Senate
15 July 1925

9^th Parliament · 3^rd Session

PAPERS
ASSENT TO BILLS
REPORT OF LIBRARY COMMITTEE
QUESTION
- CABLE TERMINAL CHARGES
QUESTION
- LOAN” FLOTATION” IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
NAVIGATION BILL
- Second Reading
HOUR OF MEETING

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

page 1008

PAPERS

The following papers were presented: -

Australian Imperial Force Canteens Fund Act- Fifth Annual Report, 1924-25.

Cattle Export Bounty Act - Particulars of bounty paid, &c, for period ended 30th June, 1925.

Defence -

Munitions Supply Board - Annual Report for period 1st July, 1923, to 30th June, 1924, together with Annual Report of the Commonwealth Government Clothing Factory.

Report, by Lieutenant-General Sir H. G. Chauvel, G.C.M.G., K.C.B. (for InspectorGeneral), on the Australian Military Forces (Part I., 31st May, 1925).

Publio Service Act - Appointment - Deportment of Health- F. H. Taylor.

Public Service Act - Regulations amended - Statutory Rules 1925, Nos. 106 and 107.

page 1008

ASSENT TO BILLS

Assent to the following bills reported : -

National Debt Sinking Fund Bill.

Export Guarantee Bill.

High Court Procedure Bill.

States Loan Bill.

page 1008

REPORT OF LIBRARY COMMITTEE

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:
QUEENSLAND

– On behalf of the Chairman of the Joint Library Committee, I lay on the table the report of the Committee for the year ended the 30th June, 1925.

Ordered to be printed.

page 1009

QUESTION

CABLE TERMINAL CHARGES

Senator CRAWFORD:
Honorary Minister · QUEENSLAND · NAT

– On the 26th June, Senator Duncan asked the following questions : -

What was the total sum received by the Commonwealth in respect of terminal cable charges for the year 1923-24 for ordinary, deferred, press, and other classes of traffic?
What proportion of this sum approximately represented traffic actually handled by the Commonwealth Post Office over land lines operated by the Post Office (i.e., excluding traffic operated by the cable administrations over lines leased by them) ?
What was the cost of maintenance of land lines leased to the Eastern Extension Company and Pacific Cable Board respectively for the year 1923-24?
What was the interest charge on the capital cost of such lines?
What was the total loss on the Telegraphic Branch of the Postmaster-General’s Department for the year 1923-24 without crediting cable terminal charges for which the Post Office performed no services?
Will the Postmaster-General, in future reports of the department, show clearly the receipts in respect of cable terminal charges and separate these figures from ordinary receipts of the Telegraphic Branch?

The following are the replies : -

£236,090.
Statistics are not kept.
Land lines are not leased but are provided free of charge to the Eastern Extension Company and Pacific Cable Board. The cost of maintenance (including depreciation) of the lines, but not including the cost of operating staff at repeating stations or cost of interest and maintenance of buildings, was approximately £22,300.
£19,375.
Statistics are not kept to indicate the proportion of traffic on which the Post Office performs any service, but the net loss on the telegraph system as a whole was £189,000.
These particulars are already shown in the department’s reports. (See Appendix “ A,” Table No. 5, page 30, of report for 1923-4.)

page 1009

QUESTION

LOAN” FLOTATION” IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Senator HOARE (for Senator O’Loghlin asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice -

Kas his attention been called to a cablegram from New York in the Age newspaper of 9th July, 1925, to the effect that the Commonwealth had asked the British Government whether, in view of the exceptionally heavy amount of maturing loans in 1925, the latter would have any objection to the Commonwealth approaching the New York market for accommodation up to a certain amount, and that the British. Government had intimated that it had no objection, as it did not consider there would be sufficient money available in London to satisfy the requirements of Austraiian Governments during the year?

Is it necessary for the Commonwealth Government to consult the British Government before borrowing money for the service of the Commonwealth ?

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

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

The Commonwealth has not asked the British Government whether it would have any objection to the Commonwealth approaching the New York market.
No.

page 1009

NAVIGATION BILL

Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders.

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Home and Territories · Western Australia · NAT

– I ask leave to move, without notice, that leave be given to introduce a bill for an act to amend the Navigation Act 1912-1920.

Senator Needham:

– I object.

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:

– Objection having been taken, the Minister cannot have leave to move his motion without notice.

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Home and Territories · Western Australia · NAT

.- Then I move-

That so much of the Standing and Sessional Orders be suspended as would prevent a bill for an act to amend the Navigation Act 1912- 1920 being introduced without notice, and passed through all stages without delay.

I do not propose at this juncture to deal with the bill itself, other than to say that the matter is urgent, and that the Government desires that it be proceeded with without delay. In view of the general desire that Parliament should rise for the celebration of the arrival in Australian waters of the American Fleet, it is essential that the procedure associated with the preliminary stages laid down in the Standing Orders, by which a delay of two or three days would occur, be dispensed with in this instance. As the matter is urgent, I ask the Senate to agree to the suspension of the Standing and Sessional Orders.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– I certainly- will not lend any assistance in the direction of the suspension of the Standing Orders to facilitate the introduction of a bill to amend the Navigation Act. I will not countenance the habit that has been formed by the Government of asking every week or so for the suspension of the rules which ordinarily govern our procedure. This is not a coincidence. It is not an accident. The practice of asking for the suspension of the Standing Orders, for the purpose of rushing legislation through the chamber, is becoming chronic. .The Government seems to have got into a state of panic. Ministers are being stampeded themselves, and they are endeavouring to stampede the Senate. If it be necessary to amend the Navigation Act, surely the ordinary practice can be followed. The Minister could obtain leave to-day to introduce the bill, and fix the date for - the first reading, after which the clauses of the measure could be debated deliberately. Even if the matter be urgent the suspension of the Standing Orders is not justified. By following the usual pro.cedure the bill could be debated at its several stages to-morrow, on Friday, and, if necessary, on Saturday. I do not know what its provisions are. The Minister has not seen fit to vouchsafe any information as to what portion of the Navigation Act the Government desires to amend. All I know is that there has been a caucus meeting of the supporters of the Government. It was held hurriedly this afternoon, and the Leader of the Senate, after rushing down from that gathering, now endeavours to stampede us at short notice into the suspension of the Standing Orders to enable the bill to be passed at’ express speed. Are the Standing Orders not for the good conduct of the business of this chamber? Almost every week since we assembled on the 10th June we have had the Minister asking for the suspension of the Standing Orders. Honorable senators on this side of the chamber agreed to their suspension in connexion with the National Debt Sinking Fund and States Loan Bills, for we realized the urgency of those measures, but in the present case we remember that the Navigation Act was not placed on the statute-book until it had been deliberated upon for many years. From nine to ten years of almost continuous debate took place in this Parliament before the mea- ; sure was passed, and even then it did not come into operation until it received the Royal assent. Considering how important that legislation is, and the benefit it has conferred upon the people of Australia, why should the Senate now suspend the Standing Orders so that an amending bill may be rushed through this chamber, and probably also through the other? I see no vital reason why the motion should be agreed to. Had the Minister given some indication of the nature of the amending bill we should not have been left entirely in the dark, but he has calmly invited us to give him a blank cheque. Let him bring in the bill in the ordinary way, circulate it amongst honorable senators, and let the measure be debated in the ordinary course. If the Minister then found that an attempt was made to block the bill, his present request might be opportune. I hope that he will not insist on pursuing the course he is adopting, ana I urge the Senate to show by its vote that it wishes that the recognized procedure of this chamber be followed. The Minister might as well ask that the Government be given carte blanche to introduce any legislation it desires, and rush it through the chamber without observing the Standing Orders. I recognize that the numbers are up on this occasion, and that the Minister is only obeying the dictates of the caucus meeting, hot-footed from which he has just entered the chamber. I trust that the Senate will reject the motion.

Senator HANNAN:
Victoria

– I wish to endorse the sentiment expressed by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Senator Needham). If the matter is of such an urgent nature that the Standing Orders should be suspended, honorable senators are at least entitled to some information to justify them in voting for the motion. The only reason given for it is the near approach of the American Fleet. What has the visit of that fleet to do with the Navigation Act, that has occupied a place on the statutebook for so many years? When we had a visit from the Prince of Wales, the heir-apparent to the British throne, who was accompanied by a section of the British navy, the Government of the day did not consider it essential to ask for the suspension of the Standing Orders to enable a bill to be introduced to amend the Navigation Act. Why, in connexion with the recent visit of a. section of the Japanese navy, -was it not considered necessary to amend that measure ? We on this side are entitled to know the real reason for the Minister’s haste on this occasion. Is the haste due to the pending visit of the American Fleet, or does he desire the suspension of the Standing Orders for another purpose altogether ? I have an idea that, his action is, in some way, connected with the’ present shipping dispute. If the honorable senator’s object is to introduce a bill to amend those sections of the Navigation Act which render protection to both Australian seamen and the shipowners during normal times, we on this side desire to know what those amendments are, and for whose protection they are intended. I fear that the object of the Government is to place itsfull power behind the Steamship Owners Association in their conflict with the seamen. I can only endorse the remarks of the deputy-leader of this party (Senator Needham), that no . legislation passed by this Parliament had a more difficult passage ‘through both Houses than the present Navigation Act. A few days ago Senator Lynch, in the course of a speech in this Chamber, asked for an alteration of the Navigation. Act; and I also heard representatives of Tasmania advocating the repeal of sections of that act which in years gone by they fought for because they believed that they would be of benefit to Australian shipping and those connected with it. To say that the arrival of the American Fleet is a sufficient reason for the suspension of the Standing Orders to enable this bill to be rushed through this Chamber is hypocrisy iti excelsis, and we on this side will vote against the motion.

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

– Every section of this Parliament should at all times jealously guard its interests. For that reason honorable senators should not permit the Standing Orders of the Senate to be contravened unless in extraordinary circumstances. The Leader of the Government in this Chamber (Senator Pearce) has stated that the measure to which this motion relates is a matter of urgency. I ask for whom is it urgent. Is it urgent because its quick passage through this Chamber will assist the party to which he belongs? We have been .informed that an urgent meeting of Government supporters was held to-day; and, while I do not believe all that I hear, rumour has it that the meeting was not altogether like a prayer meeting - that there were strained relations at the gathering. When at that meeting certain suggestions for dealing with the present shipping trouble were made, those who desired to go beyond what the more moderate-minded among’ them believed was necessary were told, so we are informed, “ Thus far, but no farther.” The suggestion was made I understand, that a bill to amend the Navigation Act should be introduced: If there is one honorable senator who ought to hesitate about amending that act, it is the present Leader of the Government in this Chamber. He it was who, as a member of a Labour Government a few years ago, piloted the measure through this Chamber, in spite of the vigorous opposition of men who to-day are associated with him politically. The honorable senator then stood for every provision in the bill which has since become law. He pointed out, as he would point out to-day if he were not tied up as he is, that that legislation was inthe best interests of the shipping industry and all connected with it, as well as for the benefit of the community generally. He showed them that it safeguarded and protected the White Australia policy, that it insured for the workers on the sea condi-Hons which they were unable to obtain previously. No sooner had the act been placed on the statute-book, than efforts were made to amend it. Those efforts were not made because of a desire to further assist the seamen ; they were made in the interests of- that section of the community from which the Government to-day derives strong financial support-. Reference has been made to the- speeches which have been made in this chamber, urging an amendment of the existing act. From time to time honorable senators representing Tasmania have vigorously opposed some of its provisions; I expect that their influence was exercised to-day at that meeting to which I ‘have already referred;

Senator Ogden:

– I do not think so.

