which any honorable senator, taking action within the law to raise the question whether regulations tabled under an Act of Parliament should have the force of law or not, might be able to have the question discussed as a matter of right. My_ contention is that this is really the business of the Senate, and not of a private member of the Senate, although it is business which a private member of the Senate must introduce.

The PRESIDENT:

– I remind honorable senators that only business which is in charge of members of the Government is considered to be public business in the sense referred to by Senator Millen. If any private member of the Senate wishes to give notice of a motion to deal with any matter in connexion with regulations or anything else, it can only be considered within the time allowed for private members’ business. When, as in the present instance, the Senate has agreed that Government business shall have precedence, under the Standing Orders the discussion of private members’ business must depend upon the opportunities afforded for it by the Government.

Senator Stewart:

– The Standing Orders ought to be altered.

page 5894

POSTAL RATES BILL

Second Reading

Motion (by Senator McGregor) agreed to-

That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would prevent the passage of this Bill through its remaining stages without delay.

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

– I move -

That this Bill be now read a second time.

– Only if he sends his letters beyond the borders of his own State.

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator FINDLEY:

– I have given the figures for 1908, and there are no later figures available. This Bill also alters the charges on books and magazines. An advantage is given to books, booklets, and magazines which are printed in Australia, as against similar publications printed outside. No good Protectionist can object to that proposal. It means that encouragement will be given to Australian writers, artists, printers, and bookbinders. For many years enterprising firms have made vigorous efforts, in different parts of the Commonwealth, to successfully establish magazines. They have been greatly handicapped. They are confronted with very heavy disabilities. I think that every encouragement should be given to the production of an Australian article, whether it be a magazine, a book, or a booklet. I am one of those who believe that in Australia we have writers and artists who will compare favorably with the writers and artists who are to be met with in any part of the civilized world. Australian writers, and artists who have left the land of their birth and gone abroad, have won name and fame for themselves. Moreover, as a printer, I may naturally be expected to maintain that as a matter of fact we are able to produce in Australia books, magazines, and other publications that will compare favorably with productions emanating from any part of the world. For these reasons, I strongly urge the Senate to give the advantage proposed by this Bill to Australian publications. It is not necessary for me to occupy the time of honorable senators at any greater length. If I have omitted to make clear any point, or have failed to give any information that is required or is necessary in connexion with the Bill, I shall be only too glad to furnish it in reply. By way of closing my remarks, I wish to say that I am satisfied that the Bill, if not carried unanimously in the Senate - as I hope it will be - will, at all events, be carried by a substantial majority ; and I am confident that when it becomes law it will mean, not as some honorable senators imagine, an advantage to a small coterie of individuals, but a distinct benefit, not only to the business community, but to every citizen of the Commonwealth.

Senator MILLEN:
New South Wales

– - There is one reflection that appeals at once to my mind in considering this Bill. As the Minister has pointed out, we have at present different postage rates for similar services in different States ; and it is obvious that, in carrying out what we intend to be the full effect of Federation, there must be uniformity in respect to those rates. The question is. therefore, whether we are to level down to the low rates which prevail in one State, or level up to the higher rates which prevail in the other States.

Senator Walker:

– We might split the difference, and make the rate1½d.

Senator MILLEN:

– We might, as Senator Walker suggests, make the postage rate 1½d. But I dismiss that suggestion, even though I respect its origin, because the very denomination1½d., for which we have no single coin, prevents the suggestion from receiving serious consideration. The only question, then, is whether we are to adopt the rate which prevails in Victoria, or are to increase the Victorian rate to that which prevails in other States. To my mind, it would be to make a retrogressive step to raise the Victorian rate to uniformity with that prevailing in other States. That being so, there is but one thing to do. If we want a uniform rate at all, we must give the whole Commonwealth the benefit of the low rate which at present prevails in one State. But, having said that, I find myself in conflict with the Minister and with those responsible for this Bill. I asked the Minister why the Government propose to delay conferring the benefits of the measure until April next? His answer strikes me as being entirely insufficient and unsatisfactory. He franklyadmitted that the present condition of affairs represents a manifest injustice; and he went on to say - I quite agree with him there - that while it is true that different rates were just enough, under the old bookkeeping system, according to which a State in which there were low rates carried its loss on its own shoulders, the people receiving the benefit while the Treasury lost revenue - just as the New South Wales Treasury received the benefit of their higher rate - nevertheless, it is manifestly unjust, when we are abolishing the bookkeeping system, and are having a common purse, that there should be different rates in different States. I do not use that as an argument against this Bill, but it is a fair argument to use against delay in bringing the Bill into operation.

