Senate
18 March 1926

10th Parliament · 1st Session



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

page 1688

PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE

Senator REID broughtup the report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, together with minutes ofevidence relating to the proposed transfer of the Postal Department’s telegraph lines between Perth and Adelaide to the transcontinental railway route.

page 1688

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN FRUIT IN LONDON

Publicity Campaign

Senator FINDLEY:
VICTORIA

– Has the Minister for Markets and Migration seen a cablegram in to-day’s newspapers to the effect that in consequence of the non-receipt of a reply to a cablegram which those interested in fruit and other Australian produce in London expected from the Government, those persons are proceeding with a publicity campaign themselves? I should like to know whether the state- ments contained in that cablegram are correct ?

Senator Sir VICTOR WILSON:

– I am sorry that I have not seen the newspaper report referred to, but I have received a cablegram. The board which represents the various interests concerned in the publicity scheme will meet to-night, and I expect that a reply will be in London to-morrow. The cablegram from London requested a reply by Friday.

Senator FINDLEY:

– May I ask whether the Minister will proceed further in the interests of Australia? Interested persons have made the definite statement that the Government has neglected to reply to the cablegram, and that, in consequence of that neglect, the Fruit Traders Federation in London intends to proceed with its own advertising scheme to the extent of £7,500. If the statements contained in the published cablegram are incorrect, the Government’s reply ought to state what has been done.

Senator Sir VICTOR WILSON:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– I cannot enlarge on what I have already said. I have taken all the necessary action to deal with the cablegrams that have been received. Whatever action the board, at its meeting to-night, may take, will not prejudice the interests of any one in London. The persons referred to at the other side of the world are only doing what they havebeen doing for years. There is no objection to them doing as they like.

Senator Findley:

– Are the persons referred to in the published cablegram distinct from those who are interested in the Government’s publicity scheme!

Senator Sir VICTOR WILSON:

– The Government recognizes only the interests embraced in the scheme, but it has been informed that other interests in London also desire to participate.

page 1688

ELECTORAL LAW

Joint Select Committee of Inquiry:

Reportsof Proceedings - Discharge of Senator Thompson from Attendance.

Motion (by Senator Plain), by leave, proposed -

That the Joint Committee on Electoral Law and Procedure, so far as the Senate portion of the Committee is concerned, have leave to report its minutes of evidence from time to time.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– I should like to know what is meant by “leave to report its minutes of evidence from time to time. The motion is very bald, and some explanation of it should be furnished to the Senate.

Senator Pearce:

– The object of it is to enable press representatives to be present at the sittings of the committee.

Senator NEEDHAM:

– The motion does not say so. Similar resolutions in the past have been couched in somewhat different language. There is no objection to admitting representatives of the press to the sittings of the committee, but the motion did not convey to my mind that that was the intention.

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

– The motion is in no way unusual.. It is in the form always employed in regard to select committees. A select committee has no authority to take any action unless authorized to do so by the House that appoints it. This committee has no authority to admit the press to its proceedings, or to make a report of its proceedings public.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:
QUEENSLAND

– I have received the following letter from Senator Thompson: -

The Senate, 18th March, 1926

The Hon. the President of the Senate.

Dear Sir,

Owing to urgentprivate business which will require my presence in Queensland when the Electoral Law and Procedure Joint Committee will be sitting, I wish to ask the Senate to relieve me from duty in serving as a member of that committee.

Yours faithfully,

  1. G. Thompson.

Motion (by Senator Pearce) agreed to- -

  1. That Senator Thompson be discharged from attendance on the Joint Committee on. Electoral Law and Procedure, and that Senator Hoare be appointed in his place.
  2. That the foregoing resolutionbe communicated to the House of Representatives by message.

Message received from the House of Representatives intimating that it had agreed to the following resolutions: -

  1. That, with reference to the resolution agreed to by this House on the 25th ultimo, the following members be appointed to serve on the Joint Select Committee to inquire into and re port upon certain matters connected with the electoral law:- Mr. Bowden, Mr. Manning, Mr. Edward Riley, and Mr. Thompson (mover of the original resolution).
  2. That two members be the quorum of members of the House of Representatives present to constitute a sitting of such committee.
  3. That this House agrees to the time and place proposed by the Senate for the first meeting of the committee.
  4. That the foregoing resolutions be communicated to the Senate by message.

page 1689

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Pacific Island Shipping and Mail Services - Descriptive Statement.

Public Works Committee Act - Eleventh General Report.

Treaty of Peace (Germany) Act- Regulations amended - Statutory Rules 1926, No. 24.

FOREIGNMIGRANTSto wESTERN AUSTRALIA.

Senator NEEDHAM:

asked the Minister for Markets and Migration, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that since July last year approximately 700 foreigners have arrived in the State of Western Australia?
  2. If so, will not the arrival of these foreigners accentuate the unemployed question in that State?
  3. Is it a fact that a certain person has applied to the Customs Department for permission to bring 200 Jugo-Slavs into Western Australia?
  4. If such application has been made, or should be made in the future, what course does the Commonwealth Government intend to pursue in the matter?
  5. Does the Government intend to take any action to prevent the large influx of foreigners into Australia?
Senator PEARCE:
NAT

– This question should have been addressed to the Minister for Home and Territories. The answers are as follows : -

  1. The figures for the seven months from 1st July, 1925, to 31st January, 1926, which are the latest complete figures available, are as follow: -
  1. This is a matter upon which I do not feel called to express an opinion.
  2. The department has no knowledge of any such application. A telegram hasbeen dispatched to the Collector of Customs, Fremantle inquiring whether he has any knowledge of the matter, but a reply is not yet to hand.
  3. An application for authority to introduce such a large batch of aliens would not be entertained unless it could be clearly shown that local labour was not available and that the introduction of the men would be in the interests of the State.
  4. The figures quoted above and also those included in a statement recently submitted to the Senate and printed in Parliamentary Paper No. 12 show that as a result of precautions taken and conditions imposed by the Government a marked decline in the volume of alien immigration into Australia during the past eighteen months has taken place, and it is not considered necessary, therefore, that any further action should be taken at present.

page 1690

QUESTION

TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION: WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator NEEDHAM:

asked the Minister representing the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

  1. Has the attention of the Minister been drawn to the unsatisfactory state of telegraphic communication between Perth and the Eastern States and the large number of telegrams delayed as a result?
  2. Does the Minister intend to look into the matter with a view to having the anomaly rectified?
  3. Will the Minister take into consideration the advisability of having a second line established so as to ensure an efficient and speedy communication between the Eastern and Western States?
Senator CRAWFORD:
Honorary Minister · QUEENSLAND · NAT

– The PostmasterGeneral has for some time been aware of the necessity for improving telegraphic communication between Perth and the eastern States, and proposals to meet the requirements were recently investigated by the Public Works Committee, whose report has been presented to Parliament to-day.

page 1690

POWER ALCOHOL BOUNTY BILL

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Senator PEARCE (Western Australia-

Minister for Home and Territories) [3.15].- I move -

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

I do so in order to enable the Minister for Markets and Migration, at a later hour of the day, to move the second reading of the bill, after which the general discussion may proceed until the bill has passed all its stages. Unless this motion is agreed to, -the Senate will, in the event of the bill on the notice-paper being disposed of, have no further business to deal with. If the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Senator Needham) desires that the debate be adjourned until to-morrow, no objection will be offered, but, in the circumstances, I ask the Senate to agree to the motion. By doing so, the right of debate will not be curtailed.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Aus tralia

– I regret that the Leader of the Government in the Senate has again submitted a motion asking for the suspension of the Standing and Sessional Orders to enable legislation to be dealt with. Probably, the bill to which he has referred is an important one; but this is the third time this session that the Minister has submitted a similar motion. The reason given in this instance is that unless the motion is agreed to the Senate, in the event of the only bill on the noticepaper being passed, will have no further business with which to deal. That is not the fault of the Senate, but of the Government. When I think of the voluminous document containing the Government’s programme for the session, which was read by His Excellency the GovernorGeneral at the opening of this Parliament, I can hardly understand the reason for the submission of this motion.

Senator Pearce.Most of that programme has already passed into law.

Senator NEEDHAM:

– In that case, the paper on which His Excellency’s speech was printed has been wasted. The Senate has power to initiate legislation. There is, therefore, no reason why the Government should not have’ brought sufficient measures before it to keep honorable senators busy. I do not like suspending the Standing Orders. The Leader of the Government in the Senate has made a habit of moving motions to suspend them. The Government should have arranged its business in such a way that this measure would have been before us long before now. I believe that it is the Government’s desire to adjourn the Senate to-morrow ; but if the Government intends to carry out the programme outlined in the GovernorGeneral’s Speech there is no reason why sufficient business should not have been brought before the Senate to keep us busy until to-morrow week. It is idle to blame the Senate for the present state of affairs. I offer my formal objection to the motion.

