Senate
2 August 1923

9^th Parliament · 2^nd Session

QUESTION
- PARLIAMENTARY RECESS
INSULIN FOR DIABETES
PAPERS
QUESTION
- AUSTRALIAN NOTES ISSUE
APPROPRIATION (WORKS AND BUILDINGS) BILL 1923-24
BILLS: THIRD READING
NORTHERN TERRITORY RAILWAY EXTENSION BILL
- Second Reading
COMMONWEALTH SHIPPING BILL
CASE OFWARRANT OFFICER J. R. ALLEN
- Ordered -
INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT BILL
- Second Reading
QUESTION
- TASMANIAN SHIPPING SERVICE
QUESTION
- NAVIGATION ACT
NORTHERN TERRITORY RAILWAY EXTENSION BILL

The President (Senator the Hon. I. Givens) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 1992

QUESTION

PARLIAMENTARY RECESS

Senator GARDINER:
NEW SOUTH WALES

-Can the Minister for Home and Territories (Senator Pearce) indicate approximately the date on whioh Parliament will re-assemble after the recess ?

Senator PEARCE:
Minister of Home and Territories · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · NAT

– It is not possible to do so at the present moment, but before the present sittings are concluded the

Government will endeavour to furnish information as to the date upon which Parliament will meet again.

page 1992

INSULIN FOR DIABETES

Senator PAYNE:
TASMANIA

-Can the Honorary Minister administering the Department of Health tell me whether it is a fact that in the proposed distribution of insulin for diabetes to the various States, Tasmania is not to participate, and if such be the case, why Tasmania is to be excluded I

Senator WILSON:
Honorary Minister · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– I am not aware that Tasmania will not participate in the distribution of insulin, I know that at present the quantity available is very limited, but 1 understand that the output is being increased as fast as possible. However, I shall make inquiries and ascertain the position of Tasmania in this regard.

page 1992

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Meat Export Bounties Act - Particulars of Bounty paid. &c. during Financial Year 1922-23.

Nauru - Agreement between the British, Australian, and New Zealand Governments,

Bigned at London, 30th May, 1923, supplementing the Agreement of 2nd July, 1019, relating to the Administration of Nauru.

New Guinea - Ordinances of 1923 - No. 28 - Supply (No. 1) 1923-24. No. 29- Expropriation.

page 1992

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN NOTES ISSUE

Senator GARDINER:

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer -

Under what conditions do private banks obtain the use of Commonwealth notes from the Commonwealth Bank?
Do the private banks deposit one sovereign for each note issued ? If not, will the Minister state bow many notes have been obtained by private banks for each sovereign deposited by them during the past five years?

Senator PEARCE:
NAT

– The answers to. the honorable senator’s questions are as follow : -

The conditions under which private banks obtain the use of Australian notes are not specifically prescribed by law, but are such as may be determined from time to time by the Note Issue Board.
The private Banks do not necessarily deposit one sovereign for each note issued. This is a matter for the Board to decide, subject to the condition imposed by the Act that gold coin and bullion of an amount not less than one-fourth of the amount of Australian notes issued shall be held in reserve. The transactions are too complex to permit of an answer being given to the latter part of this question, but the following figures as to the notes in circulation and gold reserve may be useful : -

page 1993

APPROPRIATION (WORKS AND BUILDINGS) BILL 1923-24

Bill received from the House of Representatives, and (on motion by Senator Pearce) read a first time.

page 1993

BILLS: THIRD READING

The following Bills were read a third time: -

Spirits Bill.

National Debt Sinking Fund Bill.

Beer Excise Bill.

Excise Bill.

Distillation Bill.

page 1993

NORTHERN TERRITORY RAILWAY EXTENSION BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 31st July (vide page 1845) on motion by Senator Craw- ford-

That the Bill be now- read a second time.

Senator McDOUGALL:
New South Wales

.- Although it is considered to be the duty of an Opposition to oppose Government Bills, I do not think this Bill will be very seriously opposed from this side of the Chamber. I am pleased to be able to support it. To develop the Northern Territory we must provide means of communication for settlers, and facilities for them to get their products to market. I would be more pleased if I were asked to support the extension of the southern end of the line from Oodnadatta to Alice Springs. The Bill does not provide for that, but I shall not on that account oppose it. Cattle, and perhaps sheep, raisers, will be benefited by the northern extension, but the other line would provide for closer settlement. The natural advantages of the southern lineare so great that there is, obviously, some motive for extending the northern line first. I have no doubt that the Government’s attitude is based upon the recommendation of the Public Works Committee, but the report of that Committee distinctly states -

That the construction of the section from Mataranka to Daly Waters will of itself contribute very little towards the early development of the Northern Territory, and that the recommendation for its construction is only agreed to as being a section of an eventual line to cross the Barkly Tableland to Camooweal vid Newcastle Waters.

It seems to me that ‘undue influence has been brought to bear to take the railway to Camooweal. The object appears to be to benefit the Meat Combine, which, with the advantage of this railway and the meat bounty, will be on a good wicket.” I wish to point out to the Senate the extraordinary burden that is being shouldered by the extension of the Northern line. The cost of the existing line is very heavy, and it is a question whether the Commonwealth should saddle itself with an extension which, in the opinion of the Committee that investigated the matter, will not do what we want to do, namely, extend settlement in the Territory. I quote the following figures to show the enormous’ annual loss on the existing line. The results each year of the working of the line from 1st January, 1911, to 30th June, 1919, are -

The total loss to the Commonwealth since taking the line over thus represents £513,092. Excluding interest on capital, £416,940, the loss is £96,151. The position is very unsatisfactory. The extension of the line is not likely to result in an increase in the net receipts, because, while the revenue may be more, the working expenses will be correspondingly heavier. It is probable that when the line is carried .to the point for which this Bill provides, the annual loss on working will be over £100,000 a year. I believe a well-established motor transport service, with improved concrete roads and provision for petrol stations, would be cheaper and more satisfactory, but that is a question to be considered on another occasion and in another place. I stated previously that I would support any Bill that had for its object the improvement of the conditions for the settlers. This will be one means. The question of defence has no> bearing on this subject. We are not likely to induce closer settlement in the Northern Territory, and therefore, the problem of its defence must be approached from a point other than that of the actual manpower resident in the Territory. I regret that the Government have not seen fit to put in hand railway construction from the southern end. When we took the Northern Territory over from South Australia there was a definite understanding as to what we should do. The Commonwealth railway from Quorn to Oodnadatta in South Australia is being operated by the South Australian Government on behalf of the Commonwealth, and the loss in working is so heavy that it is necessary for the Government to do something without delay to improve the position. One proposal is to extend the line to the Macdonnell Ranges to tap the good pastoral country there, and by that means insure additional revenue. .It is essential also that there should be some variation in the agreement with the South Australian Government., The arrangement provides for the number of trains to be run, and stipulates the freights and fares to be charged. Since the line .was taken over, the South Australian Government have raised rates on all their lines by 50 per cent; but under the agreement with the Commonwealth, no alteration is permitted on the Quorn-Oodnadatta section, which is linked up with the main South Australian railway-system, with the result that during the years 1911-19, the loss on that section was £933,979 8s. lid. During the year prior to the railway being taken over by the Commonwealth, the South Australian Government neglected to maintain the line in an efficient condition, and consequently the Commonwealth Government, in the . first year, was obliged ‘ to spend a large sum in repairs and in relaying throughout the entire section. In stormy weather certain portions of the line become covered with sand drift, which has to be cleared away at heavy expense before traffic can be resumed. Cattle-owners are also antagonistic. They threaten that if the Government raise rates on stock they will boycott the line, and bring their stock down by road. We seem to be in the grip of another combine. Costs m every other direction have mounted considerably in recent years, but it would seem that certain pastoralists want the taxpayers of the Commonwealth to assist them to market their stock. In all the circumstances, I think, we must support the Bill to extend the Northern Territory Railway to Daly Waters. The section of the line to Katherine River is absolutely useless. I have been as far as the present terminus, and so far as I can judge, the land through which the line passes is almost valueless, except perhaps for cotton growing. I suggest that the Government carry out experiments in cotton-growing. If it proves suitable for the Northern Territory we may then be able to settle a number of small holders on land adjacent to the line. In this way we may be- able to increase the population of the Northern Territory. A standard gauge of 4 ft. S£ in. has been decided upon, and the longer we delay converting our existing lines to that gauge, the greater will be the cost. When the first portion of this line was constructed, arrangements were made for sleepers of sufficient length to be used to allow the line to be converted to a broader gauge at very short notice. The sidings and necessary bridges were also constructed in such a way that if the gauge were widened expensive alterations would be unnecessary. I understand that no such provision has been made in connexion with this proposed extension.

Senator Crawford:

– Yes, in regard to bridges.

