Senate
26 March 1920
8th Parliament · 1st Session
The President (Senator the Hon. T. Givens) took the chair at 11 a.m., and read prayers.
page 883
QUESTION
MANUFACTURE OF SHELL OASES IN AUSTRALIA
Senator BUZACOTT:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA
– I ask the Minister for Defence if he can inform the Senate how many shell cases were made in Australia under arrangement with the Defence Department, and acceptedby the British Government during the wart Senator PEARCE.- The number was 15,715.
page 883
QUESTION
ELECTORAL
Senate Election in New South Wales.
Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Home and Territories, upon notice -
- Whether, at the last general election in New South Wales, Messrs. Falkiner and Garling were candidates?
- Did Mr. Falkiner receive 111,000 votes? Was His deposit of £25 returned?
- Did Mr. Garling receive 300,000 votes? Washis deposit of £25 returned?
Senator RUSSELL:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · VICTORIA · NAT
– The answers are -
- Yes.
- Mr. Falkiner received 100,620 first preference votes. The total number of votes counted to him (i.e., first preference and transferred votes) at the time of his exclusion in the filling of the ‘ respective vacancies was as follows: -
First vacancy, 111,774.
Second vacancy, 110,661.
Third vacancy, 136,898.
His deposit was returned.
- Mr. Garling received 5,949 first preference votes. The total number of votes counted to him (i.e.,first preference and transferred votes) at the time of his exclusion in the filling of the respective vacancies was as follows: -
First vacancy, 6,031.
Second vacancy, 12,186.
Third vacancy, 308,286.
His deposit was forfeited.
The forfeiture of deposits is governed by the number of first preference votes received by a candidate.
page 883
AUSTRALIAN SOLDIERS’ REPATRIATION BILL
In Committee (Consideration resumed from Thursday, 25th March, vide page 825):
Clause 23 -
Upon the death or ‘ incapacity of any member of the Forces whose death or incapacity -
results or has resulted from any occurrencehappening during the period he was a member of the Forces ;
does not arise from self-inflicted injuries; and
does not arise from, or from any occurrence happening during the commission of, any breach of discipline by the member, the Commonwealth shall, subject to this Act, be liable to pay to the member or his dependants, or both, as the case may be, pensions in accordance with this Act.
Amendment (by Senator Millen) agreed to-
That all the words from “ Upon,” line 1, to “ member,” line 12, be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the following words : - “ Upon the death or incapacity -
of any person to whom paragraph (a) or (b) of the definition of ‘Member of the Forces ‘ applies, whose death or incapacity -
results or has resulted from any occurrence happening during the period he was a . member of the Forces;
does not arise from intentionally self-inflicted injuries; and
does not arise from, or from any occurrence happening during the commission of, any breach of discipline by the member ; and
of any person to whom paragraph (c) of the definition of ‘ Member of the Forces ‘ applies, whose death or incapacity results or has resulted from his employment in connexion with naval or military preparations or operations.”
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 24 agreed to.
Clause 25 -
The Chairman of the Commission or of Board may -
summon witnesses;
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I should like to have a statement from the. Minister for Repatriation (Senator Millen) of the intention of this clause. So far as I can see, there is under it no limitation to the power of the Chairman of the Commission or a Board to summon witnesses, take evidence on oath, or require the production of documents of any kind. I take it that the intention of the clause is strictly limited-
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– To the purposes of the Act.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– Exactly. The Minister will know whether it is necessary to include those words, but in its presentform it appears to me that the clause would cover an inquiry into, anything.
Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– This clause is a reproduction of a section in the existing Act, and the Crown Law officers advise that the powers conferred upon the Chairman of. the . Commission or ofa Board are limited to the purposes of the measure. The Chairman could not under this provision, as Senator Pratten apparently fears proceed upon an investigation into something outside the purposes of the Act. Honorable senators will recognise that in connexion with matters of this kind there is always a possibility of fraud. All applicants under the Act may not be bona fide, and the Commission must ‘have power to send for persons and papers to enable them to determine the bona fidesof an applicant. I have the assurance of the Crown. Law officers that the powers given under this provision are limited to investigations for the purposes of the Act. I ask the Committee to pass the clause, and if Senator Pratten still entertains doubts as to its scope I shall secure a more specific statement from the Crown Law officers
Clause agreed to.
Clause 26 -
-
Each Board shall be charged with the duties of -
- determining whether the death or in capacity of a member of the Forces in fact resulted from his employment in connexion with warlike operations, and in the case of incapacity the nature and extent thereof.
Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · TASMANIA · NAT; UAP from 1931
. -I move - .
That the words “ his employment in connexion with warlike operations” be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “ an occurrence happening during the period he was a member of the Forces.”
The reason for the amendment is to remove any doubt which might be prejudicial to the beneficiary. The form of words used in the clause as it stands would limit its operation to the results of an accident happening during the soldier’s work. The accident resulting in death or incapacity might have happened in camp when the soldier was not actually at work. The amended form of words willremove ambiguity and is entirely in the interests of the applicant.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I am not quite clear that the amendment meets the whole, position. I understand that the intention is to liberalize the payment of pensions if the Commission see fit, and to cover not only warlike operations but, as the Minister has explained, every misfortune to a soldier during the currency of his service.
Senator SENIOR:
South Australia
– I am afraid that the amendment will limit the operation of the clause to accidents happening during the time the soldier was a member of the Forces, though his death might not occur during that time, and still be directly due to an injury received while he wag a member of the Forces.
Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– If a soldier dies after his discharge as the result of something which happened to faim during his war service a legal application in his case will still be possible under the Bill. The only effect of the amendment is to increase the number of causes which might result in death which may be brought under the operation of the measure. It will be in no sense a limitation. I take the case of two men who joined the army - one receives a gunshot wound and dies three months or six months after his discharge; he would be eligible. The other man receives an equally serious injury when he is merely an onlooker in camp, and while in practice that interpretation is not followed, by a strict reading of the clause as it stands, that soldier would not have received his injury in the course of his employment. He would, however, have received it during the period of his service, and whether he died before or after his discharge would not affect the matter. Honorable senators may remember that a case occurred of a soldier sustaining an accident on the railway -while going home on leave. He could not literally be said to have sustained the accident in the course of his’ employment, but it was during the period of his war service, and obviously he would not have been in the position in which he sustained his accident but for ‘his enlistment. It is in order to remove any doubt that a legal claim may be entered in respect of such a case as that that I submit the amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– As the Committee has already determined on the first duty of the Board under paragraph a. I now propose to insert another set of duties, and move -
That the following new paragraph bc inserted - (aa) determining whether the death or incapacity of a person enlisted or ap- pointed for active service in connexion with naval or military preparations or operations in fact resulted from his employment in connexion with those preparations or operations.
It is necessary to constitute an authority to determine on the matter of fact whether the boy’s subsequent death or incapacity did result from one of those happenings during the course of his employment.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 27-
An appeal shall lie to the Commission from any assessment or determination of a Board under this Part.
Senator FOLL:
Queensland
– I move -
That the following words be added to the clause: - and such appellant shall be at liberty to appoint some person to appear on his behalf should ne so desire.”
I pointed out on the second reading the cases where it might be advisable for a man making application for certain assistance under the provisions of the Act to have some one to appear for him.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– As a matter of fact, that is the practice now, but if the honorable senator wishes it in the Act I am prepared to accept it. I am afraid, however, that there is a danger in it.
Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917
– The Minister needs to give the proposal more consideration than he has done. It has been sprung on him as it has been on us. I am afraid it will mean that the time of the Commission will be wasted by legal gentlemen, who may take up hours arguing on points that do not concern the case. The returned soldiers will be well represented on the Commission, and there is no fear of any act of injustice being committed by the members of the Commission, to whom the Committee can very well leave the settlement of matters of this description. We know the amount of time wasted by legal gentlemen in placing before Arbitration Courts and Wages Boards the claims of their clients.
Senator Foll:
– This amendment applies only to appeals, not to claims.
Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917
– Time can be taken up by a lawyer just as easily on an appeal, if a soldier fancies himself aggrieved and has money to spend, to the detriment of other legitimate claims which might otherwise be promptly settled. It is the custom in military trials to allow a man to have some one to appear for him, but the Commission will not hold criminal investigations or try offences. It will have purely civil functions, and will inquire as to matters of. fact. It will be much better and will save a great deal of time to leave the clause as it stands.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– We are informed on excellent authority that an historical personage once spoke in his haste. The purpose of the Committee being to enable us by discussion to make the Bill as perfect as possible, I have no hesitation in admitting that I have unfortunately followed that somewhat pernicious example. It did not appear to me on the first view. that there was any great harm in the amendment, seeing that it is the practice to-day to permit an appellant to ask the Commission or Board for permission to have some one to represent him, where there is good cause for it. But I have been reminded of a tendency already growing upto create a class of so-called agents who are really birds of prey on the soldier. Honorable senators will have seen in yesterday’s papers the case of an architectwho was heavily fined for imposing, /or attempting to impose, upon soldiers, by using words which the Court held constituted an attempted fraud. It is clear that if encouragement is given, or the door left open in the slightest degree, there will grow up a class of so-called agents who will seek to get their living out of the soldier for doing services which the soldier, with his friends on the Commission and on these Boards, is quite able to do for himself. There is always a very’ active branch of the soldiers’ organization in existence, and if there is any reason to suppose that the Commission is being only partially informed, or has given a decision contrary to the merits of the case, the organization very quickly asks for a review. Never in a single case that I know of has that review been declined. Sometimes the request has come to myself personally, and sometimes to the Commission, and I know of no case where the papers have not been sent for and the matter retraversed. I ask Senator Foll to pardon me if I have misled him, but I think it is better to be quite frank with the Committee, even if I have to admit that I spoke rather rashly.
Senator FOLL:
Queensland
.- - The Minister has somewhat exaggerated the position, so far as “birds of prey” are concerned. I am sure he will accept my assurance that I should be one of the last to encourage people of that type to take advantage of the soldier. There may be occasions when a small legal technicality occurs, and the Department, which has all the advantage of the advice of the Crown Law Office, the best legal advice in Australia, is in a far better position than the appellant, who is unable to get legal assistance. When I moved the amendment, I was not thinking so much of legal advisers as of men who, on account of what they have suffered through war service, or because of nervousness of disposition, or for some other reason, are unable to put their cases as concisely before the Commission as others could. Will the Minister meet me to the extent of providing that in such cases a member of the returned soldiers’ organization may appear on behalf of the soldier? That would do away with the possibility of any legal gentlemen desiring to act as birds of prey on the soldier, as represented.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I was not speaking of lawyers, but of a type of agent who may be developed.
SenatorFOLL. - I agree that it is most advisable to guard against that class, but I know of various cases where, if the soldier had had some one to appear for him when he was being cross-examined, his case could have been, more effectively put, and he would have found himself in a much better position.
Senator EARLE:
Tasmania
.- I am afraid that Senator Foll is assuming that the purpose of the. Department will be to defeat any appeal made by a returned soldier by bringing to bear against him the whole of the legal knowledge and oratorical force of the Crown Law Department. I cannot imagine that such would be the desire of the Department. I am sure that the aim of the Repatriation Department will always be, as it has been from the beginning, the sympathetic administration of the Act. I am rather strong in my objection to the legal fraternity. I do not say this outof any disrespect to them, because they are a very useful organization, but in practical investigations they undoubtedly cloud the issue. Often a verdict is obtained, not on the merits of the case, but from the force of arguments advanced by these gentlemen. Senator Foil’s latest suggestion does not relieve the Minister or the Committee very much from the position that we see and object to, because the returned soldiers represent all grades of society, and the fact that a man has been to the Front is by no means an absolute guarantee of an angelic disposition. Some men who have been to the Front would be just as apt to indulge in the practices outlined by the Minister as those who have not been. Senator Foll might agree to move that the secretary of the returned soldiers’ organization should be allowed to represent the appellant.
Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917
– It might be too much for the secretary. He might be employed there all day.
Senator EARLE:
– I do not anticipate that the appeals will be very numerous. I quite sympathize with the cases outlined by Senator Foll. Apart from those suffering from the results of war service, many men are absolutely unable to place their case before a Board of strangers, but I want to guard against the possibility of the vultures whom the Minister described obtaining a footing in the administration of this Act. The Minister might accept an amendment to allow the secretary of a returned soldiers’ organization to appear.
Senator Foll:
– Or somebody appointed by the executive of the association.
Senator EARLE:
– That opens the gate again.
Senator Fairbairn:
– Add the words “ who shall not be a lawyer.”
Senator EARLE:
– I know that that provision is in the Arbitration Act, but I do not like to legislate against any particular section of the community. A proviso allowing the secretary of the Returned Soldiers Association to appear on behalf of the appellant may meet the difficulty, and, at the same time, protect the soldier and .the Department against the introduction of what might be a very undesirable practice.
Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I have listened attentively to the suggestion which has been made, and it seems to me that its adoption would involve the possibility of very serious disabilities. If a soldier has the right to employ a legal advocate before the Commission, he must also have the right to select that advocate. In other words, he should not be bound to. an official of an organization who may already have expressed an opinion adverse to the position which he is called upon to support. I look upon the returned soldiers’ organization not so much as a body which is involved in the advocacy of particular cases, but as an organization whose view is valuable in respect of a general policy. If the secretary of that body is obliged to take up the case of a particular man, it is not unreasonable to assume that he may -become biased in respect of it, and that as a result the organization may be placed in a false position. I repeat that if an appellant is to have a right to employ a legal advocate, he should also have the right to select that advocate. I ask the Committee to retain the provision as it stands. I have an assurance that the Commissioner of Pensions has never refused any person the right to put his own case or to employ somebody to put it for him. I have known the Repatriation Commission to refuse to grant interviews to persons in respect of cases which were parallel to others that had already been decided. For instance, if a decision had been arrived at in the case of A, and B comes along to-morrow with a similar case, it would only be encouraging fa’lse hopes in his breast to grant him an interview.
Senator GUTHRIE:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917
– But the Department has six men dealing with’ these cases in the six State capitals, and those men come to different conclusions.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– They can only move within the regulations, and they are vested with discretionary power within certain limits.
Senator GUTHRIE:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917
– Thus a returned soldier in Melbourne may get £1 per week, and a returned soldier in Adelaide only 10s. per week.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– Similar inequalities obtain as the result of judicial decisions to-day. One man who goes before a jurY gets six months, whilst another individual is acquitted in almost identical circumstances. These results arise from the inescapable effect of the personal equation. It is a mistaken notion that either the pensions or the repatriation authorities have endeavoured to administer the principal Act unsympathetically Of course, they have’ had to put their foot down firmly in certain cases. But it must be remembered that a great ma.pority of the Repatriation officials are returned soldiers, so that 99 times out of 100 the applicant who goes before them has sympathetic friends working for him. I ask the Committee to allow the clause to stand in its present form.
Senator GRANT:
New South Wales
– In the great majority of cases it is quite impossible for an applicant to plead his case without the assistance of a trained expert. No doubt some of those who are directly concerned are very efficient. But on the other hand many of them are quite incapable of supporting the claim which they desire to put before the State Board or the Central Commission. What harm can result from allowing these people to employ a solicitor?
Senator Earle:
– Didnot the honororable senator oppose the employment of lawyers in the Arbitration Court?
Senator GRANT:
– No. As a matter of fact, the exclusion of counsel from that Court has resulted in the creation of a number of individuals who are really lawyers under another name.
Senator Earle:
– The honorable senator was opposed to the employment of solicitors in the Arbitration Court, unless he has changed his mind.
Senator GRANT:
– We have technically excluded lawyers from that tribunal, but, as a matter of fact, they are still employed there, because the men who are engaged in advocating the claims of the various trade unions are fairly well trained from a legal stand-point. They are asgood as most lawyers, and better than a great many. Under the Bill there is no obligation on the part of a soldier to employ either a solicitor or the secretary of the Returned Soldiers Association. It would be a very great mistake to throw the work that would be involved in appeals upon the secretary, whose time, I . presume, is already fully occupied.
Senator Earle:
– Let the clause stand as it is.
Senator GRANT:
– I am not content to do that. I am prepared to give the man who is directly interested the right to conduct his own case if he so desires, or to employ somebody else to conduct it for him. It is a matter of impossibility forsome men when they are on their feet to think for two minutes in succession.
Senator Fairbairn:
– I wish that there were more of them.
Senator GRANT:
– Undoubtedly there are amongst the Australian Imperial Force a considerable number who are not able to put their own cases half as well as other persons could state them. That is the reason. why people employ paid advo cates. Doubtless it was an oversight on the part of the draftsman of the Bill that some such provision as is embodied in the amendment was omitted from it.
Senator SENIOR:
South Australia
– I would point out that the appeal which we are now considering is an appeal from the decision of the State Boards. Now, those Boards will be thoroughly seized of the facts connected with’ any particular appeal, and that appeal will be to the Commission, one of whose members, at least, will be a returned soldier. The result of any such appeal will, therefore, not depend so much upon the way in which the appellant gives his evidence as upon the nature of the evidence given before the State Board. We all know that it will be the desire of the Commission to discover the true facts of the case, whereas it may be the object of a paid advocate to cloud the real issue, and to place the case in an entirely different light, which may not always be to the benefit of the soldier. I prefer the clause in its present form.
Question - That the words proposed to be added be added (Senator Foll’s amendment) - put. The Committee divided.
AYES: 5
NOES: 16
Majority … … 11
AYES
NOES
Question so resolved in the negative.