Senator de Largie:

– The Bill cannot be brought into operation in five minutes.

Senator MILLEN:

SenatorDE LARGIE. - Not only must we have commercial men at the head of the Department, but they must have power to make a success of it. If the Department is tied down, as it is by the present rates, what is the use of finding fault with high officials?

Senator Long:

– Will penny postage improve the condition of the back-blocker ? Not one jot.

Senator DE LARGIE:

– Let us consider the effect of a reduced rate on the back- block services. Hitherto, whenever a new service for the back parts of the Commonwealth has been asked for, what has invariably been the answer? It has been, “ How much will it cost, and will it pay?” It is positive cruelty to give a scant postal service to the men who live on the fringe of civilization - the best citizens in the Commonwealth who require better mail services. With regard to applications for new services, what has been our experience? Whenever we have approached the Department with a request, we have been told that the proposed service would not pay. If the postage rate is reduced, where will the Department get revenue from ?

Senator O’KEEFE:

– I candidly admit that that is a reason why I am not justified in voting for this proposal. But I do not say so in the way in which the honorable senator takes the point. I do not say that that is the “ sting “ of the proposal. Surely Senator St. Ledger will admit that there is no class feeling in the argument when I say that, as the loss must fall upon the whole people of Australia, it is not fair to ask the man who is going to be benefited to a trifling extent to bear the same proportion of the burden as the man who is going to be benefited to a great degree. The Minister argued that the proposal is going to be of great benefit to all the people of Australia. I think that an ounce of experience is worth a ton of theory in this matter. 1 will, therefore, take my own experience. As a man who was not engaged in a business, but working for a fairly good salary, I found that I wrote on an average three letters a week, and my expense for postage was, therefore, 6d. per week. Immediately I left my former occupation and went into a small business the number of letters I found it necessary to write averaged ten a day, and if penny postage had been established my saving would have been 10d. per day, or 5s. per week. One does not care to obtrude one’s personal experience, but by doing so I have been able to present a concrete case and to state facts. I contend that my experience will be probably that of nearly every pperson in Australia.

My pamphlet on “Post Office Reform” was written in the year 1836. During the preceding twenty years - viz., from 1S15 to 1835 inclusive - there was no increase whatever in the postoffice revenue, whether gross or net, and, therefore, in all probability, none in the number of letters ;

Senator Guthrie:

– That was before free education though.

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

– That has had a certain effect. The quotation continues - and though there was a slight increase in the revenue, and, doubtless, in the number of letters, between 1835 and the establishment of penny postage early in 1840 - an increase chiefly due, in my opinion, to the adoption of part of my plan, viz., the establishment of day mails toand from London - yet, during the whole period of twenty-four years immediately preceding the adoption of penny postage, the revenue, whether gross or net, and the number of letters, were,, in effect, stationary.

– You will make it worse ; that is all.

Senator LYNCH:

The word “ discouraged “ sounds very nicely ; but still the number of boys in the service of the Department is being increased, notwithstanding the view which the Public Service Commissioner takes of toy labour. I hope that the time is not tar distant when the Government will take this question in hand, and see that boys are employed by the Government only at work for which they are physically fitted. It is altogether objectionable to find little boys of thirteen or fourteen years of age, who ought to be at home in bed, travelling the streets at night delivering telegrams.

Senator Findley:

– The honorable senator would not employ grown-up men in delivering telegrams?

