Senate
21 September 1939

15^th Parliament · 1^st Session

GOLD TAX
HOSTEL AT CANBERRA
- Report of Public Works Committee
TARIFF BOARD REPORTS
- Cotton Growing Industry
- Wire Netting
QUESTION
- AUSTRALIAN WHEAT BOARD
QUESTION
- NATIONAL INSURANCE
QUESTION
- CONTROL OF PRICES
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH RAILWAYS INQUIRY
QUESTION
- NEW GUINEA AIR SERVICE
QUESTION
- COTTON-GROWING SUBSIDY
QUESTION
- EXPORT OF HIDES
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH SUPERANNUATION ACT
QUESTION
- INVALID AND OLD-AGE PENSIONS
QUESTION
- WHEAT INDUSTRY
QUESTION
- NEW BUSINESS AFTER 10.30 P.M
GOLD TAX COLLECTION BILL 1939
SUPPLY AND DEVELOPMENT BILL’ (No. 2) 1939
COMMONWEALTH PUBLIC SERVICE BILL 1939
- Second Reading
QUESTION
- CAPTAIN T. P. CONWAY
WHEAT INDUSTRY INSURANCE BILL . 1939
- Second Reading
QUESTION
- ESTIMATES AND BUDGET PAPERS 1939-40
PAPERS

The President (Senator the Hon.J. B. Hayes) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 865

GOLD TAX

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD.Can the Leader of the Senate state whether the Prime Minister has received a lengthy and urgent protest from the Premier of Western Australia concerning the proposed gold tax?

Senator McLEAY:
Minister for Commerce · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– I am not in a position to say offhand whether such a protest has been received; hut I shall make inquiries during the afternoon and , advise the honorable senator later.

page 865

HOSTEL AT CANBERRA

Report of Public Works Committee

Senator BRAND brought up the report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works on the proposed erection of a hostel at Canberra.

page 865

TARIFF BOARD REPORTS

SenatorFOLLlaid on the table reports and recommendations of the Tariff Board on the following subjects : -

CordageRope and Twines n.e.i.

Cotton Growing Industry

Valves for Wireless Telegraphy and Telephony and Bases for such Valves.

Wire Netting

page 865

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN WHEAT BOARD

Senator CUNNINGHAM:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Can the Minister for Commerce state what fees, apart from travelling expenses, are to be paid to the members of the Australian Wheat Board, and from what fund such fees will be paid?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– The first full meeting of the Australian Wheat Board was held yesterday, and the board is sitting again to-day. The fees to be paid, which will be subject to the approval of the Minister, have not yet been decided. They will be debited against the No. 1 Wheat Pool.

page 865

QUESTION

NATIONAL INSURANCE

Senator AYLETT:
TASMANIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Services, upon notice -

Will the Minister supply the Senate with the following information: - The total cost to Australia of the National Insurance Scheme, including committees, inquiries, commissions, administration, compensation (if any), &c.?

Senator McBRIDE:
Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Commerce · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– The Minister for Social ‘Services has supplied the following answers: -

page 865

QUESTION

CONTROL OF PRICES

Senator E B JOHNSTON:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

Has the Minister’s attention been directed to reports from friendly societies that the prices of drugs and chemicals for their stocks have been quoted at increases of from 25 to 50 per cent.; if so, in view of the serious effect this may have upon their members, will he have the matter investigated urgently, andmeanwhile direct that all drugs mentioned in the British Pharmacopacia be declared necessaries of life and included in the list of goods the prices of which may not be increased without licence?

Senator FOLL:
Minister for the Interior · QUEENSLAND · UAP

– The Minister for Trade and Customs has supplied the following answer: -

Representations have been made by the Friendly Society Council of Western Australia for the inclusion of all drugs in the British Pharmacopoeia in the list of gazetted essential articles. This request is now under consideration.

Senator CAMERON:
VICTORIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

Does the Government’s scheme for the control of prices during the war include control of the prices of primary products or commodities purchased in Australia by Great Britain ?

Senator FOLL:

– The Minister for Trade and Customs has supplied the following answer : -

No. Local prices of exportable primary products gazetted as essential articles willbe subject to control.

page 866

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH RAILWAYS INQUIRY

Senator CLOTHIER:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister for the Interior, upon notice -

In connexion with the Commonwealth Railways inquiry, was the Commissioner allowed his legal costs, and, if so, what amount?
Were the officers who brought under notice the unsatisfactory state of affairs in the Commonwealth Railways allowed any legal costs ?

Senator FOLL:
UAP

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

page 866

QUESTION

NEW GUINEA AIR SERVICE

Senator COOPER:
QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Civil Aviation, upon notice- -

Is it a fact that representations have been made by Carpenter & Company in reference to the discontinuanceof the New Guinea Air Service?
If the service is to be discontinued,has this action been taken in view of the increase of the price of petrol?
If so, what action does the Government intend to take?

Senator McBRIDE:
UAP

– The Minister for Civil Aviation has supplied the following answers : -

Representationshave been received from W. R. Carpenter and Company, who propose to discontinue their second non-subsidized service between Sydney and New Guinea, on which the company states it is suffering a substantial loss and that the increased price of petrol adds to the loss. This second service was begun without subsidy and the Government already subsidizes one servicea week.
Sec answer to No. I.
Carpenter and Company have been informed that the Government does not at present propose to subsidize a second weekly ser- . vice to New Guinea.

page 866

QUESTION

COTTON-GROWING SUBSIDY

Senator COOPER:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Customs,upon notice-*

In view of the reported anxiety among cottongrowers in Queensland, will the Minister inform the Senate when it is proposed to indicate the Government’s decision on the request of the cotton industry for a renewal of the bounty?

Senator FOLL:
UAP

– The Minister for Trade and Customs has supplied the following answer : -

A statement will be made at the earliest possible moment.

page 866

QUESTION

EXPORT OF HIDES

Senator COOPER:

asked the Minister for Commerce, upon notice -

Has the Minister any statement to make in reference to the price of hides intended for export?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– It is proposed to hold a conference with trade interests next week on the subject of the conditions for the export of hides.

page 866

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH SUPERANNUATION ACT

Senator KEANE:
VICTORIA

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice -

When is it intended to introduce the amendment of the Commonwealth Superannuation Act to provide for the inclusion of temporary employees in the Federal Members’ Rooms and Com mon wealth departments whose duties are of a permanent nature?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– The Treasurer has supplied the following answer: -

Owing to the urgency of other public business the Government has not yet had an opportunity to consider the practicabilityof amending the Superannuation Act in the direction indicated.

page 866

QUESTION

INVALID AND OLD-AGE PENSIONS

Senator SHEEHAN:
VICTORIA

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice -

Is it a fact that owing to failing health and other disabilities, many old-age and invalid pensioners find it most difficult to attend the appointed place to collect their pensions?
In view of the reported unpopularity among pensioners of the system of payment by cheque, will the Minister favorably consider the institution of a system whereby pensions can be paid on behalf of pensioners into a savings bank account if they so desire?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– Inquiries are being made and a reply will be furnished as soon as possible.

page 866

QUESTION

WHEAT INDUSTRY

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

asked the Minister for Commerce, upon notice -

Seeing that the Government has decided to acquire all wheat now held in Australia, except that held by farmers, will the Minister inform the Senate what advance the Government intends to make to farmers; and will he see that the initial advance is as high as possible?
What action is the Government proposing to take to protect the interests of farmers who have been forced to sell their wheat since the outbreak of war at prices much lower than those ruling to-day, or the figure they would be likely to receive from the pool?
Docs the Government propose to treat wheat now held in Australia as a pool separate from the 1939-40 crop?
In view of the difficulty of making sales of barley overseas and the fact that home consumption sales will be considerably below the cost of production, will the Government consider the question of fixing a reasonable homeconsumption price for barley?
Will the Government consider the question of having barley graded on the following lines: - Barley No. 1 quality; barley No. ‘2 quality; barley, feed quality?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– A reply to the honorable senator’s questions has not yet been received. The Australian Wheat Board sat until midnight last night and is sitting again to-day. I hope to be able to make a statement on the subject to-day or to-morrow.

page 867

QUESTION

NEW BUSINESS AFTER 10.30 P.M

Motion (by Senator McLeay) put -

That Standing Order 68 - half -past 10 p.m. rule - be suspended, up to and including Friday, 22nd September, for the purpose of. enabling new business to be commenced after 10.30 p.m.

The Senate divided. (The President - Senator the Hon. J. B. Hayes.)

AYES: 18

NOES: 14

Majority 4

AYES

NOES

The PRESIDENT:

– There not being an absolute majority of the whole number of senators voting in favour of the motion, the question is resolved in the negative.

Motion negatived.

page 867

GOLD TAX COLLECTION BILL 1939

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

page 867

SUPPLY AND DEVELOPMENT BILL’ (No. 2) 1939

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

page 867

COMMONWEALTH PUBLIC SERVICE BILL 1939

Second Reading

Debate resumed from the 12th September (vide page 348) on motion by Senator Collett -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Senator COLLINGS:
QueenslandLeader of the Opposition

– This measure is one that can be discussed most effectively at the committee stage. Honorable senators have had it before them for some time, and are probably well acquainted with its details. Whilst some of the clauses are more or less innocuous, the wisdom of accepting others is debatable. I agree with the remarks of the Minister (Senator Collett) regarding clause 2. It extends the provisions relating to graduates of Australian universities to graduates of universities in other British countries, but provides that graduates of the latter universities must be born in Australia, or, if not born in Australia, they must satisfy the Public Service Board that they left Australia for the purpose of entering the university from which they graduated, and resided in Australia for at least twelve months immediately prior to leaving Australia for that purpose. This clause really extends the operation of the relevant section to graduates of British universities other than Australian universities.