Senator McDOUGALL:

– It is useless to increase the width of the bridges if the steel sleepers to be used are of insufficient width to carry a gauge of 4 ft.8½in. In opposing invaders, all our railways would be required for military purposes, and possibly rolling-stock would have to be transported from the south for use on our Northern Territory lines. Leading military experts, including the late Lord Kitchener, have stated that our first line of defence is a uniform railway gauge. I do not know what extra cost would be involved in supplying sleepers of a greater length, but perhaps the Honorary Minister (Senator Crawford) will give that information. In constructing the proposed lino, the Government will be carrying out thecompact previously entered into with South Australia. The Government of that State are now endeavouring to bluff the Commonwealth Government by suggesting that they are prepared to take over control of the southern portion of the Northern Territory, but there is little likelihood of any of the States shouldering the responsibility of a section or sections of the Territory when they have so much of their own to develop. The control of the Northern Territory, together with the construction of railways within its boundaries is a national question, and one which should be handled only by the Federal Government. I do not object to the Government incurring expenditure in necessary railway construction, and I am not concerned whether the line is eventually extended into Queensland or South Australia, but we should not allow it to remain at a dead-end. When the Bill is in Committee, I shall move an amendment to provide that the length of the sleepers be increased to enable the gauge of the line to be broadened at the proper time. If we are ever called upon to defend Australia - rpersonally, I do not think the occasion will ever arise - a uniform gauge will be essential. The gauge of the line from Port Darwin southward should be widened. An effort should also be made to reduce the heavy losses which are at present incurred, and it is to be hoped that the extension of the line will assist in that’ direction. I support the Bill.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

. - I approach the consideration of this measure with very mixed feelings. Iu submitting this measure, the Government should have also introduced another Bill embodying other recommendations of the Public Works Committee in connexion with the construction of a line from Oodnadatta to Alice Springs. I have been rather severely criticised by honorable members in another place for my attitude in connexion with these proposals, and for supporting some of the recommendations in the report of the Public Works Committee. Senator McDougall also appears to see in this project some sinister move to assist the big American meat works. In connexion with our report, we have not considered -any meat works other than those at Port Darwin. I direct attention to two recommendations of the Committee,the first of which is -

That the Committee approves of the construction of a section of railway from Mataranka to Daly Waters on the 3-ft. 6-in. gauge, using 60-lb. rails, as proposed in the reference.

The second recommendation reads -

That the Committee approve of the extension of the Port Augusta to Oodnadatta line to Alice Springs by the construction of a light line of railway with 60-lb. rails and low-level bridges.

Those recommendations are clear and . definite. Some honorable members in . another place have found fault with these proposals, and instead of quoting the recommendation of the Committee, have quoted opinions which are quite distinct from definite recommendations. There are several instances in which the Committee placed on record its opinions, one being that the line would not be payable until extended to Camooweal. Another opinion reads -

The construction of a line to Newcastle Waters and Alice Springs would meet the requirements of the Commonwealth for many years.

That, also, is an expression of opinion by the members of the Committee. Two other expressions of opinion in the report have nothing whatever to do with the recommendations of the Committee. The recommendations are quite clear and definite. I am not concerned with what honorable senators may say or think . of those declarations of opinion. It might have been better to have excluded them altogether from the report. I have reason to doubt the purpose of this Bill, in view of the Minister’s remarks last week when introducing it. In effect, he said that the proposed railway would cross the Barkly Tablelands, and that it would link up later with the Queensland railways in order to develop the pastoral country of north-western Queensland. “When the Bill is in Committee, I intend to submit amendments which, to my mind, will make the purpose of the Bill and the intention of the Committee clear.

Senator Crawford:

– I do not remember making use of the words quoted by the honorable senator.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– In reply to Senator Kingsmill’s interjection “ Which direction will the extension take?” the Minister stated - “

It will be towards the Queensland border, and nearer to the Barkly Tablelands, which comprise the better class of land in the Territory. The railway will form a link of the main overland line connecting the Northern Territory with the southern portion of Australia. It will aid in the development of pastoral country and bring railway facilities nearer to the pastoral areas east, south-east, and south of Mataranka and Daly Waters.

If that route is not in the direction of Camooweal, then my knowledge of Australian geography is greatly at fault.

Senator Crawford:

– I did not mention either Camooweal or Queensland.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– We know perfectly well what is in the Minister’s mind. Later I shall quote reports showing that, for a long time, there has been a decided intention that the Northern Territory railway shall link up with Camooweal. The Government, in selecting this route, have not followed the trend of the evidence which was taken by the Public Works Committee. I doubt very much whether the Government have read the report. I know that, for some time past, there has been a feeling on the part of railway officers in the Commonwealth Service that this railway should extend to Camooweal; if not, then to Birdsville, and thence in the direction of Bourke. The evidence taken by the . Public Works Committee during their travels through Australia shows that that is the last direction the railway should take. I shall not quote extensively from the evidence. It was impossible to keep the evidence separate, and the witnesses were questioned as to the North-South railway and the Eastern railway, that is, the railway to Camooweal. The Committee commenced ‘their inquiries early in January, 1921, and the first evidence was taken in Western Australia. I particularly draw attention to the evidence given by Mr. Durack, one of the great pioneers of the north-west of- Western Australia. He has an intimate knowledge of the Northern Territory. His evidence was free from self-interest, as his investments did not affect that country. He stated -

As to the line I unhesitatingly say that, committed as we are to the White Australia policy, this extension is the only means ofdeveloping Northern Australia. All that northern area and its contingent area on the western side is pastoral, and I take it that it will remain pastoral for some time. A railway right through would undoubtedly increase the wealth of the country, and tend to increase population and closer settlement. … ‘

My argument for a direct railway is that it will open up and make more accessible an area of country eastward of Hall’s Creek, which, so far as I have known for thirty-five years, has always had a regular rainfall. . . . 1 favour the direct North and South line from a defence point of view, while at the same time urging that it would develop that remote area of which I have spoken ; the distance . is shorter, and centres of population will be tapped.’ It is also the proper route from a defence point of view.

Senator Thompson:

– From a defence point of view his opinion is valueless; Sir Brudenell White holds a different view.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

-Sir Brudenell White stated that, from a defence point of view, the direction taken by the railway did not matter a snap of the fingers. Apart from that, surely Mr. Durack’s evidence concerning the pastoral possibilities of the Northern Territory is of considerable value. Mr. Miles, another witness, has also an intimate knowledge of the Northern Territory. Honorable senators will remember that some time ago he exhibited, in the Queen’s Hall, maps showing a route for the great North-West railway. He stated -

I consider that we require railways to connect Derby, Wyndham, and the western side generally with the Northern Territory line - with the North-South railway. . . . The construction of the proposed railway would be an ‘ advantage to Australia generally. . . Another point is that the North-South line would bring the Northern Territory within a couple of day’s of Adelaide or Melbourne, instead of a fortnight. . . .

The next witness which the Committee examined in Western Australia was Mr.

Dyke, an ex-South Australian. He had been engaged in railway construction in South Australia, and on survey work in the Northern Territory as far north as Tennant’s Creek. He stated - . . I . was on the construction of the Alice Springs line, and I was five years in the Mncdonnell Ranges for the Government. . . . If I were constructing a railway north and south, I would go the direct route to Alice Springs after leaving Oodnadatta; this direct route would serve all the western country; it is magnificent pastoral country. . . . Supposing we had a north and south railway, it would serve the pastoral country east for at least 150 miles; and, if there were stock waters, it would reach right up to the west, into the Kimberley country, and east into the Queensland Gulf country . . .

Iwould certainly say the railway should be run north and south as nearly as possible along the transcontinental telegraph lines. This would not run through a large area of poor country; that is a fallacy on the part of people who have not been through that part. . . .

I am quite familiar with the northern portion of Australia as high as Tennant’s Creek, which is nearly half way to Darwin from Oodnadatta. . . .

I am quite definite in my opinion that the North-South route is the preferable. . . . I am certain that the country to be travelled by the North-South railway will carry stock all the way, from one end to the other, provided there is water and means of getting the stock down, and water can be got there. . . .

It would not be a good scheme to connect the railway to Port Darwin from Camooweal instead of down from Oodnadatta. . . .

There is certainly not better land in the north-west of Queensland than in the centre of Australia;, the land in the centre of Australia is better than in the north of Australia. I am talking about ordinary cattle country, and there are cattle stutions there now.

When such a comparison is made by a man who has livedin this, so-called “ desert “ for five years, honorable senators will see that there is a great deal to be said in favour of the centre of Australia being much better country tnan it is generally supposed, to be. Mr. Startiforth Smith, who was Administrator of the Territory for a period, expressed the following opinion: -

A railway built for 207) miles from Oodnadatta to Alice Springs would do more to develop the Northern Territory than the whole of the efforts. of South Australia and the Commonwealth up to the present have succeeded in doing. It would open up a corridor to^ and make accessible, the valuable country in the Maedonnell Ranges. It would decrease the cost of freights in the whole of the southern half of the Territory. It would enable it to be stocked with sheep, and would give access to that great mineral field to which I have referred! …

I have read everything I can find to read in regard to the rivalVoutes for the railway. The conclusion 1 havecome to is that a NorthSouth line is necessary, because it will bisect the great mineral field of the Territory as well as serve the pasteral country, better than would a line from Camooweal to Powell’s Creek. . . .