Senator LONG:

– I would, under similar conditions. Boys are now engaged in delivering telegrams at a time of night when they should be at home in their bed, growing, as nature intended they should. I do not claim that the Government should have established all these reforms in the few months they have been in office; but I am directing their attention to these paragraphs of the Postal Commission’s report in the hope and belief that they will consider them when the proper time arrives. I wish to refer again to the back-blocks postoffices. The country districts in the different States are not so much interested in penny postage as in twopenny postage.

Their concern just now is to be supplied with a postal service at least once a week. I have had representations made to me, which, in turn, I have made to the Department, for a weekly postal service here and there, and for the establishment of money-order offices in other places. The lack of money-order offices is a sore point with many people living in the country districts of Tasmania. Under existing conditions, people have to walk 5 or 6 miles in many places, if they wish to send a postoffice order or a postal note. My concern just now is to see better postal facilities provided for the country districts, and nothing will induce me to vote for this proposal, unless I have a declaration from the Government that, notwithstanding the anticipated loss of revenue under this Bill, they will still be prepared to increase the facilities afforded the residents of country districts, not only in Tasmania, but in all the States of the Commonwealth. Some honorable senators have stated that the time has arrived when we should have a uniform postage in the Commonwealth. They claim that, as Victoria has enjoyed penny postage for so many years, the other States ought to be brought into line with that State. On that subject, I may say that I do not think the majority of the Victorian people will have the slightest objection to their State being brought into line with the other. States, and a uniform twopenny rate established.

Senator Findley:

– Would the people of Tasmania be in favour of an increase in the postage rates?

Senator LONG:

– What I suggest would not involve an increase in the postage rates in Tasmania. I do not propose that we should interfere with the existing arrangements in any of the States, providing for penny postage within certain limited city areas. Instead of losing revenue, as we must do under this Bill, I should prefer to see Victoria brought into line with the other States, in order that the revenue we are at present deriving from the Postal Department may be increased. At the present time, the Government are faced with the necessity for a huge expenditure on the Post and Telegraph Department alone, to say nothing ofthe expenditure to which they are committed in other directions ; and, in the circumstances, they cannot afford to surrender the revenue which must be lost under this Bill. Until I hear that the Government intend to do a fair thing by the country districts which have not had a fair deal in the past, I shall continue my opposition to the proposal for the establishment of penny postage.

Senator KEATING:
Tasmania

– I wish to be very brief in addressing myself to this question. I congratulate the Government upon introducing this Bill this session. I hope it will become law, and that we shall have universal penny postage in the Commonwealth as soon as conveniently may be. I do not view the establishment of penny postage throughout the Commonwealth in the same way as does Senator Long. I recognise with him that, in the past, the Postal Department has perhaps not been as mindful of its obligations to the country districts throughout the Commonwealth as we could have desired j but I do not think for a moment that the establishment of penny postage will make it less mindful of its obligations in that regard. In my opinion the two matters are not in the slightest degree associated. Those who take up that position, it seems to me, are assuming that the estimated immediate loss in revenue resulting from the establishment of penny postage will continue. I think that it will not. Some honorable senators who have already spoken, have pointed out what has been pointed out in another place, and on various platforms throughout the country during the last general election, that the experience of all countries that have lowered their general rate of postage from “Sd. to id., is emphatically to the contrary. As a matter of fact, in the first year or two, there has been a drop in the revenue, but it has been very speedily converted into a rise ; and, in the course of a very few years, the revenue has assumed normal proportions.

Senator Long:

– Without taking the increase of population into consideration at all?

Senator KEATING:

– We may take New Zealand,, where the increase of population has not been so great as in Canada. We may take the United Kingdom or Victoria, where, during the period covered by the comparison, the population did not increase beyond the ordinary average normal increase of the Commonwealth. I have heard that the Minister, in introducing this measure, stated that it will be for the benefit of all the people in Australia. That statement has been challenged by those opposed to the Bill. I venture to say that it cannot be successfully challenged, because the benefit of this proposal will be for all the people in Australia. I may say - and in this regard it is necessary for me to in troduce a personal note - that, in addressing the electors on the last occasion on which I appeared before them, from every platform in my own State, I strongly advocated penny postage throughout the Commonwealth ; and, wherever I did so, it was strongly supported, and nowhere more strongly than in the country districts.