– Whatever the responsible authority, a man’s tenure of office may be the result of circumstances. Recently, a new department of Supply and Development was created. Probably thi- majority of the appointments to that department will be from other departments of the Public Service, but for the efficient management of the new department, it may bc necessary to appoint some experts to the permanent staff forthwith. In other branches of the Service, however, there are men who have been employed for years but are not regarded as permanent employees. Those men would be nf a disadvantage compared with appointees to the new department. I hope that, in committee, amendments to rectify these anomalies will be accepted by the Government.

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:
Western Australia

– I am in accord with the bill, and I congratulate the Govern ment on its introduction. I am particularly pleased with those provisions which seek to attack the pernicious system by which the salaries of public servants are gaarnisheed, and the Commonwealth Treasury is used as a collecting agency for money lenders, who pay no fees whatever for the service. I imagine that there are many men in commercial life who would like to have a government department to collect their outstanding debts at no cost to themselves.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– This provision i ri et v prove to the unfortunate borrowers to lie » two-edged sword.

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD.Clause 2 provides for the admission to the Commonwealth Public Service of graduates of Australian universities who were born in Australia, and also of persons who either were born in Australia andleft Australia to attend universities in other parts of the British Empire ‘and subsequently returned to Australia or, not being born in Australia, satisfy the board that they left Australia for the purpose of entering such universities and that they resided in Australia for at least twelve months immediately prior to their departure. I wish to know whether that clause would prevent a graduate of an English university who was bora in the United Kingdom and did not arrive in Australia until after his graduation from becoming an officer of the Commonwealth Public Service? It may be that provision is already made for him in the parent, act.

Senator Collett:

– Only if bo is a bona fide Australian.

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:

– Tha Australian Public Service would benefit by the admission of graduates of British, Canadian, and South African universities who subsequently ‘settle in Australia. They should not be precluded from joining such bodies as the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research.

Clause 3 seeks to amend section 42 of the principal act by inserting the words “ any member of the permanent naval, military or air forces of the Commonwealth “. I have a distinct recollection that, during the depression the question of the admission to the Commonwealth Public Service as permanent officers ov cadets from the Royal Military College, Duntroon, or the Naval College at Jervis Bay, arose. I desire to know whether these men will come under the definition of “members of the permanent naval, military or air forces of the Commonwealth “.

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

– in reply - There is little to which I have to reply, as the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Collings) was good enough to re-explain the bill in some detail, and thereby refresh our, memory as to its contents. The points raised by Senator Sheehan are not covered by this bill, but may be considered at some subsequent date. As to the points raised by Senator Allan MacDonald, I point, out that section 36a of the principal act provides that persons who are at the date of the examination graduates of an Australian university may apply to the board for admission to the Public Service. The proposed amendment provides that any person who, at the date of the examination - (a)Is a graduate of an Australian university; or

Is a graduate of a university in any part of the British dominions other than Australia and -
1. was born in Australia; or
2. in the case of a person not born in Australia, satisfies the board that he left Australia for the purpose of entering that university and that he resided in Australia for at least twelve months immediately prior to so leaving Australia.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clause 1 postponed till after the consideration of clause 5:

Clauses 2 to 5 agreed to.

Postponed clause 1 agreed to.

Amendment (by Senator Collett) agreed to -

That after clause 1 the following new clause be inserted - 1a- Sections 1, 5a and 8a of this act shall be deemed to have taken effect on and from the second day of September, One thousand nine hundred and thirty-nine.

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

– I move -

That after clause 5 the following new clause be inserted: - 5a. Section fifty of the principal act is amended by inserting after sub-section 7 the following sub-section: - (7a). The board may regard an appeal us having been made, on either of the grounds specified in sub-section 6 of this section, by an officer who, at any time within the time prescribed for lodging an appeal, is absent on leave granted in pursuance of section seventy-two of this act, and in that case this section shall have effect as if an appeal had been received from that officer.

This provision is intended to protect the rights of those who may be called up for military service.

Amendment agreed to.

Clauses 6 and 7 agreed to.

Clause 8 (Attachment of salaries of officers).

Senator AYLETT:
Tasmania

– Proposed new subsection 4 enacts that if a judgment debtor fails to prove to the satisfaction of the paying officer that the judgment has been satisfied, the paying officer may, from time to time deduct from any moneys due to the judgment debtor, such sums as, in his opinion, should be deducted and applied in reduction of the judgment debt. There is a proviso that no deduction shall be made which will reduce the amount to be received by the judgment debtor to less-, than £2 a week. If £2 a week is to be the maximum amount allowed to a judgment debtor it will be inadequate in the case of those with dependants. Some judgment debtors may be officers holding responsible positions in the public service.

Senator Collett:

– The amount allowed to a judgment debtor must be not less than’ £2 a week.

Senator CAMERON:
Victoria

– I direct attention to some figures supplied by the Minister in charge of the bill (SenatorCollett) dealing with the number of orders that have been issued against employees in the department of the Postmaster-General. We have been informed that there were 243 orders in 1927, 832 in 1930, 1,675 in 1933, 2,034 in 1934, 2,108 in 1935, 2.592 in 1937, and 2,410 in 1938. There was a big increase between 1.927 and 1937, which suggests that some employees of tlie Postmaster - General’s Department are not receiving -iiilaries sufficient to enable them to meet their obligations. Some borrow money when they should not do so, but the majority borrow because of the decreased purchasing power of money.

Senator Allan MACDONALD:

– Does not the honorable senator think that the answer is that some have a champagne appetite and a beer income?

Senator CAMERON:

– I do not. The average employee in the PostmasterGenera l’’s Department lives moderately, and generally speaking he has to be satisfied with very little. If the employees of that department, used their organized strength to a greater degree they might bc in a better position than they arc today. I do not think it can be said that these men deliberately waste their money. The Minister stated that the number of judgment orders issued in all departments in 1938 was approximately 2,800, the bulk of which wore taken out against employees of the Postmaster-General’s department. A perusal of the figures indicates that between 3936 and 1938 the - average yearly wage of employees in that department was ?261.69, which is too low. I f these employees wish to borrow money 40 lender will have to take the risk, or employees will have to apply to their superior officer for the necessary permission to borrow. Under this measure the department is entering into an unholy alliance with money lenders.

The CHAIRMAN:

- (Senator James Mclachlan). - In discussing the clause, the honorable senator must not make a second-reading speech.

Senator CAMERON:

– I am dealing with the attachment of salaries of Commonwealth officers. Has the Government taken, into consideration the matter of increasing the salaries of the employees of The Postmaster-General’s Department, or of making some provision whereby those in financial difficulties can obtain a loan, suv from a branch of the Commonwealth Rank?

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in charge of War Service Moines · Western Australia · UAP

– The total number of permanent Commonwealth public servants is over 30,000, and of that number 23,671 are employed in the Postmaster-General’s

Department, the average salary being, as stated by Senator Cameron, ?261.69. The average salary of the 30,000 permanent Commonwealth public servants is in the case of adult males ?327, females ?192, and minors ?96. A majority of the employees in the Postmaster-General’s Department are in fourth division and the remuneration, including cost of living adjustments, is fixed by- various authorities. Although the number of attachment orders is rather alarming, it is not out of proportion to the total number of public servants. I do not know whether the Government has provided an easy means by which public servants in financial difficulties can be assisted..

Senator ASHLEY:
New South Wales

– Sub-section 4 of proposed new section 64 reads -

If the judgment debtor fails to prove to the satisfaction of the paying officer, within the time specified by the paying officer, that the judgment has been satisfied, the paying officer may from time to time deduct from any moneys due to the judgment debtor such sunns, as, in his opinion, should, in the circumstances, he deducted. . . .

Sub-section 5 reads -

Commission at the rate of ?5 ner centum on nach sum deducted by, or at the direction of, the paying officer under the last preceding subsection shall bc payable to the Commonwealth, by the judgment creditor in whose favour the deduction is made.

It will be possible for a money lender to pass on to the borrower the 5 per cent, collection fee. The Minister stated in his second-reading speech that the object of the measure is to protect the borrower, and that is true to a degree; but. it will be possible for the borrower to be charged the 5 per cent, fee in addition to say 12 per cent, which he may have to pay in the form of interest.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– There is a limit to what can be passed on. A man may not get anything at all, and perhaps it would be better for him if he could not.

Senator ASHLEY:

– I regard the proposal as unfair.

Senator FRASER:
Western Australia

– I am opposed to the Government setting itself up as a debt collector.

Senator Collett:

Senator BROWN:
Queensland

– Senator A. J. McLachlan said that although the Government could devise means to prevent money lenders from making excessive charges, the money lenders would find methods to overcome any obstacles placed in their way. That is a candid admission from an ex-Minister, that this particular clause will virtually be unavailing. As usual, the Government is putting the cart before the horse. Under this measure it seeks in the most willing spirit to safeguard the public servant who is compelled by circumstances to borrow from money lenders. I know of many serious and genuine cases - men who, having met with disaster, have been compelled to seek assistance from these bloodsuckers in order to safeguard themselves and their dependants for the time being. Because of their urgent needs, they agree to pay extortionate charges. If the Government is so keenly desirous of safeguarding the interests of public servants in this respect, can it not limit the amount of interest which shall be charged to public servants on money lent by these financial leeches? Under this clause, a money Sender is defined as a parson who lends money at a rate exceeding £12 per cent, per annum. Would it not be possible in these cases to specify the maximum rate of interest, and provide, in the event of such limit being exceeded, that the paying officer shall have power to approve of only a. portion of the repayments claimed by a lender? I admit that the money lender is to be penalized to the extent that he is to be obliged to pay a commission of 5 per cent, on all moneys collected on his behalf. But I should like the Minister to show why it is not possible, taking everything into consideration, for the Government to limit in the way I suggest the bloodsucking propensities of the money lender who gets a public servant into his clutches.

