Senate
16 May 1930
12th Parliament · 1st Session
The President (Senator the Hon. W. Kingsmill) took the chair at 11a.m., and read prayers.
page 1865
QUESTION
CACTOBLASTUS
Senator McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA
asked the VicePresident of the Executive Council, upon notice -
Is the report true that the insect parasite Cactoblastus is attacking the tomato plant in Queensland?
Senator DALY:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · through Senator Barnes · ALP
– Inquiries have been instituted through the Council for Scientific and industrial Research, and the information desired will be furnished as early as possible.
page 1865
QUESTION
CANADIAN TRADE COMMISSIONER
Senator McLACHLAN:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Markets, upon notice -
For what term, and on what salary, is the Canadian Trade Commissioner engaged?
Senator BARNES:
Assistant Minister assisting the Minister for Works and Railways · VICTORIA · ALP
– The Minister for Markets has supplied the following answer to the honorable senator’s question : -
Mr. Macgregor has been engaged for a term of five years from 31st March, 1930, at a salary of £2,000 per annum.
page 1865
QUESTION
H.M.A.S. SUCCESS
SenatorCOOPER asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -
Is it a fact that H.M.A.S. Success is to be put out of commission at an earlydate ?
How many men are to be paid off?
Are these men to be discharged, transferred, or otherwise placed in the service?
Senator BARNES:
ALP
– The Minister for Defence has supplied the following answers to the honorable senator’s questions : -
- Yes. 2 and 3. The complement is 101; but all will not be discharged,as somewill fill vacancies caused by discharges in other ships and establishments.
page 1865
QUESTION
CIVIL AVIATION
Miss Amy Johnson - Canberra Aerodrome
Senator GUTHRIE:
VICTORIA
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -
- What steps do the Government intend to take regarding the reception, and, if necessary, assistance to the wonderful British woman aviator, Miss AmyJohnson,at Port Darwin and Canberra?
- In view of the importance of aviation,, will the Government take steps to improve the totally inadequate facilities at the Federal, Capital by providing telephone communication, some necessary shelter for aeroplanes, and by removing the obstructing telephone or telegraph line which nowbisects the aerodrome at Canberra?
Senator BARNES:
ALP
– The Minister for Defence has supplied the following answers to the honorable senator’s questions : -
- The G overnment Resident at Darwin has been asked to extend a welcome to Miss Johnson on behalf of the Commonwealth, and’ an officer of the Civil, Aviation Department will bepresent to afford her any possible assistance. The Commonwealth Government, in congratulating Miss Johnson on her achievement, will extend an invitation to her to visit Canberra. It is understood that there will be two aeroplanes to guide her after her arrival at Darwin. Comprehensive arrangements are being made by the civil aviation authorities in, connexion with her visits to Sydney and Melbourne, and suitable arrangements will be made should Miss Johnson accept the invitation to visit Canberra.
- I would refer to the reply given on this question on the 7th May, Hansard, p. 1435, in regard tothe aerodrome at Canberra. I may add, however, that the telegraph and telephone lines were removed some time ago.
page 1865
QUESTION
GERMAN NATIONALS: PROPERTY RIGHTS
Agreement between Australian and German Governments.
In reference to the agreement between the Commonwealth Government andthe Government of the German Reich regarding the release ofproperty rights and interests of German nationals, subject to the charge created in pursuance of the Treaty of Versailles, is it intendedtogive the Senate an opportunity of expressing an opinion on this agreement, as has been done in the House of Representatives?
Senator DALY:
through Senator Barnes · ALP
– Yes.
page 1866
LIFE INSURANCE BILL
In committee (Consideration resumed from loth May, vide page 1815) :
Clauses 63 to 66 agreed to.
Clause 67-
In the event of any premium due on any life policy remaining unpaid for a longer period than . 30 days, the company may charge compound interest thereon at a ratenot exceeding the rate prescribed, and the policy shall, if it hasbeen in force for three years or upwards, not lapse until the premiums due and unpaid, together withthe interest charged thereon, are equal to the surrender value of the policy as calculated by the company after having deducted any unpaid loan with interest or other indebtedness on thepolicy.For this purpose the surrender value of the policy shall be computedon the assumption that all premiums up to the time of computation have been duly, paid.
Senator THOMPSON:
Queensland
.- I move-
That the words “thirty days” be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “ one month.”
I have had my attention directed to the. inconvenience and seriousconsequences suffered by certain policy-holders owing to the practice of some companies in fixing the period at 30 days. The Australian Mutual Provident Society, and a number of other companies, allow one month, but theMutual Life adheres to the period of 30 days, and the result is confusion. The number of days in the different months varies. February may have 28 or 29 days; some months have 30 days and others 31 days. I amadvised that it is desirable to secure uniformity, and that the practice adopted by the Australian Mutual Provident Society, and certain other companies, is preferable to any other arrangement. .
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– It is more advantageous to policy-holders to have the period fixed at 30 days instead of one month. I may also remind the honorable senators that the period mentioned in this clause is super-imposed upon theperiod of grace allowed by companies for the payment of premiums. I have no objection to the amendment, but Iwould point out that in thecase of one month policy-holders would have less grace than is provided for in the clause. I hope the honorable senator will not press this amendment, but if its acceptance will facilitate the passage of the bill, I shall offer no objection.
Senator Rae:
– What is the legal interpretation of the term “ one month “ ?
Senator McLACHLAN:
– “ One calendar month.”
Senator THOMPSON:
Queensland
.- I am advised that it would be more convenient for policy-holders to have the period fixed at one month instead of 30 days. If a policy matures on the 15th of one month the holder will know that he will be allowed until the 15th of the following month for the payment of the premiums. He will not have to calculate when the period of 30 days will expire. There havebeen serious consequences in certain cases from the operation of this provision governing the period of. grace. My amendment is a small one, and Itrust that honorable senators will accept it. It will be a convenience to policy-holders generally.
Amendment agreed to.
Senator RAE:
New South Wales
.- The clause provides that in the event of any premiums due on any life policy remaining unpaid for a longer period than 30 days, the company may charge compound interest thereon. I should like to know what justification there is for charging compound instead of simple interest in such circumstances. If compound interest is charged it may cause the forfeitureof policies which would be detrimental not only to the individual policy-holders, but to the company. An enormous number of policies are forfeited every year in consequence of policyholders being unable to keep up their premiums. Those who have had experience know that compound, interest is an excessive burden, and inthese circumstances the companies should be satisfied with simple interest on overdue premiums. Toomany penalties are imposed on policy-holders who are unable to meet their obligations, which, in many instances, cause forfeitures. Imove -
That the word “ compound “ be left out with a view to insert in lieu thereof the word simple.”