Senator O’Keefe:

– I just as strongly opposed it, and my experience was the reverse.

Senator KEATING:

– So far as I could gather, the system was nowhere more strongly supported than in the country districts. It has been alleged, by the opponents of this Bill, that the adoption of penny postage will benefit only city residents.

Senator Needham:

– The question which we have to consider is whether the present time is an opportune one for the introduction of the proposed reform.

Senator KEATING:

– Undoubtedly the time is opportune. Now that we have entered into a new arrangement in regard to our financial relations with the States, it is particularly opportune. The adoption of penny postage will benefit people in the country in a way in which they have not hitherto been benefited. At the present time, commercial institutions, such as banking and insurance companies, legal offices, and other large city houses, do not enjoy penny postage. They enjoy, on an average, farthing postage, for the simple reason that the great bulk of their mail matter is forwarded for considerably less than id., not merely in our cities, but throughout the whole State in which they carry on their operations, and even beyond the limits of that State. I would invite the attention of honorable senators to the rates which are set out in the schedule to this Bill. There, we find that the rate upon letters is to be id. per J oz., that upon letter cards it is to be so much, and that the rate upon printed papers is to be a. per 2 ozs., or part thereof. What proportion does that bear to the rate of id. upon letters? I think it represents about one-eighth. Upon books which are published and printed in Australia d. is to be charged per 8 ozs., or part thereof. I now wish to show what the commercial, the financial, the legal, and other establishments in our cities have been enjoying in the matter of postal rates for years past. Take, say, in my own State, the packet rate of d. for 2 ozs.

What passes through the post at that reduced rate? The following: -

Acceptances. - Accounts, invoices, and receipts, the remark “ with thanks,” and advice when and how the goods are forwarded, will be allowed, also the following trade notices, whether printed or impressed with a rubber stamp : - “ All empties returned must be advised “ ; “ When remitting, please return the statement to be receipted”; “Terms, cash in advance”; “ Terms, 2½ per cent. discount for cash “ ; “ This settles your account up to date.” Anything, however, of a general character printed in ordinary type may be enclosed with accounts, provided it is not of the nature of actual or personal correspondence.

Ballot-papers, if sent in open covers, with the end open at least two-thirds of the width of the envelope. Balance-sheets and reports (printed) of public societies and companies. Bankers’ packets, from one bank to another, containing cheques, cheque-books, drafts, or orders, pass-books. Bills of exchange. Bills of lading, and ships’ manifests. Bottles containing fluid, &c., very securely corked so that their contents cannot escape, and packed in boxes sufficiently strong so as to prevent breakage of the bottles and damage to the mails. Briefs. Bees, and live but harmless entomological specimens, under special regulations, and also by parcel post.

Cards, either plain or bearing printed matter, or pictures, or both (the name only of the addressee may be written on the face of such cards). Catalogues printed (prices in figures may be written). Circulars, i.e., letters wholly printed, engraved, lithographed, chromographed, or produced by other mechanical process except the copying press and the typewriter, intended for transmission in identical terms to several persons (the name of the addressee may, however, be added in writing). Circulars printed in imitation of the typewriter, provided that at least twenty copies in identical terms are brought to the Post Office, and handed in to the officer in charge. Commercial papers (inland and intercolonial only).

Deeds, or copies thereof. Depositions, drafts, drawings.

Engravings. Examination papers (corrections allowed).

Glass.

Insurance documents, not being in the nature of a letter. Invoices or bills of parcels.

Legal documents, not being in the nature of a letter.

Manuscript for printing, maps, merchandise, Meteorological returns. Mineral specimens. Music, written.

Notices of meetings, natural history specimens.

Obliterated stamps. Orders for goods. Instructions as to packing, the route for forwarding and effecting insurance may be added. Orders for goods must at least be partly printed.