Senator FINDLEY:

– We on this side hold that there should be no tinkering with the Navigation Act, which would adversely affect the seamen or endanger the White Australia policy. We are informed by the Minister that the passing of this bill is a matter of urgency. Every, thing seems to be urgent when . the GoTvernment wants to get into recess, or enjoy a short holiday. With the Government nothing succeeds like recess. It is true that the American Fleet is expected to arrive in Melbourne next week. It is true also that that will be an event of importance in the history of the Commonwealth, but I confess my inability to Bee any connexion between the arrival in our waters of vessels forming part of the American Fleet and the urgency of an amendment of the Navigation Act. This is too serious a matter to be trifled with. Not in connexion with any measure which has found a place on the statute-book of the Commonwealth have more pains been taken, nor has greater discussion taken place, than in connexion with the Navigation Act, which now the Leader of the Government in this chamber seeks permission to amend as an urgent matter. I shall not assist in passing any amendment of the Navigation Act which is not in the interests of seafaring men. If the act is to be amended, and the numbers are’ up from the Government point of view, the amendments should be made in a constitutional way. This Government, one of the characteristics of which is to go slow, seems to get into a state of panic when any alleged trouble arises. It desires then to have the Standing Orders abrogated, and to carry legislation through at express speed, and in a most unbusiness-like way. It is unbusiness-like for the Government to desire the suspension of the Standing Orders at the commencement of a session. There may be some excuse for such action when we. are approaching Christmas, as’ at that period of the year there is usually a better spirit abroad. and members are anxious to return to their respective states and to the bosom of their respective families. In such circumstances a motion for the suspension of the Standing Orders would not encounter the opposition that it is meeting with to-day. Parliament reassembled on the 10th June. We had hardly commenced the business of the session when the Government found it necessary to proceed with its work in a way which no other Government would have considered prudent. It is characteristic of this combination, which is supposed to consist of business men. They may understand their respective businesses, but they do not understand the political business. A matter of urgency ! If the

Government went about ils work in a business-like way it would pass legislation in much less time than it will by introducing a motion such as the Minister has just submitted. The Minister could not bring the bill forward without moving for the suspension of the Standing Orders, and when objection was raised to such a course being adopted he endeavoured to look surprised; but he was not surprised. He would have been if the motion had been adopted without opposition. Any task the Minister has to perform in the direction of amending the Navigation Act must be a thankless one to him. His heart cannot be in his work unless the opinions he held a few years ago have completely changed. You will remember, Mr. President, how warmly the Minister supported the Navigation Bill, and how vigorously he attacked those who desired to amend it in the way they considered necessary. I believe it was one of the joys of his life when he was able to say that the Government with which he was associated had at last passed a measure which had been so’ long under discussion, and about which every preceding Government had issued promissory notes which were never redeemed. lt was a happy day for the Minister when the measure passed all its’ stages, and eventually received the royal assent. Is the Minister happy to-day ? If he is ho could be happy in any circumstances ; but I do not think he is constituted in that way. The Leader of the Government in the Senate cannot be unmindful of the past. To hear the opinions of certain honorable senators one would think that the present shipping dispute was something new to Australia. We can reasonably anticipate that the proposed amendment of the Navigation Act is in connexion with the present shipping trouble. If it is not in that connexion, what is its object ? ‘ Is it to placate those Tasmanian representatives who always seem . to have a grievance ? If they are not complaining of the Tasmanian shipping services, they are in difficulties over the disposal of their apple or hop crops, and if it is not either of those mentioned it is something incidental to that institution which is known in different parts of Australia as “ Tattersalls.”

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– Considering the meagre information that has been vouchsafed by the Minister (Senator Pearce) the suspension of the Standing and Sessional Orders should not be countenanced by honorable senators. For very many years efforts have been made to frame Standing Orders which will give to every honorable senator a fair deal. It is now suddenly proposed to sweep those to one side in order that action may be taken of which honorable senators, on this side at any rate, had no knowledge before the meeting^ of the Senate. The Government is no’t playing the game. There are no fewer than 450 Standing and Sessional Orders which honorable senators are expected to observe. An index covering 24 pages is provided to enable an honorable senator to locate promptly any Standing Order that he may desire to consult. For the further assistance of honorable senators an analysis of the various Standing Orders is embodied in another nine pages. We are all liable to err, but prompt action is always taken to keep honorable senators within the limits of the Standing Orders. Apparently, because of the visit to Australia of the American Fleet, the Government desire to pass through all its stages an amendment of the Navigation Act. Very few acts have occupied the time of the Senate for so long a period as did the Navigation Act. It must be remembered that the seamen are not the only persons who are affected by the provisions of that act. It affects also the ship-owners and the travelling public, as well as the sea-borne commerce of the Commonwealth. Any one who Has followed the endeavours by seamen in all countries to better their conditions must have been struck with the fact that at all times they have had a very strenuous existence. It has been said that the conditions of the seamen on the Australian coast, are equal to, and in some cases better than, those obtaining in any other part of the world. They should be. In the opinion of the seamen, however - and they are the best judges in the matterthose conditions are not so good as they should be. Some little while ago a powerful morning newspaper referred to one of the seamen as the leader of a revolution to secure ham and eggs for breakfast. Imagine the impudence of this well-fed, well-groomed, well-paid editor, criticizing the action of one not so well favoured, although built of the same material as he!

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon.

Givens). - Does the honorable senator really consider that that has anything to do with the question as to whether the Standing and Sessional Orders should or should not be suspended?

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– Anything which may affect the seamen can, I think, be properly reviewed in a discussion of this motion. I cannot see what urgency there can be for the introduction of an amendment of the Navigation Act. Had the Minister been able to show that there was urgency, the position would have been entirely different from what it is now. He was particularly careful not to give any indication of the nature of the urgency, excepting to say that the American Fleet was visiting Australia. I fail to see any connexion between the arrival, the departure, or the entertainment of the American Fleet and the Navigation Act.

Senator Wilson:

– Did not the Minis ter distinctly state that the matter was urgent because of the adjournment that is proposed on account of the visit of the American Fleet to Australia?

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– I did not hear him say that.

Senator Duncan:

– The Minister said that the adjournment over the fleet festivities made the matter an urgent one.

Senator Hannan:

– The Minister may have intended to say that, but he did not do so.

Senator Wilson:

– He did!

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– I do not deny that he said it. But what is of greater concern to me is, why the necessity to suspend the Standing and Sessional Orders? Does the Minister think that he is acting fairly in attempting, with the aid of honorable senators who support him; to force this measure through the Senate. That method of doing business may be all right in a place like Italy, and may eventually be adopted in Australia. It may have some good points in its favour, but if the tables were turned, and Labour had a majority in the Senate, those who are now supporting the Ministry would from these benches strenuously oppose a proposal to suspend the Standing Orders for the purpose of enabling the Government of the day to put the whole of the principles of the Labour platform on the statute-book in one act. If the present Government wants to force legislation through without adequate notice, and fair discussion, I can only presume that if a change of government takes place members of the present administration will raise no serious objection to their successors following the example that is now being set. I do not sav that two wrongs make a right, but there will at least be some justification if such a thing is done. Our Standing Orders are ouch that honorable senators frequently come into conflict with them, but they are framed for our guidance. I realize that Senator Pearce is perfectly in order in asking ‘ that the Standing Orders be suspended, so that his proposed amendment of the Navigation Act can be dealt with almost without discussion.

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:

– The honorable senator is under a misapprehension. The Leader of the Government is asking only for the suspension of so much of the Standing and Sessional Orders as would prevent the bill being passed through all its stages without delay. The rest of the Standing and Sessional Orders will remain intact.

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– I understand, of course, that if this motion is carried, honorable senators will not be prevented from opposing the bill to the best of their ability, but it is to be regretted that the Minister did not take us more into his confidence and point out the reasons for thealleged urgency. If he had shown us that something of an extraordinarycharacter necessitated this departure from the usual method of procedure, I am sure honorable senators would have been reasonable enough to give him a square deal. But he has not done so, and I enter my emphatic protest against the suspension of the Standing and Sessional Orders for this particular purpose.

– I ask the honorable senator whether we should not treat the matter as a serious one? I point out that a serious position cannot be met by ordinary means. Extraordinary means, such as the present proposal, have to be adopted. I notice in this afternoon’s issue of the Melbourne Herald a statement showing that the course the Government proposes to adopt in. this case is to be followed by the Melbourne Trades Hall Council. This paper does not print anything that I say. But that does not matter. There is a freemasonry amongst the Melbourne newspapers, and if you offend one you offend them all. The old world tyranny was nothing to the tyranny of these “ rags.” I pick up this paper, and on a page which bears no number, but is stamped “ Late City,” and bears a red star, which certainly looks ominous, and on that account ought to be accepted as a standard authority.

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:

– Order! A red star in the

Herald has nothing to do with the question under discussion.

Senator LYNCH:

– “What the Government now proposes to do has been done, according to this report, at the temple at which mv honorable friends opposite must kneel, almost with bared feet. The paragraph reads -

Contrary to custom, the Melbourne Trades Hall Disputes Committee has not yet summoned a conference of the unions likely to be concerned. This action is expected to-morrow or on Friday. To-morrow night the suspension of standing orders will be moved at the meeting of the Melbourne Trades Hall Council, to enable the position to be discussed, and the executive of the Council is expected to submit a report on the matter.

Senator LYNCH:

– And that is not a bad title. I shall support the motion, and hope that honorable senators who have expressed their intention of opposing it will see the folly of their way, and retrace their steps. By so doing they will show their willingness to act worthily of the great traditions of His Majesty’s Opposition in this chamber.’

Senator BARNES:
Victoria

.- I rise to speak against the motion. Although it is true that on many occasions it has been found necessary for the Senate to suspend the Standing Orders, as far as I can remember, the Minister moving the motion has oh every occasion taken honorable senators into his confidence, informed them of the reason for his proposed action, and given them some indication cif the nature of the amendments to be . brought forward . Honorable senators have already referred to the fact that the Navigation Act. was placed upon the statute-book only after very full consideration; and that, even after it had obtained the approval of both Houses of Parliament, several years elapsed before the royal assent was obtained, and the legislation put into operation. When we consider those circumstances, and then call to mind the circumstances existing at present in the shipping industry, we must seriously consider what should be done. Those who constitute the Parliament of a country are supposed to have special ability to deal with great issues, such . as that now agitating the minds of the people of Australia.’ If that be true, surely we should not be the first to rush in, looking for a fight. Seeing that the ship-owners and the seamen have been see-sawing, negotiating, and also, unfortunately, uttering words which radoubtedly are unwise, it is not for us to interfere before it is necessary. It is their own fight, and as yet Parliament has no place in it.

Senator Lynch read from the Herald a statement that the Melbourne Trades Hall Council to-morrow would move the suspension of its standing orders. That is a matter of importance, as the council represents 250,000 workers in Victoria.

Senator PEARCE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917; UAP from 1931

– We, in this Senate, represent 2,000,000 electors of Australia.

Senator BARNES:

– That may be so, but we are not all in touch with the forces in the industrial world. Some of us are, but Senator Lynch evidently is not. He said that certain things which are contemplated in this chamber were also contemplated by the’ Melbourne Trades Hall Council. Nothing of the kind ! Before the Melbourne Trades Hall Council adopted that course, reasons for the suspension of the standing orders would be given, as well as proper notice of the intention to move in that direction. Had the Minister given us an indication of the nature of the amending bill, and provided Opposition members with an opportunity to study it, he would have been acting in a- proper manner, and could, with reason, have asked that the measure be passed through this chamber without unnecessary delay. It was only after a long fight (hat the Navigation Act was placed on the statute-book. Among its provisions is one embodying the White Australia policy. It might be that the Government now proposes to attack that principle, and to provide that vessels employing black labour may engage in our coastal and interstate trade to the detriment not only of the seamen of this country, but of the ship-owners also.