Amendment negatived..
Clause agreed to.
Clause 28 agreed to.
Clause 29-
Where any assessment or- determination -in relation to the pension payable to a member of the Forces under this Part is required to be reviewed, and the member refuses or fails to attend at the time and place fixed by the Commission for the review, or by his default renders it impossible to review the pension, the Commission may cancel the pension, and any pensions payable to the dependants of the member shall not be continued for more than twelve months from the date fixed for the review.
Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I move -
That after the word “ Commission,” lines 5-6, the words “ or a Board “ be inserted.
The object is to make the provisions of the clause apply to cases which are determined by a Board, as well as those cases determined by the Commission.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 30 agreed to.
Clause 31 -
- The rates of pension payable under this Act shall be those specified in “the schedules to this Act.
- Pensions shall be payable in fortnightly instalments, which may be paid in advance.
- The instalment of a pension covering a period of less than a fortnight shall be in proportion to the number of days in a fortnight.
Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I move -
That the following new sub-clause be added: - “(4) The amount of pension granted and payable to a member of the Forces shall not be reduced within the period of six months from the date of the commencement of the pension.”
The present law provides that the amount fixed shall be untouched for a period of six months, and this provision was inadvertently omitted in the preparation of the measure.
Senator BOLTON:
Victoria
Is there any limit to the number of times that a pension may be reduced? I believe there is some understanding with the Returned Soldiers’ League that after one review of the amount the pension should become permanent, notwithstanding any changed conditions in connexion with the earning capacity of the soldier.
Senator MILLEN (New South Wales-
Minister for Repatriation) [11.50]. - Naturally, some sympathy will be excited from the point of view expressed by the honorable senator. This matter has been under very careful consideration by those responsible for the administration of the Pensions Act for some time, because it affects pensions rather than repatriation. All the medical advice goes to indicate that it is absolutely impossible to say if certain forms of invalidity are permanent or otherwise, and it is not thought right to fix a limit of the kind suggested, because if a man be completely restored to health a few months after his application for a pension, it is only right that the payment should be reviewed. The majority of cases fortunately do show some degree of improvement as time goes on, and so the amount of pension is gradually written down. No great hardship will be involved by requiring a bond fide pensioner to present himself, say, once in six months, to enable the doctor to see how he is getting on. If his invalidity is permanent his pension will not be affected, but if his invalidity is passing away, then his pension payment should likewise be less. We cannot ignore with safety the medical advice on the subject. If after apparently having been restored to health, a soldier’s invalidity returns, he may become an applicant again.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed’ to.-
Clause 32-
Where the Commission is satisfied that in the case of any member of the Forces the rate of pension payable under this Act is not more than 30 per centum of the rate which would be payable as for the total incapacity of the member, the Commission may assess the lump sum which would, in its opinion, be equivalent to the payment of a pension under this Act, and in that case the liability to payment of the lump sum so assessed shall be substituted for the liability to payment of a pension under this Act.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– This clause gives me the impression that the power to capitalize the pensions up to 30 per cent, of total disablement lies in the hands of the Commission without any safeguard for the pensioner. If the Commission assesses a lump sum as commutation of the pension, the pensioner will be bound to accept the assessment. Consequently I suggest, for the consideration of the Minister, that some amendment of the clause is needed. It is the desire of the Committee, I take it, to protect the pensioner. I would not like to see the clause pass in its present form, seeing that it places an arbitrary power in the hands of the Commission to commute the pension at an amount which might not be acceptable to a pensioner. The addition of on© or two words would, I think, make it perfectly clear that any commutation made by the Commission should be subject to acceptance by the pensioner.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I should like to tell the Committee what the practice is under this clause. No cases will be considered unless a specific’ application comes from the pensioner. I do not know on what percentage basis the Commission will work, but I submit that if the Committee has any doubt as to how the commutation will be made, I would prefer it to determine the point. What might be a reasonable basis for commutation to-day, might not be a reasonable basis five years hence. If a pension of £12 were capitalized to-day it might be said that £200 would earn the amount, whereas la, few years hence a much larger sum might be necessary.
Senator CRAWFORD:
QUEENSLAND
– And much would depend upon the age of the pensioner.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– That is so. I suggest, therefore, that discretion should be left to the Commission. I understand very few applications will be made under this clause, but if it is so ‘amended as to permit a pensioner to make application, and then decline the commutation, I venture to say that there will be thousands of applications from pensioners, who desire to know the capitalized! value of their pensions, but have no intention of taking it; in much the same way as many policy-holders apply to insurance companies to ascertain the surrender value of their policies. The amendment suggested by Senator Pratten would throw a tremendous amount of work upon the Commission, so I suggest that the clause be left as it is.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I am still not quite satisfied, and wish to show what is actually taking place in connexion with accident insurance policies. If a man is covered in an accident insurance company, and is unfortunate enough to sustain injuries that interfere with his full earning capacity, he has certain rights, under our State laws, and receives a stated amount per week according to the extent of the injury. Very often men so injured are unfit to follow their usual vocation and desire to branch out into some other line of business, and so they make application to the insurance company for a commutation of pension payment. If an applicant does not think the sum sufficient he ‘ has a right to decline it, and is not prejudiced in any way by his inquiry and application. Under this clause, if a pensioner is partially disabled or prevented from following his ordinary occupation, and if he inquires the capital value of his pension, thinking that he would prefer a lump sum in lieu of a continuing payment, the Commission will have power to assess the lump sum, and the soldier applicant will be obliged to accept it, though in his opinion it may not be sufficient.
Senator SENIOR:
South Australia
– I think Senator Pratten is under some misapprehension. The pensioner would not be obliged to accept the lump sum.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I read it that way. The word “ shall “ appears in the last sentence.
Senator SENIOR:
– I do not favour a compulsory clause. If a person has been granted a pension, we may assume that he is justly entitled to it. If the Commission has the power to say that a lump sum may be given, there may be the desire to get the case off its hands. The pensioner should be able to accept or reject the sum; but perhaps the Minister will be able to say how far this provision extends. A case may come before the Commission in which a man receives less than one-third of the totally incapacitated rate, and such a case might be assessed by the Commission and a lump sum offered to abrogate all further claims,
Senator Rowell:
– It does not compel the pensioner to accept it.
Senator SENIOR:
– No. But there ma)’ be a desire on the part of the Commission to wipe the pensioner off the list. We need to be careful to protect the interests of the pensioner, and I think Senator Pratten is right in raising the question, as it will enable the Committee to obtain a definite expression of opinion from the Minister.
Senator FOLL:
Queensland
– From the wording of the clause it would appear that the only persons concerned are those who are not receiving life pensions.
Senator Senior:
– The Bill does not so provide.
Senator FOLL:
– The only persons eligible to derive benefits are those receiving 30 per cent, of the total rate. It does not apply to those who are receiving pensions for only a few months. Does the provision refer to life pensions?
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– Not necessarily.
Senator FOLL:
– The clause reads - “ which would be payable as for the total incapacity of the member”; that indicates a life pension.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I think the honorable senator is right.
Senator FOLL:
– Does that indicate that only life pensions can be capitalized ?
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– No.
Senator FOLL:
– According to the schedule there is no rate for a life pension; it refers only to those receiving the maximum rate as one-half or threefourths.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– Some less than that.
Senator FOLL:
– I am referring to the schedule on page 20.
Senator Senior:
– There are two others before that.
Senator FOLL:
– The clause refers to “ the member “ of the A.I.F. The lowest rate in the schedule on page 20 is onehalf, which means that a soldier receiving a life pension will not be able to get the benefit of a lump-sum payment. I desire to ask the Minister to consider the question of amending the provision so that it will apply to a man who has only one eye. I know of a case in New South Wales where a man applied to have his pension capitalized. He was a steady person and one likely to be successful working on his own account. He had been a member of the Flying Corps, and as he had lost one eye, he was receiving only one-half of the full pension. Apart from the disability mentioned, be is in possession of all his faculties, and although he is not able to follow his trade as an employee,_ be is capable of entering business on his own account. I think it is reasonable to ask the Minister to extend the facilities to a man who has lost one eye.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– Although the question raised is worthy of consideration, I do not think it is of major importance. 1 therefore suggest two amendments, which I think will meet the views expressed by all but the last speaker. It has been pointed’ out that if the clause is literally interpreted it would leave the Commission free to initiate action, but I, too, think it right that the action, if initiated at all, should be at the request of the pensioner. To meet the position, I shall later move to insert at the beginning of the clause, “Upon the application of a pensioner and”. That will mean that no action will be taken unless the pensioner so desires. I shall also move to add after “shall” (line 10) the words, “with the consent of the pensioner.” That will meet Senator Pratten’s objection.