I think a line from Oodnadatta would serve the bust interests of the Territory better than would a line from Queensland. If the profosal were to build one section of the line only, would build the stretch from Oodnadatta to Alice Springs, because it would open up proved country suitable for sheep, cattle, and horses. … It would open up the biggest unexploited mineral belt in Australia at the present time. . . .

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– That reply gave me greater cause for uneasiness than has anything else hitherto said in connexion with the Oodnadatta to Alice Springs proposal. So far I have been quoting evidencetaken frompersons who to some extent have not seen the centre of Australia. I have here the evidence of a man who has lived there for many years. Mr. Hayes, a pastoralist of TJndooyea and Maryvale, said -

If the railway were constructed following somewhere in the vicinity of the telegraph lino, I think the land-holders would possibly spend more money on their runs. … I would favour a direct North-South, because it would suit me and the others up there the best. . . .

Senator Guthrie:

– That is very vague. He declares that they “ may “ spend something.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– Mr. Hayes’ evidence continues -

If the line were built north and south, it would help ns to increase our stock by giving us facilities to shift them. We could stock heavier if we had opportunities of removing them during bad times.

That statement should appeal to Senator Guthrie.

Senator Sir Thomas Glasgow:

– But such a remark would apply to any place where . a railway was proposed to be built.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– Of course. These people were putting their case before the Committee.

Senator Guthrie:

– Did not the majority of the witnesses say that they could not afford to truck their stock long distances ?

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– No ; but the majority said that in good seasons they would travel their stock, just as Senator Guthrie would do.

Senator Guthrie:

– They could not afford to send their stock by rail.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– In good seasons stock can be travelled almost as easily as they can be trucked. The journey would take more time, but the stock would very likely arrive in better condition. We took evidence at Avon Downs, at the other end of the Territory, to the same effect I do not intend to quote too much of this evidence. It is mostly a repetition. From “one end of the route to the other, the witnesses all told the same tale. I desire now to quote evidence taken further north than Alice Springs.

Senator Crawford:

– Has it ever been proposed to construct a line more directly north and south than is proposed in the Bill?

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– Yes. The suggestion has been made to build a line to Oodnadatta and Alice Springs from Kingoonya, on the East- West line. Such a route would be further west than the existing Quorn-Oodnadatta line, but witnesses declare that it would tap the best country. It would certainly avoid a certain range of hills ; and it is a matter for inquiry to ascertain whether it would run through better country. The. trouble is that over 300 miles of the existing railway, from Quorn to Oodnadatta, would have to be pulled up. Mr. Brcadon, of Todmordan, gave the following evidence : -

I have been forty-four years in this country, and twenty-two years on this property. . . The railway when it came to Oodnadatta was of great advantage. My opinion is that, if the railway goes through to the north, it will be of great benefit to a large number of settlers, and will probably attract more settlers. . .

He has lived practically the whole of his life in the centre of Austidlia. Another squatter on the route said - .

I am in favour of the direct route for the railway, because I believe there are plenty of minerals in the vioinity of Alice Springs on both sides of the telegraph line. .

Another big owner, Mr. Pearce, of Crown Point, said -

I have been fourteen years in this district, and about twenty-three years in the northern portion of the Northern Territory. . The further west the railway goes, the better, because it would” open up huge pastoral areas all lying dormant, and all fairly good stock country. … I suggest that the railway should go to the west, because it. is all unoccupied and good country. … By taking a direct route you would have the whole of the line from Pine Creek to Oodnadatta serving country which will be sooner or later taken up. . . .

Senator Crawford:

– None of the evidence opposes the ‘line from Mataranka to Daly Waters.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– No one opposes that route. I am trying to show that the Government . ought to have provided for the building of the other railway, and I am quoting this evidence in an endeavour to induce them to proceed with its construction at the earliest possible moment. Mr. G. Johannsen, of Deep Mill, said -

If a railway were ..constructed anywhere within 50 miles of us it would be a great benefit. I am convinced that if the railway could be put through, and the country cut up into smaller blocks, it would be all taken up.

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:
QUEENSLAND

– The honorable senator has said that he is not quoting this evidence in support of an alternative route for the, railway for the construction of which this Bill has been introduced.. If he were doing so, or if he were quoting evidence in support of a supplementary proposition, he would be in order, but as the line he is advocating is not an alternative proposal, he may not refer to it except in a casual way.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– At the outset of my remarks I said that it was difficult to separate the evidence, because both projects were taken as one. I do not want to advocate the construction of the Oodnadatta to Alice . Springs line as an alternative proposal to that which is now before the Senate, but I want the Government to give effect to the recommendations of the Public Works Committee at the earliest possible moment.

The PRESIDENT:

– I understand that this Bill is giving effect to one recommendation of the Public Works Committee, but not to both.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– That is so. The Bill does not give effect to the full recommendation of the Committee.

The PRESIDENT:

– The Senate is not now discussing the recommendation of the Public Works Committee. It has before it a specific proposal for a railway extension to Daly Waters. The honorable senator’ will be perfectly in order in making passing reference to, or in advocating, an alternative proposal; but as he is, on his own declaration, not advocating an alternative proposal, I must ask him not to make more than a casual reference to any other railway proposal.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– I realize that the facts I am putting before the Senate are not directly intended to suggest an alternative proposal to the project now under consideration. ‘ That was not my intention when I quoted this evidence. I studied the Bill carefully and endeavoured to find some means of submitting an amendment in favour of the OodnadattaAlice Springs railway, but I could not see how I could possibly do so. I shall not quote any further evidence given to the Public Works Committee except to show that if the line goes in the direction in which I fea”r the Government intend to build it, namely, down to Birdsville, it will pass through country which is not worth a railway in any circumstances. At this stage, I shall quote the evidence given on the proposal to take the line to. Camooweal) and thence on to Birdsville and Boulia. Mr. Gaffney, of Bedourie, in giving evidence, said -

I ‘have been in this district for seventeen years. … I favour the construction of a railway through Bedourie to tap’ this valuable district and give the shortest route to South Australia. . . . This country is subject to floods, and sometimes the river comes down while the weather is fine, and spreads all ‘over the country. . ; . Again, in some places, if you throw a bush down it becomes covered with sand in a night, and perhaps the same thing would happen to a railway….. The

Georgina sometimes extends for 15 miles, and makes the country impassable for, perhaps, three months. You could not carry on any work during that time, but notwithstanding the floods, the people could get to the railway. … I do not think there is any high ground upon which the railway could Be run to avoid the flooded country!

The railway from Birdsville to Marree has been reported upon both by Mr. Hobler, who is a railway engineer, and by Mr. Bell. The natural corollary of the line proposed .in the Bill is >a railway to Camooweal, thence down to Birdsville and across a portion of South Australia comprising the worst country to be found in the whole of Australia. I refer to the country between Birdsville and Marree. One witness, who told the Committee that he had been there for twenty-seven years, assured the Committee that the country was not worth *a railway. The members of the South Australian Railways Standing Committee got lost there some time ago. The flood waters came down, and the members of the Committee were cut off and nearly starved.

Senator Guthrie:

– The honorable senator is advocating a line from Oodnadatta to Alice Springs.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– Yes. That would avoid all the Marree country. The members who went through this country consisted of a section of the Public Works Committee, and their report has been embodied in the report of the full Committee. This sectional Committee reported -

That, after due consideration, the Sectional Committee is of opinion that the sections of railway proposed to be constructed from Mataranka to Daly Waters, and from Oodnadatta to Atldce Springs, should be regarded as portions of a direct North-South railway, which the Sectional Committee considers should be the first step towards the railway development of the Northern Territory.

Senator Crawford:

– The Government proposes to give effect to part of that report.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– That is the suspicious “ part “ of it. In fairness to the minority of the members of the Committee, I must inform the Senate that the following amendment was moved : -

That, having inspected the route for a proposed railway from Oodnadatta to Catherine and an alternative mid the Barkly Tableland to Camooweal, . Boulia, Birdsville, and Marree, the Sectional Committee is of opinion that, until expert information shall ‘have been obtained hy the full Committee as to which line is likely to be in . the best interests of Austral ia.Itioon a defence paint of view, no recommendationcan be made ithat either section of tine linebe oonsitrudted

That amendment was moved by one member of the sectional Committee, and seconded pro forma toy another.

Senator Guthrie:

– The Committee did not jnecommeind the Hiiie from a defence paint of view ?