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– If a policy-holder refrains for aconsiderable period from payinghis premium, thecompany is deprived of the use of that money, andin the circumstances is entitled to charge compound interest. If the company had the money at’ its disposal, it would be receiving interest on it. The contract between the companies and the policyholdersprovides for the payment of premiums within a specified period, and if the money is not placed at the disposal of the company in accordance with the terms of the contract, compound interest should be payable. If it were merely a question of 30 days, compound interest would not be charged, but over a longer period it would be a serious matter, particularly where a number of cases were involved. The point we have to consider is whether it is fair to place a defaulter in a better position than the policy-holder who has paid his premiums. If SenatorRae, for instance, paid his premium on the due date and I, as another policy-holder, refrained from doing so for perhaps two or three years, he shouldnot becompelled to suffer indirectly as a result of my default. This provision, I understand, has been taken from the Queensland act, and was inserted for the protection of policyholders. We wish to assist the policyholders, but we should not extend leniency towards some at the expense of, others. If a. policy-holder in a mutual or cooperative company does not in these circumstances pay compound interest he has an undue advantage over those who have paid their premiums on the due. date.
Senator THOMPSON:
Queensland
– I remindSenatorRae that all interest charged is more or less on a compound basis. The use of theword “ compound “ in this instance is to simplify bookkeeping. A person who receives financial assistance from a bank, and who does not reduce the amount every six months, or within whatever period may be arranged, is charged interest on the balance, which, in effect, is compound interest. I do not think that the impost is as great as SenatorRae thinks.
SenatorRAE (New South Wales) [11.21]. - The obvious answer to the point raised by Senator McLachlan is that instead of simple interest on overdue premiums imposing hardships upon other policy-holders, it would be of benefit to the policy-holders, particularly in a mutual society, because the number of forfeitures would necessarily be reduced, and consequently the general financial position of the society would be improved. We should make it easierfor those in temporary financial difficulties, and if provision were made to charge simple instead of compound interest I think it would “be ultimately to the benefit of the companies. Life insurance policiesare usually taken out for the purpose of providing funds for the widow and orphans of the person insured. It is usually financial stress that compels policy-holders to get into arrears in the matter of premiums, and every effort should be made to assist them to retain their policies. The payment of simple instead of compound interest would make if easier for those policy-holders who are in arrears, and would not, I submit, be detrimental to. the interests of other policy-holders.
Senator McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT
.-If the amendment were adopted, it would, perhaps, make it easier for policy-holders whowere inarrears, but it would be at the expense of other policy-holders who had paid their premiums within the specified time. If the money were inthecoffers of the company from the date on which it was due, it would be earning interest. In these circumstances, I do not think it unjust to charge compoundinterest; to dootherwise would be to act unjustly towards those who had met their obligations.
SenatorRae.- The surrender value of a policy would be exhausted more rapidly if compound interest were charged.
Senator McLACHLAN:
– If a policy- holder is receivingbenefit at the expense of the others, that cannot he regarded as an objection. I cannot accept the amendment moved by SenatorRae.
Question- That the word proposed to be left out, be left out (SenatorRae’s amendment) - put. The Committee divided.
AYES: 8
NOES: 14
Majority . . … 6
AYES
NOES
Question so resolved in the negative.
Amendment negatived.
Senator Sir HAL COLEBATCH (Western Australia) [11.29]. - I move -
That the words “until the premiums due and unpaid together with the interest charged thereon are equal to “ be left out with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “ so long as “.
The clause, as amended, would then read -
In the event of any premium due on any life policy remaining unpaid for a longer period than one month, the company may charge compound interest thereon at a rate not exceeding the rate prescribed, and the policy shall, if it has been in force for three years or upwards, not lapse so long as the surrender value of the policy calculated by the company after having deducted any unpaid loans with interest or other indebtedness on the policy. . . .
The wording of the clause could he improved. I see no necessity for the words “ if it has been in force for three years or upwards “. The meaning is, however, clear.
Senator McLACHLAN (South Australia [11.31]. - The amendment by Senator Colebatch would place the companies in a less favorable position than I think the committee desires. It makes no provision for any computation of interest. I appreciate the point raised by the honorable senator, but I am afraid that it would be difficult to give effect to his desire. There has been considerable difficulty in drafting this clause. I suggest that we allow it to pass on the understanding that it will be re-committed. I fear that if the amendment is carried the companies would be deprived of the right to debit interest charges.
Senator Sir HAL COLEBATCH (Western Australia) [11.33.]. - I do not agree that the amendment deprives the com panies of interest. The provision in respect of interest will remain the same even if the clause is amended as suggested. However, if when the bill is re-committed we can overcome the difficulty caused by the clumsy wording of the clause, I shall not press my amendment.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– Senator Colebatch has missed the point. The interest which he has in mind is interest on unpaid loans, whereas the interest to which I refer is that to which the words which he proposes to strike out have reference. By striking out the words “until the premiums due and unpaid, together with the interest thereon are equal to” we should deprive the company of the right to bring the interest into computation.
SenatorRae. - Would not the words “ or other indebtedness “ cover that point ?
Senator McLACHLAN:
– I do not think so. There are various forms of indebtedness. I have failed to improve on the original drafting of this clause, although I realize that it is not perfect. I suggest that the clause be now passed with a view to its being redrafted to give effect to our common desire.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 68 to 70 agreed to.
Clause 71 (Substitution of industrial policies).
Senator Sir HAL COLEBATCH (Western Australia) [11.37]. - I should like an explanation of this clause. I understand that it has been copied from the English legislation and applies to classes of policies entirely foreign to Australian practice. In such circumstances it can have no meaning in an Australian act, for Australian companies have no substituted policies within the meaning of this clause.
Senator McLACHLAN (South Australia [11.38]. - I understand that the substitution of policies is not a common practice in Australian companies to-day; but we may in the future have overseas companies doing business here, and it would be well to make provision to meet the class of business they transact. Such provision can do no harm. While the substitution of policies is not a common practice of Australian companies I understand that one Australian company does almost similar business. I feel that while we are passing insurance legislation we should provide for contingencies which are likely to arise.
Senator Sir HAL COLEBATCH (Western Australia) [11.39]. - This clause is not in consonance with the rest of the bill. We shouldnot go here and there putting in clauses on the mere supposition that they might some day be needed. The bill should be one comprehensive whole. I suggest that the clause be negatived.