In regard to the point raised by Senator Foll, I may say that it was never intended to get away from the present pension system. It would be rather undesirable, on a broad scale, to pay capital sums to a large number of men. Many of them would undoubtedly make good use of the money, but there would be others who would not. It would be idle to ignore the fact that some would be tempted to indulge in dissipation, and to spend the money in undesirable ways, or dispose of it in a bond fide effort to start in an undertaking for which . they were illequipped. In such cases further applications would be made when the pension had been exhausted. The idea of spreading the payment over a period of years is to provide a form of insurance and to enable the pensioner to receive assistance from time to time. The intention was not to make the payment of the pension in a lump sum general, but to deal only with special cases. For instance, at the outbreak of war some new arrivals from the Old Country, who had not been here sufficiently long to take root and make friends, joined up with the Australian Imperial Force. After having seen service abroad, they returned to Australia injured, and rather than remain here they desired to take the pension in a lump sum, and return to England to be with their friends. It was to meet cases of that kind that the Commission was em: powered to take action. This does not apply to life pensions. The Commission has said that in cases involving a lumpsum payment of perhaps £10 to £20, the money has been paid, and the recipients have gone.
Senator GUTHRIE:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917
– The same thing applied to men who were in England, and joined the Imperial Force at the outbreak of war.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– Yes. As there can be no general desire to bring in a broad scheme of commutation, I move -
That the following words be inserted at the beginning of the clause: - ‘‘Upon the application of a pensioner and “.
Amendment agreed to.
SenatorFOLL (Queensland) [12.10].- It is not my intention to press for a further amendment, as I can see now that I was misreading the clause so far as incapacity is concerned. No person entitled to a life pension will have the opportunity of having the capitalized amount paid in a lump sum.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I totally disagree with the point of view of Senator Foil. I am in entire sympathy in giving discretion to the Commission to commutate a small pension up to 30 per cent, of the rate allowed to totally incapacitated men, hut I strongly oppose the power being given to the Commission, the Government, or any one else to capitalize pensions of a higher amount. It all seems to point to the illustration I previously submitted, that there are many men who, to a minor extent, are , prevented from following their old occupations to whom this clause would be of special benefit, as it will enable them to engage in some other occupation, and eventually become successful and useful citizens. We are here to do our best for the soldiers, and’ the clause, as amended by the Minister, will assist. But we are also here to protect the soldiers, even against themselves. I cannot support the commutation of a pension which is the major part of a man’s sustenance, as the capitalization of a minor portion is going quite far enough. Those receiving over 30 per cent, of the total rate should be protected from themselves. If no ‘discretion is given to the Commission, a higher rate than 30 per cent, of the pension will have to stand, as at present. I am not in favour of commutation of life pensions.
Amendment (by Senator Millen) agreed to -
That after “shall,” line 10, the following word’s he added: - “with theconsent of the pensioner.”
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 33 consequentially amended and’ agreed to.
Clause 34 agreed to.
Clause 35 -
The maximum amount which may. after the commencement of this Act, he granted by way of pension to a person who is the widowed mother of one or more members of the Forces, shall not exceed the rate specified in column two of the First Schedule opposite the rate of pay of the member.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I move -
That the clause he left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the following : - “35. In the case of the widowed mother of two or more members of the Forces who died from, or from the results of, occurrences happening during the period they weremembers of the Forces, the maximum amount of pension which may be granted to the widowed mother, in respect of the death of those members of the Forces, shall not, unless the widowed mother was dependent upon them, exceed the rate specified in column two of the First Schedule opposite the rate of pay of any one of those members.”
This refers only to widowed mothers who were not dependent upon their deceased sons. The purpose is to prevent the payment of two or three pensions in respect of the sons of a widowed mother who was not dependent upon those sons. Under the existing Act, a widowed mother is entitled to claim a pension in respect of each of her sons who has died as a result of war service, whether she was dependent upon him or not. Where the widowed mother was not dependent upon her deceased sons, it is thought right that she should be limited to the receipt of one pension.
Senator GUTHRIE:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917
– Are foster-mothers provided for?
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– Foster-mothers are included, with the stipulation that they shall have discharged the duties of mothers to the soldiers in respect of whom the claim for a pension arises.
Senator Grant:
– The proposed amendment would not interfere with the existing right of widowed mothers receiving pensions ?
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– No . All existing rights are preserved under clause 3 of this Bill.
Senator SENIOR:
South Australia
– If all existing rights are preserved, then the amendment will have no effect.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– It will have effect where, for instance, a second son of a widowed mother may die later on as the result of his war services, if it is shown that the mother was not dependent upon him. No pension granted in the past will be cancelled as the result of the proposed clause.
Senator SENIOR:
– In that case, even if the amendment be agreed to, its effect will in no sense be retrospective, and a widowed mother, who, under the existing law, may be drawing pensions in respect of more than one son who has died as a result of his war services, will continue to receive those pensions.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– That is so.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 36 agreed to.
Clause 37-
The Commission may reject a claim for a pension by a dependant of a member of the Forces or may terminate any pension granted to such a dependant, if the Commission is satisfied that the grant or continuance of the pension is undesirable.
Senator FOLL:
Queensland
.- Perhaps the Minister will say whether a person in receipt of a pension will have the right to appeal against a decision given under this clause.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– There is a right of appeal in all cases from a Board to the Commission.
Senator SENIOR:
South Australia
– What the Commission may consider to be desirable may be felt by the person in receipt of a pension to be unjust. There is no right of appeal against the Commission provided for.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– That is so.
Senator SENIOR:
– The decision of the Commission under this clause will be final.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– All these cases will be first dealt with by the Boards, and will go from them to the Commission. The final decision will rest with the Commission.
Senator SENIOR:
– Cases are reviewed by State Boards, and the final decision rests with the Commission, but persons in receipt of pensions will have no intimation of the intention to cancel them, and, therefore, will have no opportunity to appeal from the decision of a State Board.
Senator Foll:
– There is no reference in the clause to the first decision by a State Board.
Senator SENIOR:
– That is so.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– The alternative is to provide that a State Board shall adjudicate, with the right of appeal to the Commission.
Senator SENIOR:
– There should be an appeal from the first decision to discontinue a pension.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– The reason why the clause is submitted in its present form is that it is felt that it is rather a serious thing to withdraw a pension once it is granted. It was thought preferable not to leave such a decision to a State Board, but to take it to the highest authority established under the Bill. Another reason for the adoption of that course is that, the Commission acting for the whole Commonwealth, there would be greater uniformity in the principle upon which such decisions would be arrived at. If honorable senators prefer that a State Board should give its decision first, and that that decision should be subject to review by the Commission, I have no objection, and I move -
That the words “ The Commission,” line I, be left out, with a view to insert in. lieu thereof the words “ A Board.”
Amendment agreed to..
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– It occurred to me that it would be necessary, following upon the amendment just agreed to, to insert at the end of the clause the words, ‘ such decision shall be subject to appeal to the Commission “ ; but I find that that is unnecessary, because by clause 27 it is provided that an appeal shall lie to the Commission from any assessment or determination of a Board.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 38 agreed to.
Clause 39-
The widow and children of a person who has been a member of the Forces and who dies from causes other than the results of his war service after the expiration of three years from the date of his discharge shall, subject to this Act, he entitled to continue to receive any . pension payable to them prior to the death of the member.
Amendment (by Senator Millen) agreed to -
That the words “ The widow and children of a person who has been a member of the Forces and who dies from causes other than the results of his war service after the expiration of three years from the date of his- discharge” be left out, with a view to insert in: lieu thereof the following words: - “The dependants of a person who has been a member of the Forces, and who dies after the date of his discharge from, causes other than the result! of an occurrence happening during the period’ he was a member of the Forces.”
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 40 consequentially amended and agreed to.
Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I move -
That the following new clause be inserted: - “ 40a. The children of a deceased member of the Forces who are in receipt of a pension by reason of the death of that member shall not, upon becoming the step-children of a person who is or was . a member of the Forces, be entitled to a further pension by reason of the death or incapacity of that person.”
The object is to provide that children shall not be entitled to double pensions’. Experience has already shown that, under the wording of the present Act, it is possible for a widow with children who are receiving pensions because they are her children, to marry a soldier, and for those children then to become entitled to receive not only the first pension as orphans, but also a pension as children of their new step-father. This was evidently never the intention of Parliament, and the new clause will prevent its occurrence.
Proposed new clause agreed to.
Clauses 41 to 44 agreed to.
Clause 45 -
-
For the purposes of this Part, any person who
- is serving or has served during the present war in the Naval or Military Forces of any part of the King’s Dominions, other than the Commonwealth, on active service outside that Dominion, on proof to the satisfaction of the Commission that he had, before his enlistment or appointment for service, resided in the Commonwealth; …. shall be deemed to be an Australian soldier within the meaning of this Part.
Senator GRANT:
New South Wales
– I move -
That in paragraph (c) of sub-clause (2), after the word “Dominion” the following words be inserted : - “or who had been engaged abroad in the manufacture of munitions.”