Senator COLLETT (Western Australia -Minister in charge of War Service Homes) [4.25 J. - This clause provides that an officer’s .salary shall not be garnisheed in any case in which any portion of an amount due under a judgment is in respect of money .borrowed from a money lender unless the chief departmental officer, after a full examination of all the circumstances, considers it to be desirable. Provision is ako made for a charge of per cent, for the collection of moneys by the department in respect of unsatisfied judgments against public servants. The activities of money lenders have constituted a scandal for some years past, and. consequently, the Government is desirous not only of minimizing that scandal but also of affording some protection to members of the Commonwealth Public Service who, by reason of their circumstances, arc compelled to seek financial aid from these people. One reason for the present position is that money lenders, knowing the security at the back of public servants, have made a specialty of- tempting them to accept accommodation. Any claim made in respect of a public servant under this measure will first be subject foi review by the chief officer before the paying officer will accept the garnishee, or make arrangements foi- any deduction front the salary of the officer concerned. For some years past the paying officers have acted as debt collectors for these people, and certain expenditure has been involved in the provision of special staff for this work.

Senator CaMeron:

– Will not this provision place the paying officer in a difficult position?

Senator COLLETT:

– The chief officer of the department, and not the paying officer, will be the judge in these eases. It will be the duty of the chief office)’ to review the claim, and to decide whether the interest being charged on any particular transaction, is excessive; if it is he will authorize the paying officer to take certain action.

Senator Fraser:

– Cannot 30mc provision be made to prevent money lender? from making charges in addition to interest?

Senator COLLETT:

– I do not knowhow we could deal with that difficulty under this measure. T have no further explanation to offer to honorable senators. This measure represents a genuine attempt by the Government to give adequate protection to public servants who, because of their circumstances, are forced to borrow from money lenders.

Senator BROWN:
Queensland

– Under this measure it is permissible for the chief departmental officer to authorize the amounts to be paid in settlement of judgment orders of this kind, but it is also provided that debtors, without exception, must receive not less, than £2 a week. It may be that a particular authorizing officer, because of his peculiar conception of the evils of money lending, may not be averse to meeting a judgment order too generously as to allow the debtor a bare minimum of £2 a week. Such an officer, for instance, may be averse to borrowing money himself, because he has been on an easy wicket all his life and ha.3 never been confronted with financial difficulties. We know that such persons exist. Only the other day I met a married man who works at his profession in the day-time, and whose wife also is in employment. At night-time both of them sing on the radio, whilst the wife also engages in dressmaking in order to make extra money. That couple has no financial encumbrances whatever, but, in conversation with me, the husband said that if he had his way he would gaol any man who borrowed money. I am not suggesting that departmental authorizing officers are likely to share that outlook, but it is not altogether impossible that one or two such officers would view money lending in that light and would therefore not be averse to leaving a public servant in his department with the bare minimum of £2 provided for under this measure. It must also be remembered that many officers who are in debt to money lenders may have many other creditors besides the one who has secured a judgment against him. For instance, he may be buying some article such as furniture, on time payment. As Senator Darcey has often pointed out, under our present economic system, production is so great that goods are sold to lie paid for in the future. Consequently many families are purchasing poods on the time-payment system. It may be that a judgment is secured against a public servant who has other creditors as 1 have pointed out. Under this measure, it will be permissible for the authorizing officer in arranging payments in respect of an order, to leave the public servant concerned with only £2 a week. Further, that arrangement may continue for as long as six months. If the Government is so keenly desirous of helping unfortunate public servants of this kind, surely it will agree to increase this minimum from £2 to, say, £3 10s. a week. I have no doubt that the Minister will reply that all of the factors have been taken into consideration. Nevertheless, the fact remains that a public servant can be left with only £2 a week.

Senator AMOUR (New South Wales) 1 4.35 J. - This provision is designed to protect public servants who borrow from money lenders. A man who borrows £10 from a money lender is required to sign as having received £12 10s. If the whole of the amount is not repaid at the end of the term, say six months, the money lender will add £2 10s. to the amount then outstanding. That amount is 25 per cent, of the original loan, but it may in fact, represent interest at the rate of 80 per cent. Should the amount outstanding not bc paid within some further period, the money lender may apply to the court and obtain a judgment against the borrower. I know something of the operation of this system because of my association with a firm by which I was once employed. Even if the borrower has repaid £7 of the original £10 that he obtained, £5 may be added to the debt by way of interest. It frequently happens that a person has borrowed money from several money lenders. Should one of them proceed to squeeze him, all will do so and they will obtain orders against his salary. An instance came under my notice recently of a man who owed money for rent. The’ landlord interviewed the paymaster of the New South Wales railways, where the borrower was employed, only to be informed that it would be useless for him to obtain an order against the> man’s salary, as he would have to wait twelve’ years before he could hope to collect anything. This legislation will probably do some good; but we must avoid doing any injury to an honest employee .of the Government who, because of unforeseen circumstances such as sickness in his family, requires money urgently. In addition to this measure, legislation to restrict the interest which money lenders may charge should be introduced. The Commonwealth Government can take action in this direction by making thi Commonwealth Bank the source from which short term loans may be obtained at low rates of interest. If legislation to that effect were introduced, money lenders could practically be eliminated. The rates of interest charged by many money lenders are exorbitant. Should a borrower be charged interest at the rate of 20 per cent, for six months, it really means interest at the rate of 40 per cent, per annum. A heavy responsibility will be thrown on the paying officers of government departments by this legislation. In some instances, they may find that public servants have borrowed money from a number of money lenders and that several judgment orders have been issued by the court.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– An earlier provision stipulates that the borrower must, be allowed to retain at least £2 of his weekly salary.

Senator AMOUR:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– That is so. The payment of the debt may extend over a number of years. I urge the introduction of legislation to restrict the amount of interest that, may be charged.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– That cannot be done in this bill.

Senator AMOUR:

– It should be done somewhere. There is urgent need to restrict, interest charges on loans and cash orders. The Government has power to do so by authorizing the Commonwealth Bank to issue credit at low rates of interest upon certain security being offered.

Senator WILSON ( South Australia)

T4.43]. - As was pointed out by the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Collings), some honorable senators do not appear to understand the real purpose of this bill. It? object is to prevent money lenders from taking advantage of existing legislation in order to garnishee the salaries of Commonwealth public servants. It must bf> realized that public servants incur many debts besides those owing to money lenders. It may be that as the result of sickness money is owing for medical expenses. In such an event, the doctor could obtain a judgment order and serve it upon the paying officer of the department in which the debtor is employed, and the chief officer would then have to deduct a prescribed amount from the borrower’s salary. The money lender is not entitled to serve such an order. The purpose of this bill is to prevent money lenders from garnisheeing a man’s wages, unless and until the paying officer “ has scrutinized the transaction and satisfied himself that it was a reasonable one. If, for example, u money lender has charged an exorbitant rate of interest, or unreasonable costs, as many money lenders do, the paying officer could refuse service of a .garnishee order. In those circumstances, not one penny could bc taken from the officer’s salary. An officer cannot lose any of his salary by a garnishee order in favour of a money lender unless the chief officer has investigated the transaction and is satisfied that ir i.f a i r.

Senator Brown:

– Could not a money lender proceed under the State law?

Senator WILSON:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Yes; but I venture to say that if money lenders as a body are as unscrupulous as honorable senators say they are, one who knowthat a public servant has assets which he can seize, will not adopt the roundabout method of obtaining a judgment order under which he will be paid a few shillings a week.

Senator Brown:

– Why not force him t o do so ?

Senator WILSON:

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in Charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

– Ishall convey to the responsible Minister the suggestion made by Senator Sheehan. The general discussion on this clause has assisted honorable senators to a better appreciation of what is intended. I again assure them that the debtor is amply protected by paragraph viii of this proposed new section 64. The amount of £2 a week is the minimum which may be -retained on behalf of a judgment debtor. The general purport of the proposed new section is to increase very greatly the protection of the public servant.

Clause agreed to.

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in Charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

– I move -

Thatafter clause 8 the following newclause be inserted.: - “ 8a. Section 72 of the principal act is amended by omitting from sub-section (2.) the word ‘active’ (wherever occurring) and inserting in its stead the word ‘ war ‘.”

Section 72 provides in sub-section 2 for leave of absence to officers called up in pursuance of the Defence Act for active service in Australia or for active service in the naval forces. Subsection 4 of the same section enacts that the period of absence shall for all purposes be included as part of the officer’s period of service under the Commonwealth Public -Service Act. In a proclamation by the Governor-General, published in the Gazette on the 2nd September, calling out the Citizen Forces, the term “ war service “ is used. As there is a ‘distinction between the terms “ active service “ and “ war service “ it has been considered advisable to amend proposed new sub-section 2 by inserting the word “ war “ instead of ‘” active “.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– The purpose is to harmonize this measure with the Defence Act.

Senator COLLETT:

– Yes

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, -agreed to.

Clauses9 and 10 agreed to.

Senator COLLINGS:
Leader of the Opposition. · Queensland

– I move -

That after clause 10the following new clause he added: - “ 1 1. Section 73 of the principal act is amended by Omitting from sub-section (1.’) the second proviso to . that sub-section.”.

The proviso reads-

Provided further that in the ease of any person becoming an officer of the Commonwealth Service after the commencement of this act the service which shall be taken into account for the purpose of this section shall not include any service in a temporary capacity.

The effect of the proposed new clause is to ensure that furlough shall be granted to temporary employees. It should be unnecessary for me to elaborate the necessity for an amendment of the law in this respect.When temporary employees become permanent officers they are entitled to furlough ; therefore, temporary employees should receive similar consideration. In many instances temporary service is temporary in name only, and is actually permanent. The reasons advanced in support of my proposal are -

The fundamental reason for the granting of furlough is length of service, not nature of service.
Under the original (1902-20) act temporary service, if followed by permanent service, was counted for furlough purposes.
Delay in changing temporary service into permanent, service is never the responsibility of the officer himself, but is mainly due to the desire of his department to play “ safe “.
By War Service Homes and Repatriation Staff Regulations, persons appointed to permanent classified positions in such commissions prior to 1937 and 1933 respectively obtain the benefit, for furlough purposes, of temporary service continuous with permanent service. Under the Commonwealth Public Service Act, second proviso to section 73, no person appointed to the Commonwealth Service subsequent to the 19th July, 1923, obtains the benefit of temporary service for furlough purposes.
Certain officers of the War Service Homes Commission and Repatriation Commission are more favorably treated, in regard to furlough because of the recognition of their temporary service than Commonwealth public servants with longer service of analogous character.