Question put.

The PRESIDENT:

– There being more than a statutory majority of the whole Senate present, and no voice being raised in dissent, I declare the motion carried.

Bill (on motion by Senator Sir Victor Wilson) read a first time.

page 1691

WESTERN AUSTRALIA GRANT BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 17th March (vide page 1644), on motion by Senator Pearce -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Senator KINGSMILL:
Western Australia

– It is almost superfluous for me say that I intend to support this bill. I do so with somewhat mixed feelings, because, while I recognize that it is necessary for Western Australia, and, I think, looking at the matter in a wider sense, for the Commonwealth, I regret very much the causes that have made it a necessity. However, be that as it may, I can see no other way out of Western Australia’s existing difficulties. The righthonorable the Leader of the Senate (Senator Pearce) yesterday detailed with great accuracy, and fairly fully, the disadvantages, natural and artificial, under which Western Australia has to struggle. He pointed out that the sparseness of its’ population and the hugeness of its area made its administration extremely, if not abnormally, difficult and expensive. Isolated as Western Australians from the rest of Australia by sea and by uninhabited tracts which place it almost in the position of an island, its development is a herculean task from which, I am proud to think, its inhabitants did not shrink even in the early days of its history, when they were a much smaller handful of people than they are to-day. Even in those days they tackled these problems with a great deal of courage and a large amount of discretion. Those honorable senators who have not visited that State may have brought home to them the vastness of its area when I state that a traveller may board a steamer at Fremantle, journey over 2,000 miles northward, and still be. off the Western Australian coast. If he travels also in the other direction from Fremantle to Eucla, he will cover, in all, between 3,000 and 3,500 miles of Western Australian coast-line. From east to west the distance is approximately 1,000 miles. Expressed in these terms, the vastness of its area should convey to honorable senators some idea of the task of development that lies before the people of the western State. I may also add that the best and most fertile parts of the country are divided, in many instances, by intervening areas of poor country, rendering administration still more difficult. I invite honorable senators to consider some of the public works which were initiated and carried out in the early years of its history, when; as I have stated, the population was much smaller than it is to-day.

Senator Findley:

– ^Nearly all those works were carried out by Victorians.

Senator KINGSMILL:

– The honorable senator’s interjection is typical of the Victorian - I might almost say, the early Victorian - attitude. It is the sort of argument, if it may be termed an argument, that one might expect from this blessed portion of Australia - Australia Felix, blessed in her situation and her lack of area, blessed in the fertility of her lands, and, above all, blessed in the understanding and intelligence of her people. With this digression, perhaps the honorable senator will now allow me to proceed without interruption. I was about to instance certain public works carried out in Western Australia as evidence of the courage and discretion of those who were charged with the responsibility of its administration in the earlier years of its history. The first to which I direct attention is the construction of the Coolgardie water scheme. That monumental undertaking, which involved an expenditure of £3,000,000, was shouldered in its first stages by a population of 80,000 people, with a confidence in the future that subsequent events fully justified. That was an example of the courage of the people. Let me now give an example of the discretion which accompanied it. When the money for this scheme was borrowed in London, legislation was passed providing that the contribution to the sinking; fund for the extinction of the debt should be 3 per cent, instead of the ordinary amount of 1 per cent., with the result that, great as was the hurden of the scheme upon the people of Western Australia, it is to-day written off the books.

Senator Ogden:

– What is the use of a sinking fund when the public expenditure exceeds the revenue every vear?

Senator KINGSMILL:

– Is it not better to have such a sinking fund in those circumstances rather than to be like other States which are exceeding their revenues and have no such provision?

Senator Ogden:

– We have a sinking fund in Tasmania, and I have always deprecated it in view of the fact that the expenditure exceeds the revenue.

Senator KINGSMILL:

– I was always under the impression that there was some “ sinking “ propensity on the part of Tasmania. Let me remind the honorable senator that Western Australia, despite her accumulated* deficits, stands higher to-day in the eyes of the British investors than any other State in the Commonwealth, because that State’s sinking fund, as the Leader of the Senate stated yesterday - and I think he understated rather than exaggerated the position - amounts to over £9,000,000. The greater portion of this amount is invested in Western Australian stocks, which were bought at a considerable discount, so that, even if we have a deficit, which may be traced to certain specific causes, the investing public has an assurance that Western Australia has something to put against it.

Senator Ogden:

– Why not reduce the deficit from the sinking fund ?

Senator KINGSMILL:

– That would be like eating everything to-day and having nothing to-morrow, a policy Which has never met with the approval of the Western Australian Legislature, although determined efforts have been made from time to time by various Treasurers to thus misappropriate the amounts to the credit of the sinking fund. I have mentioned the natural disadvantages of Western Australia. Let me deal now with some of its artificial disadvantages which have contributed to the position in which it finds itself to-day.. The greatest is, in my opinion, the tariff, which, in its application to Western Australia, is really a secondary industry tariff for a primary industry country. So long as Western Australia occupies this position, not the Governments of the eastern States, or, for that matter, the Commonwealth Government, but the business people of the eastern States are determined that it shall have as few secondary industries as possible. I can mention two industries which seemed to be going! ahead in Western Australia until the business people of the eastern States, acting against all moral law, if not against the statute law, dumped their goods at below cost price in Western Australia.

Senator Thompson:

– The honorable senator is referring to dumping from the eastern States?

Senator KINGSMILL:

– Yes. The first so affected was the boot industry, established some time ago, and the second, which is of comparatively recent origin, was the fruit-preserving and jam-making industry. In both these cases, when these nascent industries appeared to be on the point of succeeding, supplies were sent from the eastern States, and sold at rates below those ruling in the east, which rendered it impossible for those industries to be carried on at a profit.

Senator Foll:

– Have you not recently erected a woollen mill in Western Australia, which will need substantial protection?

Senator KINGSMILL:

– Quite so. That reminds me that Western Australia suffers from another business disadvantage in that, unhappily, she does not produce an exportable quantity of a necessary commodity required by the rest of Australia, and therefore is not able to take toll of the rest of the Commonwealth for the fostering of that industry, and the production of this necessary and essential food supply. I do not wish Senator Foll to rush to rash conclusions. I was thinking of butter.

Senator Foll:

– I, too, was thinking of butter.

Senator Thompson:

– Has not Western Australia a few legacies from former Labour Governments?

Senator KINGSMILL:

– Yes ; I shall deal with one or two. Another legislative handicap we have suffered from, to a greater extent perhaps than any other State, with the exception of Tasmania, is the operation of the coasting provisions of the Navigation Act. I do not wish to make this statement without giving some concrete examples. I was speaking today to a gentleman interested in the iron foundry industry, and, of course, in the development of any country the necessity of producing her own iron castings is evident. “Western Australia is forced to get her raw material from elsewhere. Naturally she looks round, and in doing so finds that she can get scrap-iron from the United Kingdom for £6 5s. per ton, landed at the foundry. On the other hand, if certain persons had their way, she could he forced to strain her patriotism to the extent of paying io the big iron producers in eastern. Australia £10 5s. per ton for similar material. The higher rate is principally due to the operation of the Navigation Act, and the excessive freights which are the result of the operations of that act. Again, the timber industry, .which is, and has been for many years, one of the principal industries in Western Australia, is handicapped almost out of existence by the fact that her valuable timbers, which are eminently suited for house construction and kindred other purposes, have to pay an exorbitant freight from Western Australia to the eastern States. In these circumstances, again I maintain that Western Australia occupies a very unhappy position, and one which would discourage most people. There is yet another handicap, and in mentioning this, I reply to Senator Thompson’s interjection - the legacy handed down from past administrations. Certain institutions in Western Australia - I allude to the State enterprises - have been steadily dragging at her finances. We have had a more perfect, and therefore a more pernicious, system of State industries, than any other State in Australia. We have had State steamships, State sawmills, State butcher’s shops, State fish shops, a State milk supply, and other State enterprises too numerous to mention, all of which have been losing propositions. In order to ascertain the exact position in which the State has been placed in consequence of these handicaps, the Government appointed a royal commission to investigate, report, and suggest a remedy. The commission has made certain recommendations. Western Australia is not always voicing her shortcomings, or asking for assistance. When she has done so, she has always been ready to submit her requests to an adequate tribunal in order that her rights might be reasonably assessed. I have read with great interest the report, of the commission. It is a peculiar report. Its peculiarities and its novelties make it, perhaps, all the more interesting reading. Some of the propositions put up are, if I may be pardoned for being so irreverent as to refer in such a way to the findings of such an august body-, almost absurd. For instance, I cannot understand why they proposed that Western Australia should be granted a separate tariff for 25 years. That, of course, cannot be done; but the Parliament of the Commonwealth, and more especially this portion of it, wherein the interests of the States are supposed to be conserved, might well pass a universal tariff for Australia which would be more fitting than the present, .and more likely to meet the needs of such a State as Western Australia. I do not wish to anticipate debate. I understand that, in Ihe near, if not the immediate future, we shall have an opportunity of discussing the tariff, and I shall, therefore, leave that thorny and difficult question alone to-day. If the commission had contented itself by dealing with the occurrence to which I have already referred, namely, the dumping of goods between State and State-

Senator Ogden:

– Dumping shows an anti-federal spirit; it is even worse than that.