Packets of unused post-cards. Paintings. Parchments or vellum. Pass-books or cards connected with any society. Patterns (manufacturers’ or trade mark and prices may accompany them). Pay-sheets. Photographs (not on glass, except in cases of leather or other strong material). Pictures. Placards. Plans. Policies of insurance. Powers of attorney. Press copies of telegrams sent from one office to another office of a firm or company. Prices current, printed (prices of articles included therein may be filled in in writing). Printed matter. Printers’ proofs. Prints. Prospectuses, printed. Proxy forms or notices in which may be inserted such particulars as date, signature, name of proxy, date of meeting, name of shareholder or member, and number of votes, provided that nothing appear in the document in writing or print which does not form part of the document as a legal instrument.

Rate notices receipts - (see accounts). Recognisances. Reports (printed) of societies or public companies. Returns or periodical statements.

– When we have a population equal to that of Canada a similar result may follow the experiment.

Senator KEATING:

– If we are not to take action until our population is equal to that of Canada, we shall continue to lag behind. I hope that the Bill will receive the cordial support of honorable senators, because I believe that penny postage will lead to closer communication between the States. With the introduction in the near future of a uniform stamp and the adoption of penny postage, I believe that we shall take a forward step in Australian Nationalism. These reforms will also tend to cement the ties which have hitherto bound the different States together. I feel that the Government have not been unmindful of the financial aspect of this question. I am very pleased to reflect that I was asso ciated with a Ministry which some time ago indicated its intention to bring forward a Bill of this character. But in order to permit of that being done, it was necessary that an arrangement should be made with some of the States, and the opportunity for entering into that arrangement did not present itself. I congratulate the Government upon having introduced this measure at the earliest opportunity, and I feel sure that it is one which will redound to their credit.

Senator READY:
Tasmania

The great importance of the subject which is now under consideration impels me to say a few words upon it. I have listened very attentively to the utterances of my Tasmanian friends and colleagues upon it. To-day we have had one of the most interesting debates of the session - a debate which will go far towards dissipating the objection urged by the Leader of the Opposition a few days ago that the Senate can no longer be regarded as a deliberative assembly. The discussion which has taken place to-day conclusively proves that this Chamber is a deliberative body. It will also serve to place before the people of Australia the advantages which will flow from the adoption of penny postage. I appreciate especially the splendid speeches made by Senators O’Keefe and Long, who evidently have a grasp of the subject, and spoke from experience.

One of the most comprehensive reports which have ever been issued has been made by the Postal Commission on one of the most important services’ in the Commonwealth. The more it is studied, the more it will be realized that our Postal Department requires a great deal of re-organization. I could, if I wished to do so, cite innumerable instances in Tasmania. I could also cite instances which have come under my notice in other States. But I only propose to mention some of the many Tasmanian complaints which are referred to by the Postal Commission. Some of the reforms they deal with are of so important a character that I take it that any one interested in the subject must be impressed. For instance, they say -

The winter mail service with the mainland is not sufficiently frequent, and should be the same as the summer service.

That is admitted by every Tasmanian.

The King Island mail service is insufficient.

We have heard from honorable senators to-day remarks, which I can substantiate, as to the inadequacy of the mail service to King Island. Its people have no means of communicating with the mainland; and, although the want of telegraphic communication has been brought under the notice of various Governments, no action has yet been taken to redress the grievance.

In the northern parts of Tasmania it has come to be regarded as almost a scandal that no step has yet been taken. Not only has King Island a bright future, but it is recognised as being, for its size, one of the most up-to-date and populous places. Its people have shown a very progressive spirit on all public questions, and, to my mind, to deny them the right of a decent mail service is a disgrace to any Government. I hope that the present Government will take some action, even though it be late in the day -

More mail services are required in country districts.

As Senator Long has said, in the back portions of Tasmania you will find very often that the residents have only a weekly service, and that they have to send a great distance for the mail -

Staff to attend to public at Hobart and Launceston is insufficient.

One has only to go into the post-office at either place to see that it is insufficiently staffed.

Addition of messengers to staff at certain country offices is required.

At Campbelltown, an important town in the Midlands of Tasmania, where I live, there is a post-office where there has been no messenger provided, and the postmistress in the past has had to send out telegrams by any one who chanced to come along. And in Campbelltown itself it has been no uncommon thing for me to take delivery of a telegram from some person to whom it has been intrusted by the postmistress.