I trust that the Minister will accept’ the proposed new clause.

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in Charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

– I am interested in the proposed new clause moved by the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Colling?), and I have obtained some information on the subject. The honorable senator has given the pros, and I hope that the cons will be equally convincing.-

– I cannot say.

Senator -COLLINGS. - There are some public servants - I am not now referring to Commonwealth public servants - who have been employed in a temporary capacity for twenty years, and whose services are retained year after year. We say most definitely that the granting of furlough should be based on the length, and not on the nature, of service. Temporary employees should not be allowed to retain their positions if they are not rendering efficient service, and when they are retained in the Service they should not be denied the rights of permanent servants merely because they are classified as temporary officers. For varying reasons, the Government has allowed certain sections to come under the Public Service Act and to obtain furlough, to which they would not otherwise be entitled.

Senator Collett:

– They are public servants.

Senator COLLINGS:

– But they do not come under the Public Service Act.

Senator Collett:

– I agree with the honorable senator.

Senator COLLINGS:

– Those temporary officers are working under the Public Service Act, and consequently are bound by Public Service regulations. Why should they be entitled to rights and privileges which are denied temporary officers in other branches of the Service? For 50 years I have come in contact with public servants in different parts of Australia, particularly in Queensland, but more recently with Commonwealth public servants, and I have no hesitation in saying that nowhere in the world are there men who are better trained or more efficient that those in the Commonwealth Public Service. Yet there is no department in the Public Service in which the rank and file are not grossly underpaid. I point out to the Government that it looks to the lowerpaid workers for the great majority of the men required for military service, and the better the wages and conditions provided for employees in every department of life the more efficiently will the Government be arranging for the present and future safety of the nation. I am sure that, when the Minister was stating Iris objections to the amendment, he did not do so with any pleasure, and the argument that he was probably least pleased about was that relating to the cost of this proposal.

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:
Western Australia

– There is much that appeals to me in the amendment submitted by the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Collings) on behalf of temporary employees in the Public Service. After a long period of temporary employment these men reach an age, or suffer illness, which causes a cessation of that employment. I know that a proposal has been under consideration that some form of superannuation or other payment should be given to them in recognition of long and meritorious service. If the Minister can assure me that such a proposal is receiving the serious consideration of the Government I shall support him, because T consider that this furlough is a reward to the permanent public servant. An employee who makes the Public Service his life’s work is entitled to more consideration than is one who serves only in a temporary capacity and who may sock employment elsewhere. Many of the temporary men are returned soldiers, and something should be done for them when they have to leave the service after long periods of employment in it.

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

– The point raised by Senator Allan MacDonald relates, I think, only to returned soldiers in the Public Service.

Senator Allan MacDonald:

– No, 1 refer to all temporary employees.

Senator COLLETT:

– That matter has been under the consideration of the Public Service Board and the Government on more than one occasion, and no solution has yet been reached.

Senator SHEEHAN (Victoria) [5.26^. - I support the amendment, and I am pleased that the Minister drew attention to the fact that furlough is granted after twenty years service. That should be a convincing argument in favour of the amendment. One would think, on hearing other portions of the Minister’s reply, that the carrying of the amendment would bring about the expenditure of a vast sum of money ; but the fact that the officers concerned will have to serve for twenty years before qualifying for furlough shows the necessity for, and justice of, the amendment. The retiring age in the Public Service is 65 years, but any officer may be retired at an earlier age. Provision has now been made for members of the Naval and Military Forces and others to be brought under the Public Service Act, and their retirement will take place at. earlier ages than 65 years. One can imagine that temparary employees brought under this act will not be in the service twenty years before receiving their long-service furlough, but many of them may have served in what is termed a temporary capacity for a great many years.

It was said by the Minister that some officers might get an advantage through accepting temporary employment, the implication being that they would receive favours. Vacancies sometimes exist in country centres for positions in various grades of the Public Service, and such officers as telegraph messengers or telephonists are given temporary employment. These are mostly young persons. and when, they are appointed to the permanent staff they eventually become entitled to long service leave. Others, however, are brought into the Service as adults, and, although they have had long years of service they never become permanent officers, simply because the Public Service Board refrains from issuing the necessary authority to classify them as permanent officers. It is not right that an outsider should be appointed to the Public Service without examination, simply because a person in authority certifies that there is no officer in the Service able to fill the position.

SenatorCollett. - When is that done?

Senator SHEEHAN:

– Section 42 of the act provides that if the board is satisfied that it is desirable in the interests of the Commonwealth that, a certain appointment shall be made the hoard may appoint a person to that office without examination or probation. At the Victoria Barracks, Melbourne, many civil posts are filled by members of the military and naval forces. Why should anybody be appointed to the PublicService without examination or probation, and thus be placed ina more favorable position than the temporary employee?

That the . proposed new clause (Senator Collings’ amendment) be agreed to.

The committee divided. (The Chairman - Senator James McLachlan.)

AYES: 15

NOES: 0

N oes . . 16

Majority . . . . 1

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Proposed new clause negatived.

Senator COLLINGS:
Leader of the Opposition · Queensland

– I move -

That after clause 10, the following new clause be added.: - “ 11. -Section ninety-one of the Principal Act is amended ‘by adding at the end of subsection (2) the following proviso: “Provided that an officer may., subject to the approval of the Board, act as a Director of a Consumers’ Co-operative Society’’.”

Section . 91 (2) of the principal act reads - ‘Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to prevent an officer from becoming a member or shareholder -only of any incorporated company, or of -any company or society of persons ‘registered under any act in any State or >elsewhere, but an officer shall not take any part in the conduct of thebusiness of the company or society otherwise than by the exercise of hisright tovote as a member or shareholder..

As honorable senators know, cooperative societies exist to-day all over the world. In Queensland a miners’ cooperative society is -proving a fine proposition. Newcastle : and Adelaide also provide examples of what can be done by cooperative societies on behalf of consumer shareholders. The Wholesale Cooperative Society of Great Britain is one of the biggest trading concerns in the world. Recently a commission was appointed to investigate the high cost of living in Canberra., and the commission’s report is available to all honorable senators. That inquiry arose from the fact that the late Prime Minister, when he moved to Canberra with his large family, was shocked by the high cost of living here as compared with costs in other places where he had resided. The cost of living in Canberra is much higher than it is elsewhere in Australia. The permanent population, which consists mainly of married public servants and their families, can best appreciate that fact. Some months ago a young and enthusiastic public servant approached me on the subject of establishing a co-operative society in Canberra in order to reduce the cost of living to its shareholders, and asked me what I thought of the proposition. I replied that there was nothing I was more enthusiastic about. I suggested that Canberra was a very suitable centre in which to establish such a concern, and urged him to get on with the job, offering to givehim any assistance within my power. He and a few other enthusiasts immediately set -about establishing a society, which was -eventually formed with seven directors, some of whom were public servants. That society was not registered because no provision existed for the registration of such a company in the Territory. However, an ordinance was gazetted recently which would enable that -difficulty to be overcome. But these enthusiastshave since come up against another difficulty. They now find that the . powers that be do not like their idea. There has been a good deal of correspondence between the promoters of this society and the Public Service Board and the Prime Minister’s . Department. I shall not read the whole of the correspondence, but I wish to draw attention to the following letter from the Secretary of the Prime Minister’s Department, dated the 10th July, 1939 : -

I am directed to refer again to your letter of 5th May, 1939, in which you requested that the Commonwealth ‘ Public Service Act be amended to enable an officer to act on the directorate of a co-operative society, and to inform you that advice lias now been received from the Public Service Board.

The board is of opinion that it would be most difficult for an officer to take an active part in the direction of a trading concern without it interfering with the efficient performance of his public service position and that, furthermore, it would be undesirable for tin officer of the Public Service to be on the directorate of a, co-operative society, particularly in a place such as Canberra, where the society would necessarily come into competition with shopkeepers whose living was involved.

If that means anything, it means that a public servant, merely because he is a public servant, is to be denied his ordinary rights of citizenship. He may not engage in any undertaking, although it may be of some value to the community, even outside public service hours. What a preposterous position !

Senator Collett:

– The honorable senator is too general in his statements.

Senator COLLINGS:

– These young men have put a lot of effort, into the formation of this society, but not one minute of public service hours has been devoted to it. Although I do not play golf, partly because T cannot, afford to do so, and partly because am not likely to excel at the sport, I know that there is a golf club in. Canberra which is a trading concern. It has a bar. and it proposes 10 expend about £10,000 on improvements. With that laudable object I agree, but . know that the conduct of the golf club occupies the time of some public servants during public service hours. But when a number of young men desire to start in Canberra, an organization similar to many that are operating in every part of the world, without drawing any salaries or receiving any return for their services, excepting such dividends as may accrue to them, as consumer shareholders at the end of certain accounting periods, the Government steps in and prevents them. If such action is to pass without question, the right of every public servant to under.ra ke any activity outside his office work will be interfered with. There are in Canberra a number of denominational schools, which are trading concerns in competition with public schools. Are we 10 understand that a public servant, whose children attend one of those institutions is not to be permitted to act as a member of a school committee in order to increase the efficiency of the institution? Or is a public servant to be denied the right to participate in the activities of the various religious bodies, or militia welfare committees, in the Territory? The two reasons given for refusing to public servants permission to act; on the directorate of this society were, first, that there might be some conflict of interest between his public service duties and the society’s affairs, and, secondly, that the society would compete with shopkeepers in the Territory. Such reasons are so puerile that they ought not to be tolerated. The members of the directorate of the society will receive no salaries - their chief concern is that the public of Canberra shall not be exploited by local tradespeople. Some months ago I addressed a public meeting of workers in the Australian Capital Territory. At the time these horny-handed toilers, working for wages, were deeply concerned about the high cost of living in this city. They told me that, if something were not done to reduce the cost of living, some of them would take it in turn to collect orders from their mates, drive to Goulburn, make their purchases there, and distribute them on their return. Had they done so. they would merely have done what this society proposes to do in a more orderly way. Will honorable senators say that they would have been wrong if they had carried out their intention? They could have bought their requirements at prices at least. 10 per cent, lower than in Canberra.. They were prepared to meet their own transport expenses. If the Government is not prepared to accept the amendment, the Opposition will have to pay orions attention to the activities of honorable senators on the other side, and even Cabinet Ministers, as well as highly paid, public servants who are directors of all sorts of organizations. Not long ago £ drew the attention of honorable senators to a booklet entitled Who Owns Australia? which showed that many Cabinet Minister’s had shares in various concerns. We are now told that that state of affairs no longer exists; that they have got rid of their shares. Of course they have. Those shares are now held in the names of their wives, their brothers-in-law, or other relatives. The promoters of the proposed co-operative society are spirited members of the Public Service who are trying to rendera service to the community by bringing down the cost of living. Their aim is to benefit all persons who wish to become members of the society.