Senator KINGSMILL:

– Unfortunately, we cannot provide against it.

Senator Ogden:

– Is there no means?

Senator KINGSMILL:

– Without an amendment of the Constitution I do not think we could pass any legislation which would meet the circumstances. The underlying principle of the Constitution is that there shall be free intercourse of commerce between the States. While that, of course, is not to the prevention of dumping, it militates against taking any measures to prevent the occurrence of dumping. In the circumstances which I have mentioned, this dumping trouble is not the fault of the Federal Government or the Federal legislature. It is simply due to the action taken by certain individuals or firms in the eastern States to prevent what they consider to be dangerous competition in that small but good market for their products which exists in Western Australia.

Senator McLachlan:

– Are the unprofitable State industries still being continued ?

Senator KINGSMILL:

– I do not wish to assign to any particular political party any undue blame for those State industries. Although the Labour, party started them, the Nationalist party is an accomplice, because when it had an opportunity to get rid of them, difficult, indeed, and involving enormous loss, it did not do so. By continuing some of them it added to the disabilities of Western Australia.

Senator Pearce:

– It closed up the State butchers’ shops.

Senator KINGSMILL:

– They were closed automatically.

Senator Needham:

– It did not close up the brickworks.

Senator KINGSMILL:

– It cannot be said that the National party closed the butchers’ shops, because the butchers’ shops and the fish shops closed themselves.

Senator Foll:

– Was there difficulty in obtaining supplies of meat

Senator KINGSMILL:

– There was plenty of meat available. The Government had, in addition to the other State enterprises mentioned, its own cattle station. I do not think, however, that it obtained meat from that station. It was established, I believe, with the idea of collecting all the natives within a certain large’ radius, and supplying them with the beef which the station produced. The station has been a most unpayable proposition, and is always likely to be, under government control.

Senator Ogden:

– Western Australia itself is responsible for that trouble.

Senator KINGSMILL:

– Quite so. I was pointing out first the natural, and secondly the artificial, disadvantages of which this is no small part. We realise that it is our responsibility to try to eliminate what I- am afraid is not likely to be removed. Personally, I have no serious fault to find with the attitude that the Federal Parliament has always taken up towards Western Australia. There are in that State a number of persons who allow their feelings to run away with them in this direction, and they exaggerate matters of comparatively small im portance into serious acts on the part of the Commonwealth against the interests of that State. They have not my support. My experience as a member of both this Parliament and the State Parliament of Western Australia has led me to believe that my State has always received a fair hearing and a fair deal from the Federal Parliament, with the exception of what Western Australia regards as the most pernicious tariff under which it now labours.

Senator Foll:

– What has that State done to help itself by increasing its State taxation ? How does its taxation compare with that of the other States ?

Senator KINGSMILL:

– If the honorable senator had listened to the speech by the Leader of the Senate yesterday, he would know that Western Australia has the highest State taxation in Australia.

Senator Thompson:

– Surely not! It cannot be higher than that of Queensland.

Senator Needham:

– The Leader of the Government in the Senate made a statement to that effect.

Senator Pearce:

– On incomes over £6,000 per annum the Western Australian tax is higher than that of any State.

Senator KINGSMILL:

– Apparently the bill will afford relief to Western Australia for one year only, and in the meantime the matter is likely to be influenced by the result of a conference of State and Federal Ministers to be held in the near future.

Senator McLachlan:

– To what purposes will this money be applied by the State Parliament?

Senator KINGSMILL:

– The purposes are not specified in the bill, and I do not know that it would be constitutional or proper to so specify them, because that would amount to an exercise of control over matters that are entirely outside the Federal sphere. I trust,’ with the honorable senator, that no portion of the grant will be expended - those Federal Ministers who have spoken on this subject employed, I think, the term “splashed’ up” - on State enterprises. With that suggestion, which affords considerable guidance, I think that any State Government could be trusted to put the money to proper national use. It is proposed that the question of the continuance of this assistance shall, to a certain extent, be influenced by the result of a conference to be held at an early date. My experience of these conferences in the past has been very disappointing. Let me say that the provision of this money is a matter not for any State Government or for any interstate conference, but for this Parliament. That being so, while such a conference may be able to give us valuable information as to the amounts that the grant should cover, I think that the Federal Government will be ill-advised to place before it the necessity or otherwise of the grant being made. We have enough Western Australians, small though their number may be, in this Parliament to undertake the sifting and determination of the question and the placing of the facts before the Legislature. After all, it is proposed that this Parliament shall make the grant. Under those circumstances, may I be pardoned for hoping that the Government will not, as has been done with disastrous results on various occasions inthe past, depend too much on the proposed interstate conference, but will rather shoulder its own responsibility. It should not endeavour to place upon other shoulders the duty of dealing with a matter that should be decided by the the national Parliament itself. I have said sufficient to satisfy myself on this subject. I have ever before me the narrow escape that the bill had in the other branch of the Legislature from being talked out by its own supporters. I think that I have given cogent reasons for the acceptance of the measure. I support it, and hope that it will have an easy passage through the Senate.

Senator GRAHAM:
Western Australia

– I desire to add a few words to the speeches that have already been delivered in regard to the proposed special grant to Western Australia as the outcome of the recommendations of the Royal Commission appointed by this Government. I do not intend in any way to oppose the bill. My only regret is that the grant of £450,000 is not to be made for a longer period than twelve months. Although the Minister (Senator Pearce) pointed out that at the end of the first financial year there, will be a review of the situation so far as the disabilities of Western Australia are concerned, it seems to me that the Treasurers of the other States have very little in common with Western Australia, and should not be asked to decide whether the grant should be continued after the first year. The . majority report of the Commission contained a recommendation that the £450,000 should be granted annually, pending the granting of the right to the State to impose its own Customs and Excise Tariff, and the minority report suggested a grant of £300,000 for ten years. The bill, therefore, does not embody either of the recommendations in the way that I think it should’. A specified period should be fixed, so that the Western Australian authorities would be able to satisfactorily shape their finances. I have no desire to speak disparagingly of the sponsors of this bill; but, as one of the representatives of the great State of Western Australia, I must express regret that the grant is not to be made over an extended period. In introducing the bill the Minister spoke of the potentialities of that State - of its size, and of the sparseness of its population. The enormous extent of its territory necessarily makes administration expensive. When gold was discovered at Coolgardie, in 1896, a boom period began in Western Australia, and the enormous quantities of gold won on that field not only gave that State much greater prosperity, than it had previously enjoyed, but also gave a great fillip to Victoria. The richness of the gold-fields of Western Australia is indicated by the fact that the total quantity of gold won up till quite recently in that State is valued at £250,000,000. That enormous quantity of gold having been taken out of those fields, that State does not now occupy as favorable a position, in so far as its mining areas are concerned, as do the eastern States. At Bendigo, Clunes, and other old mining centres in Victoria, the land can be farmed right up to the mouth of the shaft, after the gold has been removed. Agricultural conditions are diffferent from that in the State I represent, and farming on the goldfields is almost non-existent. Beyond Southern Cross very little farming is done Gold-mining has played a prominent part in the development of the State.

Senator Thompson:

– What has become of the £250,000,000?

Senator GRAHAM:

– It has gone abroad. A farming district is much better circumstanced than a gold-mining district. Although a crop is taken off the soil this year, another crop can be grown next year. I am glad that the bill has been introduced, but it should state definitely when the State can draw the money. Senator Kingsmill said that, in Western Australia, the foundries found it profitable to buy scrap-iron from other parts of the world at £6 10s. per ton. Such things sound all right on paper; but the honorable senator, who is familiar with Western Australian conditions from one end of the State to the other, knows that there are, at Yampi Sound, mountains containing millions of tons of iron ore. It is only necessary to install blast furnaces to be able to supply all the iron the world needs. Queensland has sent ships, and taken iron from that place. All that is needed to open up this valuable deposit is finance.