Better accommodation and a money-order branch are required at Ranelagh, and the office should be open for an hour at night.

That is typical of many other country offices.

The telephone service at Launceston is very unsatisfactory.

On two or three occasions lately I have failed to get the numbers, after ringing for about half-an-hour, which convinced me that Launceston is behind the times as regards telephone service.

Tasmanian trunk line services are bad.

That is admitted by nearly every postal official in Tasmania.

Telephone service at Devonport is unsatisfactory and not private.

Telephone facilities in country districts are insufficient.

More public telephones are required, in country towns.

Telephone rates to domestic subscribers should be reduced.

Allowances paid Jo certain unofficial employes are inadequate.

These statements, which apply to all Tasmania, are substantiated by sworn evidence, and are not contradicted. In fact, there is no one who will defend the existing state of affairs. There are crying evils calling tor reform. The present Government is one which stands for clean administration, and whose main principle is to show the public that, by administration, they can put a Socialistic system, such as the Post Office undoubtedly is, on a better footing. Their first duty is to attend to these matters as speedily as possible. I, as a supporter, have every confidence that, before this session is ended, a pronouncement will be made by the Government as to their intention to remedy many of the existing evils.

It is when the existence of great evils is urged as an argument against the establishment of penny postage that I beg to disagree with the opponents of this measure. I hold that penny postage, and the reforms I have alluded to, are distinct matters. While we, as believers in an efficient, well-governed and paid system, are anxious for certain evils to be redressed, the very fact of their existence is not a good argument against our instituting a great reform. If any matters in connexion with the postal administration are in a backward state, is that an argument that we should not proceed with such an important reform as the introduction of penny postage? I fail to see the trend of that argument. Every year the introduction of penny postage is delayed will increase the cost of its institution. If we now put expediency before principle, and do not introduce penny postage for five or six years, it will result in a greater initial loss of revenue than would be the case now. It has been stated that, if penny postage be introduced now, the loss of the postal revenue will be so great that there will be no money available for instituting certain postal reforms.

But I take it that the more efficient and up-to-date our postal service is, and the cheaper the rates are, the more .it will be used by the people, with the result that, not only shall we get more revenue, but we shall have a people more satisfied with the system as a whole. We have a duty to perform to the Public Service. It would ill-become a Government, with such a platform as the Labour Government have, to illpay their employes, or to give them bad conditions. At the same time, it would illbecome them to lag when the great reform of penny postage calls for public attention. I am glad to see that the Government have had the pluck to take the question in hand, as they promised to do in the Governor-General’s speech, and I hope that the measure will soon be placed on the statute-book.

A few years ago, Mr. Fielding, Treasurer of Canada, pointed out that, when it had postage rates of 1½d. and 2jd., its Postal Department was worked at a loss. He stated that with improved administration and an increased volume of business, due mainly to the introduction of penny postage, the Postal Department was able to contribute £^184,000 a year to the Consolidated’ Revenue. I believe that,- within a few years of the introduction of penny postage in Australia, the deficit in the postal revenue will be so small that it will not seriously embarrass our finances, and that the people generally will gain a benefit.

I quite understand how my honorable friends from Tasmania feel, in reference to this measure. They are hurt because nothing has been done this session to benefit the postal employes and the service as a whole.. Considering the business which we have put through, and’ remembering that we have been engaged on some of the most important measures ever put before this Parliament, and that the Labour Government have only been in office for a few months, I think that they are entitled to be allowed a reasonable time in which to organize their Departments and start great reforms. I trust that, before we rise this session, we shall have a pronouncement from the Ministry that such improvements in our Public Service as we can reasonably expect will be carried out, and that, in consequence, those who are engaged in postal work will be put on a better footing.

One of the great contentions of the Postal Commission is that the persons in charge of allowance offices are not receiving an adequate remuneration. If we facilitate .the business and increase the number of letters, will not these officers benefit? Did we not receive from the PostmasterGeneral a sliding scale showing that the persons in charge of these offices were paid according to the number of letters which went through them? Naturally, if more letters are posted, these persons will be paid an increased amount, so that one of our complaints will be remedied by the introduction of penny postage. There will be more letters to deliver, and consequently more pay tor the postmistresses to receive.