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– After the (report of the seebwMaal Committee had been dealt, with, General Sir Brudenell WOiite told the Committee thai from a defence point of viiew the rowte of the proposed railway did not matter. He said that if am enemy landed at Port Darwin it could be left there, for all the harm it woii’W do. Honorable senatorscan form their own. opinion of that view.I have formed mine. The recommendation of the Committee that the two sections should be regarded as portions of the North-South railway is, I am afraid, not likely to be adopted. I have said that certain officers in the Railway Department have favoured the line from Mataranka to Daly Waters, and from there to Camooweal, Boulia, Birdsville, and Marree. In that connexion I wish to quote from a report furnished to the then Minister for Works and Railwaysby the Railway Commissioner, Mr. Bell, on the 24th November, 1920. That report states- -

As the honorable the Minister is aware, I am of the opinion that the country through which this route passes can never, from a pastoral point of view, support a railway, that it can never be of any value from an agricultural point of view, that its value, from a mineral point of view, is questionable, and that, in any case, the route of a main trunk line should not be controlled by the comparatively 6hort period, whilst tfie railway is there for all time.

He says, further, that -

The country between Marree and Birdsville is inferior, but apparently no worse, than that between Marree and Alice Springs.

A witness told the Committee that the country was under water from 18 inches to 5 feet deep, and that the floods sometimes lasted for three or four months. A witness said he had known the Mulligan River- not to flow for seventeen years, but that when the water came down it sometimesspread over the country for 50 square miles ; that when the grass grew the cattle waded in after it and gotbogged and drowned; and that when the water was low in the waterholes, it turned salt. The country, moreover, is impassable whendry.

Senator Guthrie:

– Is the honorable senator describing the awful country between Marree and Birdsville?

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– That is so..

SenatorGuthrie. - The countrybetween Oodnadatta and Alice Springs is almost as bad. A railway across that country would lead, to nowhere.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– It would lead to Alice Springs, where the land is recognised as being among the best country in the Northern Territory. Later in his report Mr. Bell says -

There would beno difficulty in itsconstruc tion. The floods which occur on that route are much more easily dealt with from a railway point of view than the drafting sand on jttie Macdonnell Range route.

The drift sand on the Macdonnell Ranges route does not prevent traffic getting through. The sand hills there are always in the same direction, but those on the Birdsville route run north and south one day, and east and west the next, and, indeed, turn round to every point of the compass. The Teport by Mr. Bell leads me to believe that if the Commonwealth railway officials have any influence, that route will ultimately be adopted. Mr. Hobler went through the country with the Committee, and he furnished a long and extensive report to Mr. Bell. . He recommended the route through Birdsville. I would like to solicit the assistance of ray friends opposite, because, as long ago as 1913, Mr. Josiah Thomas, who was then a Labour Minister, gave an undertaking that the railway would be constructed. He said -

On behalf of the Government, I .undertake to have a new survey .made from Port Augusta right to the Macdonnell Ranges.

Doing that he most admit that his view of the agreement with the Commonwealth was against the suggestion, that the line should be a direct one.

Senator Hoare:

– But Mr. Harper is a Victorian.

Senator GUTHRIE:

– He is a member of the South Australian Parliament. He continued -

The best route would ‘ be from Hergott directly north to strike the northern boundary of the State at Birdsville, then to Camooweal, and north-west to Darwin. That would be by far the most profitable route..

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– The honorable senator does not agree with Mr. Harper’s opinion.

Senator GUTHRIE:

– I believe that if a railway is to be built at all, it must connect with the western extensions of the Queensland and New South Wales railways. Every one realizes - and the evidence we have before us confirms it - that if Australia were attacked in the north, and we wished to send troops,, horses, and munitions to Port Darwin from Townsville, Rockhampton, Brisbane, Newcastle, Sydney, or any part of Eastern Australia, it would be foolish to firsttransport them to Adelaide and send them away north through the centre of Australia on a line which has breaks of gauges, starting from one dead end and finishing at another. In the event of an invasion from the north - which God forbid! - all our troops, horses, and munitions despatched from the eastern portion of Australia, where all the population is, would have to be sent over those lines already running out towards the Northern Territory. It would be absurd to adopt any other course. Moreover, the military experts have said that it would be utterly impossible to concentrate our forces, equipment, guns, munitions, and so forth, in Adelaide, and endeavour to transport them through the dead heart of Australia. I can only support a proposal for the extension of a line which will develop . the Barkly Tableland country, the best in the Northern Territory, and will eventually link up with the railways already constructed in Queensland and New South Wales.

Senator McHUGH:
South Australia

– I find it very difficult to oppose the construction of a developmental line, and it is not my intention to do so in this instance. I thank Senator Guthrie for the sympathetic way in which he dealt with’ a proposal which he eventually condemned. The honorable senator quoted a statement made by Mr. Harper, a member of the South Australian Parliament; but if there is one man in South Australia who does not know anything at all about the Northern Territory, it is Mr. Harper. No doubt, that gentleman will be told that by the other members in that Parliament, many of whom know the Northern Territory better than Senator Guthrie. There are members of the South Australian Parliament who know almost every inch of the Territory.

Senator Duncan:

– The same can be said of Senator Guthrie.

Senator Guthrie:

– I have never been there.

Senator McHUGH:

Senator Crawford:

– I understand it would be about £1,000 a mile.

Senator FINDLEY:

– It would be moro than that, but it would be money well spent. Later a Bill will be introduced to provide for the further extension oi the line.. If the same Minister is in charge of it, he will advance the same arguments for constructing the line to a 3-ft. 6-in. gauge, while making provision for conversion to a 4-ft. 8½-in. gauge. Ultimately, the line may reach Oodnadatta, when it will probably become necessary to convert the whole line. If a business man were constructing that line, he would say, “ The standard gauge will have to be adopted sooner or later, and- it is better that I should begin here and now, than wait for ten or fifteen years before commencing,” I do not believe that the railway will open up much, if any, additional country. I do not believe that it will add materially to the population of the Territory. The Government needs a Northern Territory policy.Without a definite policy we may continue to build railways that will make heavy losses while conferring no substantia] benefit upon the Territory, or the people of Australia. I support the Bill in a half-hearted way, not because I can see that any great good will come from it, but because I am anxious to help, in any way I can, to further the interests of the Territory. If the Bill will help the Territory, I shall be pleased, but I have my doubts about that.

Senator BENNY:
South Australia

Senator Crawford:

– Surely the honorable senator has not forgotten that we have had a wax since then.

Senator HOARE:

– I do not forget that; but I hold that the solemn compact made with the Government of South Australia should be honoured. There is ample evidence from experts’ that if the line were started from the southern end, it would open up an immense area of valuable pastoral country. One. witness before the Parliamentary Standing Committee stated that there was a good pastoral country for 100 miles on each side of the route, and that the mineral potentialities within the Macdonnell Range country were practically limitless. It may be said that South Australian representatives are biased, but we are only urging that the Government should have recognised the report furnished by the Committee to which I have referred, and have made a declaration of policy with regard to construction from the southern end.

Senator Sir . THOMAS GLASGOW (Queensland) [5.40]. - I should not have taken part in this debate but for certain remarks to which, although perhaps, they were not altogether relevant to the Bill, I should like to reply. Both Senator McHugh and Senator Hoare. have emphasized thatthere should be no suspicion of political “pull.” in connexion with railway construction. I absolutely join with them in that view, and I suggest that this matter be submitted to an absolutely unbiased committee of experts to say in which direction the line should eventually go. The honorable senators have suggested that if the railway does not go due north and south, the Commonwealth will be breaking a solemn’ agreement entered into with the Government of South Australia.

Senator Hoare:

– Not necessarily due north and south.

Senator Sir THOMAS GLASGOW.Well, the honorable senator urged that the agreement will be violated if the railway is not constructed absolutely within the boundaries of the. Northern Territory, and if it does not cross the southern boundary of the Northern Territory. On this point I suggest that the best judges of what the agreement means were those, who were parties to it. I refer, of course, to the responsible Ministers and members of the South Australian Parliament, when the Northern Territory Surrender Bill was passed by that Legislature. I have looked up the debates in the South Australian Hansard and I find that not one member urged that the Commonwealth had not a perfect right to construct the line along what route it pleased, provided the railway crossed the Northern Territory boundary of South Australia proper. The then Commissioner for Crown Lands (Hon. L. O’Loughlin), who introduced the Bill, said -

They held this opinion, hut in discussing the question with Mr. Deakin, he pointed put, and properly so, that it would be unwise to bind the Commonwealth Government to construct the line of railway within a stipulated time. Mr. Deakin, however, undertook to construct the line from Port Darwin through Central Australia to join the existing railway at Oodnadatta, or to go through what was considered to he very much better country - from Pine Creek vi& Camooweal, alongside the borders of Queensland, and the territory west of Birdsville, down to Port Augusta via Hergott.

Even Senator Newland, who was a member of the South Australian House of Assembly at that time, . pointed out, in the course of his remarks, that the Bill did not bind the Commonwealth to any particular route.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– We wanted it to, but it did not bind the Commonwealth.

Senator Sir THOMAS GLASGOW.Exactly, but now the honorable senator is endeavouring to persuade the Senate that there was a definite agreement as to the north-south route.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– The Northern Territory Acceptance Act, ‘in my opinion, is quite definite on the point.