There is a difference between this amendment and the one I moved regarding pensions. The wives of these men during the time they were abroad were allowed certain financial assistance from the Defence Department. They were not regarded as ordinary citizens whose husbands were abroad doing ordinary work, but as in some direct way assisting in carrying on the war.
The CHAIRMAN (Senator Shannon:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA
– The Committee has already dealt with an amendment to the same effect earlier in the Bill.
Senator GRANT:
– This part of the Bill deals only with proposed “ assistance and benefits,” and not with pensions.
The CHAIRMAN:
– The Committee dealt with the question of munitionworkers at an earlier stage of the Bill.
Senator GRANT:
– The earlier proposal was to bring munition-workers under the provision regarding pensions. That proposal was defeated. It is intended by a subsequent clause to clothe the Commission with power to make recommendations to the Governor-General for regulations to provide for the granting of assistance and benefits to Australian soldiers upon their discharge from the service, or the children of deceased or incapacitated Australian soldiers, while those children are by reason of physical or mental disability incapable of contributing to their own support, or are under the age of eighteen years. In a number of other cases, as set out in clause 46; the GovernorGeneral in Council is to be armed with authority to make regulations providing for the disbursement of assistance and benefits. With all due respect to your opinion, sir, I think I am entitled to ascertain whether the Committee is prepared to extend that assistance and those benefits to the persons named in my amendment.
The CHAIRMAN:
– I shall accept the amendment if it applies to the payment of assistance and benefits, and not of pensions.
Senator GRANT:
– It is provided by clause46-
The CHAIRMAN:
– Order ! The honorable senator is not at liberty to discuss a clause which the Committee has not reached.
Senator GRANT:
– The two clauses are so closely interwoven that it would be an advantage to consider them together. The Minister has suddenly moved a considerable number of amendments which were difficult to follow. Some of them have been circulated and others have not, or I have not seen them. Clause 46 deals with a number of very important cases, which we should be allowed to consider when dealing with clause 45. In view of the services rendered by the munition workers, and the hardships their wives and families suffered during their .prolonged absence in Great Britain, we might very well extend the privileges granted under clause 45 to them, notwithstanding the decision arrived at by the Committee, and the decision apparently already arrived at by the Government. We have to-day considerably enlarged the scope of the Bill, and made it possible to pay out a great deal more money, and, therefore, my amendment ought to be favorably received. At one time nurses were not regarded as active participants in war-like operations. Today no branch of the service is more honored than the nursing staff. The Medical Corps and a number of other bodies attached to an active army were not regarded as at all in the same category as the men in the actual firing line, but to-day that difference in their treatment has been swept away. The small extension I ask for will not lead to great additional expenditure, but it will mete out to these people a degree of justice which they have hitherto been denied. The Minister for Defence (Senator Pearce) stated the other day that the total number of persons involved would not exceed 5,000. The great majority of them returned to Australia in good health, and will make no claim whatever against the Repatriation Department, but no doubt there are some cases where it would be giving only the barest justice to incorporate this amendment in the clause. I am anxious to see the measure put through; and only regret that the Committee did not sit all night last night to complete it. I am sure that if my amendment had occurred to the Government when the Bill was being drafted they would have included it, and they should not hesitate, now that the matter has been fully explained to them, to extend the benefits of the Bill to this small but very useful body of men.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– The Committee will remember that only a few hours ago we had in essence, though not technically, the same amendment submitted by the honorable senator. In view of the discussion which then took place, I do not propose to detain the Committee by any further observations at this juncture.
Senator SENIOR:
South Australia
– Under clauses 47 and 50 sums of money are permitted to be raised by a specific method. Such moneys are to be distributed amongst the cases mentioned in the clause, which is now under review. Now it may happen that one of the Local Committees may desire to assist a returned munition worker, who has contracted a disease, or sustained an injury while he was absent abroad, by building a house for him. It may be anxious to help him by discharging similar functions to those discharged by it in the case of returned soldiers. Then I think that a considerable amount of usefulness might result from local charities working in conjunction with Local Committees for the benefit of returned men.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– Local contributions may be spent in any way that the persons controlling them may desire.
Senator SENIOR:
– If munition workers are included in this clause they will be controlled by the same authorities as are returned soldiers.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– Local persons can raise any money that they choose, and for any purpose that they may determine.
Senator SENIOR:
– I desire a provision to be inserted in the Bill which will enable local charities wishing to assist munition workers, to do so. Such, an amendment would constitute an improvement on the measure, and would be a recognition of the services rendered by munition workers and other war operatives.
Senator MILLEN (New South WalesMinister for Repatriation [12.50]. - I would point out to the Committee that, whilst such an amendment as has been proposed might have had much to recommend it when the Repatriation Commission was controlling the funds contributed by the public, that control having ceased, it is no longer necessary. Local persons raising money to-day are at liberty to spend it just how they choose. Previously they could not do that. But, as soon as the war ceased, it was recognised that it was desirable that we should refrain from interfering with the ordinary affairs of the population, and leave local authorities to do just what they liked. No harm can result from the freedom which has been given to them.
Senator SENIOR:
South Australia
– The argument advanced by the Minister is an exceedingly good one when applied to matters outside those which have arisen out of the war. But it is a weak argument when applied to our war workers. Last night, the Minister mentioned the case of our wheat-growers, and the part which they took in helping to win the war. May I point out that they were not liable to personal injury as were our war workers.
SenatorMillen. - Then I will cite the case of the seamen on our mercantile marine.
Senator SENIOR:
– I grant that” the marine workers have a claim. But one argument does not vitiate the other. The ; claim that the farmers of this country assisted in winning the war does not derogate from that of the munition workers who incurred a great deal more risk of personal injury. Many of these men were employed within the danger zone of air raids, and to debar them from the benefits conferred by this clause seems un- just. I wish to recognise the services which they rendered to the community.
Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917
– This is altogether a different proposition from that which was submitted by Senator Grant last evening. The proposal which he then presented was that the dependants of munition workers should be entitled to pensions. But under this amendment, we shall confer . a benefit upon the entire family of a munition worker.
Senator Foll:
– Not unless the munition worker has suffered as the result of the work in which he was engaged.
Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917
– Just so. I would have preferred that Senator Grant should have moved for a recommittal of a prior clause, because I fear that, under the amendment, we shall be opening the door to expenditure very much wider than we should have done under his proposal of last -evening. I fail to understand exactly the liability which the adoption of his amendment would impose upon the Commonwealth, and for that reason I cannot support it with the same heartiness that I did his proposal of yesterday.
Question - That the words proposed to be inserted be inserted (Senator Grant’s amendment) - put. The Committee divided.
AYES: 8
NOES: 10
Majority . . . . 2
AYES
NOES
Question so resolved in the negative.
Amendment negatived.
Clause agreed to.
Sitting suspended from 12.59 to 2.30 p.m.
Clauses 46 and 47 agreed to.
Clause 48 (Arrangements with States for employment of State officers).
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
.- Will the Minister kindly explain what is the intention of the Government with regard to State officers?
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– In almost every Commonwealth law which provides tor utilization of the services of State officers, provision of this nature is inserted. In the Pensions Department, for instance, work is being done by certain State officers, and it is necessary, in the transition period, that we should take advantage of their experience and knowledge. As the honorable senator will know, it would be impossible to transfer, between Saturday night and Monday morning, all the work of the Department to a new staff. It may, and probably will, be necessary to utilize the services of the existing pensions staff for a certain period.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– And some permanently ?
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– That is not likely, as the honorable senator knows from what is happening in other Departments.
Clause agreed to.
Clauses 49 and . 50 agreed to.
Clause 51 -
- Contributions of money or in kind may be made to the Minister for any of the purposes specified in section 40 of this Act.
- Such contributions shall be dealt with as prescribed:
Provided that where the contributor desires that the contribution shall be used for a particular purpose the contribution shall, if the Minister thinks fit, be so used.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I move -
That the word “Minister,” twice occurring, be left out, and the word “ Commission “ inserted in lieu thereof.
This will vest in the Commission any contribution made for the purpose of helping our returned soldiers. It is desirable that any such grant should vest in the Commission instead of the Minister, who, after all, is more or less, a bird of passage.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I am not quite sure that the amendment is altogether desirable. The clause has special reference to donations of money or property which generously disposed citizens may see fit to give for the purpose of benefiting our soldiers. I understand that already in some States substantial contributions have been made to the Department, and I should like to know how the Minister proposes to deal with them. Will they be handed over to the Commission?
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– All funds, including donations already made, will vest in the Commission. This is provided for in subclause 3 of clause 11.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I see now the reason for the amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 52 (Audit of accounts of Local Committees) .
Senator ROWELL:
South Australia
.– Regarding the Local Committees, will the Minister say whether, from his point of view, they are working satisfactorily or otherwise?