Senator de Largie:

– More letters and less revenue.

Senator READY:

– There may be a loss of revenue for a while, but I am now dealing with the question from the point of view of the postal officials, who? if there are more letters, will receive more salary under the allowance-office system.

Senator de Largie:

– Where is the salary to come from if we have less revenue?

Senator READY:

– I take it that the revenue will not drop to such an extent as the honorable senator suggests. We admit that in the first year it will decline, but when we have a Government telling us that they can finance penny postage, why should we hesitate? Surely they would’ not tell us that they were prepared to lose £400,000 in the first year if the finances were not in a good position !

Senator de Largie:

– How are they going to finance this proposal ?

Senator READY:

– With that, I am not concerning myself a great deal, because I have full confidence in the Ministry. We shall not get as much revenue for a while, but eventually, I think, we shall. The Labour party has always stood in the van of progress.. It is not going, for the sake of expediency, to postpone this great reform year by year, but intends to place it on the statute-book for the benefit” of the whole people.

Senator ST LEDGER:
Queensland

– What Senator Henderson said was that, if this Bill becomes law, there will be less chance of outlying districts securing postal facilities.

Senator FINDLEY:

– In the event of the Bill being agreed to, why should such facilities be denied to Western Australia if those facilities are required?

Senator Millen:

– Is it not a fact that before additional facilities are granted, the

AYES: 21

NOES: 6

Majority … … 15

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In Committee:

Clauses1 to 5 agreed to.

Clause 6 -

The First Schedule to the Principal Act is amended -

by inserting therein before the word “ Newspapers “ the words “ Part I.”, and

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

– I move -

That after the word “Papers” in the first column, line 4, the words “as Prescribed” be inserted.

The addition of these words is unimportant, because the regulations will prescribe what are printed papers.

Amendment agreed to.

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

– I move -

That the words “ Published, and “ in the first column, line 5, be left out.

The idea underlying my amendment is that we should encourage as much as possible Australian production. I am mainly concerned with the printing of these publications in Australia. It is immaterial where they are published, so long as this provision will encourage their printing in the Commonwealth.

Amendment agreed to.

Senator STEWART:
Queensland

– I move -

That the figure”2” in the second column, line 8, be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the figure “ 4.”

The object of my amendment is to place Looks which are printed and published outside of Australia in the same category as magazines which are printed and published outside of Australia. The postage proposed upon such books is½d. for 2 ounces, whereas the rate proposed on magazines printed and published out of Australia is ½d. upon 4 ounces. I do not see why any advantage should be given to magazines over books. Books are just as valuable as magazines ; and there is no reason why more should be charged for carrying the former through the Post Office.

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

– I do not know that the Government have any strong objection to this amendment. Of course, books are more difficult and expensive to carry.

Senator Givens:

– It all depends upon the weight.

Senator FINDLEY:

– We will accept the amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendments (by Senator Findley) agreed to -

That the figure “2,” in the second column, line 9, be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the figure “ 4.”

That the words “ Published and,” in the first column, line 7, be left out.

Amendment (by Senator Findley) proposed -

That after the word “Merchandise,” in the first column, lines 31-2, the words “ as prescribed” be inserted.

Senator WALKER:
New South Wales

– Can the Minister see his way to alter the rate attached to the last line? Is it not rather small compared with the other rate?

Senator Findley:

– No.

Senator Lt.-Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD (New South Wales) [10.50].- There seems to be no reason why the rate for the carriage of commercial papers, patterns, samples, and merchandise, should be higher than the rate for the carriage of printed papers, as prescribed. The charge for the former is1d. per 2 ounces or part of2 ounces, or double the charge for the latter. I suggest, unless there is any strong reason to the contrary, that the charge for the former should be reduced to ½d. per 2 ounces or part of 2 ounces.

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

– I understand that there are good reasons for the difference which is made. Senator Gould would permit traders to send numerous accounts through the Post Office at the low rate of½d. per 2 ounces. It would take a number of accounts to weigh an ounce. This is a rate which we do not desire to see altered.