Senator Elliott:

– Are Australian ships running at the present time?

Senator BARNES:

– I am sorry to say that they are not, and I am very concerned whether the action of the Government will assist to make them run. The Prime Minister in another place a short time ago remarked that we. should be careful about interfering in delicate matters. There are people in Australia who know more about this shipping dispute (ban does Senator Lynch, but they have sufficient sense not to run in with a big stick and bludgeon every one. Senator Lynch has thought fit to deliver a lecture to Senator Findley and myself and others who were in the Labour movement before he came to this country, and are in it still. We stand for white labour in Australia, while Senator Lynch advocates black labour. Yet the honorable senator presumes to lecture me. There are capable men on both sides in this dispute who, in all probability, are now cudgelling their brains to find a way out. They are prepared to go to the limit of what their respective sides can do to deal with thi3 dispute in a way that will give them a reasonable chance of settling it honorably. Seeing that I am the president of an association containing 120,000 men in this country - all good fighters when the necessity arises - I might be excused if I were presumptuous enough to say that I would be one pf the last to attempt to interfere in a coercive manner in a matter of this kind. I believe that it is the right and privilege of every prominent member of the community who is in the full possession of his senses, whether he be in this Parliament or in the industrial or shipping world, to place his services at the disposal of his country to ensure peace in industry. We want nolectures from Senator Lynch, as we know more about the position than he does. Unlike Senator Elliott, I have not had the honour of taking a part in the battles of the Empire, but I have been in almost every industrial fight in Australia during the last 30 years. I do not want any one to tell me what I should do or say ; I object to such lectures. We on this side object to the Minister’s proposal because we are fearful that the Government will try to do on this occasion what was done under the War Precautions Act, when so many in this Senate were misled. While I am a member of this Parliament I am not going to agree to anything of the kind. I seriously ask the Government to re-consider its proposal, and to give effect to its intentions in another and what I consider to be the constitutional way. If they did that, it would probably avoid the trouble that must naturally arise if action is taken in the direction indicated by the Minister. I trust that wiser counsels will prevail. We should not in this Chamber start a conflict over the shipping dispute which will extend far beyond the precincts of this Chamber; in fact, all over the Commonwealth. It should not be said that as your side is fighting ours will fight also. An earnest endeavour should be made to settle the dispute, and thus enable industry to be carried on in a manner satisfactory to all parties.

Senator GIBBS (New South Wales) mitted by the Minister (Senator Pearce) with a good deal of diffidence, as this is the first occasion on which I have spoken in this Chamber. I therefore trust honorable senators will bear with me if I do not comply in every detail with the established custom of the Senate. As the debate proceeds the more perplexed I become. The Minister indicated that the motion was submitted in consequence of the approaching visit of the American Fleet.

Senator Pearce:

– No, in consequence of the adjournment proposed in connexion with the visit of the fleet.

Senator GIBBS:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– The Minister referred to the arrival of the fleet.

Senator Pearce:

– Yes, and the proposed adjournment in consequence of its visit.

Senator GIBBS:

– It appears to me that the motive underlying the motion is that given to the Senate by Senator Lynch. Everyone is well aware that an industrial crisis is pending, and I am very much afraid that the amendment of the Navigation Act, as proposed, will not have the results anticipated. The Navigation Act, I understand, contains approximately 425 sections, and I should like to know which of these sections it is proposed to amend. Is it the intention of the Government to amend the act so far as it relates to the restrictions imposed upon men who go down to the sea in ships. Does it propose to interfere with the operations of ship-owners engaged in Australian costal trade, or is it intended to place employees aboard those ships who have not complied with the conditions laid down in the Navigation Act? If it is the intention to amend the act inany of these directions I shall most emphatically protest.

Senator Lynch:

– Has not society some claim in the matter?

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:

– Order ! The honorable senator should be allowed to proceed without interruption.

Senator GIBBS:

– We are grateful to Senator Lynch for the kindly feelings he displays towards honorable senators on this side of the chamber. Personally, I am grateful to him for pointing out the evil of our ways, but let me assure the honorable senator that we have nothing whatever to fear from the people of Australia in the opposition we are showing to the proposal to amend the Navigation Act, which was passed after strenuous discussion and lengthy debate, and which was acclaimed from one end of the country to the other when it became law. Senator Lynch said that in consequence of the pending industrial crisis the Standing Orders should be suspended to enable a bill to be introduced to amend the Navigation Act. From that I assume he believes that an amendment of that act will be the means of preventing an industrial crisis. Let me assure Senator Lynch that such will not be the case, and that the suspension of those provisions which protect the rights of seamen working on the Australian coast will bring about an even greater industrial crisis than that which is at present feared. I am firmly convinced that the whole of the trouble referred to by Senator Lynch could have been avoided if the Prime Minister (Mr. Bruce) had displayed a little more tact, instead of informing the members of a deputation from New South Wales that a stage had now been reached when the dispute had to be fought to a finish. The right honorable gentleman should have indicated his willingness to intervene and brim* about a conference between the parties concerned. Even at this stage I feel that it is not too late to prevent an industrial upheaval. All that is necessary is for the Prime Minister to intimate to the ship-owners throughout Australia and to the employees’ representatives that it is his intention to convene a round-table conference at which all the cards of the opposing factions can be placed on the table. If that is done I believe that the present industrial trouble will be settled in a short time. If the act is amended - I presume that such amendments can only be for the purpose of endeavouring to prevent an industrial crisis being precipitated - in the way which the Government believe is necessary to prevent a crisis, it can only be done by amending section 39 of Division VI., which provides that seamen must serve a certain time before the mast before the.y can be employed on coastal vessels. Amendments can only be made in that direction or in the manner suggested by Senator Barnes, so that overseas steamships may engage in the interstate coastal trade. That would mean the abrogation of our White Australia policy, because the ships which would engage in such trade are in most cases manned by coloured labour. That is a proposal which I, as an Australian born citizen, strongly resent, particularly in view of the strenuous efforts made prior to the introduction of the Navigation Act to protect Australian seamen from the competition of coloured labour. I earnestly trust that the Government will review the situation which has arisen in consequence of the Minister’s expressed intention to suspend the Standing Orders, and that he will permit the amending bill to come before the Senate in the customary manner. It is to be hoped that he will not regard the measure as a matter of urgency, but will allow it to be dealt with as are other bills. If that is done honorable senators will have a proper and reasonable opportunity to debate the bill clause by clause, and we shall then know that the measure has been passed after due deliberation and the utmost consideration of the importance of its provisions.

Senator FOLL:
Queensland

.- Practically every honorable senator who bas opposed the motion for the suspension of the Standing Orders appear to be fully conversant with the provisions of the bill to be submitted. I am not officially aware of the contents of the measure- to be presented, but when we remember that during the last two years a royal commission has been inquiring into the operation of the Navigation Act as it affects Australian trade and ascertaining how existing anomalies can be rectified, apparently the time to introduce amendments to that act is overdue. As honorable senators are aware three distinct recommendations have been made, and judging by the reports of the commission there is an urgent need to amend the act. A number of questions have been asked in this chamber and in another place concerning the introduction of an amending Navigation Bill more in keeping with existing conditions, and the Government apparently realize that the time is now opportune for certain amendments to be made. During a recent visit to New Guinea of the Public Accounts Committee, the representatives of the commercial community and those responsible for the administration of that territory brought under the notice of the committee the fact that trade was considerably hampered in consequence of the operation of the Navigation Act. Prior to the visit to New Guinea of the Public Accounts Committee the Navigation Commission also took evidence from representative authorities in that territory, who forcibly stated that its trade and commerce were seriously hampered and that the whole of the shipping business of New Guinea was being forced under the control of one company. Complaints have also been made by the people of other distant parts of Australia that certain sections of the Navigation Act are affecting them adversely. They have pointed out that, without destroying those provisions which give protection to the seamen, alterations could be made with advantage in certain directions. It is surprising to hear honorable senators opposite endeavouring to forecast the contents of the proposed bill. They may be right, or they may be wrong, in their conjectures. Every honorable senator is anxious to know what the bill contains, so that he can decide whether to support or oppose it. All that the Minister (Senator Pearce) has asked is that certain obstacles should be removed to enable the work of the Senate to be expedited.

Senator Hannan:

– Why is the honorable senator “ stone- walling “ the motion ?

Senator FOLL:

Senator PAYNE:

Motion (by Senator Wilson) - That the Senate do now divide - put. The Senate divided.

AYES: 16

NOES: 11

Majority … … 5

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

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

AYES: 19

NOES: 9

Majority . . . . 10

AYES

NOES

Motion (by Senator Wilson) proposed -

That leave be given to bring in a bill for an act to amend the Navigation Act 1912-1920.

Question put. The Senate divided.

AYES: 18

NOES: 9

Majority . . 9

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Sitting suspended from 6.30 to 8 p.m.

Senator WILSON:
South AustraliaMinister for Markets and Migration · NAT

– I bring up the bill and move -

That the bill be now read a first time.

Senator Needham:

– I point out, Mr. President, that honorable senators have not yet seen the bill.

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon.

Givens). - There can be no discussion at this stage, which is a purely formal one.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator WILSON (South Australia-

Minister for Markets and Migration) [8.1]. - I move -

That the bill be now read a secondtime.

I shall confine myself as much as possible to the alterations of the principal act, which the Government feels to be essential in the present abnormal conditions. Only last week we had submitted in the Senate motions by Senator Ogden, of Tasmania, and Senator Lynch, of Western Australia, bearing upon the prejudicial effect of the Navigation Act upon the trade of their respective states.

Senator WILSON:
NAT

– That dealt with the necessity for the Government to give an undertaking that there would be continuity of transport facilities between the mainland and Tasmania, which cannot be reached except by water. The many differences that the Seamen’s Union has had with the shipping companies culminated on the 4th June in the union being deregistered by the Arbitration Court. Many years were spent in building up our arbitration system in order that all sections of the community might have the protection of the court, and so thatthe wheels of industry might be kept running. But the seamen’s representatives now say to the ship-owners, “ We are deregistered, and our award is cancelled, but if you do not give a written undertaking that you will observe the conditions of the cancelled awards, we shall tie up all your ships.” The ship-owners on the other hand, have declared in effect, “ We are quite prepared to observe the existing conditions on board our ships, but we refuse to be bludgeoned into signing an agreement to embody in our articles the terms of a cancelled award.” There is a third party to this dispute. I refer to the people of this country.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– They are not in the picture.

Senator WILSON:

– The Government feels that they ought to be. It realizes that these people have a right to expect it to prevent any section from taking the law into its own hands. Through the medium of the arbitration laws the Government will assist the seamen, but their union has refused to have anything; more to do with the awards of the Arbitration Court. In these circumstances it is veryencouraging to find, in spite of the statements made in this chamber thisafternoon, that many trade unions still hold the view that the Arbitration Court should be upheld, and that the stand adopted by the Seamen’s Union is not suited to the times in which we live. The Navigation Act confers many privilegeson those engaged in the Australian coastal trade, and I am sure that honorable senators will admit that in no other part of the world are conditions to be found equalling those enjoyed by Australian seamen. We are told now by the leaders of the Seamen’s Union that they do not want the Arbitration Court and the protection that it has given them, but that they are going to force their own terms on the community. Speaking for myself, I maintain that the stand taken by the unions in New South Wales who undertook to police the Seamen’s Union, wa9 fraught with great danger. No union has the right to police another union, except through the medium of the law. I heard the statement made this afternoon that the Prime Minister had said that this was to be a fight to a finish. The Prime Minister has never made such an assertion. He advised the union what to do, and he is willing to assist it to reorganize and brins; itself into harmony with the laws of the country.