Senator Sheehan:

– Even Cabinet M inisters.

Senator COLLINGS:

– I know what happened inmy State, and I know what would happen here if a co-operative society caused prices to come down. Not only the lower-paid public servants, but also many persons well able to pay extravagant prices, would be keen to get goods at the lower prices.I am not personally concerned, because I have no occasion to buy a great deal in Canberra. 1 get my board and lodging at the Hotel Kurrajong, and generally I am well satisfied.I ask honorable senators opposite intake a serious view of this matter. These young men are trying to render a service to the community, but the whole machinery of government isset in motion to prevent them from doing so. I hope that the Minister will see his way to accept the amendment.

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in Charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

– The Leader of the Opposition (Senator Colli ngs) seeks to insert the following new clause -

Section91 of the principal actis amended by adding at the end of sub-section 2 the following proviso: - “ Provided that an officer may. subject to the approval of the board, act as : a director of a consumers’ co-operative society.”

An amendment moved by the honorable gentleman is always worthy of the closest attention, and on this occasion he has been characteristically eloquent. Nevertheless, I cannot accept his amendment.

Senator Collings:

– Obviously, the shop-keepers have got in first.

Senator COLLETT:

– I desire that honorable senators should understand clearly what the law provides in regard to such activities as the honorable senator has mentioned. Section 91 of the Public Service Act provides -

Except withthe express permission of the board, which permission mayat any time be- withdrawn, no officershall - (a.) accept or continue to hold an office in or under theGovernment of any State. or in or under any public ormunicipal corporation : or
1. accept or continue to hold or discharge the duties of, or be employed in a paid office in connexion with, any banking, insurance, mining, mercantile, or other commercial business, whether carried on by any corporation, company,firm or individual; or
2. engage in or undertake any such business, whether us principal or agent : or (d.) engageor continue in the private practice of any profession, occupation intrude, or enter into any employment. whether remunerative or not, with any person, company or firm who or which is so engaged; or
3. accept or engage in any remunerative employment other than in connexion with the duties of his office or offices.- under the Commonwealth.
Nothing herein contained shallbedeemed to prevent an officer from becoming a member or shareholder only of any incorporated company, or of any company or society of. persons registered under any act in any State or elsewhere.

– That is not the one I have in mind.

Senator WILSON:

– There is no logic in the amendment. It provides that a public servant shall be allowed to accept the directorship of a co-operative society which may be really a trading concern whose purpose is to make profits instead of reducing prices to its members.

Sitting suspended from6.15 to8 p.m.

Senator WILSON:

– I have intimated that I shall support the amendment moved by the Leader of the Opposition, provided that certain safeguards are inserted - first, to ensure that the society is purely co-operative and ‘ does not distribute profits amongst its members, but uses such profits to reduce prices; and, secondly, that the society shall not trade with the Crown. Should the latter restriction bo not imposed there would be a serious possibility of a conflict of interests if the head of a. department, responsible for buying on behalf of the Government were also a. director of the society anxious to sell to the Crown.

Senator Cameron:

– In what way could the society trade with the Government?

Senator WILSON:

-For instance, the authority controlling the parliamentary refreshment-rooms makes substantial purchases of certain commodities, and should a director of the society ha ve any control over the purchase of goods required by that department there would possibly be a serious conflict of interests. I do not think that the public servants of Canberra would want any officer to be placed in such an invidious position. If my suggestions be adopted, the society will be placed beyond any possible suspicion. I suggest that the Leader of the Opposition should amend his amendment by adding the following words: -

Provided that such society does not distribute profits amongst its members, and, provided further, that such society shall not enter into contracts to supply any government department.

Senator COLLINGS:
Leader of the Opposition · Queensland

– I understand that Senator Wilson desires that the society shall not distribute its profits amongst its members, but that its profits shall be usedto reduce price-. That would make it a truly co-operative concern. There is a good deal inthe honorable senator’s suggestion that the society should not enter into contracts with government, departments. I therefore ask leave to amend my amendment to read : -

Provided that an officer may, subject to the approval of the Board, act as a director of a Consumers’ Co-operative Society which does not distribute profits among the members of the society and does not enter into contracts with the Commonwealth or a State.

Leave granted: new clause amended accordingly.

Senator A. J. McLACHLAN(South Australia) 8.5. - The amendment moved by the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Collin gs) prompts me to consider the Public Service in relation to the Crown generally. Before a Commonwealth Public Service Act was passed public servants could be dismissed on the ‘ ipse dixit of a Minister; but, when the actbecame operative, public servants were given certain benefits, including the right of. appeal before they could be dismissed. The only power which a Minister or a departmental head now possesses in thai respect is the right to suspend an officer. If the position were as if; existed when, the Public Service Act was passed, 1 would not have supported the amendment, because the underlying principle was that, having given the public servants certain protection and privileges, they were excluded from participation in any other civil occupation whatever. The act conferred upon them benefits which they had not enjoyed previously. What has happened since then? Canberra is populated mainly by officers of the Crown, and they are in asomewhat anomalous position. There is nothing to preventthem from forming aco-operative society ; but I do not see why the word “ consumers “ should be used. It does not appear to be an appropriate expression.I have never heard of a similar society being designated a consumers’ cooperative society. The Government has deputed public servants to various office? in connexion with semi-governmental activities, because of their knowledge of certain classes of businesses. Those officers form a liaison between the Government and the various business entities, in some of which the Government itself has a considerable financial interest. The principle previously observed has been departed from, 1 understand, with the approval of the Public’ Service Board. The amendment, which has been improved by the addition of the words suggested by Senator Wilson, provides ample safeguards, although the position again becomes curious. A member of the Public Service Board may be a member of the society, and the organization will act wisely if it arranges for the appointment of a member of the board to the directorate. The Leader of the Opposition is wise in accepting the safeguards suggested by Senator Wilson. It is only fair to allow these men, if they possess the necessary commercial genius, to direct the policy of the concern. That is what the directors of a co-operative society should do. They do not handle contracts from day to day, but deal only with broad questions of policy. I presume that shares will be made available to members of the general community in Canberra. With the safeguards indicated, which have been accepted by the Leader of the Opposition. I shall support the amendment, but I ask the Leader of the Opposition and Senator Wilson to consider whether they regard the word “ consumers “ as necessary. That word, in this instance, has not any significance, and may give rise to some doubt. A co-operative society means a co-operative society, and its cooperative effort can be directed only towards saving the consumers’ money. Some public servants are still in receipt of a Canberra allowance, but if the cost of living be reduced as a result of the operations of this society, some may not then be entitled to the allowance, and so governmental expenditure may he reduced.

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

– The Government is prepared to accept the amended new clause moved by the Leader of the Opposition (“Senator Collings).

New clause, as amended, agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported with amendments; report adopted.

Bill read a. third time.

page 888

QUESTION

CAPTAIN T. P. CONWAY

Select CommitteeReport Adopted.

Senator BRAND:
Victoria

.- I move -

That the report of the select committee appointed to inquire into and report upon the discharge of Captain T. p. Conway from the Australian Military Forces be adopted.

The finding of the committee was unanimous. Captain Conway claimed £5,000 for-

Loss of opportunities to obtain a position in the Federal Service;
Consequent loss of income;
Loss of reputation and prestige affecting his opportunity to obtain responsible positions ; and
Suffering and pain of mind.

The committee has not recommended the ‘ payment of any compensation, but recommends that an ex gratia payment of £100 be made to Captain Conway, because of the nervous strain suffered by him following the publicity given to a letter dated the 31st July, 1931, from the then Minister for Defence, the offending portions of which were expunged some months afterwards from the official files. This letter ran very close to constituting a case for libel. In addition, a misstatement was made by another Minister for Defence in the House of Representatives regarding Captain Conway passing for the rank of major. No blame is attached to the responsible military officer at Army Head-quarters for including that statement in the Minister’s reply to a parliamentary question, as the question asked was rather ambiguous. Nevertheless, Captain Conway’s truthfulness was doubted as the result of that reply, which was recorded in Hansard. The committee, whilst satisfied that there were insufficient grounds for compensation, was unanimously of opinion that, as Captain Conway’s health has been seriously affected, particularly since the Minister’s letter dated the 31st July, 1931, it was only fair and equitable that Captain Conway should receive the sum of £100. With that ex. gratia payment he would be able to meet, to some extent, the expenditure already incurred, and still to be incurred, in restoring him to normal health.