Senator Lt.-Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD (New South Wales) [10.52].- There are printed papers to be charged as prescribed. A man may send 2 ounces of printed pagers for½d., but for every 2 ounces of commercial papers he will be charged1d.

Senator Givens:

– That rate also includes patterns and samples.

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

– I do not know that it matters much whether it is a sample or a lot of printed matter. I do not see why a distinction should be made. It is no. more serious a matter to carry a sample weighing 2 ounces than to carry a bundle of printed papers weighing 2 ounces; but it is proposed to charge½d. in the former case and1d. in the latter. What is the reason for making the difference? I think it is a matter which the Minister might consider.

Senator MILLEN:
New South Wales

– There is one argument which may, perhaps, appeal to the Minister. Irrespective of whether one rate is high and the other low, it seems desirable, as far as we can, to have uniformity. To-day, when a man goes round to the Post Office, he is in some doubt as to which rate his parcel or package comes under. The more uniform the rates are made the more will every one know what he has to pay. With a variety of charges, one is at a loss to know what to do ; and he has to go to the bother of asking an official the category under which it comes. In view of the advantage of having uniformity the Minister might see his way to accept an amendment’ in the rate attached to the last line.

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

Senator MILLEN:

– Matter which is partly written, and partly printed, should be included under the letter rate. This list could be cut down to half its size.

Senator KEATING:
Tasmania

– The existence of a number of rates with regard to those articles on which a reduction is made from the ordinary letter rate is ‘a constant source of annoyance and irritation. People receive through the post articles posted in one place in the full belief, and very often on the assurance of an official, that the rate is1d. for 4 ozs. But when the recipient is entitled to receive them, he is told that the articles were posted under a wrong designation, and that he has to pay1d. for 2 ozs. This is of daily occurrence in the experience of many persons. The fewer the rates in the list the less likelihood is there of friction between citizens and officers. It is quite impossible to think that the officer at the despatching office, and the officer at the receiving office, will always agree as to what is the particular designation under which articles of this character come. I hope that whether the rate in the previous instance is raised, or this rate is lowered, there will be at least uniformity.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported with amendments; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 5944

SEAT OF GOVERNMENT (ADMINISTRATION) BILL

Motion (by Senator McGregor) agreed to-

That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would prevent this Bill being passed through all its stages without delay.

Bill read a first time.

Senate adjourned at 11. 2 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 10 November 1910, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1910/19101110_senate_4_59/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate10 November 1910

PRINTING COMMITTEE

PAPERS

Senator PEARCE:Minister for Defence · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

QUESTION

CASE OF WARDER WISE

Senator NEEDHAM:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator PEARCE:ALP

Senator Needham:

Senator PEARCE:

QUESTION

WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY

Senator GIVENS:QUEENSLAND

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

Senator GIVENS:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator GIVENS:

QUESTION

VANCOUVER MAIL SERVICE

Senator CHATAWAY:QUEENSLAND

Senator FINDLEY:ALP

Senator CHATAWAY:

Senator FINDLEY:

ORDER OF BUSINESS

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

The PRESIDENT:

The PRESIDENT:

Senator MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator Pearce:

Senator MILLEN:

The PRESIDENT:

Senator Stewart:

POSTAL RATES BILL

Second Reading

Senator FINDLEY:Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

Senator Millen:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Lt:

Senator Henderson:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Millen:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Lt:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Millen:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator O’Keefe:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator O’Keefe:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator O’Keefe:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Guthrie:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Guthrie:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Walker:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Lt:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Lt:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Walker:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Walker:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Lt:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Millen:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Lt:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Millen:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Lt:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Walker:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Walker:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senate
10 November 1910

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

Senator NEEDHAM:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator PEARCE:
ALP

Senator GIVENS:
QUEENSLAND

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

Senator CHATAWAY:
QUEENSLAND

Senator FINDLEY:
ALP

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

Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator FINDLEY:
Honorary Minister · Victoria · ALP

Senator MILLEN:
New South Wales

Senator DE LARGIE:
Western Australia