SenatorRAE (New South Wales) [11.40]. - While I do not quite understand the purpose of this clause, I agree with Senator McLachlan that provision should be made to meet cases which are likely to arise. A bill of this nature should have been referred to a select committee. I am acquainted with persons who have taken out industrial policies, and know of one instance in which a person paid an annual premium, instead of. making weekly payments. Subsequently, when through loss of position, he was unable to make his payments annually in advance, and endeavoured to have quarterly payments substituted; his request was refused. There is need for greater elasticity in respect of changing from one class of insurance to another.
Senator McLachlan:
– Is it not probable that business may develop along those lines?
SenatorRAE. - I think so. There should be greater elasticity in order to meet varying circumstances. Industrial insurance is probably the most expensive of all forms of insurance, largely because of the heavy overhead expenses due to the enormous cost of collecting premiums. Industrial policies return very little for the money expended. If anything can be done to improve these policies, we should do it.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– There is nothing in this clause which is not in harmony with the rest of the bill. Industrial insurance is dealt with in the bill, and this clause provides for other policies being substituted for industrial policies. I admit that very little of that class of business is done in
Australia to-day; but, so far as I am aware, there is nothing to prevent insurance companies from embarking on that class of business immediately. We have no guarantee that they will not do so. I think the committee would be well advised to stand by the clause.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 72 agreed to.
Clause 73-
- Where a company proves that such an omission or misstatement was so made, and that the omission would have affected the amount of the premium, the sum insured shall he adjusted in such a manner as to correspond with the premium paid.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– There is slight omission from sub-clause 2, and I therefore move -
That after the word “ insured “, sub-clause 2, the words “and the bonuses (if any) declared” be inserted.
As the clause now reads there could be no readjustment of bonuses. That was not intended.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– I have given the Leader of the Senate (Senator Daly) an undertaking to move a new clause to follow clause 73. I, therefore, now move -
That the following new clause be inserted: - “ 73a. Notwithstanding anything contained in this act where thesum insured under any policy does not exceed one hundred pounds the policy shall not be invalidated by any non-fraudulent omission or mis-statement made in the proposal upon which the policy was issued.”
Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE (Western Australia) [11.45]. - I think that Ave should have some explanation of this proposed new clause. There is always a danger associated with an amendment that excludes certain things. I believe that it can be argued that if you exclude certain things, you include those that are not so expressly excluded. This amendment says, in effect, that if a non-fraudulent omission or statement is made affecting a policy for less than £100, the policy shall not be invalidated. Is it not natural to infer that if a non-fraudulent statement is made in a policy exceeding £100, that policy will be invalidated. My recollection is that a previous clause lays down the procedure in respect of policies in. which there has been a non-fraudulent omission or statement.
SenatorMcLachlan. - That refers to industrial policies.
Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE.I should like the honorable senator to elucidate the point that I have raised.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– The amendment is one that I agreed to accept from the Leader of the Government in the Senate (Senator Daly). Unfortunately, the honorable senator is not present this morning to defend it. My personal view is that it carries the law no further than it stands at present. I do not think that any nonfraudulent statement vitiates the policy, but I believe that Senator Daly had some specific cases in mind. In order that the honorable senator may be able to elaborate his point, I suggest that honorable senators accept the amendment so that I may recommit it at a later date.
Senator Sir George Pearce:
– Does the honorable senator know of. a similar provision in any other legislation?
Senator McLACHLAN:
– I am not aware whence the draftsman got these words. I do not think that they carry the law one whit further than it stands at present ; therefore, the point raised by Senator Pearce is met . I must keep faith with Senator Daly, and I give honorable senators an undertaking, if they accept the amendment, that I will recommit new clause 73a at a later date.
Senator Sir Hal Colebatch:
– The new clause is entirely in the interests of the policy-owners.
Senator Sir George Pearce:
– Not in the interests of those who hold policies for over £100.
Senator BARNES:
Assistant Minister · Victoria · ALP
– I should like to see the amendment agreed to, and Senator McLachlan’s assurance accepted that he will recommit the bill. I recall a conversation that I had with Senator Daly on this point. He was much concerned about the matter for reasons that had come under his notice in the practice of his profession. That is why he desired to have the bill amended in the way suggested by Senator McLachlan. I am not in a position to inform the committee of the reason which prompted Senator Daly to suggest the amendment, but I am prepared to accept Senator McLachlan’s assurance that it will be recommitted.
Proposed new clause agreed to.
Clauses 74 to 76 agreed to.
Clause 77 -
- 1 ) If a company declines to accept any proof of age tendered by or in respect of a policy-owner who has died during the first year of insurance, or in respect of a policy issued prior to the commencement of this act, the policy-owner or his legal representative may apply to the court on motion for an order directing the company to accept the proof tendered.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– I move -
That after the word “ policy “ first occuring the words “ owner who “ be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “the insured under which “.
It may not be the policy-owner who has died. It is the assured upon whom the onus as to age lies, so I ask the Senate to accept the amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 78 (Notice regarding proof of age).
Senator PAYNE:
Tasmania
The clause reads-
- A company shall, in respect of any life policy issued by it after the commencement of this Act, give to the policy-owner, at the time of the receipt of the first premium, a printed notice stating that proof of age is essential prior to the payment of the sum insured and shall, until proof of age is admitted by the company, give a similar notice to him upon the payment of each subsequent premium.
That indicates to me that proof of age is not essential before the company accepts the first premium. I want to know why, particularly as, in view of the wording of the last part of the sub-clause, the serving of that notice may go on interminably. I can visualize a case where an agent persuades an individual to insure his life, but at the time the proponent is not in a position to furnish satisfactory proof of age. After the company collects his premium, it can demand proof of age.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– The provisions of clause 78 and the immediately following clause, to which I direct the attention of honorable senators, have been inserted to meet the very point elaborated by Sena- tor Payne. The proponent may represent himself to he of certain age, and the onus is thrown on the company to serve him with a reminding notice until proof of age is finally established. That is essential before anything can be received under the policy. I cannot see that we can adopt any machinery similar to that embodied in clause 79.
Senator Payne:
– Would it not be possible to adopt machinery similar to that provided in clause 77? Then, if the company declined to accept the proof of age tendered, the court would decide the matter. The policies covered by clause 77 are onlythose issued prior to the passage of this bill.