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– The honorable senator has placed before me rather a large order, in view of the fact that there are from 700 to 800 committees in existence. Like individuals, they vary very much; but, as I mentioned in my second-reading speech, making allowance for the fact that the gentlemen who comprise these honorary bodies are men of force and character, it is only to be expected that occasionally they do not see eye to eye with the Administration. I feel, however, that it is a matter for congratulation that the causes of friction have been so few. Here and there a Local Committee has made up its mind that the
Department is in the hands of utterly incompetent and wilfully wicked persons, but I can offer no better assurance of their good work than the information that trouble has been limited to very few cases.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– The clause provides that the books and accounts kept by a Local Committee shall be subject to audit as prescribed. I take it that the prescription for the audits will be contained in the regulation, and I hope that some elasticity will be allowed in connexion with the accounts of small committees. For instance, a Local Committee, 200 or 300 miles in the interior, should not be subjected to departmental red-tape methods. It should be sufficient, I think, if a local man were given instructions to make the audit and furnish a certificate. I am raising the point in order to prevent any unnecessary trouble to hundreds of estimable citizens who have been giving their services gratuitously for the purpose . of benefiting our returned soldiers.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– The view expressed by Senator Pratten is one which the regulations have been framed to conform to. It was recognised that with so many committees in existence it would be foolish to stipulate in an Act of Parliament exactly how the audit should be conducted. It is therefore to be left to the Commission to determine the matter, and I have no doubt that that elasticity for which Senator Pratten is pleading will be provided for. Two points are covered by the clause- one, those funds for which the Department is responsible, and the other, funds which a Local Committee has raised itself. We propose to release all control of the latter. In future these committees can raise funds and administer them as they like. In regard to the books of account, they are acting as agents of the Department in administering public funds, and it is quite clear that there must be a sufficient and satisfactory audit. I do not say an irksome one, but there should be proper protection of public money, and also an audit in conformity with the Audit Act. Everything is done in the way of a proper presentation and examination of accounts.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I am glad the Minister is looking at this matter in a broad-minded way. I understand that the action of the Commission in connexion with governmental audits is distinct from private expenditure, and will be in the direction of sending a visiting auditor to the various centre’s rather than centralizing the whole audit at the convenience of the auditor. The convenience of the auditor should be secondary to that of the Local Committee.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– As regards the expenditure of public money, the accounts will be sent to thecentral office and the audit carried out there. No expenditure will be incurred by the Local Committees.
Senator SENIOR:
South Australia
– The elasticity in this clause is desirable. As mentioned by Senator Pratten, the auditing of the accounts of the State Boards might very well be conducted at the same time as the Treasurer’s audit. The Commonwealth Auditor could examine the State Board’s accounts, and thus avoid extra expense and transmission . of books.
Clause agreed to.
Clauses 53 and 54 agreed to.
Clause 55 -
The Governor-General may enter into arrangements with the Government of any other part of the King’s Dominions whereby -
the same assistance, benefits, and pensions may be granted in the Commonwealth to members of the Naval or Military Forces of that part of the King’s Dominions who have been employed on active service during the present war, as are granted in that part of the King’s Dominions to members of the Naval or Military Forces of the Commonwealth who have been employed on such service,
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– This clause is to enable the Government or the authorities controlling the Department to enter into a reciprocal arrangement with other Dominions for the care of soldiers of either contracting parties who may happen to be in territory under their control. There is need for such a provision, and some progress has already been made in negotiations with other authorities. It is the intention of the
Government to pursue these negotiations to a successful issue. I move -
That the words “ benefits and pensions “ be left out, and the words “ and benefits (not being pensions) “ inserted in lieu thereof.
The clause will then read -
The Governor-General may enter into arrangements with the Government of any other part of the King’s Dominions whereby -
the same assistance and benefits (not being pensions) may be granted.
There are many reasons why this provision . should not apply to pensions, as these are fixed and vary considerably in the different Dominions. We have already made arrangements whereby pensions may be paid, for instance, in London by the Agents-General.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– Before the amendment is put, and in view of the possibility of being ruled out of order if I were to raise the point at a later stage, I may state that the words “King’s Dominions” are hardly accurate. I believe the proper designation of the Empire is, “Great Britain and Ireland and the Dominions overseas.” That clause is intended to apply not only to the King’s Dominions overseas, but also to the temporary residents of the United Kingdom. It is intended to apply to all parts of the Empire. The drafting appears to be rather crude.
Senator SENIOR:
South Australia
– I ask the Minister to carefully consider the effect of his proposed amendment if it reads “ not being pensions.” How will pensioners resident in South Africa, Canada, New Zealand, or any other Dominion be situated in the matter of receiving pensions ?
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– That is covered by another clause, where power is given to make the necessary arrangements. We can arrange with other Governments to pay these pensions.
Senator SENIOR:
– I thought there might be a possibility of difficulty arising in this regard.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– It has been found necessary to divide the provision into separate clauses, as what might be done under one clause could not be done under the other.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 56 -
The Governor-General may make regulations not inconsistent with this Act, prescribing all matters which by this Act are required or permitted to be prescribed. . . .
Senator SENIOR:
South Australia
– Would it not be well to omit any reference to “ prescription” in other portions of the Bill, and include it only in this general clause. We take full power to make regulations and- to prescribe under this Act, and one general provision should be sufficient.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– That was the way in which the original Bill was brought before Parliament, and there was a strong expression of opinion by members of both branches of the Legislature that certain details should be given as an indication to the Commission. As to the way Parliament ought to proceed, I agree that had it been given an open cheque it would have covered all, but to meet the views expressed by some, it was necessary to have certain linger posts to direct the Commission as to the particular activities in which it was to engage.
Clause agreed to.
First Schedule (General Pension Rates).
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– A typographical error occurs in the fifth column of the schedule. An amount which should read “ £2” is shown as “£1 16s.” I therefore move-
That “ £1 16s.” where last occurring be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof “£2.”
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I have no objection to the Minister’s amendment, but . I would like to voice the dissatisfaction that has been expressed outside at the low rate of some pensions. I trust the Minister will inform the Committee as to what has been done recently in the direction of raising the rates, and will also make a comparison with those originally paid.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– It is impossible to run through all the various grades, but I can supply the honorable senator with basic figures. For instance, the present pension of 30s. in the case of total incapacity is raised by this Bill to 42s. The pensions in the case of every lesser degree of incapacity are correspondingly increased, since these are based on a percentage of the pension for total incapacity. For instance, a man adjudged to be incapacitated to the extent of 50 per cent, is, under the existing law, receiving a ‘pension of 15s., and under this Bill 50 per cent, of the basic rate will bring his pension up to £11s. In every other case of lesser incapacity the pension will be raised under this Bill proportionately in accordance with the difference between the basic figures of 30s. and 42s. fixed for total incapacity under the existing law and under this Bill respectively. The wife’s pension, in the case of total incapacity, is at present 15s., and that by this Bill is raised to 18s., so that, in the case of total incapacity, husband and wife will, under this Bill, receive £3 per week as against £2 5s. paid under the existing law. The widow to-day receives 42s., and will receive the same amount under this Bill, plus the allowance for children of 10s. for the first, 7s. for the next, and 5s. for each succeeding child. If there are no children, the pension is lifted from £1 to 23s. 6d.; but if in the opinion of the Commission, because of ill-health or for other reasons a widow is unable to look after herself, the allowance may be raised to the level of that paid in the case of a widow with children.
Senator Grant:
– Where is the amount of 23s. 6d. shown in the schedule?
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– The honorable senator will find in column three the fortnightly rate of payment. The figures I have given cover by far the larger number of beneficiaries. There is one very important increase provided for, and that is in the case of pensions paid to blinded and otherwise totally and permanently incapacitated men. The pension to-day is 30s., and under . this Bill it will be raised to 80s. Men so afflicted will not only receive that amount of pension, but their wives and children will be entitled to the pensions allotted to wives and children generally. Unless Senator Pratten can indicate particular cases upon which he desires information, I do not know that I can profitably add to the statement I have just made.
Senator GRANT:
New South Wales
– I wish to direct attention to a feature of the schedule which specially appeals to me. I notice by column five that the pension payable to the wife of a member of the Forces who is totally incapacitated is the same amount per fortnight whether the husband drew pay at the rate of 6s. per day or 17s. 6d. per day. That, so far as I know, is something new in our legislation, and it meets with my entire approval. The Government have in this matter gone a long way in the right direction, and later on they might see their way to carry the same principle throughout, and give the same amount per fortnight to the wife of a member of the Forces who is totally incapacitated without respect to the military pay which he drew while in the service.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I thank the Minister for the explanation he has given. It indicates that, roughly, there is to be an increase of 40 per cent, on the basis first fixed for those totally incapacitated, and 20 per cent, increase in the case of dependants. I am perfectly satisfied that the reply to those who say that the pensions at present are too small is ‘that this Bill raises them by 40 per cent.