The Government hopes, by this small but very important bill, to place itself in a position to deal with the serious situation that has arisen. It asks, under it, for the suspension of the coastal provisions of the Navigation Act which are covered by Part VI. Part VI. of the act, comprising sections 284 to 293, inclusive, deals with the engagement of ships in the coasting trade of the Commonwealth and of the territories under the authority of the Commonwealth. Under the provisions of this part, no passengers or cargo can be conveyed between such ports excepting where the ship is licensed to engage in the coasting trade, or in special circumstances where the ship is granted a permit to do so. Section 288. deals with the licensing of vessels to engage in the coasting trade. Any ship, whether British or foreign, can obtain a licence on compliance with the conditions laid down in the act. These conditions are -

That the seamen employed on the ship shall be paid wages at the current rates ruling in Australia;
That in the case of a foreign shipshe shall be provided with the same number of officers and seamen, and with the same accommodation for them, as would be required if she were a British ship registered in Australia or engaged in the coasting trade.

The foregoing are the two main provisions. There is also a third condition, of relatively little importance, which requires -

That where a library is provided for the use of passengers, and there is no special library for the use of the seamon, the latter are to be entitled to obtain books from the passengers’ library under the same conditions as the passengers.

This last-mentioned provision, it may be stated, is practically a dead letter, for the simple reason that in the few cases where coasting ships provided passengers’ libraries such were discontinued. Section 286 of the act deals with the issue of permits. As provided in the section, such permits can be issued only -

where no licensed ship is available for the particular service to a port or between any ports in the coasting trade limits; or
when the service as carried out by a licensed ship or ‘ships is inadequate to the needs of such port or ports.

The carriage of passengers or cargo under a permit does not subject the ship to any condition as to payment of coasting wages, provision of accommodation according to the Navigation Act standards, etc. The new section, 293a, now proposed, will enable the Governor-General, in times of public emergency, to suspend by proclamation the provisions of Part VI. of the act relating to the coasting trade. This will enable any ships whatever, whether engaged in the oversea or coasting trade, whether British or foreign, to participate in the carriage of passengers and cargo. Let me say here that the Government hope that many of the powers to be conferred by the bill will not be found necessary; but the time has arrived when it should take a very firm and definite stand in this matter. While I say that we should be firm, I also consider that it is equally the duty of the Government to be fair to all sections of the community. I can give an assurance, on behalf of the

Government, that the powers for which the bill provides will be used, if it is found necessary to use them, with the greatest care, and everything possible will be done to expedite a return to those happy conditions to which the people of Australia have been accustomed.

– The Seamen’s Union is not a party to that agreement.

Senator NEEDHAM:

– We shall see what transpires ; but it is understood that there will be no job control exercised in connexion with ships of the Commonwealth Government Line. Senator Lynch referred to the action of the Trades Hall Council in suspending its standing orders to discuss this question tomorrow, and it is a pity that the course to be taken by that body was not followed by the Government in this instance. The Trades Hall Council has to-day given notice to the delegates that a motion will be submitted to-morrow for the suspension of its standing orders to enable this question to be discussed. Clause 3 of the bill, which is its most important provision, provides - “ 293a. (1) The Governor-General may, if at any time he considers it expedient in the public interest to do so, by Proclamation sus pend, for such time as is specified in the Proclamation, the operation of any of the foregoing provisions of this Part, as regards any ship or class of ships, and either unconditionally or subject to such conditions (if any) as he thinks fit. to impose.

A Proclamation issued in pursuance of the preceding sub-section may providefor suspension for the period specified in the Pro clamation or may provide for suspension until the issue of a Proclamation revoking the prior Proclamation.”

Clause 2 provides -

This Act shall commence on a date to be fixed by Proclamation after the King’s approval thereto has been proclaimed in the Commonwealth.

It will be seen that, if this measure is passed by both branches of the legislature, it will have to receive the Royal assent. We are asked to add to section 293 of the principal act clause 3, which I have just quoted. Section 293 of the act reads -

The master, owners, and agents of anyship engaging in the coasting trade, shall be jointly and severally responsible for compliance with this part of this act by or in respect of the ship, and shall be liable to any pecuniary penalty provided’ by this act for any breach or contravention of this part of this act, by or in respect of the ship, and where no penalty is provided shall be liable in respect of any such breach or contravention to a penalty of not more than one hundred pounds, and the ship in respect of which the offence is committed may be disqualified by the GovernorGeneral from engaging in the coasting trade.

– I do not desire this matter to become a personal one. I have iust told the honorable senator that I was not in the Senate when the exemptions were granted, but I made my voice heard as a private citizen in Western Australia. Therefore it did not take me three years to arrive at that conclusion.

Senator HANNAN:

– And on the other hand, the policy of the Steamship

Owners Association is ,.to tie up all the shipping of Australia. Despite what any Minister may say to justify the attitude of the Government . in bringing forward this panic legislation,- the fact remains that the responsibility for the possibility of the shipping of Australia being tied up at the present juncture must be placed upon the shoulders of the Commonwealth Steamship Owners Association. But let me examine Senator Crawford’s statement. The Minister for Markets and Migration (Senator Wilson) called it a job-control policy. . In the industrial movement of Australia to-day there are two shades of opinion. One type of union leader despises the idea of having a general strike, or even a strike of the whole of the men and women engaged in any one industry. . He believes that the proper method of conducting a dispute is to confine it to one shop or one ship at a time. It has not been the policy of Mr. Walsh or Mr. Johannsen to tie up the shipping of Australia as a whole. They adopted a policy which, though, it may have irritated the Steamship Owner’s Association, was not at any stage likely to bring the commerce or industry of Australia into a state of chaos. I say that it may have been irritating to the owners, but one needs to understand the point of view of the seamen. The law or an award may prescribe that there shall be a certain, number of firemen, trimmers, and so forth, to work certain classes of vessel, according to the number of boilers and the horse-power of the engines, and also that there shall be a certain number of. cooks employed, according to the size of a vessel. I have been through many vessels. On one boat I would find that the work in the galleys could be done with a certain amount of comfort, but on another vessel I found that, from the moment a man entered a galley until he came out again, he was practically living in a reeking hell. The same remarks apply to. the forecastle accommodation, and to the conditions applying in . the engine-rooms and stokeholds. The trouble is that the law makes no distinction between the different types of vessels. What may properly apply to one vessel may not be suitable to another. At any rate, instead of the unions calling out every man in the whole of the industry in order to rectify a grievance in regard to the conditions of work on any particular vessel, they adopted the policy of endeavouring to get those grievances rectified in another way. They made representations to the owners’ association to try’ to have the conditions improved in regard to specified vessels. So Senator Crawford was quite correct in saying that all the seamen wanted to do was to tie up one ship at a time. But that was not done for the sake of pleasure, or in an effort to disorganize trade. If those who understand seafaring life go down to the vessels and examine them, they will find that in 99 cases out of 100 where the seamen took action to prevent vessels from leaving port because they considered they had grievances to be rectified, their grievances were perfectly legitimate. The leaders of the seamen of Australia are opposed to a general strike, so far as the shipping of the Commonwealth is concerned.

Senator Pearce:

– Do they stand for arbitration?

SenatorHANNAN. - The seamen of Australia have stood for arbitration almost since the establishmentof the Arbitration Court.

Senator Guthrie:

Senator HANNAN:

Senator ELLIOTT:

– The royal commission drew attention to the great disadvantages large sections of the people of Australia suffered by reason of the operation of the act, and there is no doubt that those disadvantages will be aggravated by an industrial dispute. Therefore, the need for amendment pointed out in the report of the royal commission must be much more urgent at the present time than it was last year. On page 78 of the report the commission pointed out the inadequacy of the permit system to meet the requirements of the travelling public. I notice that honorable senators opposite are quoting the section in the original act, but section 286 has already been amended, and reads as follows: - 286. ( 1 ) Where it can be shown to the satisfaction of the Minister, in regard to the coasting trade with any port or between any ports in the Commonwealth or in the Territories under the authority of the Commonwealth -

that no licensed ship is available for the service; or
that the service as carried out by a licensed . ship or ships is inadequate to the needs of such port or ports, and the Minister is satisfied that it is desirable in the public interest that unlicensed ships be allowed to engage in that trade, he may grant permits to unlicensed British ships to do so, either unconditionally or subject to such conditions as he thinks fit to impose.

That provision seems to be wide enough, and almost as wide as the provision the Government now seeks to. introduce, but the Director of Navigation stated in evidence -

Except in two isolated cases he had always been advised by the Crown Law Department that the Minister’s powers are limited by the fact that the existing services cannot be proved inadequate.
The Minister has first to he satisfied that no licensed ship is available for the service. The Director has never been able to satisfy the Minister that there is no licensed ship.
An application for a permit cannot be made by a deputation, but by the owner or agent of the ship requiring to carry the passengers or cargo.
The oversea shipping companies have de cidedthat, in future, they will have nothing to do with permits, which they consider are not worth the trouble they have to take to obtain one.

Foreign ship-owners will not take the responsibility or incur the odium that would attach to any proposal to break through the protection afforded toAustralian shipping companies. The report of the commission says -

It seems fairly obvious that the permit system has not been applied very much to cargo, nor is it likely to be availed of for cargo to any extent, with the exception of the case of the Queensland meat industry, which, during the past two years, has sent large quantities of frozen meat to southern markets by the refrigerated space on oversea steamers.

In the bill the Government has followed almost word for word the conclusion formed by the royal commission, which is given on page 79 of the report, and reads as follows: -

It appears to your commissioners that this is a genuine complaint, due to the rigid nature of the act. The machinery, is there to enable advantage to be taken of oversea vessels, but it is so hard to set in motion that the oversea companies will not’ bother about it, and when the individual attempts to set it in motion, it moves so slowly that the opportunity to take advantage of it is in danger of being lost. The act at present requires that it be shown to the satisfaction of the Minister that the service is inadequate. It would require great courage in administration to declare in advance that a service is inadequate, and it is not to be wondered at that decision is delayed, except in such cases where the interstate companies admit the fact. Great dissatisfaction was shown in many places because the Director of Navigation refers in the first instance to the interstate companies, and the inference has been that there is something improper in this, but it is obvious that such reference is often the shortest way of settling the question of inadequacy. If the interstate shipping companies admit the inadequacy, nothing more is required, for the Minister will be satisfied on such admission. On the other hand, if they dispute the fact, it is necessary to get independent evidence of the inadequacy, and the delay in establishing this inadequacy defeats the purpose of the provision.

– Would it not be better for the honorable senator, before criticizing the Prime Minister, to make, himself conversant with what he did say?

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– I have done so.

Senator Wilson:

– Will the honorable senator read it ?

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– I shall read from a report which appeared in the Melbourne Argus on 2nd July, 1925. It is headed, “Fight to a Finish,” those words appearing in large type. Underneath are subheadings,’ “ Prime Minister’s Stand,” “ Deportation Proposals,” “ Strike Fomenters Warned.” The report -states -

In a speech to members of the Rotary Club, whose guest of honour he was yesterday, the Prime. Minister (Mr. Bruce) declared, amid’ enthusiastic applause, that if the seamen - and their leaders persisted in their tactics they must be fought, and fought to a finish. To the poisonous doctrines of imported union leaders he attributed most of the industrial trouble in Australia to-day.

Mr. Bruce is reported to have said on that occasion - .