Senator Sir THOMAS GLASGOW.The honorable senator says one thing inthis Chamber, but during the debate in the South Australian Parliament he expressed the view that the agreement did not bind the Commonwealth to a particular route.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEEDHAM:

– That is so. It might just as well be said that if, after Senator Payne had made a promise to. Senator Hoare, the Honorary Minister and, say, Senator DRAKEBROCKMANman had engaged in fisticuffs, Senator Payne was relieved of his obligation. The position is very illogical, and I cannot understand why the agreement is not being observed. I intend to support the construction of the line, but I would be more enthusiastic over the proposal if the Government were also proposing to continue the existing line from Oodnadatta northwards.

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator McDougall:

– Was there not a proposal for a 4-ft. 8?-in. gauge line in Queensland ?

Senator CRAWFORD:

– The idea was toprovide a line of one gauge between Brisbane and Sydney, and that proposal, of course, may be carried out, independent of the other railways in Queensland. The section dealt with by this Bill is to be built on the route originally proposed. It approximately follows the Overland telegraph line, and it connects a couple of important centres of trade in the Northern Territory. It is also a most important link in the proposed North-South line.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In Committee:

Clauses. 1 and 2 agreed to.

– It is very hard, nowadays, to estimate what a work is likely to cost. One never knows what an ordinary building is likely to cost once a start is made.

Progress reported.

Sitting suspended from 6.26 to 8 p.m.

page 2016

COMMONWEALTH SHIPPING BILL

Assent reported.

page 2016

CASE OFWARRANT OFFICER J. R. ALLEN

Debate resumed from 26th July (vide page 1642), on motion by Senator Elliott) -

That a Select Committeebe appointed, with power to send for persons, papers, and records, to inquire into and report upon the discharge from the Military Forces of Warrant Officer J. R. Allen, of the Instructional Staff, and the refusal of compensation and . removal allowance to this Warrant Officer; and that such Committee consist of Senators Benny, Duncan, Sir T. W. Glasgow,. McDougall, Ogden, Thompson, and the mover.

Senator ELLIOTT:
Victoria

.- I desire to add a few brief remarks to conclude my reply to the debate on this motion.When “boiled down” the argument of the Minister was that the officer had a tribunal to which, under the regulations, he could have applied, but that he failed to do so. My answer to -that is that the evidence discloses that he did his best to bring his case before the tribunal, and it was, in fact, brought under the notice of the officer who controls the summoning of the Military Board. He failed to take any action to call the tribunal together. The proceedings show an entire lack of judicial handling of the case. An adverse report on Warrant Officer Allen was religiously rubber-stamped by all the officers up to the Minister, through whose hands it passed, and not an official concerned thought of summoning Warrant Officer Allen to ask for an explanation.

The PRE SIDENT.- The honorable senator has exhausted his time.

Question - That the motion be agreed to - put. The Senate divided.

AYES: 13

NOES: 10

Majority . . 3

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Ordered -

That the Committee report to the Senate on or before this day week.

page 2016

INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT BILL

Second Reading

Order of the Day called on for resumption of debate from 26th July (vide page 1643), on motion by Senator Grant -

That the Bill be now read a second time.

Question - That the Bill be now read a second time - put. TheSenate divided.

Ayes …. … … 8

Noes … … … 13

Majority … … 5

Question so resolved in the negative.

page 2017

QUESTION

TASMANIAN SHIPPING SERVICE

Debate resumed from 19th July (vide page 1307), on motion by Senator Ogden -

That, in view of the fact that all the mainland States are linked up by the railway systems of the Commonwealth and the States, the advantages’ of which are not shared by Tasmania, in the opinion of the Senate it is an undoubted obligation of the Federal Government to provide adequate means of transport between this State and the mainland.

That, with this object in view, this Senate affirms that a direct and up-todate Federal steamer service should be established between the northern ports of Tasmania and Melbourne, so that Tasmanian citizens may. be brought into closer communication with the sister State, thus enabling them to share advantages enjoyed by the other States.

Senator WILSON:
South AustraliaHonorary Minister · NAT

– The question of providing extra transport facilities between the mainland of Australia and Tasmania was discussed” fully during the debate “‘on the Commonwealth Shipping Bill. I then gave an assurance that when the Shipping Board was appointed it would go fully into the matter, and would no doubt be ready to cater for the trade of Tasmania. Since this debate was last adjourned, I have discussed the matter with the Prime Minister (Mr. Bruce), and I can assure Senator Ogden that the subject will be brought directly under the notice of the new Board as soon as it is appointed, and that the

Government will request the Board to give the fullest possible consideration to the requirements of Tasmania. The Board will be a business body, with a broad outlook, and it is hoped that it will cater for all the trade available, and, without delay, will do something to help the Tasmanian people.

Senator PAYNE:
Tasmania

.- It is indeed gratifying to receive from the Minister (Senator Wilson) an assurance that the position of Tasmania will be taken into favorable consideration by the Government. Tasmania to-day is not the Tasmania of twenty or thirty years ago. Owing to the enterprise and energy of its people, it now occupies a very prominent position as an industrial State. The time has arrived when special consideration should be given to the question of improving the present means of communication between Tasmania and the mainland. The motion has my hearty support. I feel sure that if the Government give the question that consideration which it deserves, and which has just been promised by the Honorary Minister, they will see the force of the contention that because of their insular position, the people of Tasmania have good reason to expect to be placed on the same footing as citizens in other portions of the Commonwealth. Recently there has been a great expansion of industries in my State. We are quite prepared to do our part towards building up the industries of the Commonwealth. I shall have an opportunity later, I hope, of bringing under the notice of the Senate a very large undertaking which it is contemplated shall be established before long to add to the already important industrial concerns of Tasmania. If Tasmania were at a standstill, from the point of view of development, one could understand a certain amount of opposition to the improvement of its shipping services. But Tasmania is progressing, and the possibilities are very great indeed. The fact that the largest concern of its kind in Australia - I refer to the hydro-electric scheme - has been established there, is proof of the enterprise of our people. We are assured that if we keep plodding away, and utilizing every avenue open to us, the developments following the establishment of those great works will . be such that eventually we shall reap the reward we deserve. In the circumstances, I think it is the duty of the Commonwealth Government, backed up by Parliament, to agree to the spirit of the resolution. I am satisfied that the Commonwealth will share in the added prosperity that will come to Tasmania as the outcome of improved shipping facilities with the mainland.

Senator GARDINER:
New South Wales

.- This is about the first opportunity I have hadto join with other honorable senators in a proposal to confer a direct benefit upon Tasmania. I am glad to be able to support my colleague (Senator Ogden). In view of the fact that Queensland is getting its meat bonus, and that Western Australia has been linked up by a railway at a cost of a million pounds, this request from Tasmania for improved shipping services is quite reasonable. I understand there is another very good reason why the motion should be passed- I believe the Tasmanian Government are losing money by their shipping ventures. It is just as well, in the circumstances, that they should approach the richer mainland States with a suggestion to cover any future losses in this direction. I merely rose to remark that the motion will enable the Commonwealth Government to show a truly Federal spirit. Some day, I hope, New South Wales will be in a position to make a special appeal to this Parliament. Heretofore her part has been to pay for about one-half the cost of everything.

Senator Guthrie:

– And look prosperous on it.

Senator GARDINER:

– Well, the prosperity of New South Wales warrants such an attitude. Her industries are so enor- mous, and her enterprise so noteworthy, that she is quite satisfied to be able to pay about half the cost of meat bounties to help to keep the banana farmers going, and to subsidize sugar companies. However, one would be very narrow in outlook if one denied to Tasmania an improvement in the existing shipping facilities, and as I am in a truly Federal frame of mind, I think that in view of what we have done for the other States, we may very well- support this motion wholeheartedly.

Senator PEARCE:
Western AustraliaMinister for Home and Territories · NAT

, that this matter will be brought before the Shipping Board as soon as that body is appointed, he should withdraw the -motion. If it is pressed to a division, and carried in its present form, it will be practically a direction to the Government, and whilst the Government are prepared to recommend the Shipping Board to give this question of improved shipping facilities with Tasmania serious and friendly consideration, we may not be disposed to give a direction to the Board. I trust, therefore, that as the honorable senator has achieved his object, and the subject has been well ventilated in debate, he will withdraw the motion.

Senator OGDEN:
Tasmania

.- I am very pleased to have the assurance of the Minister (Senator Wilson) that this important matter will have serious attention.

Senator Payne:

– And sympathetic consideration.

Senator OGDEN:

– I hope it will receive sympathetic consideration, because it is of very great importance toTasmania. We are really very serious about the matter. I am in this difficulty, however, that if the. resolution were carried, the Government might please themselves whether or not they did anything. I am prepared for the time being to accept the assurance of the Minister that, something definite will be done to provide better shipping facilities between Tasmania and the mainland. If the Ministry fail to observe the spirit of the motion in the way that I think is justified, I shall renew the appeal in this Chamber. Ibelieve that Ministers recognise that the majority of honorable senators are inclined to support the motion, but in view of the definite promise made by Senator Wilson’ I ask leave to withdraw the motion.