Senator Foll:

– If Western Australia has all these valuable things, why does it come to the Commonwealth Parliament for charity?

Senator GRAHAM:

– We have not the money to work them. There is coal alongside the iron deposits, and all that is needed is finance. Western Australia is suffering greatly to-day for the want of secondary industries. With more secondary industries the population would increase, because there would be more work for the young people to do. The children of men working on the eastern goldfields cannot be sent into the mines, and there are no secondary industries to absorb them. It is true, as Senator Kingsmill has pointed out, that the secondary industries of the eastern States control the market in Western Australia, and they do what they like in the matter of dumping. Among other things Western Australia started a jamfactory, but the competition of jam factories in the eastern States wiped it out of sight. If a local jam factory sells jam at 10½d. per lb., and the jam factories of the eastern States sell their jam at 7½d. per lb., the local factory cannotsurvive for long. Some honorable senators have asked what Western Australia will do with this money, and they particularly wish to know whether it will invest it in State enterprises. If the money is granted, the Government of that State may be trusted to spend it judiciously. The present Government is quite competent, and should be trusted to use the money to the best advantage. I could say quite a lot about the gold-mining industry. The bounty on the production of gold does not help very much. It would be insufficient even if the whole of it were given to the industry in Western Australia.

Senator FOLL:
QUEENSLAND · NAT; UAP from 1931

I do not oppose the bill, but I wish to draw attention to a statement made by the Minister (Senator Pearce), and reiterated by Senator Kingsmill, regarding amounts of taxation imposed by the States of Western Australia and Queensland. It is correct to say that on incomes up to £400 or £500 a year the tax is slightly higher in Western Australia than in Queensland, but on incomes from £500 to £5,000 the taxation in Queensland is much heavier than that in Western Australia. State Governments that find it necessary to apply to the Commonwealth Government for financial relief should exhaust every avenue of State taxation. The relief has to be provided by States that do not receive any of the benefit. For years Tasmania was an applicant for relief, although the income taxation was lower in that State than in the other States. Persons drawing incomes of from £400 to £1,000 per annum pay very much less per head in taxation in Western Australia than in Queensland.

Senator Thompson:

– Land taxation is very much lower in Western Australia than in Queensland.

Senator FOLL:

– That is so, especially when assessments that include the bulk of the taxpayers are considered. This is not the only grant given to Western Australia; she also receives grants for solidier settlement, road construction, and migration. Senator Graham attributed many of Western Australia’s difficulties to dumping by the secondary industries of the eastern States. At the present time Western Australia is essentially a primaryproducing State, and it is probably not a sound policy, until the population increases, for her to establish large secondary industries. One of the most modern woollen mills in Australia has, however, recently been established at Albany. Every one wishes it success; but, in spite of the protests of Western Australians against Customs duties, it will be necessary for a very large duty to be placed on textiles to keep that mill alive. The State of Queensland has refrained at all times from seeking aid from the Commonwealth Government. It has not participated in the grants distributed to other States. As a wealthy State it is ready to lend a helping hand to any State that is in difficulties. It has been heavily taxed to build its great mileage of railways. The total mileage of railways in that State is over 5,000, which is more than the mileage of railways in any other State. Whenever there has been a deficit in Queensland owing to extravagant expenditure on State stations, State butchers’ shops, or State fish shops, no application has been made for assistance to the Commonwealth Government. Queensland has had a bitter experience since Labour got into power, in 1915. No greater calamity ever happened to any State. Prior t& that date its public utilities were all on a sound commercial basis. In 1915 its railway system was the only railway system in Australia that was paying its way. With Labour in office in Queensland there have been losses and trouble on the railways, extravagant expenditure, and annual deficits. But, notwithstanding the disastrous effects of Labour rule in Queensland, honorable senators repre,senting that State have not approached the Senate with a request for a grant to make up any deficiency.

Senator Needham:

– The Queensland representatives are only concerned with sugar.

Senator FOLL:

– The honorable senator should remember that the Queensland sugar producers sold sugar in Western Austrafia at 3-Jd. per lb. when London parity was ls. a lb.; the balance is still in favour of the sugar-growers. So long as Labour Governments engage in State enterprises, there will be losses. Queensland has suffered greatly in this respect during recent years. The socialistic enterprises of the Labour Governments there have resulted in hundreds of thousands of pounds being wasted. The railways have been run at a loss owing to the rotten administration and lack of business ability displayed by Labour ministries since 1915. But the taxpayers of Queensland have met those losses without outside assistance. The taxation in Queensland on incomes between £400 and £1,500 is probably the highest in the world, while I admit that in Western

Australia the taxation is higher in respect of incomes over £5,000. I point out that those who are in receipt of such large incomes do not constitute the great bulk of the taxpayers. For some years Tasmania has asked for an annual grant. Now Western Australia, cap in hand, asks a generous Parliament for assistance. Victoria has benefited greatly from the construction of various works on the Murray River, while millions of pounds have been expended in New South Wales on the construction of a new capital. Probably the worst offender in this respect is South Australia, in whose territory there are hundreds of miles of non-paying railways, the losses on which are being met by the taxpayers of the Commonwealth as a whole.

Senator Needham:

– In South Australia until recently there has been a succession of National Governments.

Senator FOLL:

– Already in South Australia there is a railway from Marree to Oodnadatta, on which there is an annual loss; and now an extension of that line is to be made. The taxpayers of Queensland, on the other hand, bear their own burden. However, as my heart has been softened by the earnest pleading of honorable senators representing Western Australia, I shall not vote against the bill. I realize from their remarks that Western Australia is in need of assistance to enable the present period of financial stress to be passed, and, being charitably disposed, I shall not oppose the granting of that asistance

Senator MCLACHLAN:
Australia · South

– As it is my intention to vote for the bill, I wish to explain that my action on this occasion is not to be regarded as establishing a precedent. This system of spasmodic grants to the various States by the Commonwealth is neither scientific nor desirable in the interests of good government. The money that we collect through the Customs and by various other methods is a trust, to be expended in the best interests of the country as a whole. With considerable skill the Minister put the case for Western Australia; but I point out that by passing this measure we shall hand over to another Parliament, which is not answerable to the taxpayers from whom the money has been collected, a sum of £450,000 to be spent as and bow it will, and not as and bow- the Parliament of Australia decides. Whether a case has been made out for this grant to Western Australia, I am not at this juncture prepared to say; but we cannot gainsay the fact that when the States federated the legislators of that time, including those from Western Australia, felt that the Constitution sufficiently safeguarded the interests of every State. If the precautions then taken have since been found to be insufficient, the remedy is not to be found in measures of this character. If the Minister had not referred to this bill as a temporary expedient to tide Western Australia over a time of financial stress - and I am still in a state of bewilderment as to whether the difficulties of Western Australia justify a grant of £450,000 - I fear that I should vote against the measure. But, in view of the Minister’s statement and the probability of a conference of State treasurers being held to discuss the financial position of the States, I like Senator Foll, feel that my heart has been softened. With a great “deal of trepidation I shall vote for the measure. It has been contended that this grant to Western Australia is justified because of the vast area still to be developed’ by that State. It would be as logical for Tasmania to put forward the plea that she is entitled to a grant because her area is so small that that State is incapable of great expansion. The Minister referred to the report of the royal commission on the disabilities of Western Australia, but in my opinion, and I believe that in this matter I am. unprejudiced, nothing in that report justifies this grant. In this connexion I cannot disregard the fact that the Constitution was drafted by men of no mean order. Some of them were men of very high calibre; one was responsible for the construction of the east- west railway which, despite Senator Foil’s remarks, has been of great service to Australia. The framers of the Constitution had in their minds the disabilities which at that time existed. Should the Constitution now be found to be defective, this Parliament should .take steps to secure its amendment. I do not expect great results from a conference of State treasurers. It might resolve itself into a discussion of the rights of the various States.

Senator Needham:

– A purely academic discussion.