Senator McLACHLAN:
– I am glad that Senator Payne has drawn my attention to that fact. I shall look into the matter and bring the clause before the committee again.
Senator Sir GEORGEPEARCE (Western Australia) [12.1] . -Senator McLachlan might also consider the advisability of adding to this clause a provision similar to clause 79, which enables an application to be made to the court to establish proof of death. In the clause now under consideration, provision is made for proof of age, but the company is the sole judge and judgment is not given until after death. I think that provision should be made to permit the beneficiary to make an application to the court for an order directing the company to accept the proof of age tendered.
Senator McLachlan:
– I shall endeavour to make provision for that in clause77.
SenatorRAE (New South Wales) [12.3].- When it is difficult to establish proof of age in the case of applicants for old-age pensions, police magistrates are asked to give a judgment on the apparent age of an applicant, on his physical appearance and on other corroborative evidence. I think we should make the procedure simple, and at the same time we should see that every opportunity is given to get the age of the policy-holder admitted prior to death.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 79 agreed to.
Clause 80-
- The property and interest of any per son in a policy effected upon his own life shall not be liable to be applied or made available in payment of his debts by any judgment, order or process of any Court, and shall not, in the event of his bankruptcy or any assignment made by him for the benefit of his creditors, pass to the trustee, receiver or assignee of his estate.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– I think it is desirable to amend this clause, which, in certain cases, protects the interest of the policy-holders. Provision should be made to protect the interest of creditors in case of fraud. While I am all for the protection of. policies I am against the use of them for the purposes of fraud and I move -
That after sub-clause 1 thefollowing be inserted - “ Provided that, if it is proved that the policy was effected and the premiums were paid with intent to defraud the creditors of the insured, they shall be entitled to receive, out. of the moneys payable under the policy, a sum equal to the premiums paid in respect of the policy, with compound interest thereon at the rate of five poundsper centum per annum convertible yearly.”
While the protection afforded by the: clause is absolute, the amendment would bring back to the estate of the bankrupt any moneys he had laid out for the purpose of perpetrating a fraud upon his creditors. The proviso is already made in the case of policies taken out by husbands for the benefit of their dependants.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 81 - (1.) A married woman may effect a policy upon her own life or the life of her husband, for her separate use, and the policy and all benefits thereof shall enure accordingly.
Senator Sir HAL COLEBATCH (Western Australia) [12.7]. - It seems to me. that a sub-clause should be inserted to” make it clear that the obligation of the company ceases when it has paid over the money to the trustee; otherwise it might be contended that the company was responsible for what the trustee did with the money. I therefore move-
That the following new sub-clause be added: - “ 9. The company liable under the policy shall not be bound to see to the application of the trust moneys “.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– I cannot see any provision in the clause imposing on a company any liability to do anything but pay over to the trustee, and I know of no obligation on the company in law or equity to discharge any other duty than to pay over that for which it is liable. I have no strong objection to the amendment, but I fail to see that it is essential for the companies to have the additional protection sought to be given to them.
SenatorRAE (New South Wales) [12.10]. - This clause permits a married woman to effect a policy upon her own life or the life of her husband for her separate use and raises a question in my mind as to whether any person has the right to insure the life of another.
Senator McLachlan:
– There would be some difficulty in doing so without the consent of the other person.
SenatorRAE. - Provision has not been made in this clause to require that consent. Although the majority of people are not criminals, there are some who designedly insure other people’s lives for the sake of gain.
Senator Sir George Pearce:
– A man was executed in England the other day for having killed his mother whose life he had insured.
SenatorRAE. - In Victoria, a woman insured and murdered her two children one after another, and was supposed to have attempted to murder her husband and brother-in-law, after having insured their lives. I think that we should insert the words “ with his consent “ in subclause 1, and, if Senator Colebatch will temporarily withdraw his amendment, I shall move to do so.
Amendment, byleave, temporarily withdrawn.
Amendment (by SenatorRae) proposed -
That after the word “or,” sub-clause1, the words “ with his consent upon “ be inserted.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– We know what happened in the unfortunate cases referred to by Senator Pearce and SenatorRae, but are they really sufficient to warrant the inclusion of the words proposed? In ordinary circumstances, the woman who insures the life of her husband does so to protect herself and her children against an impecunious husband whom she sees is heading for ruin. It may be an inducement to her to end his days earlier than otherwise mightbe the case, but if she had a recalcitrant husband who did not wish to be insured, it would be difficult for her to achieve her purpose, because the amount of premium payable and the attitude of the company would be determined only after a medical examination. I think it is better to allow the clause to stand. This provision is to be found in State legislation upon which the hill is based, and I have not heard of its abuse. In any case it would be extremely difficult to insure any person’s life without first obtaining his or her consent. If, for example, an honorable senator had designs on my life, and with that end in view attempted to get a cover from an insurance company, the company approached would require first to be sure that the risk was reasonable, and this could not be determined until there had been the usual medical examination.
SenatorRae. - There would not be the same difficulty in the case of a woman wishing to insure her husband’s life.
Senator McLACHLAN:
– I fear that, if we amend this clause in the manner indicated, there will be considerable comment. It may be an improvement, but I should prefer the clause to stand.
Question - That the words proposed to be inserted be so inserted (Senator Rae’s amendment) - put. The committee divided.
AYES: 16
NOES: 5
Majority . . 13
Senator Sir HAI COLEBATCH (Western Australia) [12.23]. - I move-
AYES
NOES
That the following new sub-clause bc added-
The company liable under the policy shall not be bound to see to the application of the trust moneys.
The company having paid the amount of the policy would have no further obligation. Throughout the debate the committee has practically agreed to the course suggested by Senator McLachlan, and has allowed provisions of which we do not entirely approve to remain- in the bill so that they may receive further consideration on re-committal. This is a sound principle, because we shall have the amended bill in print for further study. It is much easier to decide whether something which is in the bill should come out than it is to decide whether something which is not in the bill should be inserted. Acting on this principle, I suggest to tha honorable senator now that he might very well accept this amendment for the time being, so as to allow it to appear in the amended print of the bill. We may then give it further consideration, and, if we do not approve of it, strike it »ut.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 82 -
In any case in which the moneys payable . . . aggregate an amount not exceeding £500 . . . the company, without requiring the production of any probate or letters of administration, may pay the moneys … to any person . . . who proves . . . that he is entitled . . .
The company making any such payment shall be thereby discharged from all further liability in respect of the moneys so paid.