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:

– Is it the pleasure of the Senate that Senator Ogden have leave to withdraw his motion?

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– I object.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senator Duncan:

– Mr. President, did I understand you to declare that the motion had been agreed to?

The PRESIDENT:

– Yes. I put the question, and there was no call for a division.

page 2019

QUESTION

NAVIGATION ACT

Exemption of British Ships from Coastal Provisions.

Senator OGDEN:
Tasmania

.- I move -

That, in the opinion of the Senate, the operation of Part VI. of the Navigation Act is decidedly detrimental . to the interests of the producers of Tasmania; and, therefore, ministers should provide relief by exercising the powers conferred by section 286, which authorizes the Governor-General to exempt British ships from the coastal provisions of the Act.
That this resolution be forwarded to the House of Representatives with a request for its concurrence therein.

I am aware that I may be treading upon somewhat dangerous ground in. attacking a measure that was placed upon our statute-book primarily for the relief of those men who go down to the sea in ships.. The Navigation Act was designed toinsure better accommodation, better wages, and better working conditions generally for seamen engaged in the Australian coastal trade. We all agree, I think, that this is a very desirable object, and that the reform was long overdue. No one desires to have those provisions eliminated from the Act, but, unfortunately, we find that there exists something like an unholy alliance between the seamen, on the one hand, and the representatives of local shipping companies on the other. The local shipping companies are the most strenuous opponents of any alteration in the existing conditions. I should like to ask the members of the Labour party if they are prepared to bow to the desires of the steam-ship companies which are penalizing the people of Australia and elsewhere by charging high shipping freights? The present arrangement is all very well for the local companies, as they have practically secured a monopoly of the trade in consequence of the operations of the Navigation Act. We can quite understand, why they should strenuously fight any proposal to break down the monopoly.

Senator Duncan:

– Those companies employ white labour.

Senator OGDEN:

– They do; but at the same time I remind Senator Duncan that legislation, however well it may be framed in the interests of the shipping companies, or of the seamen, should not inflict hardships upon the rest of the community. No ship, unless it complies with the restrictions imposed by Part VI. ‘ of the. Act, may carry cargo or passengers between one Australian port and another, and I should like to ask the seamen, whether, in the exercise of the rights and privileges they enjoy they are treatingfairly another section of the community. The provisions of the Navigation Act certainly inflict hardship upon the Tasmanian producers. I have always held that the men who toil on the farms and in the orchards should receive special consideration from the Labour party. The man who labours in the orchard or on the farm works a good deal harder, and probably receives a much lower remuneration, than many industrialists. I understand that the supporters of the Labour movement have as much regard for that class of worker asfor those who are engaged in manual work of any kind. How does, this part of the Navigation Act affect Tasmania? Its position is different from that of any other State in the Federation . It is separated from its sister States by Bass Strait. Its producers have to place their produce in ships, which carry it to the markets of the world, and their interests are seriously affected by the difficulties experienced in disposing of their perishable products. Fruit and potatoes are the main items of export, and the fruitgrowers of Tasmania were, until last year, compelled to pay a freight of 5s. per case on the fruit shipped to the markets of the Old Country. The Commonwealth Government Line last year reduced the, freight to 4s. per case, and immediately that was done the private shipping companies reduced . their freight, to 4s. 6d. The fruit producers have to dispose of their products in a very short time. We have agreed to the payment of a bounty to ‘assist the meat producers in Queensland. A deputation recently waited upon the Minister for Trade and Customs (Mr Austin Chapman), and asked fora bounty upon dried apples; but ifwe could get a further reduction of one shilling per case . in freight on the whole of the fruit we export a bounty would be unnecessary. If such a reduction were made, the Tasmanian apple growers would save £114,000 a year on the crop of the State.

Senator Guthrie:

– What quantity of apples is exported from Tasmania ?

Senator OGDEN:

– Over two and a quarter million cases.

Senator Wilson:

– Last year it was 1,560,000 cases.

Senator OGDEN:

– The Honorary Minister (Senator Wilson) is referring to the export to England only, and has made no allowance for the trade with the mainland, which brings the total quantity up to that which I have stated. .Prior to the Navigation Act coming into operation the Orient and Peninsular and Oriental liners which called at Hobart for fruit, were allowed to carry Inter-State passengers on their vessels, and that to some extent, reduced their expenditure. : The overseas vessels, which now call there - they are only few in number - are not allowed to carry Inter-State passengers. If an exemption *were granted to enable the overseas steamers to carry passengers between one State and another, it is quite possible that these companies could carry our fruit for 6d. per case less, which would be of great advantage to the Tasmanian apple-growers. Moreover, the Navigation Act has deprived us of a regular service which existed between Hobart and the Bluff, New Zealand, and in consequence of this Tasmania has almost lost her timber trade with New Zealand. We produce a large quantity of hardwood sleepers, for which it is difficult to get freight, and the proprietors of timber-mills and the timber-getters are affected. Honorable senators representing Western Australia will doubtless be surprised to learn that firms in the timber trade could do considerable business with Western Australia in the export of dressed hardwood flooring boards. . Remarkable as it may seem, a considerable trade with Western Australia in dressed hardwood boards could be established.

Senator Drake-Brockman:

– The Tas- manian product is not at all comparable with the Western Australian jarrah.

Senator OGDEN:

– I am not arguing that point. There is nothing better in the world for flooring than Tasmanian dressed hardwood boards. The fact that we might do a considerable business in timber with Western Australia is in keeping with one of the peculiarities of our commercial life. Even when there was a scarcity of wheat in Australia a few years ago, and importations were coming from the Argentine, we were exporting wheat to

– It costs about 9s. per case to market apples in the Old Country.

Senator PAYNE:

– Yes ; from 8s. 6d. to 9s. is, I think, the amount; so that if the London market yields 10s. a case, the grower gets about1s. per case for himself, and then has to pay for his cases. I have no wish to delay consideration of the motion. The industry, I think, deserves all the consideration that can be given to it. I claim that the Navigation Act contains a provision to permit relief to be given under certain conditions. It has been suggested that, if certain portions of the Act are suspended, in the interests of Tasmania, similar requests will be received from other portions of Australia; but I know of no other part of Australia from which fruit is exported that is in the same position as Tasmania. The Peninsular and Oriental and Orient companies’ vessels call regularly at other Australian ports; and, if fruit is offering, they will accept shipments from any of the ports of call. But the position in Tasmania is entirely different. The mail steam-ship companies do not care to send their vessels to Tasmania for the comparatively small quantity of fruit which they are able to take. They require an additional inducement in the form of passengers, who, prior to the operation of the Navigation Act, were in the habit of making what was known as the “ apple trip.” I support the motion, and I hope that Senator Ogden’s statement of the position, and my plea for special consideration to be given to those engaged in the fruit-growing industry, will be sympathetically received by the Government.

Motion (by Senator Drake-Brockman) - That the debate be adjourned - put.

The Senate divided.

AYES: 12

NOES: 8

Majority . . . . 4

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Debate adjourned.

page 2026

NORTHERN TERRITORY RAILWAY EXTENSION BILL

In Committee (Consideration resumed, vide page 2016) :

Clauses 4 and 5 agreed to.

Clause 6 -

The gauge of the railway shall be 3 ft. 6 in.

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

.- I move-

That the words “three feet six inches “ be left out with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “ four feet eight and one half inches.”

I submit the amendment in order to place before the Committee the desirability of constructing this proposed section of the Northern Territory line to the standard gauge of 4 ft. 81/2 in. I realize, of course, that it may be some time before the Commonwealth will be in a position to seriously consider the question of unifying the railway gauges in Australia. I am aware also of the immense mileage in Queensland on the 3-ft. 6-in. gauge, and of the difficulties encountered in Victoria, South Australia, and Western Australia owing to the breaks of gauge. I know how serious, from a financial point of view, is this problem of securing a uniform gauge for the Commonwealth. But it must be tackled some day, and the sooner the better. If this section of the Northern Territory railway were constructed to the standard gauge, the existing line from Darwin to the Katherine River would have to be widened. That should hot be a matter of very great difficulty. In my opinion, we should not construct any more Commonwealth railway lines to other than the standard gauge. Even if the wider gauge for this section of the line cost an extra £1,000 per mile it would be money well spent.

Senator Duncan:

– It would cost more than that. The estimate of an additional £1,000 per mile relates only to the provision of’ sleepers to carry the standard gauge. The actual construction would cost considerably more.

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– Even if it did cost more, we could have no more favorable opportunity than the present for the construction of the line according to the standard gauge.All New South Wales lines are built to that gauge. One branch line extends as far up as Bourke, and another as far as Walgett. It is about time that the representatives of New South Wales in this Chamber took a leaf out of Tasmanian or Queensland senators’ books, and did something to insure a fair deal for their State. There is no reason why a branch of the Northern Territory railway should not come down from Avon Downs to either Bourke or Walgett. This is more likely to result if we insist on the Northern Territory lines being built to the 4-ft. 8½-in. gauge. But that is not my main reason for submitting the amendment. I believe that the 4-ft. 8½-in. is the best gauge. It is recognised all over the world as the standard gauge, and since it has been adopted by the Commonwealth, all new lines should be built to it.