Senator MCLACHLAN:

– A discussion of an academic nature might result in some advantage to the ‘Commonwealth ; but a conference of Treasurers is more likely to be a gathering of men each intent on obtaining the best possible for his own State. This Parliament should take a larger view of the situation than has been presented by . the Leader of the Government in the Senate (Senator Pearce), the Acting Leader of the Opposition (Senator Needham) and Senator Kingsmill. We should endeavour to arrive at a scientific method of rendering assistance to the more necessitous states, or those which have suffered most under federation. Nothing has been placed before the Senate which was not contemplated when the Constitution was framed. It is easy for this Parliament to grant this money; but it is not so easy to reconcile that action with our duty to the taxpayers. By passing this measure we shall hand over £450,000, which has been collected from them to a body over which we have no control. We have no guarantee that the money will not be expended to recoup the Western Australian Government some of its improvident expenditure on State enterprises. The measure contains no such safeguard. The Western Australian Government might to-morrow wipe out the deficit created by that improvident expenditure. When we are called upon to make grants of this nature, we should insert a provision to safeguard the interests of the taxpayers. Senator Kingsmill has suggested that this might be unconstitutional, but we should retain some controlling power over the expenditure. The Minister (Senator Pearce) and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Senator Needham), both of whom hail from this vast territory, expressed the pious hope that tb( money would be applied frugally. I trust that it may.

Senator REID (Queensland) [4.22”.- - Though I intend to support the bill, I am not in favour of the pernicious principle underlying it. I endorse Senator McLachlan’s suggestion that the position should be inquired into. I have a great deal of sympathy for the people of Western Australia. As a member of the Public Works Committee I was privileged some time ago to travel up the northwest coast of Western Australia, and. I obtained a good deal of first-Land information concerning the disabilities under which the people there are living. My colleague (Senator Toll) has mentioned what Queensland has done in the development of her more remote areas. Fortunately, Queensland has a valuable hinterland behind its numerous outports. In this respect Queeusland differs from Western Australia. I have no desire to speak disparagingly of the western State, but I was impressed with the many natural difficulties that confront the people who are settled on country behind some of the ports which I visited. The Western Australian Government is deserving of every credit for its attempt to develop the north-west coast, which, for the most part, is very inhospitable. Large sums of money have been spent in the construction of jetties and other harbour works. In some of the harbours ships may be seen tied to the wharfs high and dry, with the tide at the ebb, a quarter of a mile out. Generally speaking, the country behind the various ports is devoted to the pastoral industry, but an attempt is being made at Carnarvon to grow bananas and pineapples. Although the farms looked fairly healthy when I visited that portion of the coast, it was feared that the prevailing winds would eventually destroy the plantations. The sparseness of the population, and the necessarily limited amount of trade, does not give the Government a reasonable return on the amount of money expended for public works along the coast. During the war, when prices for mutton and lambs were high, large meat works were built at Carnarvon, but, unfortunately, the market collapsed, and the works have never been opened. This was a severe blow to the pastoralists, who were looking to that establishment to give them an outlet for their surplus production. The State meat works at Wyndham are also losing money, but if they were closed pastoralists who are settled over a considerable area at the back of Wyndham, and even into the Northern Territory, would be in a disastrous position. All these difficulties suggest that Western Australia is entitled to some consideration. I speak, of course, only of the coastal country from Geraldton northwards, where, as I have stated, agricultural operations have not, up to the pre sent, been successful. Reference has been made to the policy of business people in the eastern states dumping their goods in Western Australia to the injury of local secondary industries. In this respect, Western Australia is not suffering in greater measure than certain other States. Prior to federation Queensland had a number of thriving fruit and jam factories. With interstate freetrade, some had to close down and others were removed to Melbourne or Sydney. Fortunately, Queensland has great natural resources, and the State is now prospering. I have no objection to the bill, which provides for the payment of a special grant as a temporary expedient, but I trust that before long something will be done to more satisfactorily define the financial relationship of the Commonwealth with the States.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– One is inclined to wonder what citizens of other countries who read of the debate on this ‘ bill, will think of the people of Australia. For some years we have been holding out inducements to people overseas to settle in this country, and to-day several honorable senators have been telling the people of the world that a large portion of Australia is a miserable and God-forsaken place. It will not be in Australia’s interest if it is recorded in the debates of this Parliament that, while we are extolling the capabilities of certain States, we are at the same time referring to the impoverished condition of other States in which a determined attempt is being made to get people to settle. If what we have heard from some honorable senators is true, we should offer an inducement to the people of Western .Australia to quit that State and settle in Queensland, which is so blessed by Providence that apparently it has never had to appeal to the Commonwealth Government for assistance in any form. If I were inclined to find fault with the attitude of any State, I might be tempted to tell the people of Australia what the Commonwealth Government has done for Queensland. When a State obtains assistance from the Commonwealth Government it is merely receiving that consideration which the framers of the Constitution contemplated. I am glad that the Government have refrained from giving assistance to Western

Australia in the direction the commission recommended. To me the commission’s report is a most remarkable document. It deals with practically everything under the sun, including the tenure of office of honorable senators and members of the House of Representatives. So much space has been devoted to extraneous matters that very little has been said concerning) the actual requirements of Western Australia.’ A perusal of the document will show that all the members of the commission agreed on very few points, and I am confident that if honorable senators were to be guided by lie recommendations of the commission, Western Australia would receive very little support from this branch of the legislature. I intended to refer to some of the recommendations of the commission, but I do not think it worth while to go into them in detail, because the document is practically worthless. In introducing the bill, the Minister (Senator Pearce) put the case for Western Australia forcibly, reasonably, and fairly. In a sense, he was at a disadvantage, inasmuch as the purpose of the measure is to benefit the State which he represents in this Chamber. It must be recognized, however, that it is impossible to assist Western Australia without benefiting the whole of the. Commonwealth. The Minister said certain persons in Western Australia were dissatisfied with federation, but there are others, in other portions of Australia, who are not altogether enamoured of the federal system. The members of this wonderful commission suggest that we should raise a tariff barrier between Western Australia and the other States. Senator Foll. - Only for a period. Senator NEWLAND. - Yes, for 25 years. Those who have made a study of ‘ Australian conditions realize that it is absolutely impossible for a State consisting of such an enormous area to be effectively developed without assistance. Western Australia, and particularly the north-western portion of that State, has not been developed as have other portions of the Commonwealth, owing principally to the sparseness of the population and the limited funds at the disposal of those in authority. Senator Reid said that there is no territory in Australia equal to the coun try north of Bundaberg, in Queensland; but, in my opinion, there is no part of Australia that cannot be equalled by some other part. A large portion of northwestern Australia is undeveloped and unexplored, but persons who have visited it have said that portions of the country are equal to the best found in other parts of Australia.

Senator Reid:

– There is nothing in Australia to compare with the volcanic country in north Queensland.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– I cannot agree with the honorable senator. Whether the north-western portion of Australia is to be developed by the Commonwealth or by the State Government, the money for its development will have to be provided by the Commonwealth, because the State will not be in a position for many years to carry out such a stupendous task. Western Australia should do as South Australia has done in relieving herself of the responsibility of developing the Northern Territory. The people of South Australia made an honorable bargain, but the Commonwealth has the advantage, and if the Western Australian people consent to hand over a large part of north-western Australia to the Commonwealth they will be relieved of a great deal of anxiety and worry. The Commonwealth will have to develop that large tract of country either as Commonwealth territory, as a new State, or as a portion of the State of Western Australia. Honorable senators, whose duty it is to protect the interests of the States, must not view such subjects as this through provincial spectacles, but from the stand-point of the development of the whole continent. Senator Needham seemed somewhat concerned because the proposed grant is for a period of one year, but if provision had been made for the payment of a grant for more than one year I would have opposed the measure. Parliament will require a guarantee that it will be wisely spent.

Senator Needham:

– Has the Government received any guarantee from Tasmania ?

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– The Government has closely watched the manner in which Tasmanian grants have been expended, and it will also exercise the same right in regard to this grant. If at the end of the present financial year it is found that the money has been wisely spent and that “Western Australia requires and deserves further assistance, favorable consideration will be given to the request of Western Australia.

Senator Needham:

– Has Tasmania ever given a guarantee ?

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– All the Government have to do is to see that the money is judiciously spent, and if financial grants to Tasmania had not been wisely handled by the State authorities further assistance would not have been forthcoming. I dislike hearing references made to the generosity of the Commonwealth, and

I am equally averse from any State being referred to as a mendicant. Such terms do great damage to this country. The proposed conference of State Treasurers is advisable and necessary. Such gatherings are held from time to time, and they have a beneficial effect. This Parliament now makes large distributions of Federal revenue among the States for various purposes, and, although I personally do not approve of the manner in which money thus taken out of the pockets of the people is disbursed, I realize that conferences of Federal and State officials have a good effect. They maintain confidence in this Parliament by seeing that the money is not frittered away on fanciful schemes such as are, unfortunately, put into operation in Western Australia and some of the other States. This Parliament is not permitted under the Constitution to restrict, in any way, trade between the States, and it is powerless to prevent the dumping of goods as between State and State. I suggest that citizens of Western Australia should help themselves in this matter. If cheap goods from the eastern States are dumped into Western Australia, I imagine that the merchants in that State rush to the wharfs to obtain a share of those goods, because they know that the people of that State will purchase a cheap commodity. Would it not be better for those people to assist in the establishment of their own secondary industries?