Amendment agreed to.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– Paragraph 6 of the footnote at the close of the first schedule reads -
In the eases of -
Widows with dependent children; and
Widows without children whose circumstances are such as, in the opinion of the Commission, justify an increase in the rates specified in this schedule - the Commission may, for such period as it thinks fit, increase the rate of pension to an amount not exceeding £4 4s. perfortnight.
I move -
That the words “ whose rate of pension, as specified in column 3 of this schedule, is less than £4 4s. per fortnight” be inserted before the words “(the Commission,” second occurring.
That is to say that beyond £4 4s. it is not proposed to raise pensions in proportion to the increase given to the lower rates.
Amendment agreed to.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I move -
That the following words be added : - “ Where the rate of pay of a member of the Forces exceeds a rate shown in column one of this schedule and is less than the next higher rate in that column, the rates of pensions . payable for the purposes of columns two and three shall be computed by adding to the rate of pension shown in those columns opposite to the next lower rate of pay the sum which bears to the difference between that rate of pension and the next higher rate of pension shown in those columns the proportion, which the difference between the rate of pay received by the member and the next lower rate of pay shown in column one bears to the difference between the next lower and the next, higher rates of pay in that column.”
The meaning of all this verbiage is simply that an average is taken where the amount comes between the higher and the lower column ; we take the mean between the two. It takes all these wonderful words, which are probably very necessary from a legal point of view, to express that simple proposal.
Senator GRANT (New South Wales) [3.81. - I have no doubt that the statement made by Senator Millen is quite correct, but I have a lively recollection that, when we were passing an Income Tax Assessment Bill, after . being treated to a long dissertation by Senator Pearce, we accepted without question a formula which the mathematical experts on the following day discovered to be a little out of joint.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– The curve was not. quite right.
Senator GRANT:
– It became necessary then to ‘ withdraw the formula which we had accepted, and with about the same degree of information and knowledge we proceeded to swallow the second formula submitted by the mathematical geniuses. It is about time that the gentlemen responsible for drafting these formulaeadopted plain language, such as that just used by Senator Millen. They should realize that it is neither necessary nor wise to encumber a Bill with obscure phrases. But for the explanation given by Senator Millen, I venture to say that no member of the Committee could have said what the amendment means.
Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I admit that the words of the amendment seem horrifying, but to allay the alarm excited in the breast of Senator Grant, I may inform him that those very words have been the law of the land for the last three years. It was only by an oversight that they were not included in the first print of this Bill. They have been in . operation, under the existing law, and no one has suffered in consequence.
Amendment agreed to.
Senator SENIOR:
South Australia
– I wish to call attention to what I regard as an omission in the first schedule. A column of figures is given showing rates of pay of members of the Forces from 6s.. per day to 50s., but there is nothing in the schedule to indicate the grades of the members of the Forces who received those varying rates of pay.
Senator Rowell:
– The figures are the rates of pay received by different ranks in the Forces.
Senator SENIOR:
– I am not as well informed upon military matters as is Senator Colonel Rowell. I have noticed that in the schedule to the English Act information is given showing that the varying rates of pay were received by warrant officers, or noncommissioned officers of a particular grade. There might well have been another column added to the first schedule of this Bill giving information showing the grades of members of the Forces receiving the various rates of pay set down. I was puzzled by the schedule as it stands, and I confess that I do not know who gets 6s., and who gets £2 2s. I do not know whether a private, a major, or a lieutenantcolonel gets any particular rate of pay set down.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– The benefits set out in the schedule are not given because a man was a major or a private, but are in proportion to the rate of pay he received.
Senator SENIOR:
– I ask the Minister whether it would not clarify the schedule if the rank of each officer as well as the rate of pay received were shown.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I cannot see the force of the honorable senator’s argument. I conclude that what he thinks ought to be done is to have a column showing that a private gets a certain pension, a lieutenant such another pension, and so on. Instead of expressing that by the ranks of various individuals, it is expressed in the terms of the pay they receive. I venture to say there is no soldier who did not know what rate of pay he was getting.
Senator Foll:
– His only trouble was that there were not enough pay days.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I have no doubt that there is no soldier who does not know what military pay he received, and what he will be entitled to.
Senator SENIOR:
South Australia
– I thank the Minister for his explanation. I do not think I may be charged with being abnormally dull, but I confess that I did not know the application of the first column. I do not ob ject to the provisions of the schedule, but they need to be clarified on the lines of the English Act.
Senator ROWELL:
South Australia
– Under this Bill the men are no longer privates or officers, but are all civilians. All that requires to be stated, therefore, is the rate of pay received by them when members of the Forces. It would be foolish to put the different ranks into the Bill. It is easy to find out from the rates of pay what the ranks were.
Senator SENIOR:
South Australia
– The ‘honorable senator’s criticism does not condemn me, because I was simply quoting the British Act. It merely shows what absolute wisdom we have in Australia. The honorable senator in a most sweeping way condemns the British Act by saying that the men are no longer privates or non-commissioned or commissioned officers. I think we ought to cable that information to England. All I desired was to make the schedule clear. I had no objection to the Bill, but we should take the opportunity to show clearly what the first column means. We have to get the information, not from the schedule, but from the Minister’s explanation. We cannot pierce the cloud, and only those who have been behind it know what it means. We are passing a schedule which is intelligible only to military .on- naval officers, or others who are accustomed to that kind of thing.
Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
Second Schedule (Rate for Special Pensions. - £8 per fortnight).
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– Power is given to the Commission by this schedule to grant special pensions not exceeding £8 per fortnight, or £4 per week. All honorable senators must be sympathetic with the special treatment of blinded soldiers, who will be paid £4 per week under this schedule, but I am somewhat puzzled by the inclusion of other soldiers,, the words reading, “And to members who are totally and permanently incapacitated (i.e., incapacitated for life to such an extent as to be precluded from earning other than a negligible percentage of a living wage).” So far as I can see, these men are already dealt with in column four of the first schedule, which sets out the ‘ ‘pension payable to a member upon total incapacity.” I bring this point under the notice of the Minister because, in the absence of an explanation, there is a clear inconsistency and clash between the two schedules. Some welldefined line should be laid down to show how and why the Commission should grant special pensions.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
.- The fourth column of schedule 1 refers to “totally incapacitated” men, and schedule 2 to “ totally and permanently incapacitated” men. A man stunned for a few minutes may be totally incapacitated for the time being, but he is not totally and permanently incapacitated. He may achieve the same result in a variety of ways that will occur to honor - able senators. The expression “ totally and permanently incapacitated “ is intended to apply to those men who are literally what the words say. These include cases of spine injury; men who are paralyzed, and who, unfortunately, can never hope to recover. This special rate is designed for those special cases. We are making provision for the majority of them in the hostels, such as the Graythwaite Hostel, near Sydney, and the Anzac Hostel, at Brighton, Victoria. Most cf them -will, by degrees, if not immediately, become inmates of those institutions. They require such constant and varied care and attention that it is not possible to supply it to them in ordinary homes. For such of them as elect to remain outside of those institutions, this provision is being made.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I understand, then, that the pro vision for totally but temporarily incapacitated men is set out in column four of the first schedule, and that for totally and permanently incapacitated men, at about double the rates, is included in the second schedule?
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– That is so.
Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT
– I thank the honorable senator for the explanation.
Schedule agreed to.
Third schedule agreed to.
Fourth schedule -
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I move -
That after the words “The Fourth Schedule” the following words he inserted: - ‘‘Any member of the Forces who is incapacitated by reason of a disability specified in the first column of this schedule shall receive the rate of pension shown in the second column of this schedule opposite the description of the disability.”
The schedule as it stands does not clearly indicate who are to receive the benefits set out. The omission of the words I am now inserting is due to an oversight in the recasting of the two measures, which are now being amalgamated. The words occur in the present Act, and their effect is merely to make it clear ‘ that the disability set out in column one entitles the
sufferer to the benefit provided in column two.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment (by Senator Millen) agreed to -
That the words “ For the purposes of this schedule a leg, foot, hand, arm, or eye is deemed to be lost if it is rendered permanently and wholly useless”be left out.
Amendment (by Senator Millen) proposed -
That the following words be inserted: - “ For the purposes of this schedule -
a leg, foot, hand, arm, or eye is deemed to be lost if it is rendered permanently and wholly useless; and
‘the maximum rate’ means the rate of pension in column four of the First Schedule opposite the rate of pay of the member.”
Senator SENIOR:
South Australia
– Would not the same effect be achieved if the words now appearing in the schedule were left in, and new paragraph b were added? We seem to be striking out words and reinserting them with an addition.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– What the honorable senator says is quite right, but on three or four occasions we have cut a group of subjects embraced in one paragraph into a number of small paragraphs for the purpose of clearness and the better understanding of the casual reader. The only real alteration effected by the amendment is the addition of paragraph 6. That is what we had clearly in mind.