Senator CRAWFORD:
Honorary Minister · Queensland · NAT

– I cannot accept the amendment. The proposal, if adopted, would involve not only the broadening of the gauge of the proposed line, but that of the existing line.

Senator Duncan:

– It would also create great disorganization when the line eventually connected with the Queensland lines.

Senator CRAWFORD:

– I am not considering that for a moment. To construct the proposed line on the broader gauge and convert the existing 200 miles of railway, would involve an expenditure of at least £250,000, quite apart from the expense incurred in altering the rollingstock. The annual interest at 5 per cent, would be equal to £12,500, and the present and probable traffic would not be sufficient to meet such a heavy outlay. It would probably cost less to convert the existing line at some future date. Additional lines will also have to be constructed before the Territory can be properly developed, and any substantial increase in the cost of construction must inevitably hinder development.

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

.- I did not expect the Honorary Minister (Senator Crawford) to accept the amendment. We have been informed by the Minister that if the gauge of the proposed line were broadened as proposed an additional expenditure of £250,000 would be involved, and that further railways will have to bo constructed in the Northern Territory. The Northern Territory will not remain in its present state, and doubtless the gauge of the proposed line will eventually be broadened. It would be infinitely better to deal with this project in a business-like way and construct the line on the standard gauge of 4 ft. 8½ in. The line, when completed to Port Augusta, will extend for, approximately, 2,000 miles. Is there any reason why this piecemeal policy should be adopted ? Is there any justification for the Govern- ‘ ment submitting a proposal for the construction of a line on the 3-ft. 6-in. gauge when it admits that 4 ft. 8½ in. is the standard gauge. If the line were constructed on the broader gauge, the Government would set an example to the various State Governments. The Minister stated that a unified gauge for Australia has never been seriously discussed, but prominent railway officials and various State Governments have given the matter close attention. When a Labour Government was in power a few years ago, it was extremely anxious that the work of unifying our several gauges should proceed without delay, but owing to the difficulties which arose the policy then outlined could not be given effect to. I do not know of anything more wasteful, or any greater handicap to trade between the various States, than the varying gauges now in existence. The Northern Territory is now under the control of the Commonwealth, and I cannot understand the Government opposing such a reasonable proposition, even if it means the expenditure of a fairly large sum of money.

Senator Crawford:

– I find that the broadeningor the gauge would cost more than i intimated a little while ago.

Senator FINDLEY:
VICTORIA · ALP

– Probably the rolling-stock would have to be scrapped, and it would not be at all disadvantageous if a new line were constructed from Darwin to Daly Waters, and new rolling-stock provided, as useful employment could then be given to very large numbers of men who are now out of work. I do not suggest that the Honorary Minister is favouring the 3-ft. 6-in. gauge, so that eventually the line may be linked up with the Queensland system. He is, I hope, too big an Australian to look at it from that point of view. I am supporting the amendment, not because I am opposed to the Bill, but because the broader gauge will eventually be adopted throughout the Commonwealth. When the construction of the trans-Australian railway was under consideration some years ago, some were under the impression that the 3-ft. 6-in. gauge -should be adopted, but no one has since questioned the wisdom of adopting the broader gauge-.

Senator CRAWFORD:
Queensland!Honorary Minister · NAT

– I was in error in stating that to construct the proposed line on the 4-ft. 81/2in gauge instead of the 3-ft. 6-in. gauge, and to convert the existing line would cost £250,000. To convert the line from Port Darwin to the Katherine River from the 3-ft. 6-in. to the 4-ft. 81/2-in. gauge would cost more than £250,000. The extra cost of constructing the proposed line to Paly Waters on the broader gauge would involve an additional expenditure of £165,000. The whole cost would probably be well over £600,000. The annual interest at 5 per cent, on this extra capital expenditure would amount to over £30,000.

Senator Thompson:

– What is the length at the other end?

Senator CRAWFORD:

– Two hundred miles, and it is estimated that it would cost more than £250,000 to convert that section..

Senator Findley:

– It would save the cost of conversion later if we constructed the proposed line on the broader gauge.

Senator CRAWFORD.If the interest on this additional expends ture had to be paid for thirty years it would amount to nearly £1,000,000. There would also be the extra cost of maintaining the wider road. In view of this I hope that the amendment will not be pressed. There may not be sound reasons for converting the line to the wider gauge for a generation or two. The Government should not be asked to incur unnecessary expense, which would make the construction of railways in the Territory very costly, and delay the provision of the necessary lines for the development of that country.

Senator GARDINER:
New South Wales

– I am astonished that the Government should . attempt to spend public money in building a railway on the 3-ft. 6-in. gauge. Twelve years ago a Government embarked upon the construction of 1,100 miles of railway to link up lines in South Australia and Western Australia, which are both of the 3-ft. 6-in. gauge. That work was largely brought about by Senator Pearce, and it was constructed on what is to be the uniform gauge for Australia. In those days Senator Pearce thought ‘as an Australian, and he realized that it was . necessary for the East-West line to be built on the 4-ft. 81/2-in. gauge. Surely the present proposed line, whichis only 165 miles in length, should be of the same width. We are now very much nearer the attainment of a uniform gauge than we were when the East- West line was built. It is. practically a certainty that the standard gauge of. Australia will eventually be 4 ft. 81/2 in. If only for military reasons, the sooner there is uniformity the better. . Personally, I am not anticipating foreign aggression; hut that is not the question at issue. We should remember that we are legislating for all time. Then, again, since the construction of the East-West line there has been an. invention in New South Wales by which, rolling-stock can be transferred from the 3-ft. 6-in. gauge to the 4-ft. 81/2-in. gauge. A successful test has been carried out with a waggon bearing a 5-ton load of wool. Surely the Government will not now revert to the bad old system and perpetuate the present breaks of gauge. Australia is bearing a huge burden because of the many changes of gauge. . This, is not a party question; it is a matter of using ordinary intelligence. . We ought to be far-sighted enough to profit by the mis- takes of our forefathers. Ita now proposed to spend £1,500,000 on a new line, and the extra expense of providing for the 4-ft. 81/2-in. gauge would be comparatively small. I should like to see thorough tests made with concrete sleepers. I do not know that it would not pay to build even a concrete road, linking up the Northern Territory with the capitals of the southern States. A railway trackcosts thousands of pounds a mile to construct, and can be used for one class of traffic only, whereas, a concrete road, say 12ft. wide, with a suitable number of sidings, could be utilized for all classes of traffic, and particularly motor vehicles. There is not much doubt that motor traction will provide the transportation of the future. On one of the most difficult roads in New South Wales, where the heavy grades in the Blue Mountains have to be negotiated, a motor service is competing successfully with railways for a distance of 200 miles. We should certainly obtain an estimate of the cost of concrete roads. If, however, we must have a. railway, let us show as much courage and. patriotism as we did when the East-West line was. authorized, and let us adopt the same gauge. This Parliament should set. its. own house in order,, so that there may soon be a uniform gauge for Australia.

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

Ayes . . . . … 6

Noes …. . . . . 12:

Majority . . . . 6.

Question so resolved in the negative. Amendment negatived.

Senator McDOUGALL (New South

Wales) [10.14].- I move-

That the following words be added to the clause, “ provided that all bridges, culverts. and sleepers are so constructed that the gauge may be altered to four feet eight and. one-half inches without delay.”

We are told that this provision has been made in regard to bridges, and culverts ; but there is no mention of it in the Bill.

Senator CRAWFORD:
Honorary Minister · Queensland · NAT

– I . cannot accept the amendment because I have already given the Government’s assurance that the bridges and culverts will be constructed to carry a 4 ft. 81/2 in. line, and because also it would unnecessarily increase the cost of the line to provide sleepers suitable for the wider’ gauge.

Senator McDOUGALL:
New South Wales

.- Is it not a fact that on the extension from Pine Creek toKatherine River the sleepers were laid with a view to conversion to the 4 ft. 81/2 in. gauge

Senator Crawford:

– Yes.

Senator McDOUGALL:

– Then I cannotunderstand why the Government refuse to make the same provision on this further extension of the line. The work done in this respect on the Pine CreekKatherine River section is rendered valueless, because the Government decline to spend another £60,000, to do on the Daly Waters extension what has already been done on the portion of the railway already in use. The extra cost, is a mere nothing. My proposal is to provide for what the engineers had in mind, namely, the future conversion of the line to the 4-ft. 81/2-in. gauge. « I think it is a suicidal proposal to provide sleepers on this new section which will not permit of the conversion, to the broader gauge.