Senator KINGSMILL:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · NAT

– The people will not do that, even in Victoria and New South Wales. It is the price that talks.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– Yes. I realize that it would be expecting too much of the patriotism of the people to ask them to pay higher prices for locally-manuf actured goods than are charged for articles made elsewhere. It seems to me that, before this Parliament is invited to make a further grant to Western Australia, the people of that State should see that their own industries are protected. They do not live in a poor State, or one having no natural resources.

Senator Drake-Brockman:

– The Commonwealth is surely under an obligation to assist in the development of Western Australia ?

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– I admit that it should do its share; but the State, also, should do something in its own interests. I have much pleasure in supporting the bill, the object of which is in conformity with the intention of the framers of the Constitution.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.

Clause 3 (Instalments to be determined by Treasurer).

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– This clause provides that the amount payable under the bill shall be paid in such instalments as the Treasurer determines. I was under the impression that the total sum payable would be transmitted to the Treasurer of Western Australia. If the Parliament adjourned prior to the end of June, and would not meet until July, what would be the position ?

Senator PEARCE:
Western AustraliaMinister for Home and Territories · NAT

– This is simply a clause to enable the Treasurer, as a matter of convenience, to pay amounts from time to time in the event of the money, or any portion of it, not having been paid at the end of June. The vote would not lapse, because the money is appropriated under this bill.

Clause agreed to.

Preamble and title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.

page 1701

POWER ALCOHOL BOUNTY BILL

Second Reading

Senator Sir VICTOR. WILSON (South

Australia - Minister Tor Markets and Migration) [5.2]. - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time. Provision is made under this measure for a bounty of 4d. a gallon on power alcohol derived from cassava, sweet potatoes, arrowroot, or other approved starchbearing plants. It is not proposed to include molasses. Many people are entirely opposed to the bounty system; but I think that it will be realized that, in the initial stages, the manufacture of an article of such great importance to Australia as power alcohol should be encouraged. It may be contended that the bounty should be granted for the manufacture of this article from many other substances. I point out to honorable senators, however, that although the Government realizes the importance of the manufacture of this product from whatever source it is derived, this bill deals specifically with the manufacture of the article from cassava and other approved starch-bearing plants.

As an initial step towards lessening Australia’s enormous importations of petrol, th committee is of opinion that the production of power alcohol from various vegetable ;a’nd other products available within Australia should be scientifically investigated, and, where proved advisable, assisted.

The Government is willing to consider applications for assisting other industries; but the bill applies only to the production of power alcohol from cassava and other cultivated starch-bearing plants. The committee also reported: -

Cassava, however, appears to be the most favorable of these crops, provided it can be successfully cultivated at reasonable cost in the tropical parts of the Commonwealth. Owing to the fact that the cultivation of this crop has not been hitherto attempted on a commercial scale in Australia, no evidence is yet available on which accurate costs of production, its yield per acre, or the alcohol contents of Australian-grown cassava, can be based. The experiments with cassava now being conducted in Queensland will, no doubt, give useful information which will form a valuable guide for the future.

It would be of great advantage not only to Queensland, but also to the whole of Australia, if the production of power alcohol from prickly pear could be carried out on a commercial basis. Dr. Sinclair has made satisfactory laboratory experiments, and Senator Cox and other persons interested are very sanguine as to the possibility of establishing the industry. The Institute of Science and Industry has the matter in hand, and will shortly make a recommendation to the Government as to the assistance required.

Senator Sir VICTOR WILSON.That is so; but molasses will, nevertheless, be used for the production of power alcohol. The Government has not been asked to provide a bounty for that purpose. I understand that no sugar mill in Queensland is producing sufficient molasses to justify the erection of a’ factory and the installation of machinery for the production of power alcohol from that alone.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– The Minister has said that this is a legitimate bill. I agree that the purpose of the bill is legitimate ; but the amount I regard as insufficient. Although the honorable gentleman said that the’ Government’ desires to assist in the production of power alcohol from any source, the bill which it has introduced is limited to power alcohol produced from certain specified materials only.

Senator Sir Victor Wilson:

– When we get another proposal we shall deal with it.

Senator NEEDHAM:

– This is an important measure, which requires very careful consideration; it should not be rushed through the Senate. To realize that the question of petrol supplies is of vital importance to Australia we have only to look at the increasing use of motor transport. Our industrial and commercial life depend largely on adequate supplies of oil fuel. Experts who have given evidence before the Public Accounts Committee have stated that the world’s supplies of crude oil are limited. They have pointed out that no new fields have been discovered recently; and they predict that before long there will be a serious shortage of oil. Unfortunately, we are at the mercy of the oil combines ; we must pay their price. We are certainly paying more for petrol in Australia than we should pay. .In October, 1924, petrol was sold in England at. from ls. 5½d. to ls. 7½d. per gallon retail. The price in Australia at that time was about 2s. 3d. per gallon.

Senator Payne:

– It was nearer 2s. 9d. per gallon.

Senator NEEDHAM:

– The consumption of petrol in Australia is increasing by about 20,000,000 gallons per annum. In 1922-3 we imported 46,000,000 gallons of oil, its value being about £3,500,000. In 1923-4 the quantity imported increased to 60,000,000 gallons, valued at £4,200,000. During the following year 90,000,000 gallons, valued at £5,375,000 were imported.

It would be reasonable to say that our requirements are now 100,000,000 gallons per annum. In the face of those figures, it is clear that this bill, which provides that in five years the Government will assist the power alcohol industry in Australia to the extent of £25,000, is only playing with the project. Parliament should set aside a sum which .would be sufficient to encourage people to produce power alcohol from any source. The main thing is to get the fuel. Other countries would not be so niggardly in a matter of such vital importance to their development. I have here a list, showing that to date the sum of £4,951,867 has been expended in the payment of bounties in other directions. Clause 6 reads -

No bounty shall be authorized to be paid under this act on any power alcohol unless it has been manufactured from the following products grown in Australia : -

Cassava, sweet potatoes, arrowroot, or such other cultivated starch-bearing plants as the Minister approves.

From evidence given before the Public Accounts Committee it would appear that cassava is a difficult plant to grow.

Senator Thompson:

– Ninety-eight per cent, of the cassava planted in Queensland has struck.

Senator NEEDHAM:

– In its report the Public Accounts Committee said that cassava appeared to be the most favorable crop from which power alcohol could be produced, provided that it could be successfully cultivated at a reasonable cost in the tropical parts of the Commonwealth. Although the Minister referred to the prickly pear as a source of power alcohol, the Government is not alive to the possibilities in that respect. It appears to regard the manufacture of power alcohol from prickly pear as being still at the laboratory stage. I have seen two demonstrations of the process by which power alcohol is obtained from prickly pear, and, though I speak as a layman, I should imagine that the laboratory’ stage has long since been passed. If monetary assistance were granted to those engaged in that work, we should, in my opinion, soon have power alcohol manufactured on a commercial basis .from prickly pear. The bill should provide for the payment of a bounty to those people who are experimenting with prickly pear as a source of fuel supplies, especially as their efforts are being directed towards turning what is now a curse into a bless ing. The Minister said that the Institute of Science and Industry would investigate the possibilities of manufacturing power alcohol from prickly pear. The institute as re-organized will, have to be a little more vigorous than the old body if any beneficial results are to be obtained. The bill should be more comprehensive; it should, at least, apply to power alcohol manufactured from molasses. About two years ago I visited the acetate of lime factory in Brisbane, and I came away with the impression that the manufacture of power alcohol from molasses would in the future be an important Australian industry. My complaint against the bill is that it does not go far enough; the sum of £25,000 is far too small.

Senator Sir Victor Wilson:

– Would the honorable senator like to give those interested more than they have asked for?

Senator NEEDHAM:

– The bill should have provided for a trust fund to assist all who are engaged in manufacturing power alcohol from any source. Assistance is more likely to be required in the earlier and ‘experimental stages. Some years ago, the Commonwealth Government offered a reward of £50,000 for the discovery of oil in Australia, evidently overlooking the fact that the discovery of oil would of itself be a sufficient reward for any company engaged in that work. The Government’s policy now is to grant financial aid to companies prospecting for oil. It is evident that the Ministry has not given close attention to the possibility of obtaining power alcohol from prickly pear, though I understand that the Minister for Trade and Customs (Mr. Pratten) attended a demonstration at the Customs House, and saw what could be done under certain conditions. If power alcohol can be manufactured from prickly pear on a commercial basis, the so-called curse of Queensland will become a valuable asset. I should like the bill to be framed on more comprehensive lines.