If industrialists as a whole can lead- these men to reason, there is very little after all in this canker. If not, we will have to come to a fight (prolonged applause). And if it is going, to come to a -fight, let us remember that these men have declined to remain within the jurisdiction of the Arbitration Court, and to observe their obligations- there. They haVe outlawed themselves from the industrial system that exists in this country. If they still persist, they have got to be fought, and fought to a finish (prolonged cheering).

– They were apparently in complete agreement with Mr. Walsh, who is now where they then were.

Senator Thompson:

– The Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act had not then been passed.

Senator FINDLEY:

SenatorFINDLEY - The Shipping Board was appointed to manage a line of steamers that is the propertyof the people of Australia, and on those vessels the conditions that obtained previous to the union’s deregistration are to be observed. Now the Government asks for power to abrogate certain provisions of theNavigation Act to enable it to employ any labour it likes:

Sitting suspended from 12 midnight . to 1 a.m. (Thursday).

Thursday, 16 July 1925,

Senator FINDLEY:

– Nothing would be more regrettable than that Australian ships should be manned by coloured crews who would be fighting our own white men. Surely no honorable senator opposite would desire a fight of that nature to take place. But that is what we may anticipate if this bill becomes law.

Senator Lynch:

– What is the use of fighting a shadow?

Senator FINDLEY:

– It is not a shadow, if we are to take any notice of what the Minister in charge of the bill has said: His language was not in any way ambiguous when he stated that, if it were considered necessary’ by the Government, coloured labour would be employed on the ships.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Newland), - The honorable senator’s time has expired.

Motion (by Senator Grant), “ That Senator Findley be granted an extension of 30 minutes.” negatived.

Senator PAYNE:
Tasmania

– One reason which has been given for the urgency of this measure is that at the end of this week it is proposed” to adjourn Parliament for the period that the American Fleet will be in Melbourne, but a greater reason than that exists for the expeditious treatment of this bill. Honorable members who have objected to this measure are aware of the critical position which obtains to-day in the shipping industry. During the last week or two vessels have been held up one by one, and only yesterday more were added to the list. . Unfortunately, everything points to a general hold-up of shipping. No honorable senator can regret that more than I do; I hope that some means will yet be devised to avert such a calamity. From the remarks of honorable senators opposite one would think that this bill dealt specifically with the present dispute between the Seamen’s Union and the Ship-owners’ Association.

Senator Hannan:

– The Minister made that clear.

Senator PAYNE:

– The purpose of the bil] is to ensure that precautions will be taken to prevent a general hold-up of our communications by water. In view of the present situation and the possibilities before us, the failure of the Ministry to bring in such a bill would have been an evidence of criminal neglect of the best interests of Australia. It has been suggested that this legislation is intended as a blow at trade unionism, but honorable senators know that that. is not so. Any one who cares . to analyse the measure with an unbiased mind-

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT(Senator Newland). - Order ! I call the. attention of Senator Barnes to the fact that smoking in the chamber is not permitted.

Senator Barnes:

– Mr. Deputy President, will you inform me under what standing order you refuse to allow me to smoke in the chamber ? .

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT.- The honorable, senator knows well that smoking is notpermitted in the chamber.

Senator Barnes:

– I think that that is not so . If you will permitme-

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT.- The honorable . senator may dispute my ruling if he feels so inclined. He knows the procedure that must be followed.

Senator Barnes:

– Although I do not agree with your ruling, I am not disposed to dispute it.

Senator PAYNE:

– The argument has also been advanced thatthe purpose of the bill is to replace white labour on the ships with coloured or hybrid labour.

– At a meeting of the Rotary Club. Senator Hannan referred to the speech the Prime Minister made on that occasion, and said he declared there would be a fight to. a finish. What the right honorable gentleman actually said on that occasion was -

The fundamental thing that is destroying this country is fomented, and increased, and aided by men who are doing everything in their power to prevent such prosperity coming to Australia as we long to see. If we can destroy that fundamental cause we will come to the prosperity that we so much desire. All smaller causes have no effect.

The underlying thing that is Bapping our national confidence is this doctrine that is strangling industry to-day, and preventing the development that we might expect. (Applause.) If we could get rid of that we should see the end of the problem. There should be no difficulty in getting rid of it. It is not as if we had great sections of the community imbued with class consciousness. It is not that men and women to-day are being faced with burdens that are being placed upon them, or being denied fair conditions. There is nothing in our national life that should cause the canker to increase and spread. It is the work of a small group of people in this country determined to import into Australia that hideous, poisonous doctrine that is prevalent in other parts of the world. If ever in our history we want the clear recognition of our people it is in regard to this matter. What is the basis of this trouble which appears to be threatening us? Is it caused through industrial unrest and general discontent? No. The workers of this country - the great mass of them, at least - recognize that the conditions they enjoy are incomparably better than in any other part of the world. There is, properly speaking, no industrial unrest in this country. There is no mass of workers that wants to destroy the basis of our national life and substitute something else for it. The majority of our people is content, with no desire for any change but that brought about by evolution.

If you examine this industrial unrest you will find that it is almost confined to one individual section - the seamen. They, unfortunately, are the men who are employed in one of our national services, which is an artery down which the whole trade of the nation has to flow. Among the ranks of the seamen it would take a lot to convince me that there is any unrest. (Applause.) The trouble is due only and entirely to the way in which they are being led. “ I have seen these seamen,” Mr. Bruce went on, “ and have been told of what is happening. I have been told of a case when the fiat went forth that .a ship was only- to be held up at the last minute by the men jumping off and leaving her undermanned. I have been told that some of these men came back to the superintendent of the shipping company and told him that they did not want to do it, but they dared not disobey- the orders of the union. If the seamen could only take control of their own union I am certain that the trouble would disappear altogether. The seamen ‘ go down to the sea. in ships ‘ and they have not !he same control of their own affairs as other unionists. ‘ Co not be always ready to condemn the seamen for their pernicious doctrines. The seamen at heart are all right. (Loud cheers.)’ I believe that they are going to get rid of those men that are trying to destroy the future of every industry of Australia, and bring privation upon every individual that is dependent on the worker. “ I must emphasize this, point. The action that has been taken by that particular union, through its leaders, is not a matter that should merely be a cause of alarm and consternation to any section, but to every section of the community,, and upon all industrialists and trade unions. They are the people against whom these formenters of strife are working. They are working against the very principle that unions have striven for, against the whole basis of peaceful settlement of industrial disputes within the country, and no one subscribes to that principle more than the working class. I am certain that the whole industrial move.ment in Australia is opposed to the tactics that have- been adopted by the seamen and their leaders. If the leaders of unionism have the’ courage to give a bold lead to trade unionists generally and the workers of Australia, then the tactics of foreign, imported agitators can count as nothing. The greatest responsibility rests upon .the whole of the leaders of the industrial movement to show whether they will tolerate these tactics any longer. There is no industrial unrest and no necessity for any thing of the sort.” . ‘

I wish honorable senators to listen particularly to the following: -

If industrialists as a whole can lead these men to reason there is very little after all in this canker. If not, we will have to come to a fight. (Prolonged applause.) And if it is going to come to a fight let us remember that these men have declined to remain within the jurisdiction of the Arbitration Court and tq observe their obligations there. They have outlawed themselves from the industrial system that exists in this country. If they still persist they have got to be fought, and fought to a finish.

– That the boats would be manned, and the service maintained continuously..

Senator Pearce:

– How does the transport workers’ group propose to ensure the observance of those conditions?

Senator GIBBS:

– I cannot say. What I do say is that the Commonwealth Ship-‘ ping Board considered the guarantee to be sufficient, accepted the assurance that was given, and signed the agreement. I assume that that attitude was a. right one, or it would not have been adopted by the board. Rather than see the country plunged into an industrial upheaval it used a little common sense.

Senator Findley:

– It might be just as well to embody in Mansard the provisions proposed to be eliminated.

Senator GIBBS:

– I am just about to do so.

Senator Elliott:

– The honorable senator has before him the original act, which has been amended. He should quote from the consolidated statute.

Senator GIBBS:

– This is still operative. Part VI. reads as follows: - 284. This part of this act shall, except where otherwise expressed, apply to all ships (whether British or foreign), 285. This part of this act shall come into operation on a date tobe fixed by proclamation, but shall not come into operation on the date fixed for the commencement of this act unless the proclamation fixing that date expressly declares that this part is to come into operation on that date. 286. The Governor-General may by order declare that the carrying of. passengers between specified ports in Australia by British ships shall not be deemed engaging in the coasting trade.

A permit issued under this section may be for a single voyage only, or may be a continuing permit.
A continuing permit may be cancelled by the Minister upon no less than six months’ notice to the master, owner or agent of the ship of his intention to cancel it.
The Minister shall, within fourteen days of the granting of any permit under this section, or the notice of intention to cancel any such permit, notify in the Gazette the issue of the permit, or the giving of the notice, as the case may be, with particulars thereof. 287. - (1) A ship shall not engage in the coasting trade which is receiving, or which onder any arrangement is to receive, or which in the immediately preceding twelve months has been receiving, directly or indirectly, any subsidy or bonus from any government other than that of a part of the British Dominions.

Penalty (on master, owner, or agent) : Five hundred pounds.

Any payment for services bona fide rendered in the carriage of mails, passengers, or goods, at rates based solely on the actual commercial value of these services, shall not be taken to be a subsidy within the meaning of this section. 288. - (1) No ship shall engage in the coasting trade unless licensed to do so.

Penalty (on master, owner, or agent) : Five hundred pounds.

Licences to ships to engage in the coasting trade shall be for such period; not exceeding three years, as is prescribed, and may be granted as prescribed.
Every licence shall be issued subject to compliance on the part of the ship, her master, owner, and agent, during such time as she is engaged in the coasting trade, with the following conditions : -
1. That the seamen employed on the ship shall be paid wages in accordance with this part of this act; and
2. That,inthe case of a foreign ship, she shall be provided with the same number of officers and seamen, and with the same accommodation for them, as would be required ifshe were a British ship registered in Australia or engaged in the coasting trade’;
3. That in every ship registered in Australia or engaged in the ‘coasting trade, where a library is provided for the use of passengers, every seaman and apprentice shall - where no library for their . special use is provided - be entitled to obtain books therefrom under the same conditions as may regulate the issue of such books to the passengers.

Penalty (on owner) : Ten pounds.