Senator Sir HAL COLEBATCH (Western Australia) [12.37]. - I move -
That the words “ so paid “, sub-clause 2, be left out with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “ payable under such policy or policies.”
This will make it clear that the company, having discharged its obligations, is under no further liability.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 83 to 88 agreed to.
Clause 89 - (1.) No assignment of a policy made after the commencement of this act shall be valid unless it is made in accordance with the form set forth in the seventh schedule to this act, and is registered in accordance with this section.
Amendment (by Senator Sir Hal Colebatch) proposed -
That after the word “ act “ Second occurring, the words “ endorsed upon the policy “ be inserted.
Senator MCLACHLAN:
South Australia
– Senator Colebatch, with his knowledge of insurance practice, doubtless considers that this amendment is necessary. T atn somewhat conservative in matters of this kind, and also with respect to legal procedure. Subclause 1 of this clause provides for a separate instrument, of assignment, as set out in the seventh schedule, and the procedure laid down is similar to that provided’ in connexion with a Torren’s title under the Real Property Act. An ordinary transfer form is to be signed by the transferor and the transferee; but it is now proposed that the transfer shall be endorsed upon the policy and the document registered. The duplicate retained by the company would be endorsed by the Registrar, and the original document returned to the policy-holder, who, for the time being, would be the person to whom the assignment had been made. That is contrary to the principles of registration with respect to land transfers. When the instrument of transfer is signed and witnessed, it is handed to the Registrar, and remains with him as a permanent record of what has occurred. This proposal would provide an opportunity for a person who was evilly disposed to destroy any evidence of an evil act. If the companies are obliged to file a transfer form, as proposed, with the original policy, the instrument is available at all times. For these reasons I ask the committee to leave the clause as it is, because if these words are included it would give undue opportunities to an undesirable assignee. The proper course is to place the instrument of the transfer in the keeping of the company which has to find the money.
Senator Sir HAL COLEBATCH (Western Australia) [12.36]. - Following the amendment I have moved, it was my intention to submit a further amendment to sub-clause 2.
Senator Sir George Pearce:
– What would be its effect?
Senator Sir HAL COLEBATCH.To reverse the practice which it is proposed to bring into force. The clause at present contemplates a reversal of the present practice.
Senator McLachlan:
– I admit that.
Senator Sir HAL COLEBATCH:
– In view of the explanation of Senator McLachlan, I am not prepared to say that his argument is altogether unsound, and that the present system is the only one possible ; but I suggest that he should consent to the recommittal of this clause, so thathonorable senators may have an opportunity to consider the view which he has put forward. While I feel that there is some justification for my contention, I am not in a position to say whether there is any occasion to reverse the present practice. If he will agree to a recommittal of the clause I shall not for the moment press my amendment.
SenatorMcLachlan. - We should consider it from the point of view of what we have already done but I am willing to recommit the clause.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 90-
An assignment registered and indorsed in accordance with the last preceding section, shall have the effect of vesting the policy absolutely in the assignee, who shall thereupon become the policy owner, and may thereafter sue, as well at law as in equity, in’ his own name, on the assigned policy, and the receipt of the assignee shall be a valid discharge both at law and in equity for all moneys payable thereunder.
Amendment (by Senator McLachlan,) agreed to -
That after the word “vesting” the words “all the right, title and interest of the assignor in “ be inserted.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 91 to 93 agreed to.
Clause 94-
Any number of mortgages may be registered against the same policy, but they shall take effect and have priority according to priority of the date of registration.
Amendment (by Senator Sir Hal Colebatch) agreed to -
That the following words be added to the clause: - “but no mortgage shall take priority of the company’s lien for money advanced prior to registration of the mortgage together with interest thereon nor for premiums and interest due in terms of section 67.”
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 95 to 98 agreed to.
Clause 99 -
A memorandum of discharge shall be registered by leaving the mortgage with the memorandum indorsed thereon, together with the policy, at the office of the company, whereupon the secretary shall, if the memorandum is, in his opinion, in due form and properly executed, indorse on the policy a memorandum in accordance with the form or to the effect set forth in the Fourteenth Schedule to this Act, and shall also indorse on the mortgage a memorandum of its having been registered in accordance with the form or to the effect set forth in the Fifteenth Schedule to this Act, and shall return the mortgage and policy so indorsed to the person leaving it.
Amendment (by Senator Sir Hal Colebatch) proposed -
That the following new sub-clause be added - “ 2. No such registration or indorsement by the secretary as is prescribed in this division, shall be deemed to impose upon the company any liability to any person claiming to have any right, title or interest in or to the policy, against the title conferred by such registration or indorsement.”
Sitting suspended from 12.45 to 2.15 p.m.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– I understand that the object of this proposed new sub-clause is to give the registration the same effect as the registration of an instrument under theReal Property Act. It is to make the record in theRegistrar’s book final so far as the company is concerned. I, therefore, accept the amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 100-
The accounts of every company shall be audited annually by one or more competent auditor’s, and every revenue account and balance-sheet issued by the company shall bear the certification of the auditor or auditors that they are in accord with the provisions of this act and with the constitution and rules of the company, that they truly represent the financial position of the company, and that the books of the company have been kept in accordance with the recognized principles of accountancy.
Senator MCLACHLAN:
South Australia
– I propose to move -
That, after the word “ that,” second occurring, the following words : - “ subject to actuarial valuations of the liabilities under the policy contracts,” bo inserted.
The actuarial liabilities are calculated by the actuary, and if some such provision is not made, the auditor would be required to see that his calculations were correct. That is outside the duty of an auditor.
Senator RAE:
New South Wales
– I have a prior amendment to move. This is one of the most important clauses in the bill. I desire to see a change in the system of auditing, and, therefore, I move -
That, after the word, “ auditors,” first occurring, the words, “appointed by the Government “ be inserted.
A subsequent clause provides that the auditors shall be elected by the policyholders. That is impracticable; it is the shell of democracy without the kernel, tt is impossible to organize the policyholders. What happens in practice is that, in most cases, the auditors first appointed continue to act year after year, until they become a part of the machinery of the company, and the policy-holders are as helpless as is the man in the moon to remove them. These affairs are generally in .the hands of a little clique. I wish to make it clear that I am not proposing that government officials shall undertake this work, but that it shall be undertaken by, auditors who belong to recognized associations of auditors and accountants. I. also desire to embody a provision similar to that which, I understand, operates in connexion with municipal affairs in Victoria, namely, that no auditor’ shall audit the same company’s books two years in succession, Provision to that effect would not only ensure that the auditors would not be under the thumb of the directors, but also that, the work would be distributed. In no other way can we obtain that freedom from bias which is so necessary in financial matters.