Senator KINGSMILL:
Western Australia

– I do not see the slightest reason ‘ for opposing the bill, and I am sorry to say I do not see much reason for supporting it, because the business of producing power alcohol from starch-bearing plants or, indeed, from any other material, is really in the melting pot. It is quite possible, and, I hope, probable, that the growing of cassava for this particular purpose will be successful, but I doubt if it can be undertaken without a bounty. There is, however, another aspect to the bill. I think it will be realized, when we get down to the essential features of the bill, that it is as much a measure to encourage land settlement as a bill for the production of power alcohol, because if the scheme proves successful it will mean the settling of thousands of acres of land in Queensland. But many things must be found out before it can be a success. I am glad to know that experiments are now being carried out to ascertain to what extent it is likely to be successful as a commercial undertaking, because, as I have indicated, it will lead to a considerable amount of land settlement in Queensland.

Senator McLachlan:

– What is being done with that land at the present time ‘(

Senator KINGSMILL:

– Practically nothing. There is, I believe, a large area of fertile land in Queensland which can be used for the growing of cassava. As a Parliament, we have nothing to do with land settlement, and it seems to me that- the payment of a bounty for the growing of cassava, as an agent for the production of power alcohol, is more a matter for the Queensland Government. In some respects, the bill may be regarded as a pious aspiration, and perfectly harmless, because no bounty will be paid unless certain people engage in the cultivation of the cassava plant, and I understand that, unless the bounty is payable, they are not likely to grow it. So many variable factors have to be taken into account that I am justified in the assumption that the whole scheme is in the melting pot. In the first place, cassava - honorable senators will know it better if I call it tapioca, because cassava is the only plant from which tapioca is made, and tapioca includes commercial sago also - has never been cultivated on a commercial scale in Australia. It is grown extensively and yields heavy crops in other countries with a similar climate. For instance, it is cultivated largely in the Malay States and Java, as well as in some portions of South America, notably British Guiana, from which country the people who are responsible for this scheme in Australia have drawn their experience. I doubt if it will be possible to grow the plant profitably under Australian labour conditions, though it may be cultivated as a domestic industry. Undoubtedly, i.t would be a wonderful plant to grow for (he production of power alcohol and other purposes in Papua, and I feel sure that if the Australian experiment proves successful, the industry will also be started in Papua. It is the best of the alcoholproducing roots. Potatoes may be ruled out, owing to the uncertainty and paucity of the crop. Sugar beet is in the same category, and arrowroot is not such a heavy yielder, either in tonnage or alcohol content, as the cassava plant. It has yet to be proved whether cassava can be grown commercially here. However, I am justified in supporting the bill for this reason: If the people who have put the scheme forward are prepared to spend £50,000 on the special plant which will be utilized for the treatment of molasses and cassava, a new industry of very great importance to Australia will be established. Certain other sources for the production of power alcohol are being tried out. If these are successful, possibly the bill will be rendered absolutely nugatory. If, for example, experiments with prickly pear on a commercial basis prove successful, the production of power alcohol from cassava will be finished with ; no bounty will be required for the cultivation of the prickly pear, because it will be the best paying crop in Queensland. Already Queenslanders, so I understand, are learning* to differentiate between the different classes of prickly pear. They are carefully noting the variety with the greatest alcohol content. At present the prickly pear is a great curse in Queensland, and we may be sure that no bounty will be required to encourage its growth. All that is asked for is a thorough investigation, by a fully-qualified and unbiased scientist, of the process for the extraction of alcohol from the plant. If it can be proved that the work can be undertaken on a commercial basis, the rest should be easy. This bill may then be thrown into the waste-paper basket, because there will be no need for it.

Senator Cox:

– It is claimed that prickly pear will yield 14 gallons of power alcohol to the ton.

Senator KINGSMILL:

– Yes, and since some areas in Queensland yield 700 tons of prickly pear to the acre, the prospect of securing an unlimited quantity of power alcohol from that plant is alluring.

Senator H Hays:

– But it has to be handled.

Senator KINGSMILL:

– The difficulty mentioned by the honorable senator has been noted, and it should be the subject of careful investigation. My references to the prickly pear may appear to be extraneous to the bill, but, as a matter of fact, they are not, because if scientific investigations demonstrate that power alcohol can be manufactured from prickly pear on a commercial basis, the bill will become a dead letter. Only to-day I heard from one of the highest scientific authorities in Victoria, if not in Australia, that German chemists had perfected a process for the fermentation of cellulose, which enters into the composition of practically all vegetable matter. I have been informed, on the best of authority, that it is quite possible that the production of power alcohol from cellulose will be undertaken in Germany at a cost of approximately 7d. a gallon. These experiments suggest that the production of power alcohol from prickly pear will one day be undertaken upon an extensive scale. If the German process proves successful, and if it can be, and will be, communicated to Australia, possibly the prickly pear as an agent for the production of power alcoholwill take precedence over cassava or other starch-bearing roots and plants. I do not blame, rather do I congratulate, the Government for making a start in this business.

Senator Duncan:

– The production of power alcohol from prickly pear may not be profitable, because of the bounty paid for the growing of the cassava plant.

Senator KINGSMILL:

– If the honorable senator will examine the bill he will see that the bounty is split up so that a certain amount will go to the distiller and a certain amount to the grower. I intend to support the bill ; but I hope that experiments in the production of power alcohol from prickly pear will be successful and render it inoperative. The measure is a step in the right direction. It aids investigation on a commercial, and not on a laboratory scale. Those who are to engage in the business have had considerable experience. Experiments of this nature have been carried out, and have really materialized into a commercial proposition in British Guiana, where those interested in this proposition have considerable interests. In British Guiana, they have the assistance of coloured labour, and I suppose that there cassava, which is not an easy plant to handle from the ground to the distillery - particularly in lifting from the ground - can be treated at a much cheaper rate than it is likely to be in Australia. Whether this business will stand the strain of, shall. I say, the strenuous labour conditions in Australia, remains to be seen.

Senator Hoare:

– The fair conditions in Australia.

Senator KINGSMILL:

– I do not blame the honorable senator for thinking they are fair. He would not be here if he did not think so. Conditions may be fair, but quite impossible. If the cultivation of cassava can stand the strain of these allegedly fair conditions in Australia, its production should prove a great success elsewhere, notably in Papua. The bill cannot do any harm, and may do some good, and, after all, it contains the principle of payment by results, which I wish was more applicable in Australia. Is that not also fair? Silence in this case. I presume, does not mean consent.

Senator Hoare:

– No.

Senator KINGSMILL:

– For the reasons I have enumerated, I have pleasure in supporting the bill.

Senator H HAYS:
Tasmania

.- The proposal is to pay a bounty on power alcohol produced from certain starchbearing plants, including cassava, to be cultivated in Australia, but it. would be preferable to pay a bounty on power alcohol produced from any commodity. The measure is too limited in its scope. The payment of a bounty of 4d. per gallon on power alcohol is not likely to encourage research work.

Senator Sir Victor Wilson:

– Research work could not be assisted by a bounty.

Senator H HAYS:

– It must not be accepted as a general principle that research work in Australia is confined to the Institute of Science and Industry. There are large commercial companies in the Commonwealth carrying out important research work.

Senator Sir Victor Wilson:

-I do not deny that, but £100,000 has been voted to enable the Institute of Science and Industry to carry out certain research work.

Senator H HAYS:

– Certain companies in Australia are sufficiently enterprising to carry out research work in their own laboratories. The Broken Hill Proprietary Company, for instance, on its own initiative, undertook the distillation of coal tar, and deserves credit for the success it has achieved. I cannot understand why the Government has introduced a measure providing for the payment of a bounty on power alcohol produced from certain specified commodities instead of allowing private enterprise to benefit by the payment of it on the production of power alcohol from any source. If the bounty is to be based on the cost of production, those producing power alcohol from one source may receive a bounty of 4d. per gallon, whilst others producing from some other commodity may receive a bounty of only 3d., which will result in unfair competition in the selling price of the liquid fuel. The period during which the bounty is to be paid is also too short. Companies desiring to undertake the manufacture of power alcohol will have insufficient time in which to profitably invest capital in a producing enterprise.

Senator Sir Victor Wilson:

– The period specified in the bill is all the company requires.