Any breach of the above conditions shall be a contravention of this act.
Before granting any licence, the Minister may require security to be given to his . satisfaction by the master, owner, or agent for compliance with the conditions of the licence and the requirements of this part of this act.
In addition to, or in lieu of, any penalty otherwise provided, the Governor-General may cancel any licence if he is satisfied that a breach of any of the above conditions has been committed.
No licence shall be cancelled unless an opportunity has been given to the master, owner, or agent of. the ship to show cause against cancellation. 289. - (1) Every seaman employed on a ship engaged in any part of the coasting trade shall, subject to any lawful deductions, be entitled to and shall be paid, for the period during which the ship is so engaged, wages at the current rates ruling in Australia for seamen employed in that part of the coasting trade, and may sue for and recover those wages.
In the case of ships trading to places beyond Australia, the wages to which a seaman is entitled under this section shall be paid before the departure of the ship from Australia, and the master shall produce to the satisfaction of the Collector at the last port of departure in Australia evidence of their payment. 290. - (1) If the seamen employed on any British ship were not engaged in Australia, the master shall, before the ship engages in the coasting trade, make and sign, before a superintendent, an endorsement or memorandum . on the agreement specifying the wages to be paid to the seamen’ whilst the ship engages in the coasting trade, and that endorsement or memorandum, when countersigned by a superintendent, shall have effect as an agreement between the master and those seamen.
Where under the original agreement a seaman is entitled to be paid at a higher rate of wages than the rate ruling in Australia for seamen in a corresponding rating, nothing in this section shall affect his right to such higher . rate during the . engagement of the ship in the coasting trade. 291. - (1) No provision in any agreement, whether made in or out of Australia, shall be taken to limit or prejudice the rights of any seaman under this Part of this Act.
Where, by reason of a seaman being entitled to a higher rate of wages while the ship on which he serves is engaged in the coasting trade -
1. any deduction is made from his wages earned out of Australia; or
2. he is paid a lesser rate of wages outside Australia than is usual in voyages of a similar nature, it shall be deemed that the seaman is not paid wages in accordance with this part of this act while the ship is so engaged in the coasting trade. 292. An award of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration which is binding on or applicable to seamen employed in the coasting trade, or a certificate of a Registrar or Deputy Registrar of that court, certifying what are the rates of wages ruling in Australia for seamen employed in any part of the coasting trade, shall be prima facie evidence of those rates of wages. 293. The master, owners, and agents of any ship engaging in the coasting trade, shall be jointly and severally responsible for compliance with this part of this act by or in respect of the ship, and shall be liable to any pecuniary penalty provided by this act for any breach or contravention of this part of this act, by or in respect of the ship, and where no penalty is provided shall be liable in respect of any such breach or contravention to a penalty ‘ of not more than One hundred pounds, and his ship in respect of which the offence is committed may be disqualified by the GovernorGeneral from engaging in the coasting trade.

– They are absolute hypocrites.

Senator McHugh:

- Senator Foll has accused honorable senators on this side of being hyDocrites. I ask that that remark be withdrawn.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Newland). - I did not hear the remark.

Senator McHugh:

– I now inform you. Mr. Deputy President, that the honorable senator made- that remark, and, as it is offensive, I ask that you call upon- him to withdraw” it.

Senator Barnes:

– “Why did the Government at that stage introduce discord by bringing in this bill?

Senator H HAYS:

– The door to an agreement is still open. The transport workers who came to Melbourne had no authority to speak on behalf of the Seamen’s Union.

Senator McHUGH:

– I sincerely believe that thatis theGovernment’s intention, and that is the principal reason why this measure is being bludgeonedthrough. Honorable senators opposite do not want the people of Australia to hear the truth.

Senator Duncan:

– We are giving you the opportunity.

Senator McHUGH:

– Because you had to.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Newland). - The honorable senator must address the Chair.

Senator McHUGH:

– Every honorable senator has. the right to express to the people of Australia his opinion on the drastic action which the Government is now taking. One of the reasons which the Government gives for the hurried passage of this measure is that Parliament is goinginto recess during the forthcoming visit of the American Fleet. I presume “that during the visit honorable senators will be enjoying a holiday, but I am more concerned with the conditions prevailing in this country than I am with the prospects of a holiday. We shall be only too happy to welcome our American brothers, but the welfare of the Australian people is of more importance than welcoming people from overseas. I am glad that the vessels of the American Fleet are visiting Australia, and that from 20,000 to’ ‘30,000 of the United States navy men will have the opportunity of learning that we had a Navigation Act framed with the object of protecting their brother seamen on this side of the world, but that it is now being practically repealed in order to meet the wishes of a certain section opposed to trade unionism. I am hopeful that these men who are coming from overseas will on their return act as organizers in their own country, and will endeavour to see that the conditions in America are at least equal to those which existed here before this obnoxious measure was introduced. The effect of this amending bill is to virtually wipe out the Navigation Act. It issurprising to find the Government introducing this bill merely because it is afraid of two men. Has itnot the courage to deal with them,ifit so desires, in any other way? If the Labour party were in power to-day the presentdispute would not last . 24 hours, (notwithstanding any action which might be taken by those persons whom honorable senators opposite are representing and who supply them with braids with which to conduct their election campaign.

Senator McHUGH:

– Senator Foll called me a liar. You, sir. should have heard him. He has insulted me three or four times.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT. - If the honorable senator was’ called a liar he had a right to ask that the expression be withdrawn. Had he done so I should immediately have demanded its withdrawal. If Senator Foll used that expression, I ask him to withdraw it.

Senator Foll:

– The honorable senator pointed to me and said that I wished to introduce black men to this country. I say that he is a liar.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT . - I ask the honorable senator to withdraw that expression.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT.- I again ask Senator Foll to withdraw the expression.

Senator Foll:

– Having regard to the procedure of the Senate, I withdraw it.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT.- I now. ask Senator McHugh also to withdraw the expression.

Senator McHUGH:

– They will suffer the greatest hardship of all. Some honorable senators who have been talking about industrial matters are mere1 children in the Labour movement, and have never experienced the. serious results of an inindustrial war. An industrial war is a serious thing. While I am in this chamber, unless there is good reason for taking the opposite stand, I shall vote for any measure which will prevent (industrial trouble. Some honorable senators have suggested that this Bill strikes a blow at the White Australia policy. Who is the enemy of that policy ?

Mr GREENE:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– Tom Walsh.

Senator OGDEN:

– Trouble occurred recently in Western Australia when the seamen attempted to hold up the shipping of that state. A state ‘ disputes committee was appointed, which made some very strong and plain statements about the seamen. I shall read a paragraph from the statement of the committee, which appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald of the 17th June last: -

A handful of men at Fremantle were making war on the Labour movement and were expecting Labour to prevent the processes of the law from taking their usual course.

Mr. Walsh himself in a contribution to the West Australian Worker in December last said -

The rank and flic must have control of the Labour party. Unfortunately, Labour has many parliamentary representatives, who said chat” the world would be a splendid place to live in when the masters and the workers adjusted their differences. The capitalist class in Australia is almost wholly in favour of the White Australia policy. There is, therefore, no need for the workers to make so much of it.

He went on to say -

There is not in either the Federal or the State Labour platforms any method by which the objective of the party can be achieved. The socialization of land and industry would (at present) be an unconstitutional act. To achieve socialization the workers must be organized . . . and internationally united. That is why patriotic Labour politicians, with their …” White Australianism “ are enemies of the working class.

Mr. Walsh is no friend of labour; yet members of the Labour party in this chamber seek to defend him. He is an opponent of the White Australia policy and an enemy of labour. His article proceeds -

If industry, .is to bo socialized the working class must be served by the army, the navy, and the air service. It must be supreme.

There is a sinister suggestion there. If Mr. Walsh is in a position to carry out his threat, there is ample justification for the measure now before us. That Mr. Walsh is not in favour of the Arbitration Court is shown by the following statement that he made : -

The Arbitration Court is a useful instrument for the adjustment of certain differences. It is capable of being used in the immediate interests of the worker. . . . The Seamen’s Union finds it useful to force the shipowners into the court. Some disputes, .however, are not capable of adjustment by the court, and on my advice the seamen fought the maritime strike of 1919 outside the court with great success. I will have no hesitation in advising members of the Seamen’s Union again to seek redress outside the court immediately the atmosphere is favorable. Now you have my idea of arbitration.

– I am no orator -

I antan orator, as Brutus, is:

But asyou know me all, a plain blunt man. . .I only speak right on.

There are many things one could say on this important question. I know that members of the Labor party have said thatthe seamen are decidedly unpopular amongst, other trades unions.

Senator Gibbs:

– Is the honorable senator endeavouring to make them less popular?

Senate OGDEN. - Yes; by desiring them to exercise a little commonsense

Senator Gibbs:

– The whole trouble could have been easily avoided.

– At this hour of the morning I shall begin with the rather encouraging promise to honorable senators that I shall not’ keep them very long, because I believe, in view of all that has been said, that I can compress what I have to say into a very little space. It is a pity that the position has not been clarified more than it has, and that honorable senators opposite have not addressed themselves to the main question. They recognize that there is to be an upheaval in this country ; but the question is, howare we going, to control it? That is the problem we all have to assist in solving. It certainly cannot be solved by adopting the practice followed last night and this morning of attributing all sorts of unwarranted motives to the Government and its supporters. We get no further forward by condemning either the Government or those who support it for certain alleged evil motives. Therefore, the lime has arrived when every member of this chamber should feel he has a responsibility cast upon him, and when he should ask himself, in the first place, how the difficulty which is now confronting us is to be solved. I totally disagree with honorable senators who have in this chamber levelled charges almost from Dan to Beersheba against the Government. For the information of the Senate I quote some samples of the expressions used concerning the members of the party to which I belong. “ They are the advocates of the ship-owners and of black labour.” “ Lord Inchcape is instigating this, and honorable senators opposite are his tools.” “ They are working in the interests of the overseas shipping combine, and making an attack on trade unionism.” These are samples, taken at random, of statements made by honorable senators opposite. It is clear that there is not a scintilla, of truth in them, because we should be courting disaster if such charges could be truthfully laid against us. I can say at once that we are not making an attack on trade unionism, are not advocating the ship-owners’ case, and are not the advocates of black labour. The influence of Lord Inchcape, whatever it may be, has nothing to do with the question. We are attacking the lawbreakers and nothing else, and are endeavouring to bring them back within the pale of the law. What has been said on this side, I believe, can be expressed in the one sentence, that this agitation has been brought to a head at the instigation of one man, who has acquired extraordinary powers in this country, and whose name I shall not mention. Let us consider what has been said by some honorable senators opposite, particularly the cool insinuation made by an honorable senator from New South Wales, concerning money obtained for party purposes. I certainly absolve from responsibility a great majority of the people who come from that state, because that majority consists of honorable men and women. That an hon- orable senator, however nurtured in a certain atmosphere, should, on the first occasion on which he opened his mouth in this chamber, speak of the use of illgotten money, and make an unwarranted charge against this party, is, to say the least of it, most regrettable. Senator Needham will recall what actually happened in connexion with the industrial history of Western Australia. He referred to the action taken by the present Minister for Home and Territories (Senator Pearce) and myself. A body of men was being offered 6s. a day and were obliged to be the victims of the “ truck “ system, and it was on their behalf that Senator Pearce, Senator Needham, and myself took up the cudgels, with the result that they were awarded better terms than they had ever had before.

Senator Pearce:

– Yes, and we organized them into a union.

Senator LYNCH:

– Yes, and what we did on that occasion I would do again in order to accomplish the objective we had in view.. On another occasion, when I happened to be a Minister of the Crown another incident came to pass. I was the member for a gold-fields constituency, and the advocate for a body of miners. After an award had been obtained from the court, although I risked a great deal, I urged the men who were on strike to obey the Arbitration Court, and I induced them to do so. The result was fully in their favour. Those men afterwards returned me to the State Parliament, and subsequently helped to send me to the Senate. I do not withdraw one word of what I said at that time, nor am I sorry foi the action that I took. My attitude has not changed. I still advocate respect for the law of the land, in the. belief that the Arbitration Court is the only bulwark that the workers have ever had. I invite honorable senators to consider what happened twenty years ago. The public men of that time were confronted with the problem whether or not the seamen should be brought within the scope of the Arbitration Act. That course was stoutly resisted in some quarters, but ultimately it was recognized that it would be a good thing to allow the seamen to have the benefit of the court’s protection. Could the Parliament then have foreseen that the seamen would be the means of bringing arbitration almost to its doom, do honorable senators believe that the act would have been passed so enthusiastically? It was perhaps just as well that a friendly veil was drawn across the eyes of the members of that time. The majority of those who were then in public life have since passed out of it. All that remains is their reputation for uprightness and an independence which would fling aside party and other miserable considerations in order that they might do their duty to Australia.