Senator PAYNE:
– It is a dangerous proposal.
Senator RAE:
– It has not been found dangerous in municipal affairs in Victoria.
Senator Sir George Pearce:
– Would it not meet the case to have the auditors approved by the Government?
Senator RAE:
– That might he satisfactory were it not that there is a tendency for these things to become matters of routine. While I do not impugn the honesty of auditors in general, I think that the amendment would remove any possibility of suspicion.
Senator MCLACHLAN:
South Australia
– I direct attention to clauses 101 and 103. The former limits the auditors to those persons who are registered as such with the Registrar; it also imposes a qualification standard. Before an auditor could be appointed he would have to furnish evidence to the satisfaction of the Registrar that he was competent to perform the duties of an auditor. Section 103 provides that the auditors shall he elected, not by the directors or officers of the company, but by the shareholders or policy-holders.
Senator Rae:
– That is impossible in practice.
Senator McLACHLAN:
– I think it is a sufficient safeguard that the Registrar, who will be an actuary, must be satisfied with the qualifications of the auditors. Unless there was dishonesty, the work of auditing would be greatly facilitated by having the same auditor to examine a company’s books each year He would thus become familiar with the method of bookkeeping, and be able to examine the accounts with much greater facility than would another auditor. I regret that I cannot accept the amendment.
Senator RAE:
New South Wales
– I- have read clauses 101 and 103, but I see in them nothing which disposes of the advisability of the amendment I have proposed. It is true that the Registrar must be satisfied with the competency of the auditors.
Senator PAYNE:
– Should it not. be sufficient that the Registrar must be a government appointee?
Senator RAE:
– -I think not. The clause provides for delegated authority. Experience has shown that the more steps we take in that delegation, the further we get from what is most desirable. There is a tendency for all these matters to become routine. Unless something definite were known against an auditor, he would automatically receive the endorsement of the Registrar. I agree that the more frequently an auditor audits the books of a company, the more familiar he becomes with its system of bookkeeping; but that is a minor matter compared with the necessity - a necessity amply demonstrated by recent happenings in New South Wales - for a stricter oversight of the auditing of the books of public companies than now exists. My amendment would not introduce an instalment of socialism, or even of unionism, excepting, perhaps, that whatever auditors were appointed would be members of organizations which admit to membership only persons with certain qualifications. If the appointment of auditors rested with the Government, there would be a distribution of the work among the men qualified to perform it.
Senator Payne:
– Is there no danger of political favoritism?
Senator RAE:
– I think not, although in all human institutions there is a percentage of fallibility. There is less danger to be feared from that source than from the hole-and-corner way in which auditors are sometimes appointed. The policy-holders of a company who may be scattered over a continent cannot be organized to take definite action in any direction, so that any provision purporting to give them the right to appoint auditors, is, in reality, of little or no effect. We all know that in practice the control of these companies is in the hands of a small body of men, generally those who live near the head-quarters of the company. Moreover, company meetings are usually held in the daytime, when many of the policy-holders cannot attend. And even if they do attend, should they raise any objection to the proposals of the directors, or seek information, they are frequently frowned upon, or even counted out. The danger is accentuated by the provision that any vacancies on the directorate which occur during the year may be filled by the remaining directors. It cannot be denied that the control of many of these- companies is in the hands of a small coterie. I recollect that a certain judge in New South Wales, when informed during the hearing of a case that certain books had been audited, spoke with some scorn as to the reliance that is to be placed on the accuracy of accounts merely because they have been audited.
Senator Cox:
– Will not the Registrar be a Government official?
Senator RAE:
– I believe so.
Senator Cox:
– Then he is the man who will appoint the auditors.
Senator RAE:
– No, he will merely give a certificate as to their competence.
Senator Cox:
– He has to approve of the auditors, and to that extent he appoints them.
Senator RAE:
– It is not stated in the bill that the Registrar is to approve of the auditors. Because these men are members of different accredited organizations it is taken for granted they are competent to do the work. It is merely a matter of routine; the Registrar will give his official certificate just because the man concerned is a member of such an organization.
Senator McLachlan:
– Would not the position be worse if the honorable senator’s amendment were agreed to? The Governor in Council would not have the knowledge that would be at the disposal of the Registrar.
Senator RAE:
– If my proposal were adopted the auditors would be changed round each year. The man who audited the books of the National Mutual Company this year might audit those of the Australian Mutual Provident Company next year. The activities of the companies are very much alike, and competent men would soon acquire a knowledge that would enable them to move from company to company without difficulty. Such a method would secure the confidence of the public, as an auditor would take care to see that his work was above criticism, in order to avoid adverse comment from the man who followed him. The amendment seeks to prevent the practice of accepting everything that is done by an auditor without demur. I seek only to protect the interests of the public. My proposal would prevent any family arrangement on the part of the directors of a company to appoint an auditor of their own choosing. As things stand the Registrar, in 99 cases out. of 100, would probably offer no objection to the person chosen by the company. That is what I want to avoid.
Question - That the words proposed to be inserted be so inserted (Senator Rae’s amendment) - put. The committee divided.
AYES: 5
NOES: 14
Majority . . 9
AYES
NOES
Question so resolved in the negative.
Amendment negatived.
Amendment (by Senator McLachlan) agreed to -
That after the word “ that “, second occurring, the words “subject to actuarial valuations’ of the liabilities under the policy contracts “ be inserted.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 101 to 104, agreed to.
Clause 105 (Report to be furnished to Registrar).
Amendment (by Senator Rae) agreed to-
That the following words be added “and to any policyowner on application “.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 106 (The Life Assurance Companies Act, 1905, is repealed).
Senator McLACHLAN (South Australia [2.38]. - I point out to honorable senators that the Life Assurance Companies Act, of 1905, is being repealed, and its provisions, which worked satisfactorily, are being embodied in clauses 106 to 113 of this bill.
Clause agreed to.
Clauses 107 to 122 agreed to.
Clause 123 (Publication of authorized . . capital).
Senator RAE:
New South Wales
– I should like to know whether there is any provision in this bill to prevent a practice which is very common, the dissemination of false propaganda on the part of insurance agents who are seeking to gain converts to their own companies, and who traduce and misrepresent other companies in their efforts to effect their purpose;
Senator McLachlan:
– It is not within our competence todo it.