Senator BOLTON:
Victoria
.- There are certain forms of injury received by soldiers which may not be regarded as lessening their earning capacity, but which should, nevertheless, be recognised in this schedule. Some of them are very disfiguring, such as serious facial injuries, which would not interfere with the capacity of a man who was employed as a mechanic or workman. As that form of injury is not included in column one, it would appear that the soldier is not entitled to any pension on account of it; but I submit that some cognizance should be taken of it by including it in the schedule.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– Upon more than one occasion the point raised by Senator Bolton has been the subject of discussion by the association of which he is a member. Whilst there can be no great objection to his proposal, I submit that no advantage would accrue from itsadoption. Every particular case which is set out in the British schedule is already provided for in this Bill. In the British schedule, for example, provision is made for “ wounds, injury, or disease resulting in disabled men being permanently bedridden.” Such cases are covered in our schedule by the words “ totally and permanently incapacitated.” Again, in the British schedule provision is made for cases of “ wounds of, or injurious to, the head or brain, involving total permanent disablement or Jacksonian epilepsy.” These cases are also covered in our schedule by the words to which I have already directed attention. Although facial disfigurement is not specifically included in our schedule, the practice has been to regard it as equal to total incapacity.
Senator Bolton:
– Then why not include it in the Bill ?
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I have no objection to doing that. But certainly its absence from our schedule has not prejudiced the claims of any Australian soldier, because in practice the victim of facial disfigurement has been allowed the full pension provided in the case of total incapacity. Again, in the British schedule various rates of’ pensions are set out for men suffering from the amputation of an arm. If the amputation . has been made very high, the rate of pension granted is proportionately greater. The rates range from 90 per cent, to 40 per cent. In Australia, however, we have adopted a flat rate of 75 per cent. Obviously, we are extending to our soldiers very much more liberal treatment. If Senator Bolton desires facial disfigurement to be included in the schedule, I shall be glad to accede to his wish. But owing to the fact that we have passed the stage at which he can secure the insertion of his suggested amendment, I will undertake to recommit the Bill in order to afford him an opportunity of moving it. Should anything prevent me from securing the recommittal of the measure, I promise him that his amendment will be inserted in another place.
SenatorFOLL (Queensland) [3.35].- No provision is made in this Bill for persons who are totally deaf. Presumably they will be included amongst those case which have to come under review every three months. Then, again, a large number of our soldiers were fighting in malarial regions, and. we know that when once malaria has gripped a man he is afflicted with it for life. The individual who is subject to malaria is likely to go down at any time, andfor that reason is prejudiced in the matter of securing employment. I ask the Minister to give consideration to the two classes of cases which I have mentioned.
Senator MILLEN (New South Wales-
Minister for Repatriation) [3.36]. - It is not to be assumed because specific provision is not made for cases of deafness in this schedule, that the victims of that infirmity are not eligible to receive pensions. As a matter of fact, they are. They receive 75 per cent, of the full rate. However, I promise honorable senators that I will look through the schedule again with a view to seeing whether cases cannot be set out in greater detail than they are at present.
Amendment agreed to.
Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
Postponed clause 17 -
If a Commissioner or an Acting Commissioner, or a member of a Board becomes in any way concerned or interested in any such contract or agreement, or in any way participates or claims, as aforesaid,he shall be guilty of an indictable offence.
Penalty: Five hundred pounds, or imprisonment for three years,’ or both.
Senator MILLEN (New South Wales-
Minister for Repatriation) [3.37]. - When this provision, was previously under consideration Senator Keating raised an objection to it on the ground that it might operate harshly upon the Commissioner or an Acting Commissioner who might offend by becoming a shareholder in some small company. To meet the view which he expressed I move -
That sub-clause 3 be left out and the following new sub-clause inserted in lieu thereof: “3. If a Commissioner or an Acting Commissioner or a member of a Board becomes in any way concerned or interested in any contract or agreement made by or on behalf of the Commission, or in any way participates or claims to be entitled to participate in the profit thereof, otherwise than as a member, and in common with the other members, of an incorporated company consisting of more than 25 persons, he shall be guilty of an indictable offence.
Penalty: Five hundred pounds or imprisonment for three years, or both.”
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Postponed clause 21 (Appointment of officers).
Senator MILLEN (New South Wales-
Minister for Repatriation) [3.40].- This clause was postponed because of the desire expressed- by Senator Poll, who was supported by other honorable senators, that we should include in it a stipulation that the Commission, whilst free to appoint officers, should grant a preference to returned soldiers. I therefore move -
That the following new sub-clause be inserted : - “1a. In the appointment of officers in pursuance of this section, the Commission shall, where the qualifications of applicants are equal, give preference to persons who have been Australian soldiers within the meaning of section 45 of this Act.”
Senator GRANT:
New South Wales
.- The proposal of the Minister I submit will not meet the case. It will leave it optional with the Commission to appoint returned soldiers. It merely provides that they shall give a preference to returned men under certain conditions. I desire those conditions to be removed. The Government are continually assuring us that it is their policy to grant preference to returned soldiers. If they are sincere in their profession why do they not place it beyond doubt that the men who will be appointed officers of the Commission shall be members of the Australian Imperial Force. I wish to move -
That the following words be added to the proposed new sub-clause: - “But all such officers must have been members of the A.I.F.”
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– That is already provided for.
Senator GRANT:
– Nothing of the sort. When we reflect upon the enormous number of men who enlisted for service abroad, and who have now returned, we must be convinced that there are amongst them plenty of individuals who are perfectly qualified to fill positions of this kind.
Senator Rowell:
– All the officers in the Repatriation Department are exmembers of the Australian Imperial Force.
Senator GRANT:
– We are assured that 98½ per cent, of them are. I have no doubt that extra work will be thrown on the officials, and that a considerable number of additional employees’ will berequired. The principle of preference to returned soldiers should, therefore, be inserted in the clause.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– Why do you not preach that doctrine to your unions, and appoint returned soldiers as secretaries to your organizations ?
Senator GRANT:
– We do. The assistant secretary of the Australian Labour party is a returned man. We are not now discussing what the unions should do. We are concerned with the professed policy of the Government, which is preference to returned soldiers, though I do not know how long it is going to last. Here is an opportunity to incorporate the policy in the Bill, and I urge honorable senators to stand up to it.
The CHAIRMAN (Senator Shannon:
– There being an amendment already before the Committee, it will be necessary to secure its withdrawal before the honorable senator can submit his amendment, otherwise he must move for the recommittal of the Bill.
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I cannot consent to the withdrawal of my amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments.
Standing Orders suspended.
Motion (by Senator Milled) put -
That the. report be adopted.
Senator GRANT:
New South Wales
– It was my intention to ask for the recommittal of the Bill, and to move for the insertion of a new clause making it mandatory on the part of the Government to appoint returned soldiers as Commissioners, members of the Boards, and to all other positions; but as . the matter has been discussed at some length, and as the opinion of the Senate is against me, I do not see any prospect of giving effect to my proposal I shall, therefore, forgo my right to move for the recommittal of the Bill.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Report adopted.
Bill read a third time.
page 905
PAPERS
The following papers were presented: -
Arbitration (Public Service) Act - Orders of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration, and other documents, in connexion with awards or variations of awards in the following cases: -
Australian Commonwealth Post and Telegraph Officers’ Association - dated 5th March, 1920.
Australian Letter Carriers’ Association - dated 3rd March, 1920 (2 cases).
Beer Excise Act - Regulations amended - Statutory Rules 1920, No. 40.
Distillation Act - Regulations amended - Statutory Rules 1920, No. 41.
Excise Act - Regulations amended - Statutory Rules 1920, No. 39.
page 905
SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT
Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917
– I move -
That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn until Wednesday, 14th April.
We are on the eve of Easter, and there is no business demanding the immediate attention of the Senate, nor can there be until some measures come from the House of Representatives. I assume that by the tame we resume the War Gratuity Bill will be ready. As we have cleaned our business sheet for the time being, I think honorable senators will agree that the motion is not an unreasonable one.
Questionresolved in the affirmative.
page 905
ADJOURNMENT
Geelong Woollen Mills
Motion (by Senator Millen) put-
That the Senate do now adjourn.
Senator GRANT:
New South Wales
– Is the Minister for Defence (Senator Pearce) in a position to supply the information I asked for some days ago with’ regard to the Geelong Woollen Mills?
Senator PEARCE (Western AustraliaMinister for Defence) [3.55]. - I have not yet received it, and as there will be an adjournment of the Senate for a fortnight, I will endeavour to obtain the information, and will forward it to the honorable senator’s New South Wales address.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Senate adjourned at 3.56 p.m.
Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 26 March 1920, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1920/19200326_senate_8_91/>.