We are on the verge of a very great trouble, such as we have not had before, because a considerable advance has been made along the road of progress. There are now Labour Administrations in five of the six states, but if the workers are not very careful they will find themselves further back than they ‘ were ten or fifteen years ago. I dissociate myself entirely from the attitude of latter-day Labour men, who look upon employers of labour with an ugly, unfriendly glare, as though they are inferior beings. The early members of the Labour party recognized that amongst the employers of labour were citizens as good as those who earned their daily bread by the toil of their hands. The tactics that are being employed by the latest dictator will, in my opinion, bring evil to the working men of this country. I see Senator Findley looking at meWhen the 1890 strike occurred I was engaged as a seaman under conditions which, as he knows, were vastly different from those that exist to-day. Public opinion was strongly in favour of that strike, and the men received sustenance from all classes of society. If subscriptions were sought tomorrow, does Senator Findley think that a Chief Justice would give half his salary towards the sustenance of the seamen on strike, as was then done by Chief Justice Higinbotham? Of course nob. Would public men support Mr. Walsh’s strike?

Senator Pearce:

– I doubt whether 50 per cent, of the unionists would contribute towards a fund for the relief of these strikers.

Senator LYNCH:

– I agree with that statement. If the unions were put to the test, would they contribute towards the sustenance of the associates of Mr. Walsh? Senator Findley surely must know that they would not. In the early days in South Australia the Trades Hall had difficulty in clearing the debt on its building. Mr. Barr Smith planked down thousands of pounds for that purpose. Where are the Barr Smiths to-day who will come to the relief of a trades hall? The responsibility lies at the door of the suicidal temper that has supplanted the better relationship that once existed between capital and labour.

Senator Pearce:

– They are too classconscious now.

Senator LYNCH:

Sydney, Wednesday. - Outspoken comments on the methods adopted by ‘the seamen in their relationswith the allied organizations to whom they are now appealingforsupport appears in the latest issue of the stewards’ monthly journal under the heading, “ Deregistered Seamen’s Fight,” “ Self-confessed Liars and Trick-‘ stersare Obstacles.” The article states : - “ Unions have hitherto suffered seriously by their disloyalty towards each _ other. The Seamen’s Union,” through certain of its officials located in Sydney, has been one of the worst offenders in this’ regard. As recently as 21st April last they, with other members of the transport group, which represented the members of other maritime unions, agreed to abide by a certain decision which had been arrived at and which dealt with the manning of the Eromanga. After the decision had been partly given effect to, after the other members of the transport group had carried out their part, the officials of the Seamen’s Union in question stated quite openly that they did not intend to go any further with it, and boasted that they had deliberately tricked the other members of the group in agreeing to it. Such an attitude is quite in keeping with the working of sewerrat minds, but it will not help the cause of the Seamen’s Union or that of the other maritime unions. While all due allowances oan be made for men who are lacking in character and capacity to represent trade unionism, they must not be trusted. If they fail in a minor issue such as -the one which has been mentioned, they will certainly fail when, bigger issues are being fought out, and the Labour movement as a whole will suffer consequently. If the Seamen’s Union expects the loyalty and support generally from ‘ the other maritime unions to which ‘it is entitled, it must be represented by officials capable of setting an example in “loyalty to those from whom they expect, loyalty’ in return. Certain officials of the union in” Sydney ave self-confessed liars and tricksters, and if the Seamen’s Union is to succeed in its fight against the shipowners it must be officered bv men who are more reliable.”

I feel that it is unnecessary for me to say more on this subject.

Senator BARNES:
Victoria

– Honorable senators have enough common sense to ignore the arguments advanced by some supporters of the Government, and concentrate on the purpose of the bill. Senator Gibbs has reminded us of the important principles that were embodied in the Navigation Act deliberately, and after lengthy discussion. The people of Australia declared that it was necessary to give the workers on sea, as well as those on shore, decent conditions of employment. This act is not a piece of panic legislation, bub was passed after the gravest possible consideration, the debates ‘on if. extending over a . number of years. Do honorable senators opposite seriously say that all the conditions read to us by Senator Gibbs should be abrogated, as they will be, if this bill becomes law? I warn them, that if they support the bill in its present form, they will have to answer for it to the people of Australia. The Government has not submitted a sound case. If it is given the powers that it now. seeks, it will have the right to hand- the shipping trade of Australia over to vessels from other countries employing black crews. I am under no delusion over the matter. I have only my common sense to guide me in declaring that there is a great conspiracy afoot to destroy the Commonwealth Shipping Line. The private shipping companies would rather employ black than white labour, because they could engage it at a cheaper rate. The White Australia policy should be upheld at all costs. . One of the noblest actions in Australian history was the return of the black boys to their native islands. Honorable senators opposite may rest assured that if the Government takes the action threatened, its chickens will come home to roost. It is intended to pass legislation which will’ deprive the seamen of all the rights which they have won during the course of a number of years. The award of the court contained certain provisions, but because of something that happened, the shipping companies, who were parties to that.’ award, applied to the Arbitration Court for the deregistration of the Seamen’s Union. The union having been harassed, and having spent a lot of money in connexion with various awards, adopted the attitude that it could gain nothing by spending further money in that direction. Its members therefore were unaffected by the threat to deregister their union. As a result of that deregistration the seamen are 110 longer entitled to the protection of the Arbitration Act and the Arbitration Court. Apparently, they are prepared to take the risk. When trouble arose between the seamen and the ship-owners the former declared their willingness to work every vessel if in their articles the award of the court was included. That was a perfectly sane proposition, and I cannot understand why the ship-owners did not accept it. Evidently its soundness appealed to the members of the Commonwealth Shipping Board and to some other shipping companies. It was recognized as a great achievement when Australia became possessed of her own means of sea transport, but from the beginning forces have been at work to make the scheme a failure. This legislation, if once enacted, will give to any government that happens to be in office powers of which they may be unworthy. I do not know whether honorable senators are aware that the existing Arbitration Act is sufficient to discipline any persons who cause industrial disturbances in our midst. Against very strong opposition, the Labour party fought for arbitration. The Arbitration Act provided a method of settling industrial disputes different from any previously in operation. Because such legislation reflected the commonsense of the community, the Labour party fought strenuously for it; for the same reason our opponents just as strenuously opposed it. . For our success on that occasion they have never forgiven us, and ever since the passing of the measure efforts have been made to destroy it. Senator Pearce, who is now proposing to amend that act, is fighting for the destruction of a child of his own. I have good reason to remember this act, as on one occasion the union of which I was an officer had a case before the Arbitration Court. We “ obtained what was said to be an award t but which in reality was an outrage. Consequently there was a strike; there was no other thing to do. We placed before the court figures which I had prepared, and which were supported by the best accountants in Sydney, as well as by the Commonwealth Statistician and our own solicitor, who was an excellent mathematician. I desire to warn the Government against doing a stupid thing. If this bill is amended in the direction indicated by the Minister people in other unions, and affected by other awards, will want to know when their turn will come. The contemplated action of the Government is unwise, as under existing legislation it already has great powers. It has been said that the seamen did not care whether they were registered or deregistered. Their real position was that they were not prepared to continue to spend money in dealing with cases before the court. After making proper provision for their families, 8,000 men could not provide a great deal towards the funds of their union, but the economic position of the Seamen’s Union was such that, whether registered by the court or not, they considered that they could hold what they had gained. It does not really matter whether they are registered or not. As an officer of my union, I was fined £100 on a charge which was laid under the Arbitration Act and about 500 people, both dead and alive, were held responsible for the pains and penalities provided in that act. What is the use of talking of deregistration ? An organization is nob an organization until it has been proclaimed as such. The Arbitration Act says -

The Governor-General may on the recommendation of the President by proclamation declare this act to apply to any association whether registerable under this net or not, and thereupon the association shall be deemed to be and shall become an organization for such of the purposes of this act as are directed by the proclamation or as are prescribed.

There is no necessity to pass coercion acts other than those already on the statutebook. Much could be said concerning the decisions given under the Conciliation and Arbitration Act. I have been closely associated with the Arbitration Court, and on one occasion a faulty decision was undoubtedly given by tha judge in consequence of a mistake being made in the compilation of certain figures. No appeal could, of course, be made; but the full particulars were later published in Hansard. In this enlightened age there should be no necessity to introduce coercive measures, because they only cause dissatisfaction and discontent, and lead to further industrial trouble. The honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley) and I had to submit to a fine of £100 or imprisonment for advising men to disregard an award of the Court. Legislation such as the Government is introducing in this chamber and in another place should not have the support of honorable senators opposite, many of whom have been “through the mill,” and know the conditions under which workmen have to operate. It is to be regretted that Senator Pearce and Senator Lynch, who, in their earlier, days so strongly advocated the cause of unionism, and who with others were largely responsible for the introduction of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act and the Navigation Act, which it is now proposed to emasculate, should support this bill which will not bc of any advantage to the people. I know we are confronted with industrial trouble, and I- am hoping that common sense, will eventually prevail, and that means other than those proposed will be adopted to settle the dispute. It must be remem- bered. that, all the intelligence of the. country isnot in this Parliament, and that outside menare working day and night in an endeavour to arrive at a. satisfactory, solution of the difficulty. I do not think Mr. Walsh should be considearedin the case?

SenatorGuthrie -Is he not theun- official leader of theLabour party ?

Senator BARNES:

– Ibelieve that he isa member oftheindustrial wing ofthe Labour party. I met Mr. Walsh 25 years ago at an industrial conference,and sofar as I knowhehas beenactivelyassociated with industrial movements for many years. He has not alwaysbeen on the side where I stand, and hehas notso far as I know, occupied any. political position. ‘“Jock”’ Garden is another man to whom reference. is frequently made, andafter that gentleman’s returnfrom a visit overseas wehearda good deal about Moscow and theMuscovites;but notwithstanding all that was said, theGovernmentduring the first three monthsof this year permitted 260 ofthose people to land in Australia. I canonly repeat that the Government will bewell advised ifit withdraws this mensure;whichwould virtually destroy the Navigation Act.

SenatorWILSON (South Australi aMinister for Markets and Migration) [5.12 a.m.]. - The debate on. the second reading of this bill has clearly shown the people of Australia the attitude of certain honorable senators in regard! to arbitration andtheir opinions concerning the industrial trouble with which we are now confronted’. I am sure a majority of hon- orable senators congratulate Senator Ogden on the determined! stand he has taken in placing the interests of his country before those of his party. The Government is only asking for a power which is exercised by every government in the British Empire, but. one which will not be exercised except in cases of emergency. Senator McHugh endeavoured’ to showthat the Government were opposing the White Australia policy.

Senator McHugh:

– That is the intention of tile bill.

Senator WILSON:
NAT

– Thehonorable senator knows as well as. any one in this chamber that’ no one here believes in a black Australia.

Senator McHugh:

– The Minister believes in it, but is not game to admit it.

Senator WILSON:

– I sayunhestitatingly that we stand far a White Australia. and know that,inadvocatingsuch a policy we have the support of the whole; of the peopleof this greatcontinent. Itis easier tocriticize than to create. Nearlyevery honorable senatoropposite criticizedthe Government for doingwhat it believes! to beitsduty, yet not onesuggested a practical substitute.

SenatorHannan. - Intervention, and a round table conference.