Senator RAE:
– This sort of business is unfair. We have some companies traducing others, and boosting their own concerns at the expense ofothers. Some form of punishment, should be meted out to them just as an individual may be punished for obtaining goods by false pretences. Under the intense competition of insurance companies, this is frequently done to the disadvantage of not only the public, but also the companies traduced.
Senator McLachlan:
– The insurer suffers and the agent profits.
Senator RAE:
– Sometimes an insurer is induced to throw up his policy in one company, because of the promises held out by the agent of another company. We may not be able to stop that sort of thing by this legislation, but we ought at any rate to make some attempt to do so.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– I have already given some thought to the subject matter raised by Senator Rae, hut I am afraid that we shall have to leave the general law of the country to provide the remedy. This Parliament has power to legislate in regard to life insurance, but if it starts to wander into the realm of the law relating to libel or slander, it may he attempting to deal with a jurisdiction which is a good deal beyond its constitutional functions. If the conduct referred to by Senator Rae can he proved, the State law is available to the companies concerned, and they are the most vitally interested, although I recognize what a detriment it is to policy-holders, who are induced by reason of false representations to lose money by throwing up the policies they hold, and make money for the agents by taking out policies in other companies.
Senator Rae:
– The greatest sufferers are the poorer sections of the community.
Senator McLACHLAN:
– Undoubtedly, but I feel that we cannot go any further in protecting the public than by means of insurance legislation, and it cannot cover the ground traversed by the honorable senator.
Senator Sir JOHN NEWLANDS (South Australia) [2.48]. - I am, sorry that Senator McLachlan . suggests that he cannot find means of stopping the profitable operations of go-getters who, by fraud, induce policy-holders to surrender their policies in one company and’ take out policies in another. It was one of the provisions I hoped this hill would make. Every day of the week .hundreds of policies are surf ended, because of the activities of these go-getters, and I did hope that something could” be done to1 bring punishment to bear upon them. A company should be given every facility to take proceedings against a man who has induced a policy-holder by false representation to throw up his policy, and I hope that before the bill finally leaves the Senate, something will be done to make that possible. I have had experience of men of the type I have described, but if some provision ‘is made in. the bill on the lines I have suggested, it should be a warning to the guilty, and an assistance to insurance . companies anxious to take proceedings to protect themselves.
Senator MCLACHLAN:
South Australia
– I can assure Senator Rae and Senator Newlands that I have the utmost sympathy with the view so ‘well put by. them, but. I do not wish to, introduce into this bill, and it’ would be, unfair on my; part to. ask the .committee to pass something, which I.i;do’ not think’ would really be ; effective. If the- legislative dog is -to “bark, I. want him- to.. bite as well.. But having regard to the words of the. honorable senators I’ shall.’take : an-, opportunity to -discuss the matter iT again with the law.. officers of the? Grown whom ‘‘the Government has had the’ ‘courtesy to place’ at my disposal in the’ consideration ‘ of this bill. The clause we are discussing does, not purport to deal with the point raised* but halving had . my. attention drawn to the matter, I shall/: before th’e bril. ‘finally leaves the chamber,. ‘ acquaint honorable Senators with the point of view taken by the -Crown law officers and give my own comments upon- it.
Senator RAE:
New South Wales
– While it may npt be possible to bring into effect laws relating to libel and slander or anything of that sort, surely it is competent to provide in this bill that advertisements, circulars and prospectuses issued by insurance companies shall not contain statements issued merely for the purpose of boosting one company at the expense of another.
Senator MCLACHLAN:
South Aus tralia
– Ample provision is already, made in the bill to cover advertisements, circulars and prospectuses. But what I thought honorable senators had in mind was the activities of those who get a citizen to take out a policy in one office and, when he has allowed it to run for a few weeks, quite sufficient to enable them tot draw their commission, go to him again :and tell him that they have found out that the company is not a good one and that it would be better for him to insure with another. They are thus enabled to draw another commission. This is the misrepresentation I thought honorable senators had in their minds.
Senator Sir John Newlands:
– Hear, hear!
Senator RAE:
New South Wales
.- The go-getters referred . to .not only make verbal misrepresentations to their clients, hut also go to the length of publishing statements that the companies they represent . are very much better and pay bigger bonuses than other companies. My idea is that all, kinds of misrepresentation of. a fraudulent, nature, or with fraudulent intent boosting one company at the expense of another should be punishable. : I know that legal proceedings cannot’ ‘ ‘easily be -taken against ‘4he whisperer, but’ something might be ‘done ‘to’ prohibit ‘the : issue cf statements which are “demonstratively untrue! ‘
Senator MCLACHLAN:
South Australia
.- A thought has. - just flashed through my mind in’ regard to the matter raised. It may be quite unsound but I have communicated it -to the Parliamentary Draftsman in attendance, and he and I- will confer upon it.
Clause agreed to.
Clauses 124 to 126 agreed to.
Amendment (by Senator McLachlan) agreed to -
That the following new clause be inserted: - “ 126a. Any document required by or under this. Act to be signed by the secretary of a company, may. be signed by any other officer of the company, thereto authorizedby the secretary toy writing under this hand, notice in writing of which has been lodged with the Registrar “.
Clause 127-
Any person having a bonafide expectation thatbe will incur expense in connexion with the death or funeral of any relative, being a parent, grandparent, child, grandchild, brother or sister, may effect an insurance on the life of that relative for a sumnot unreasonable for the purpose of covering such expense.
Senator RAE:
New South Wales
– It is quite common in many households for someone who is not a parent, grandparent, child, grandchild, brother or sister, to be dependent on the householder: one for whose funeral expenses the householder would be liable. I think the provision should be extended, and I move -
That after the word “ sister “ the words “ or other dependant “ be inserted.
Senator McLachlan:
– If upon further consideration of the clause, I find that the words proposed to be inserted do not meet the case, I will submit the necessary further amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 128 to 130 agreed to.
Clause 131 (Power to provide for difficulties).
SenatorRAE (New South Wales) [3.3]. - It has occurred to me that some of the companies doing business in Australia may have to alter their articles of association so as to comply withthe act. I suggest that provision be inserted making this course mandatory, on the companies concerned.
Senator McLachlan:
-There is sufficient provision already in the bill to meet the point raised by the honorable senator.
Clause agreed to.
Clause132 (Regulations).
Senator CARROLL:
Western Australia
– This clause provides that the Governor-General may make regulations not inconsistent with the act “with such modifications as are necessary “. It seems to me that, notwithstanding the careful study which honorable senators have bestowed on the bill, regulations made under it may be so framed as to modify certain of its provisions.