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– We are assured that the steel sleepers to be used on this section of railway will have a life of fifty years. Evidently the Government will not be in any hurry to convert this line to the 4 ft. 81/2 in. gauge. The Minister speaks of the extra, cost of cuttings and embankments if longer sleepersare used, but I do not suppose that upon this section of line there will be any cutting aver 4 ft. deep, or any embankment ever 6 in. high. I have not seen the country myself, but I am. given to understand: that it is very similar to that through which the East-West railway passes where the conditions are just as I have described. For hundreds of miles there are few cuttings more than 4 ft. deep, and there is no embankment more than 6 in. high It seems to me that the Government do not intend to unify the railway gauge.

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

– We have been informed that the Pine Creek-Katherine River section was constructed so that it could easily be converted to the 4-ft. 81/2-in. gauge. If that was the’ right policy to adopt when that line was being built, why are the Government not adopting it in regard to this new section?

Senator Crawford:

– I am not prepared to admit that it was the right policy to adopt at that time.

SenatorFINDLEY.- Then we must infer that the policy adopted in the past was not right - that the Government are now of opinion that the gauge of the Northern Territory Railway will be 3 ft. 6 in. for an indefinite period, and in fact that they are wedded to a 3-ft. 6-in. gauge.

Question - That thewords proposed to be added (Senator McDougall’s amendment) be so added - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 6

NOES: 11

Majority . . . . 5

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 7 agreed to.

Clause 8 -

The provisions of section63 of the Commonwealth Railways Act 1917 shall apply in relation to the acquisition of land for the purposes of the railway, notwithstanding the pro visions of section 11 of the Northern Territory (Administration) Act 1910 :

Provided that no person who is a lessee of lands from the Crown shall be entitled to compensation in respect of the resumption or use of any of such lands for the purposes of the railway.

Amendment (by Senator Crawford) proposed -

That the first paragraph be omitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the following words : - “ Notwithstanding the provisions of section 11 of the Northern Territory (Administration) Act 1910, the provisions of section 63 of the Commonwealth Railways Act 1917 shall apply in relation to the acquisition of land for the purposes of the railway as if after the words, ‘ Crown lands of ‘ and after the words ‘ whether by ‘ there were inserted the words, the Commonwealth or’.”.

Senator CRAWFORD:
QueenslandHonorary Minister · NAT

.- It is a drafting amendment, and provides for inserting “Commonwealthor” in two places in the original Railways Act in so far as it relates to this measure. The section will then read “ Commonwealth or State,” instead of merely “ State.”

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 9 (Wages and conditions, of employment).

Senator Needham:

– It is important that we should have a quorum present to consider such an important clause. [Quorum formed.]

Clause agreed to.

Clause 10 agreed to.

New clause -

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

.- I move-

That the following new clause be added : - “ 11. All leasehold or freehold lands increased in value by the construction of the railway shall be subject to a betterment tax of1/2d. per £ 1 per annum.”

It is recognised that the construction of a railway, or the expenditure of public money on public improvements, has a direct and permanent effect in increasing the value of land in the vicinity. The latest instance of this that has come under my notice is an Act passed by theNew South Wales Government, containing a section of this description, relating to theSydney Harbor bridge, which is, in fact, part of the railway. The whole of the land on one side, and part of the land on the other side, of the harbor has been made subject to a tax of?d. per ?1 per annum. Itis a pleasant duty to pay such a tax, because any one who pays it knows that other people have to pay it also. It takes away nothing that a person has earned, but something which has been given to him by the community, and is really communal property. As such, the community is entitled to it. I recognise that in the Northern Territory the value of the land is not so high as in other parts of the Commonwealth. I have not the slightest doubt that in a few years, and perhaps very much sooner, the Northern Territory will be thickly populated, will be a hive of industry, and will make rapid and permanent progress. There is not the remotest doubt in my mind that the construction of this line will substantially and permanently increase the value of all the adjacent lands. The further the line is constructed south, the greater will be the value of the land adjoining the section now under consideration. I do not propose that the Commonwealth should annex the whole of the added value. The land is not worth very much per square mile, and the tax will not be heavy. I understand that most of. the country is leased to various people at a few shillings per square mile per annum.

Senator Pearce:

– Most of it is not leased.

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– It will, no doubt, be leased before very long; and, in any case, it is only fair that the people whose properties are improved by the expenditure of public moneyshould make some contribution to the public funds.

The CHAIRMAN:

– (Senator Newland). -I point out to the honorable senator that the amendment seeks to impose taxation, and as the Senate has no power to originate Bills or proposals for taxation, I must rule the amendment out of order.

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– May I be permitted to move my amendment in the form of a request to the other House?

The CHAIRMAN:

– It would have the same effect. The amendment would have originated in this Committee, and the Committee has no power to originate proposals to impose taxation.

Senator Pearce:

That, theHouse of Representatives be requested to insert the following new clause : - “ 11. All leasehold or freehold lands increased in value by the construction of the railway shall be subject to a betterment tax of id.per ?1 per annum.”

Senator CRAWFORD:
Honorary Minister · Queensland · NAT

. - Although it may be permissible for the amendment sobe accepted in the folia of a request, I think, honorable senatorswill agree with mewhen I say that it Would beadeparture from the practice of this Chamber and of Parliament to convertsuch a Bill as that which is under consideration into a taxation measure. Taxation Bills are necessarily complicated, and a great deal more than the few words contained in Senator Grant’s amendment would be necessary to achieve the object he has in view. It is undesirable to include a provision of this nature is a RailwayBill, because it can only apply to the section of line to be constructed under the Bill in which the principle is included.If Parliament is in favour of a betterment tax it should be incorporated in aBill dealing exclusively with that class of taxation. This proposed line will pass through land much of which at present is unoccupied, and the remainder is held under lease. As the rental value will be re-appraised at intervals, the appraiser will take into account any increased rental value added to the leases by ‘the construction of the lore. As the honorable senator’s object willbe achieved in that way; there isnoneed for this special provision.

Senator GARDINER:
New South Wales

– I amgladthat Senator Grant has submitted this amendment. Therewas never a better opportunity ior testing the principle, because this Bill deals with territory in which the States have no concern whatever. We shall be spending public money upon a railway that will enhance considerably the value of all property through which the line passes. The suggestion that this laud should be subjected to a betterment tax of½d. in the £1 is so reasonable, and the principle isso just, thatI am surprised thatthe Minister should hesitate to accept it. It is thoroughly in accord with theprinciple adopted by intelligent Australians thirty years ago. No one would venture nowadays to go on a public platform and deny the soundness of the principle that values created by the expenditure of public moneyshould not be levied upon for the purpose of the Government. As the land at present is of comparatively little value, the tax would be correspondingly light ; but as the land increased in value through the construc tion and operation of the line, So also would the amount of taxation derived from it increase. The principle has been well laid down byHenryGeorge that values created by the presence of the community and the expenditure of public money are always a legitimate, source of revenue for the purposes of government. I am thoroughly in accord withSenator Grant in this matter, and if hecalls for a division I shall support him.

Question - That the House of Representatives be requested to insert the proposed new clause- put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 5

NOES: 11

Majority . . . . 6

Bill reported with an amendment;

AYES

NOES

Senate adjourned at 10.55p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 2 August 1923, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1923/19230802_senate_9_104/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate 2 August 1923

QUESTION

PARLIAMENTARY RECESS

Senator GARDINER:NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator PEARCE:Minister of Home and Territories · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · NAT

INSULIN FOR DIABETES

Senator PAYNE:TASMANIA

Senator WILSON:Honorary Minister · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

PAPERS

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN NOTES ISSUE

Senator GARDINER:

Senator PEARCE:NAT

APPROPRIATION (WORKS AND BUILDINGS) BILL 1923-24

BILLS: THIRD READING

NORTHERN TERRITORY RAILWAY EXTENSION BILL

Second Reading

Senator McDOUGALL:New South Wales

Senator Crawford:

Senator McDOUGALL:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Crawford:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Crawford:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Thompson:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Crawford:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Crawford:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Crawford:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Crawford:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Duncan:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Guthrie:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Sir Thomas Glasgow:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Guthrie:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Guthrie:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Crawford:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Crawford:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:QUEENSLAND

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

The PRESIDENT:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

The PRESIDENT:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Guthrie:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Crawford:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Guthrie:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Guthrie:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator Reid:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator McDougall:

Senator Thompson:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator O’LOGHLIN:South Australia

Senator GUTHRIE:Victoria

Senator Thompson:

Senator GUTHRIE:

Senator Duncan:

Senator GUTHRIE:

Senator Needham:

Senator GUTHRIE:

Senator NEWLANDS:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senate
2 August 1923

Senator GARDINER:
NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator PEARCE:
Minister of Home and Territories · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator PAYNE:
TASMANIA

Senator WILSON:
Honorary Minister · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator PEARCE:
NAT

Senator McDOUGALL:
New South Wales

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:
QUEENSLAND

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator O’LOGHLIN:
South Australia

Senator GUTHRIE:
Victoria

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator McHUGH:
South Australia

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator THOMPSON:
Queensland

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

Senator BENNY:
South Australia

Senator HOARE:
South Australia

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917