Senator WILSON:

– Intervention when an organization, has putitselfoutside the law! Let them get back to the law, whichthemajority of honorable senators opposite support.Personalabuse does not appeal to me on a greatnational question of this description, or, indeed, in amycircumstances. A great deal has been said in regard to Mr: Walsh-. I should life to speak more definitely andclearly of menwho are ina position to guide the unionists;but are afraid to do so. I have agreater admiration for Mr: Walsh than for the man who ishaving- on the game,5* and’ is. not prepared to; come into the. open in time of crisis, and leadhis men according to the dictates ofhis conscience. As Senator Lynch rightly said i twas theold-time unionists who took risks and. did. things. Most of the speeches on this matter haw; beenreasonable. and moderate. I can. assure the Senate that the Grovernment is exceedingly anxious to avoid trouble, and. it hopes; that the necessity will not arise to use the powers for which this bill provides. It remains f or honorablesenators opposite toplay their part.

Question - That the bill ho now. read a second time - put. The Senate divided,

Ayes .. … … 19

Noes . . . . … 9

Majority . .10

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

– As I desire to assist in passing legislation which will benefit the country,’ I shall not dispute your ruling. The clause is so short that, unless honorable senators take the trouble to refer to the principal act, they may not realize its far-reaching consequences. It proposes to give the Governor-General power, by proclamation, to suspend not only the operation of the whole of Part VI. of the 1912 act. butthe operation of the amending sections in the 1920 act. These sections are really the vital. part of our navigation legislation. Oan any portion of the act be more important than Part VI. of the original act, which deals with the coasting trade of the Commonwealth ? It applies to all ships, whether British or foreign. To give honorable senators some indication of the nature of the sections in the principal act which will be affected, I shall read section 285 : -

This part of this act shall come into operation on a date to be fixed by proclamation, but shall not come into’ operation on the date fixed for the. commencement of this act unless the proclamation fixing that date expressly declares that this part is to come into operation on that date.

That section was inserted with the object of delaying as long as possible the application of those provisions which were wrung from the opponents of the measure. Clause 3 will set it aside. Section 287 reads -

A ship shall not engage in the coasting trade which is receiving or which under any arrangement is to receive, or which in the immediately preceding twelve months has ‘been receiving diTectly or indirectly any subsidy or bonus from any government other than that of a part of the British dominions.

The importance of this section will be realized when I remind honorable senators that Parliament provided a penalty of £500 for a breach. I wonderthat the Government has not asked for the suspension of the whole of the ac.t, so that it might have an absolutely free hand Section 288 (1) of the principal act provides that no ship shall engage in the coasting trade unless licensed to do so. Here, again, the penalty is £500. Yet the Government, regardless of its importance, seeks the power to suspend the operations of that section. Senator Wilson, in supporting this clause, in effect admits that he is in favour of the employment of black labour in the coasting trade of Australia. Sub-section 3 of section 288 provides -

Every licence shall be issued subject to compliance” on the part of the ship, her master, owner, and agent, during such time as she is engaged in the coasting trade, with the following conditions : -

That the seamen employed on the ship shall be paid wnges in accordance with this part of this act; and
That, in the case of a foreign ship, she shall be provided with the same number of officers and seamen, and with the same accommodation for. them, as would be required if she were a British ship registered in Australia or engaged in the coasting trade ;
That in every ship registered in Australia or engaged in the coasting trade where a library is provided for the use of passengers, every seaman and apprentice shall - where no library for their special use is provided - be entitled to obtain books therefrom under the same conditions as may regulate the issue of such books to the passengers.

Penalty (on owner) : Ten pounds.

Senator Barnes:

– I draw attention to the want of a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– It is further provided in section 289 that -

Every seaman employed on a ship engaged in any part of the coasting trade shall, subject to any lawful deductions, be entitled to and shall be paid, for the period during which the ship is so engaged, wages at the current rates ruling in Australia for seamen employed in that part of the coasting trade, and may sue for and recover those wages.

The Government asks us to adopt clause 3, its real intention being to rob the seamen of the right to claim any payment at all.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I point out to the honorable senator that he is quoting from the wrong act. He is not reading the act as amended.

SenatorGRANT. - I find that the section that I have read has not been disturbedby the amending act. An amendment was made of sections 286 and 422 of the principal act, but not of the whole act. So far as. I can see, all the statements that I have made are in accordance with fact, and the adoption of clause 3 will mean that those sections will, at the wish of the Ministry, be suspended indefinitely. Clause 291 reads - (1.) No provision in any agreement, whether made in or out of Australia, shall be taken to limit or prejudice the rights of any seaman under this part of this act.

Where, by reason of a seaman being entitled to a higher rate of wages while the ship on whichhe serves is engaged in the coasting trade-
1. any deduction is made from his wages earned out of Australia; or (b)heis paid a lesser rate of wages out- side Australia than is usual in voyagesof a similar nature, it shall ‘be deemed that the seaman is not paid wages in accordance with this part of this act while the ship is so engaged in the coasting trade.

That original provision should be left undisturbed. Under this clause all the sectionsof the principal act which I have read may be suspended. Other sections may also be affected, but these, owing to the limited time at my disposal, I cannot quote. To propose in the present circumstances to set aside what is unquestionably the most vital part of the principal act so as to enable the Government to employ any labour at any cost isbeyond mycomprehension. No restrictions will be placed upon the ‘employment of colored labour on vessels engaged on the Australian coast. That is the policy which the Minister (Senator Wilson)is advocating in asking us to agree to the suspension of this vital portion ofthe act. The Government should notthrow down thegauntletand place the seamen entirely out of court.

The CHAIRMAN:

– (Senator Newland). - The honorable senator has exhausted his time.

Motion (by Senator Pearce) proposed -

That the committee do now divide.

Question put. The committee divided.

AYES: 16

NOES: 9

Majority …. 6

Majority … … 7

AYES

NOES

Question : so resolved in the affirmative.

Question - That the clause stand as printed - put. TheCommittee divided.

Questionso resolved in theaffirmative.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 4 (Dispensing power of Govern or-General) - (Senator NEEDHAM (Western Australia) [6.23 a.m.] - It is evidentthat there is some confusion in the mindsof honorable senators as to the sections we are amending, and forthe informationof the committee I quote section 422 of the principal act, which reads -

Where theGovernor-General is satisfied that the enforcement of any provision of this Act, in regard to ships of any country, would be inconsistent with theobligationsof the Commonwealth under a treaty made between that country and the United Kingdom, he may by Proclamation suspend the operation of that provisionwith regard to ships of thatcountry so far as is necessary to enable the obligations ofthe Commonwealth under the treaty to be fulfilled.

This section deals with a treaty, but the object of this measure, according to the Minister, is to settle industrial disputes.

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

– I had not the opportunity to protest as fully as I should have liked to do against clause 3, but I declare war to the knifeon this clause.Honorable senators opposite maythink that this is a matter of little or no moment, butI remind them that to every man engaged in political life there comes a day of reckoning. It will bo possible for the Governor-General to suspend all those major provisions in the act that apply to the conditions of the seamen, and he may disregard the whole of the conditions relating to the manning of vessels. That is a matter which vitally affects every one who travels by sea. A perusal of schedule 2 of the act will give an idea of the powers that the Government may exercise. Why did the Parliament devote so much time and trouble to that schedule? It wasin the interests of the travelling public. Ships that go to sea should be seaworthy and properly manned.

Senator Wilson:

– The honorable senator knows that they could not go to sea from an Australianport unless they were seaworthy.

SenatorFINDLEY. - I hope thatno Government would be guilty of allowing a ship that was not absolutely seaworthy to go to sea. Woknowthat some Few years ago the then secretary of theSeamen’s Union, Mr. Sangster, who afterwards became the honorable member for Port Melbourne, made the serious allegation that certain ships were absolutely un seaworthy. . He referred to some of them as “coffin ships.” He was not taken seriously at first, but because of his persistence, a royal commission was appointed and the truth of his statements was proved up to the hilt. I hopethat the provisions of the act will not be abrogated or suspended, and that the schedule in its relation to manning will be strictly and rigidly observed. That schedule provides for the employment of qualified men. Where, outside the ranks of the Seamen’s Union, can such men be secured ? This is a very drastic provision, and it has been inserted forno ther purpose than to try to weaken the seamen’s organization.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable seator’s time has expired.

Question - That the clause st and as printed -put. The committee divided.

AYES: 16

NOES: 9

Majority … … 7

AYES

NOES

Question soresolved inthe affirmative.

Clause agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Hill reported without amendment.

Motion (by Senator Wilson) proposed -

Thatthe report be now adopted.

Question put. The Senate divided.

AYES: 17

NOES: 9

Majority … … 8

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Report adopted.

Motion (by Senator Wilson ) proposed -

Thatthe bill be nowrend athird time.

Question put. The Senate divided.

AYES: 18

NOES: 9

Majority … … 9

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a third time.

page 1090

HOUR OF MEETING

Motion (by Senator Pearce) agreed to -

That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn until this day (Thursday), at 8 p.m.

Senate adjourned at 7 a.m. (Thursday) .

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 15 July 1925, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1925/19250715_senate_9_110/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate15 July 1925

PAPERS

ASSENT TO BILLS

REPORT OF LIBRARY COMMITTEE

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:QUEENSLAND

QUESTION

CABLE TERMINAL CHARGES

Senator CRAWFORD:Honorary Minister · QUEENSLAND · NAT

QUESTION

LOAN” FLOTATION” IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

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

NAVIGATION BILL

Senator PEARCE:Minister for Home and Territories · Western Australia · NAT

Senator Needham:

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:

Senator PEARCE:Minister for Home and Territories · Western Australia · NAT

Senator NEEDHAM:Western Australia

Senator HANNAN:Victoria

Senator FINDLEY:Victoria

Senator Ogden:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Ogden:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator GRANT:NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator Ogden:

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator GRANT:NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator GRANT:NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator Wilson:

Senator GRANT:NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator Duncan:

Senator Hannan:

Senator Wilson:

Senator GRANT:NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:

Senator GRANT:NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator Findley:

Senator LYNCH:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator Hannan:

Senator Needham:

Senator LYNCH:

Senator Hannan:

Senator LYNCH:

Senator Barnes:

Senator LYNCH:

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:

Senator LYNCH:

Senator GRANT:NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator Hoare:

Senator LYNCH:

Senator Needham:

Senator LYNCH:

Senator Barnes:

Senator LYNCH:

Senator Pearce:

Senator LYNCH:

The PRESIDENT:

Senator LYNCH:

Senator Pearce:

Senator LYNCH:

The PRESIDENT:

Senator LYNCH:

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:

Senator LYNCH:

Senator Needham:

Senator LYNCH:

Senator BARNES:Victoria

Senator PEARCE:WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917; UAP from 1931

Senator BARNES:

Senator Elliott:

Senator BARNES:

Senator Pearce:

Senator GIBBS:NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator Pearce:

Senator GIBBS:

Senator Lynch:

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:

Senator GIBBS:

Senator FOLL:Queensland

Senate
15 July 1925

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:
QUEENSLAND

Senator CRAWFORD:
Honorary Minister · QUEENSLAND · NAT

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

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Home and Territories · Western Australia · NAT

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Home and Territories · Western Australia · NAT

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

Senator HANNAN:
Victoria

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator LYNCH:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator BARNES:
Victoria

Senator PEARCE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917; UAP from 1931

Senator GIBBS:
NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator FOLL:
Queensland

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator GRAHAM:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator OGDEN:
Tasmania

Senator PAYNE:
Tasmania

Senator OGDEN:
TASMANIA · ALP; NAT from 1926

Senator J B HAYES:
TASMANIA

Senator REID:
Queensland

Mr GREENE:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator HOARE:
South Australia

Senator FOLL:
QUEENSLAND · NAT; UAP from 1931

Senator WILSON:
South AustraliaMinister for Markets and Migration · NAT

Senator WILSON:
NAT

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

Senator GUTHRIE:
VICTORIA