Senator H HAYS:

– That may be so, but I do not think it is sufficient. It will be found that the company will again be asking the Government for further assistance. The privilege conceded this company should be extended to others prepared to embark on the enterprise. Senator Kingsmill is unduly optimistic if he thinks that power alcohol can be produced from prickly pear without the assistance of a bounty. The representatives of Queensland in the Senate know, perhaps better than others in the chamber, what a menace prickly pear is to that State. Considering the large area pf country which has been rendered valueless in consequence of the spread of the prickly pear, one wonders why provision has not been made in this bill for the payment of a bounty on power alcohol produced from that source. I regret exceedingly that the Government has not given further attention to the production of liquid fuel from oil shale, of which there is an ample quantity avail able. In that case there is no necessity to seek to produce a source of supply, as is proposed in this instance.

Senator Needham:

– A bounty is paid on shale oil.

Senator H HAYS:

– Yes. But for the last fifteen years the shale oil industry has been working out its own salvation, with little or no encouragement from the Commonwealth Government. I trust that the Government will give further sympathetic consideration .to this well-known source of supply of liquid fuel, particularly as the quality is undoubted, and the deposit enormous. I support the bill, and hope that at an early date the Government will, give further consideration to the shale oil industry.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clauses 1 to 15 agreed to.

Clause 16 (Regulations) .

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

.- This clause provides that regulations may be framed for prescribing the minimum quantity of power alcohol to be manufactured and delivered to entitle the manufacturer to claim the bounty. Has the Government any idea of the quantity that will be considered, sufficient to justify the payment, or will that be a matter for subsequent consideration ?

Senator Sir Victor Wilson:

– A good deal of money would need to be spent on administration if this provision were not contained in the bill.

Senator FINDLEY:

– I presume that the bounty will not be payable unless the persons claiming it manufacture power alcohol in commercial quantities.

Senator Sir Victor Wilson:

– That is so.

Clause agreed to.

Preamble and title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment: report adopted.

Bill (on motion by Senator Wilson) read a third, time.

page 1707

INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT (BONDS SHARES) BILL

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Senator PEARCE (Western AustraliaMinister for Home and Territories) [6. Si. I move -

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

The object of this motion is to enable the first and second readings of the bill to be moved to-day. At the conclusion of the speech by the Minister in moving the second reading there will be no objection to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Senator Needham) securing the adjournment of the debate until to-morrow.

Question put.

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:

– There being more than a statutory majority of the whole Senate present, and no voice being raised in the negative, I declare the motion carried.

Bill (on motion by Senator Crawford) read a first time.

Senator CRAWFORD:
QueenslandHonorary Minister · NAT

– Imove -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This bill relates solely to the taxation of bonus shares. Its purpose is to rectify an inadvertent omission from the Income Tax Assessment Act 1922, which states that the assessable income of any person shall include -

The face value of shares distributed by a company to its members or shareholders in consequence of the capitalization of the whole or any part of the assessable income of the company which it is liable to include in its return for the purposes of its current assessment :

Provided that nothing in this section shall render liable to taxation the value of shares issued by a company to its members or shareholders in consequence of the capitalization of any other of its profits.

It was believed that that provision would cover assessments made prior, as well as subsequent, to the passing of the act, and as a consequence many repayments were made to those taxpayers who had been assessed and had paid income tax on bonus shares before the passing of the 1922 act. It was not discovered that this was illegal until an appeal, known as the James case, was’ made to the High Court, in which a taxpayer claimed exemption from tax on bonus shares on which the company had nob paid tax. The High Court then decided that bonus shares distributed by a company as a going concern, whether out of taxed or out of untaxed profits, were taxable in the hands of shareholders. That decision means that the omissions and refunds made in connexion with bonus shares received prior to the passing of the act are not authorized by law.

There is no question whatever as to the position with regard to bonus shares received since the passing of the 1922 act. The bill simply refers to bonus shares received before the passing of that measure.

Senator Needham:

– Does not the Webb case have a bearing on this matter?

Senator CRAWFORD:

– This bill does not deal with cases of the kind covered by the Webb case. In the James case, the court held that taxpayers were liable to be assessed in connexion with bonus shares issued prior to the 1922 act coming into operation. The purpose of the bill is merely to legalize the repayments that have been made by the Commissioner of Taxation.

Debate (on motion by Senator Needham) adjourned.

page 1708

DRIED FRUITS ADVANCES BILL

Bill received from House of Representatives.

Senator PEARCE:
Western AustraliaMinister for Home and Territories · NAT

– I move-

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

If this motion is agreed to the Minister’s second-reading speech can be made today, after which there will be no objection to any honorable senator asking that the debate be adjourned until to-morrow.

Question put.

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:

– There being more than a statutory majority of the whole Senate present, and no voice being raised in the negative, I declare the motion carried.

Bill (on motion by Senator Sir Victor Wilson) read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator Sir VICTOR WILSON:
Minister for Markets and Migration · South Australia · NAT

[6.17]. - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

I remind honorable senators that in 1925 Parliament agreed to grant advances to growers of sultanas, currants, and raisins to assist them in the marketing of the 1924 crop. The advance amounted to £9 a ton on sultanas, and £1 10s. a ton on currants and lexias. Since then, I am pleased to say, the outlook for the dried-fruit industry has decidedly improved, especially in connexion with sultanas, on which the groat bulk of the money was advanced. The total sum of £204,600 advanced was distributed as follows: - On currants, 9,200 tons, £13,800; sultanas, 18,400 tons. £165,600; on lexias, 2,800 tons, £25,200. Subsequent events have proved that the action taken by Parliament, at a time when the market was not in as satisfactory a condition as it now is, was amply justified. The Dried Fruits Control Board is doing valuable work for the industry, and many applications for assistance have been made to it by growers, most of whom are returned soldiers, who experienced a critical marketing period at the outset of their operations. Growers now ask, and this bill provides, that they may be allowed to make repayment of the advance in two equal amounts spread over two years, instead of the amount owing being deducted from the proceeds of the 1925 crop. Many of the settlers have had a trying time owing to family and other obligations, and their water rates, too, have proved a very great burden to them. When a deputation representing the growers waited upon the Prime Minister with respect to the repayment of the advance, the Prime Minister undertook to appoint what I may describe as a hardships board to go exhaustively into every case. Considerable argument has taken place in the . other branch of the legislature as to what this board, for which the bill provides, will cost. It will not cost more than from £250 to £300. All the information required by the board is in the department; we know the names of the growers who have received advances, and the amounts of the advances. Beyond that it is only necessary to ascertain from the grower his present circumstances. The board will investigate every case, and advise the Government as to who should receive consideration. I am quite certain that no honorable senator wishes to crush a grower who is in difficulties. The Government is anxious that the board should treat every case leniently. Some persons may say that the Government should not insist upon any repayments. I cannot agree with that view. If I had from 30 to 40 tons of currants in the pool, what right would I have to argue that I ought not to repay an advance? Only two years ago sultanas were returning a little over £20 a -ton, but under the marketing conditions now operating, with the fruit standardized and inspected for export, the average price will be about £68 a ton, which will return to the grower approximately £48 a ton in the sweat box. It is argued that it costs £40 a ton to produce the fruit, but it can be shown that, it can be produced for a little over £35 per ton. That may be a bedrock price. The outlook for sultana-growers is quite different now from what it was two years ago. The growers are very anxious to improve the quality of the fruit. They realize that, with the improved quality and packing of the fruit, and with the supervision exercised by the Customs Department, their prospects are good. The bill deals with the £204,600 which was advanced to the growers, and although there is no provision in it for a representative of the growers to be appointed on the board, I give an assurance that if they submit three names the Government will be pleased to accept one of them. The work will be done in the office of the Minister for Markets and Migration. If I did the work myself honorable senators might say, “Why did you let Bill Jones off?” It is necessary that a board should be appointed to advise the Minister. The advances to the growers were made in a very trying period, and no one now contends that they should be treated otherwise than liberally, although firmly and fairly.

Debate (on motion by Senator Needham) adjourned.

page 1709

ADJOURNMENT

Jugo-Slav Immigrants

Senator PEARCE:
Western AustraliaMinister for Home and Territories · NAT

.- I move-

That the Senate do now adjourn.

I wish to supply a further answer to a question which Senator Needham asked to-day regarding the alleged admission of Jugo-Slavs into Western Australia. The question was in the following words: -

Is it a fact that a certain person has applied to the Customs Department for permission to bring 200 Jugo-Slavs into Western Australia?

In reply I told the honorable senator that a telegram had been sent to the Collector of Customs in Western Australia. I have since received from the Collector a reply which reads -

Your telegram 17th re reported application permission introduce 200 Jugo-Slavs. No such application received here.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senate adjourned at 6.27 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 18 March 1926, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1926/19260318_senate_10_112/>.