Senator FOLL:
Minister for the Interior · Queensland · UAP

– I regret that the Government cannot accept the recommendation of this committee. As pointed out by the honorable senator who submitted the motion for the appointment of the committee, the case of Captain Conway had been dealt with by five consecutive Ministers for Defence, holding varying political views, and on each occasion the case was thoroughly investigated. Each Minister came to the conclusion that no damage had been done to Captain Conway’s reputation, that nobody had suggested for a. moment that he had acted in any way contrary to the best traditions of the military service, and that he had received compensation on the same scale as that applied to other military officers when compulsority retired from the military service. Captain Conway was retired in accordance with the provisions of the Defence Retirement Act 1922. In his evidence be claimed compensation in respect, of loss of opportunities to obtain a position in the Public Service, but he admitted that he did not know of any position to which he could have been appointed. His claim for compensation was based also on loss of reputation and prestige affecting his opportunities to obtain responsible positions. The committee itself, by its own investigations, found that there was nothing in the’ evidence to substantiate the claim.

When ‘Captain Conway was retired from the Military Forces he was paid compensation amounting to £1,283 6s. Sd., made up of £1,020 16s. 8d. in respect of his retirement under the Defence Retirement Act, and £262 10s. in lieu of furlough. I point out to honorable senators that, as Senator Brand mentioned, the committee declared, after the most exhaustive investigation, that at) could find nothing that warranted the granting of any compensation., yet the committee concluded, for some unknown reason, that Captain Conway should receive a good-luck payment of £100 from the Commonwealth Treasury. But thousands of persons in the community have imaginary grievances. If every such person could induce an honorable senator to submit a motion for the appointment of a select committee to investigate his claim - and some of them might have more justification for claiming compensation than Captain Conway had - and if he could touch the hearts of a majority of the members of the Senate there would be no end to investigations of this kind, and the Government might be frequently called upon to make ex gratia payments similar to that now recommended by this committee. This case was exhaustively examined, and no new fact was brought forward to substantiate the claim.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– The committee admitted that.

Senator FOLL:

– lt stated in no uncertain terms that Captain Conway had no right to compensation, but it now recommends that because a certain letter was sent by a Minister to Captain Conway, who said that his feelings had been hurt, a payment of £100 should be made to him. The committee bad every opportunity to call any evidence required by it, and to examine the witnesses. It could have summoned any officer associated with the Defence Department, but there is not the slightest suggestion that any officer of that department, any Minister, or anybody else associated with the case considered that the slightest slur had been cast on Captain Conway’s reputation. The Government recognizes that he was an able officer in the Military Forces, and did his duty well: but he was retired on the same basis as many other officers and was paid adequate compensation.

Senator AMOUR (New South Wales) 1 8.25]. - I support the motion for the adoption of the committee’s recommendation. What the Minister (Senator Foll) has said is exactly, what I anticipated that he would say. He mentioned that the matter had been brought under the notice of several Ministers for Defence, who held different political views. Unfortunately, however, all of them were guided by the contents of a file compiled by officers of the Defence Department. One former Minister for . Defence, however - I refer to Mr. Chifley - wrote a letter to Mr. G. Buckland, secretary of the Australian Workers Union, 323 Pitt-street, Sydney. Mr. Buckland is a close friend of Captain Conway, and the letter was written without previous consideration.

It was dated the 31st July, 1931, and read as follows: -

With reference to your representations of the6th July regardingthe case of Captain Conway, I note that the gravamen of Captain Conway’s complaint is of supersession on the 1st November, 1919, by Captains Goucher, Wynter, Blake, Pollard and Davis.

Regarding the contention in your letter that, Captain Conway’s qualifications were superior to those of the officers promoted, it is clear that preference was given in accordance with section 20a of the Defence Act to the officers promoted. Before recommending promotion, the Military Board at that time would have had to determine the respective qualifications of the officers, having in view the limitation provided in section 20a. The conditions existing at that time wereas follows: -

Captain Conway’s name had been brought to the notice of the Minister in October, 1917, for “special meritorious services rendered in Australia in connexion with the war “, and an entry was accordingly made in his record of service. These meritorious services were performed under peace conditions and in the rank of captain. All the other officers had not merely “ service abroad “, but active service in the rank of major or lieutenantcolonel.It was apparently considered that such service in higher ranks gave superior qualifications to the officers recommended for promotion.

In connexion with Captain Conway’s withdrawal of his application to proceed abroad, it is pointed out that ho was informed at the time (November, 1917) that -

While his position is realized, his action in withdrawing an application for permission to proceed on active service with the Australian Imperial Force when fit and well is likely to prejudice his future career in the Permanent Forces, for the reason that the whole purpose of the training of professional soldiers is the utilization of their knowledge and experience in active service, and it is obvious that if distressful family circumstances arc. when an occasion arises, to prevent such men from discharging professional duties, to which end they have been paid, such soldiers should have no place in any military system.It must be clear tohim that such a record compares most unfavorably with that of the citizen soldier who has risked all to serve his country.

Had Mr. Chifley studied the records on Conway’s file, no necessity would have arisen for an inquiry of this kind. On the file. were the following two communications : - 2nd Military District, Military Hospital, Victoria Barracks. Sydney. 8th May, 1918. 409/19/507.

Brigadier-GeneralRamaciotti, I.G.O. Administration, Victoria Barracks.

L have this morning seen Mrs. Conway, wife of Captain Conway of your department. She is one of those helpless, highly neurotic women, and from her present condition, and from what I know of her past history, it will be quite impossible for her husband to go to the front.

She has four children, who are a great worry to her, and I am sure that this, combined with the absence of her husband abroad, would eventually lead to her mental derangement. (Sgd.) J. crawford robertson, Lieutenant-Colonel A.A.M.C. Medical Officer i/c Military Hospital, Victoria Barracks.

Dr. G. L. Bell. “ Avon “, Bondi-road, Waver ley. 8th May, 1918.

Mrs. Conway is extremely neurotic, hysterical and in such a condition that the going of her husband on active service, with the household cares left to her alone, would in my opinion certainly result in disaster and mental break-down. (Sgd.) G. L. Bell, M.B.

I also draw the attention of honorable senators to the following letter, written by Brigadier-General Ramaciotti to Mr. Trumble. on the 20th October, 1917:- “ Strathkyle “, Bligh-street. Sydney, 20th October, 1917.

Dear Trumble,

Referring to our conversation. Conway was desirous of going to the front. When his chance came in 1916, I told Dodds I could not. spare him. Conway was rather sore over it for a time. When I gave up the command he told me that asI had blocked him before I owed it to him’ to use my influence to get him away. When he was transferred to Brisbane, he pesteredme with letters until he became a nuisance. I got a most pathetic letter from him a fortnight ago. He told me his chance had come and. he had to refuse it, completely blasting his career. His future was dark, in facthe had no future. But he had to choose between his career and killing his wife.

Conway has four children, the youngest born last Christmas. His wife is a poor miserable thing always ailing. It’s the sofa, bed or the hospital for her the whole time. She is not strong enough to look after the children. One of them’ playing in the street, was run over a couple of years ago and spent months in the hospital. Another was killed. 1. have known Conway who with the expense of his wife’s illness cannot afford a servant to do the housework.

In my opinion he deserves the greatest sympathy. He is a good man. His luck is dead out. Believe me it is harder for him to stop at home than go to the front.

Yours sincerely, (Sgd.) Ramaciotti.

That is the man who the then Minister for Defence, in a letter to the secretary of the Defence Department, said was not worthy to hold any position in the military service. Conway at first made every endeavour to get away to the front, hut later, when he had an opportunity to do so, circumstances over which he had no control, obliged him to ask that his application should be allowed to stand over. Sir George Pearce, when he was Minister for Defence in 1918, determined that, in view of all the circumstances, Conway should remain in Australia. I am not blaming the present Minister for Defence for opposing Conway’s claim. Indeed, any person who inspected Conway’s file as it was arranged, would have arrived at the same conclusion. Undoubtedly Mr. Chifley’s letter to two friends of Conway, caused Conway much concern. The Minister has said that the committee did not give to this matter the fullest consideration.

Senator Foll:

– I did not say that. I said that the committee came to the conclusion that Conway was not entitled to compensation, but decided to recommend a “good-luck” payment of £100.

Senator AMOUR:

– I do not propose to deal with the committee’s report in detail. Every honorable senator has been furnished with a copy of that report. The committee was appointed by the Senate, and consisted of four honorable senators from the Government side and three from this side, and after giving due consideration to the whole matter, came to its decision unanimously. In view of these facts I should have thought that the Government would have raised no objection to the committee’s recommendation.

Senator ABBOTT:
New South Wales

– I was a member of the Select Committee, and I support the motion for the adoption of its report. I know that, the Minister for the Interior (Senator

Foll) would not deliberately be unfair, but I do not think that he dealt with the position in- such a way as to do justice to the committee. He said, in effect, that the committee’s recommendation merely amounted to giving a “good-luck” payment of £100 to Conway. That is hardly correct. More than once the Minister said that the committee had arrived at its decision for some reason which was unknown. I refer honorable senators to paragraphs h and i of the committee’s findings. The first refers to the expunging of certain matters from Conway’s file. Honorable senators will recall that, after considerable agitation, Major-General Bruche was appointed in 1931 to conduct an inquiry into Conway’s case, and, after going into the matter thoroughly, ordered that certain matter should be expunged from Conway’s file. In the course of the committee’s investigation, I had an opportunity to examine that file, and to say the least, I found that the method adopted to expunge that matter was startling. 1 could not resist the conclusion that Conway consequently might have had ground for grievance. I found that Major-General Bruche’s order had been carried out simply by drawing a line in red ink across the matter ordered to be expunged. The references, however, remained legible, and successive Ministers, on looking at the file, were at once able to read all of these unfavorable references. I do not know whether, in view of these facts, honorable senators would consider that that matter had really been expunged from Conway’s file. To me the method employed does not quite savour of fair play. At the moment I am not going into the question of whether Conway is entitled to compensation or to -an ex gratia payment. I ask honorable senators to weigh the facts which I have stated, and to say whether Major-General Bruche’s order was fairly carried out.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– Was there any evidence that the expunged matter had ever been used against Captain Conway ? Mr. Chifley’s letter was written before the matter was ordered to be expunged.