I should like to have an explanation from Senator McLachlan on this point, particularly in view of our recentexperiences in the making of regulations.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– It is possible that the phrase referred to by Senator Carroll may need to be clarified somewhat. This legislation is confined to life insurance companies. We do not allow persons or firms to function as life insurance associations. The draftsman considered this provision necessary to meet a position that might arise if at some future time firms or persons engaged in the business of life insurance companies. The position appears to be a little obscure. I will give it further consideration, and, if necessary, recommit the clause.
Clause agreed to.
SenatorRAE (New South Wales) [3.6]. - I suggest that consideration of the schedules be postponed. Several proposed amendments have been indicated but up to the present we have not had an opportunity to give them proper consideration. If Senator McLachlan will agree to report progress, we shall have an opportunity to examine theproposed amendments to the schedules.
Senator McLACHLAN:
– We shall have to consider the postponed clause before discussing the schedules.
Postponed clause 4 (Definitions)- “ Owner,” in relation to any policy, means the person whois for the time being the person entitled to receive thesums payable under the policy.
Upon which Senator Sir Hal Colebatch had moved, by way of amendment -
That the words “but does not include a beneficiary “ be added.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
.- I regret that, when this clause was under discussion, Senator Sir Hal Colebatch and I were at cross purposes. I was visualizing a beneficiary under a will or letters of administration, whereas the honorable senator had in mind the beneficiaryunder a policy.I am prepared to accept his amendment, but I think it wouldbebetter to adopt the definition of a policy-holderas set
Senator Sir Hal Colebatch:
– I am prepared to accept the honorable senator’s suggestion.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment(by Senator McLachlan) agreed to -
That the words “is for the time being the person entitled to receive the sums payable under the policy “be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “ for the time being is the legal holder of the policy or secures the contract with the insurancecompany”.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– I desire now to submit an amendment to the definition of industrial insurance business.”
The CHAIRMAN (SenatorPlain).The amendment moved by Senator Sir Hal Colebatch to the definition of “ owner “relates to a later partof the clause. It is not competent for the honorable senator now to move anamendment to an earlier provision in the clause.
Senator McLACHLAN:
– It is unfortunate that Senator Colebatch submitted his amendment before I had an opportunity to amend the definition of industrial insurance business. If you will remember, sir,we postponed the whole of clause 4 for further consideration. It is my desire to have a reprint of the bill, imperfect as it may be, so that the draftsman may consult with me to see if we have omitted anything that should have been inserted, or, on the other hand, ifwe have inserted something which may be in conflict with other provisions in the bill.
The CHAIRMAN:
– The committee has already amended a later provision in the clause, and we cannot go back. It will be necessary for the honorable senator to recommit the clause in order to move the amendment which he now desires to submit.
Senator McLACHLAN:
– I am somewhat surprised to find that I am precluded from moving my amendment at. this stage. As the whole clause was postponed I was under the impression that I could move it at any time the clause was underconsideration. I shall, of
Senator Sir George Pearce:
– Yon cannot go back.
Senator McLACHLAN:
– When the clause was first put from the Chair Senator Colebatch received the call, and moved his amendment.
Senator Sir Hal Colebatch:
– If the honorable senator had a prior amendment he should have said so, and an opportunity would then have been provided for him to submit it.
The CHAIRMAN:
– It will be necessary for the honorable senator to move for the recommittal of theclause later on.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
First schedule agreed to.
Second schedule -
Senator Sir HAL COLEBATCH (Western Australia) [3.20]. - I direct the attention of the committee to a line in the assets column of the balance-sheet to be supplied by all companies which reads, “British Government securities (to be specified).”The words “to be specified “ should, I think, be inserted not there, but after the words “ other investments “ in the line immediately preceding the last.
Senator McLachlan:
– If the honorable senator will move an amendment in that direction I shall accept it.
Senator Sir HAL COLEBATCH:
– I move-
That the words “to be specified” after the words “ British Government securities “ be left out with a view to insert the same words after the words. “Other investments.”
Amendment agreed to.
Senator Thompson:
– I suppose it will no longer be necessary for a statement of the assets of a company to be supplied to the State authorities.
Senator McLachlan:
– Immediately this act comes into operation the State acts willcease to have effect.
Senator McLACHLAN:
South Australia
– I move -
That Form D of the Second Schedule be left put and the following new Form D inserted in its stead -
Under Form D in this schedule a company’s balance-sheet has been duplicated. If acompany has furnished a balancesheet all that is needed is a shareholders’ balance-sheet.
Amendment agreed to.
Second schedule, as amended, agreed to.
Third schedule agreed to.
Fourth schedule-
Senator RAE:
New South Wales
– I again ask the honorablesenator in charge of the measure to give honorable senators a reasonable time to consider the volume of matter comprisedin this and the subsequent schedules instead of rushing the measure through in this way.
SenatorMcLACHLAN (South Australia [3.29]. - I can assure SenatorRae that my only desire is to get the bill into proper form and then when the report stage is reached it can, if necessary, be re-committed. If honorable senators ban briefly suggest any amendments in the schedules which they consider necessary, they will receive my careful attention. I have no desire to rush the measure through.
Schedule verbally amended, and, as amended, agreed to.
Fifth schedule verbally amended, and, as amended, agreed to.
Sixth schedule agreed to.
Seventh schedule -
Amendment (by Senator McLachlan) agreed to -
That the schedule be left out and the following new schedule inserted in its stead -
Seventh Schedule.
Memorandum of Transfer.
I [here insert name of Transferor] being the owner of Policy No. issued by[here insert the name of thecompany by which the policy was issued] do herein transfer all my right title and interest in the said policy to[ here insert name and address and occupation of transferee] in consideration of [here insert particulars ofconsideration].
Dated this day of , 19.
Signature of Transferor.
Witness
Signature of Transferee
Witness
Registered at this day of 19 .
Secretary.
Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
Eighth schedule agreed to.
Ninth schedule, verbally amended, and, as amended, agreed to.
Tenth and eleventh schedules agreed to.
Twelfth schedule, verbally amended, and, as amended,agreed to.
Schedules thirteen to seventeen agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments.
page 1882
PAPER
The following paper was presented : -
League of Nations - Economic Consultative Committee, Second Session, Geneva,May, 1920 - Report of the Australian Representative (Mr. F. L. McDougall).
Senate adjourned at 3.43 p.m.
Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 16 May 1930, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1930/19300516_senate_12_124/>.