Senator ABBOTT:

– I am merely suggesting, on the facts which I have stated, that Conway had ground for at least some grievance, although, strictly speaking, it was not sufficient legally to entitle him to compensation. Those facts suggest that Conway was not entirely fairly treated, because after the matter had been expunged in this way, it, virtually remained on his file, in reply to the Minister, 1 point to thi* aspect of the. case as one reason which justifies the committee’s recommendation that an ox gratia payment be made to Conway.

Paragraph (i) of the committee’s findings refers to a letter which Mr. Chifley wrote to two friends of Captain Conway. Senator Wilson and I. studied those letters, and we had considerable doubt that they were not defamatory. The point arose, however, as to whether the letter could be said to have been written by Mr. Chifley in his ministerial capacity. Had it: been written in bis private capacity, Conway would probably have had ground for an action for libel against Mr. Chifley.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– Does the honorable senator suggest that Mr. Chifley wrote that letter after the mattei complained of had been ordered by Major-General Bruche to be expunged?

Senator ABBOTT:

- I am not, referring to that aspect at the moment, but am -imply dealing with the Minister’s insinuation that the committee had no reason for recommending that an ex (India payment be made to Conway. 1. submit that the matters to which I have referred were of a character to warrant iiic committee’s decision.

Senator Foll:

– T. draw the honorable senator’s attention to paragraph 1 of the committee’s findings, which reads - 7’here is insufficient evidence to prove that Captain Conway is entitled to compensation, but. tin: committee recommends that an amount of £100 be paid to Captain Conway as an rj’ gratia payment.

Senator ABBOTT:

– If the Minister will take the report as a whole, he will see that the committee points out that, strictly speaking, Captain Conway is not entitled to compensation. The committee, however, took into consideration the fact that it was not until some question of obtaining another position arose, that this man, for the first time, became aware of the existence of unfavorable records on his file. From that time

Captain Conway seemed to have been upset. He started an agitation which led to Major-General Bruche issuing an instruction which, although it may have been carried out in the letter, was not carried out in the spirit. Taking all of the circumstances into consideration, the committee was of the opinion that these records had bad an effect on the man concerned. Captain Conway was not an entirely satisfactory witness ; I regarded him as a man who was greatly upset because he believed that his grievance was genuine. He did have some ground for his grievance, but, it became an obsession with bini. The committee suggests that, as his grievance was, in some degree, due to official mishandling of his case, he should be granted an ex gratia payment of £100.

Senator LECKIE:
Victoria

.- I have an entirely unbiased mind about the case of Captain Conway, because I opposed the appointment of the committee. I did so, first, on the ground that it would be better if an outside body investigated his claim, and, secondly, because I did not approve of men, who had expressed definite opinions before hearing the evidence, being appointed to a semi-judicial committee. However, the Senate decided to appoint a committee, and we on this side have no ground for complaint as to its personnel, for a majority of its members were Government supporters. The committee having examined the evidence and observed the demeanour of witnesses, including Captain Conway himself, was much better qualified to judge of the merits of the claim than we are. If the appointment of the committee does nothing else than institute a better system of expunging records that are supposed to be expunged than the method adopted by the military authorities, it will have accomplished something worth while. The expunging of a record merely by drawing a red line through it is ridiculous: such a practice should be abolished.

Senator Foll:

– We all agree with that statement.

Senator LECKIE:

– Had I been a member of the committee, I do not think that I should have favoured an ex gratia payment; rather, I should have felt disposed to report that Captain Conway either was entitled to compensation or was not so entitled. However, the committee has presented its report, which I believe to be an honest one, and I am not prepared to vote against it.

Senator WILSON:
South Australia

– I support the adoption of the report, and I agree with the paragraph which states that Captain Conway has no legal claim for compensation. But there are other things than strictly legal claims, particularly when we are dealing with responsible bodies. Had I been the . legal adviser of Mr. Chifley, and had he been sued for libel in 1931, and been offered the chance of getting out of it for £100, I certainly should have advised him to accept the offer. In saying that, I am not necessarily saying that I am convinced that the letter which Mr. Chifley wrote to a third party was libellous ; but it was so close to the border-line that any wise counsel advising the defendant would say that if he could make a reasonable compromise, he should do so. All of the legal members of this chamber will agree that it is libellous to write of a man that he is not fit to hold the position which he happens to have held, or is holding. The letter which Mr. Chifley unwisely wrote to Mr. Buckland virtually said that Captain Conway was not fit to hold any position in the. Military Forces.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– Was that Mr. Chifley’s own expression, or was he quoting a statement made years before by some one else.

Senator WILSON:

– Under the law relating to libel, it does not matter whether the statement embodied Mr. Chifley’s own opinion, or was something which had been conveyed to him. The fact is that Mr. Chifley wrote to a third party and thereby published something which, to say the least, was on the verge of libel. The proper course of action for Captain Conway to have taken was to sue Mr. Chifley for libel in 1931. Had he done so. and recovered damages against Mr. Chifley, it is impossible to say now whether the Government of the day would have stood behind its Minister for Defence and paid the amount awarded by the court, or whether it would have said that, if any of its Ministers was foolish enough to libel some person in the com munity, he should bear the consequences of his action. Honorable senators will see that the committee whose report is before us, could not say whether or not the Government was responsible for its Minister’s letter. There was no evidence one way or the other on that point. Further, from a legal point of view, there is not the slightest, doubt that any action at this stage by Captain Conway would be legally barred by the Statute of Limitations. In spite of what the Minister has said, the committee was not. indecisive. It made a definite finding; it said that Captain Conway had no legal claim. But it also said that certain very injudicious things were done by a previous Minister for Defence, that he wrote a most unwise letter, and, further, that an order for the expunging of certain records was clumsily done by the military authorities. Although the committee is perfectly candid, and says emphatically that there is no legal obligation on the. Government to compensate Captain Conway, it placed the facts before the Senate so that a decision could be made as to whether or not there was justification for an ex gratia payment to Captain Conway.

Senator Dein:

– Was the committee unanimous in its recommendation?

Sena to r WILSON. - Yes.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 893

WHEAT INDUSTRY INSURANCE BILL . 1939

Second Reading

Debate resumed from the 8th December, 1938 (vide page 2975, volume 158) on motion by Senator Wilson-

That thebill be now read a second time.

Senator WILSON:
South Australia

– In view of certain aspects of the wheat industry which are now under consideration, and may affect this bill, I ask leave to continue my remarks at a later date.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

page 893

QUESTION

ESTIMATES AND BUDGET PAPERS 1939-40

Debate resumed from the 20th September (vide page 778), on motion by Senator McLeay -

That the papers be printed.

Senator SHEEHAN:
Victoria

– Some honorable senators have described the budget speech as a national stocktaking or balance-sheet. It is, at least, an indication of the Government’s intentions for the current financial year. Although presented when the nation is at war, it was prepared in a time of peace, and therefore, we are justified in examining it as an indication of the Government’s peace-time policy. I realize that all other matters are overshadowed by the catastrophe that has befallen the world. Nevertheless, I believe that it is well that the Government should be reminded that it is, for the time being, in charge of the Commonwealth. It has been said that this budget is unique inasmuch as, for the first time in the history of Australia, a £100,000,000 budget has been introduced. The fact that it has been found necessary to provide for such a colossal expenditure is indeed historic. Introducing his budget, the Treasurer (Mr. Menzies) said -

That extraordinary development - and, of course, it is a development that has taken place all over the world, because the British Chancellor of the Exchequer this year presented to the House of Commons a £1,000,000,000 budget - is not, if I may say so, in spite of some carping critics, entirely due to the extravagance of politicians. 1 have no doubt that we are not immune from the common disposition to be generous with other people’s money - it would be foolish for us to deny that charge - but, at the same time, the real and overpowering reason for the growth of ‘budgetary expenditure is undoubtedly to be found in two things. First, there has been a revolutionary change during the last generation in the view which prevails as to the obligations of governments towards the aged, the sick and the poor - in other words, a revolutionary change in our sense of obligation for what we call social services. In the second place - and this has been increasingly true in the last few years - it has been due to the rapid mounting of defence expenditures in the forcing house of international fear, and, at present, international violence. Those two great factors have, I venture to say, been the real explanation of what might otherwise, be regarded as a most inexplicable growth of government expenditure.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– That policy ba3 been of great benefit to the Commonwealth.

Senator SHEEHAN:

– That may be the opinion of the honorable senator. I ask him to study the record of the governments that, have preceded the present Ministry. Honorable senators opposite who have been members of this branch of the legislature for some years have supported various governments, including the Bruce-Page, the Lyons-Page, and the Menzies Governments. In 1925, the party led by Mr. Bruce promised to provide social services, including motherhood endowment, workers’ homes, unemployment insurance, and national insurance. Where are those reforms? Have honorable senators opposite done anything to assist the introduction of social legislation which has been promised for years?

Senator Herbert Hays:

– The party to which the honorable senator belongs promised to abolish the Senate.

Senator SHEEHAN:

– We shall do so as soon as we have an opportunity. The action of certain members of the Government during the last few days suggests that the sooner this chamber is abolished the better it will be for the community. The Government stresses the necessity for social legislation, but it does not attempt to improve the standard of living. The statement was made at one time that if an anti-Labour government were elected, one of its first acts would be to provide decent wages and comfortable homes for the workers. Even in this budget, great stress is laid upon the need for improved social services. But nothing has been done.

It is to bo deplored that in recent years the number of invalid and old-age pensioners has increased, which is a clear indication of the fact that the economic policy of this and preceding governments has been wrong. Honorable senators will recall that, with a great flare of trumpets, the Lyons-Page Government introduced a National Health and Pensions Insurance Bill in order to afford some relief to a section of the community that is suffering severe disabilities. When that measure was introduced, stress was laid on the number of persons who are becoming a charge upon the State. The then Treasurer (Mr. Casey), in dealing with the cost of pensions, said -

The gravity of the prospective growth of the cost of pensions is accentuated by the fact that, 40 years from now, there will be relatively fewer persons in the active productive agc groups to bear the burden. According to the present and recent trends of our vital statistics, and on the assumption that there will be no material change in the rate of migration which has prevailed during the past five years, the population nf Australia will have begun to decline in considerably less than 40 years from now. If one compares the number of wage-earners in Australia - I am using the term as quoted in the census returns - with the number of persons in the pension age group, it will be found that whereas to-day there are 26 persons of pension age to every 100 wage-earners, in 40 years from now the proportion of persons of pension age will have risen to 54 for every 100 wageearners. These are some of the vital considerations against the background of which the Government has had to consider the framing of this national insurance scheme. The scheme that we have framed takes into account the factors that I have mentioned - some of them quite disturbing factors.

– Probably honorable senators opposite, like Senator Darcey, want to get money or credit without paying interest on it. I ask them how we can carry on the ordinary everyday work of government, to say nothing of prosecuting a war, without borrowing money ? Honorable senators opposite first say that their object is not to borrow any more money, and then they advocate expanding credit without paying interest. 1 admit their remarks puzzle me. Senator Cameron has a style of his own. He is provocative yet likeable. I would describe his speeches as semiphilosophical, semi-profound, semi-meanderings.

The party opposite claims to be representative of the wage-earners of Australia, yet it advocates a policy which would lower the purchasing power of the wages of the workers, and deprive old-age pensioners of a considerable proportion of their income. Under their policy, a loaf of bread which now costs 6d. would cost ls.

Senator Collings:

– Not if a pricefixing commissioner was working efficiently.

Senator LECKIE:

– If credit is expanded, that will be the inevitable result. The first effect of an expansion of credit is to lower the purchasing power of the wages of the workers, whom honorable senators are supposed to represent; to reduce by half, or even more, the worth of the old-age pension; to bring ruin to every thrifty man who has accumulated a little money for his old age; to destroy the value of every life insurance policy; and to make worse the conditions of those in receipt of sustenance. Yet honorable senators opposite claim that they represent the workers.

Bay “ Here, hold on a bit ; we can’t, spend money like that; make it only a million “:

Senator Keane:

– I should want to know where the money was going.

Senator LECKIE:

– From what I know of our Labour friends opposite, if Senator Keane were on the treasury bench, he would be pulling one way while Senator Darcey would be pulling another way. It has been laid down clearly that if the Labour party came to power again, the Commonwealth Bank Board, as at present constituted, would not last long. The Labour Ministry would appoint a governor who would be at, the beck and call of Ministers.

Senator Collings:

– We have never said that.

Senator LECKIE:

Under normal conditions I should have criticized some phases of the Government’s financial proposals, and complained because certain public works, such as the provision of additional postal facilities, ave not to be provided; but as the Government is faced with tremendous responsibilities and the time of every Minister is very fully employed on work of the highest national importance, it would be unreasonable for any honorable senator to adopt such a course. I do not think that some honorable senators opposite realize the tremendous amount of work which Ministers have to perform, and the efforts which this Government. is making to preserve our national characteristics and to ensure, so far as is humanly possible, the safety of the nation. It behoves every member of this Parliament to refrain from carping criticism until we are out of danger. It is unreasonable for members of the Opposition to say that Parliament should remain in session when they occupy its time in criticizing almost every ministerial action. That is not the way in which this great conflict, in which our safety and all that we hold dear is involved, can be brought to a successful conclusion. The Government should be allowed to give its undivided attention to the numerous pressing problems confronting it, so that it may function in the interests of not only the Australian people but also of the who.le Empire.

Senator HERBERT HAYS:
Tasmania

– Honorable senators have taken advantage of the opportunity afforded by this motion to discuss a variety of subjects, many of which are related only indirectly to the Government’s financial proposals, and apart from a few heated ox-changes the debate has been conducted in a friendly manner and on a high plane. AVe should, I think, congratulate the Treasurer (Mr. Menzies) upon the lucid manner in which Australia’s financial position has been placed before the Parliament. The Leader of the Opposition (Senator Collings) said that the members of the Opposition appreciated the difficult position of the Government, and, while reserving to themselves the right to criticize, were willing to do what they could to assist. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Senator Keane) also admitted that if a Labour government were in power it, too, would have to raise money to assist in the prosecution of the war, although the Labour party believes that our present economic position could be improved by changing from the orthodox system of finance. On the other hand, Senator Sheehan, who condemned every action of the Government, said that the Ministry is responsible, and, in effect, that the Opposition should not be expected to shoulder any of the burden. A few days ago, Senator Sheehan, and others with whom he is associated, suggested that Parliament should remain in session ; but what would be the use of Parliament sitting continuously if the Opposition does not propose to assume some responsibility?

Senator Collings:

– I did not suggest dot

Senator HERBERT HAYS:

– No, but Senator Sheehan said that the Opposition would not accept any responsibility, and that a Labour government would in time show the people bow the country should bc governed.

Senator Fraser:

– The honorable senator must admit that some amendments moved by the Opposition have been adopted.

Senator HERBERT HAYS:

– I do not deny that. The Opposition, which forms an important part of our legislative machinery, should not shirk its responsibility.

Senator COLLINGS:
QUEENSLAND · FLP; ALP from 1937

– The honorable senator is concerned because we are assuming responsibility.

Senator HERBERT HAYS:

– The Opposition should submit constructive criticism instead of endeavouring tq obstruct the Government in the importantwork which it has in hand. The budget overs an expenditure of approximately £102,000,000, a large portion of which is to be raised by means of taxes. Senator Sheehan also stated that as the budget was framed prior to the outbreak of war he was entitled to discuss it from that angle. That was most unfair. When asked in what directions the Government’s policy could be improved, he said that the Government should make legislative provision for a shorter working week in order to increase employment. No honorable senator could prove to me, to the captains of industry, or even to himself, that the adoption of a 40-hour week throughout Australia would bring about a. well-balanced economy, and not reduce the purchasing power of wages. There is only one honorable senator in this chamber who would be bold enough to support such a contention, and that, is Senator Darcey. It is generally realized that a reduction of the hours of work, coupled with maintenance of the present rates of wages, would inevitably result in an. increase of the costs of production. Is it suggested that the social experiments carried out by the Labour Government of New Zealand have been successful, or have increased the purchasing power of wages, seeing that the cost of living in that dominion has risen by 30 per cent, or 40 per cent.? Labour has not solved the housing problem- in New Zealand, and there are as many unemployed in that country, in proportion to the population, as there arc in any part of Australia.

Two of the biggest, industrial organizations in the Commonwealth are the Australian Workers Union and the Waterside Workers Federation. I have never heard one honorable senator contend that a shearer should not work more than 44 hours a week, or that his work should be done by day labour and not at piece-work rates. It is well known by honorable senators generally that a substantial number, if not one-half, of the men admitted to the Waterside Workers Federation cannot be provided with constant employment. When a vessel arrives in port and requires quick unloading, the stevedore picks up the men needed for the job, and, after they have worked for a certain number of hours, they receive time and a half, and sometimes double time. I have seen 100 men waiting to be picked up, and only 40 or 50 of them have been employed. After they have been working for, perhaps, ten hours, do they say to their comrades, “ Now it is your turn “? It is sheer cant and humbug for any honorable senator in say that no worker should be employed for more than 40 hours a week. Those who control the members of the Waterside Workers Federation have never had the courage to say to these employees, “ You shall work six hours a day, and then we shall call in the others who have not been picked up “.

Senator Lamp:

– What is the average wage of a waterside worker?

Senator HERBERT HAYS:

– He does not receive too much, but he works under an award, and the judge, in fixing the rates, makes allowance for the fact that the work is intermittent. The rates are fixed , to ensure, as far as possible, a reasonable standard of living for the year, although I admit that the average earnings of waterside workers are less than the basic wage. The argument that the shorter the hours of employment the more profitable an industry will become, and the greater will be the number of men employed, is utterly unsound. Individuals or companies conducting busi nesses require to make some profit. The worker cannot take out of a business more than it earns.

The success of certain companies that employ large numbers of men seems to be anathema to some honorable senators; but there is nothing to prevent them from going to the stock exchanges and buying shares in those companies. The shares are not held entirely by wealthy persons, although wealthy men may be found on the directorates. Thousands of small shareholders have invested their savings in these companies. Tens of thousands of pounds invested in such undertakings as those conducted by the Colonial Sugar Refining Company Limited and certain shipping companies represents trust money. The purchase of . shares in such companies is often regarded by trustees. as a safe investment to provide widows and orphans with the means of livelihood - often only a bare living. Why do not the Labour unions use the money subscribed by their members for the establishment of clothing factories, steel works, . or other industrial enterprises? Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited is regarded by most members of the Opposition as a great octopus that is sapping the life-blood of this country. Whilst I hold no brief for companies that take undue profits from the people, it must, be admitted that no country can ever become great unless it has iron and steel industries. Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited, which began in a. small way, has developed a basic industry of which the nation may well be proud. Is it a crime for this company, which has thousands of employees, to make profits? What do companies of this kind do with their money? Do they bury it in the ground, or do they use it to extend their business or to establish further industries? Can any honorable senator point to an instance in which the companies that are denounced by the Opposition have sent their money out of Australia? Of course not. I do not impute improper motives to honorable senators opposite, but their attitude and speeches remind me of the story of the boy who went to sea and kept a diary which showed that at a certain time daily he said his prayers. When members of the crew told him that they knew quite well that he did not say his prayers, the boy replied, “ ~8o; but it will read very well at home “.

Senator FOLL:
Minister 1’or the Interior · QUEENSLAND · NAT; UAP from 1931

.. - in reply - As Senator Leckie has pointed out, this budget is probably the most important and certainly the most extensive, that has yet been presented in any parliament in Australia.. I appreciate the assurance by honorable- senators opposite that they will support the Government in every possible way in the present crisis, but I am disappointed that they have not done more to honour that promise. They failed, for instance, to offer any constructive criticism of the Government’s proposals. On the contrary, we have been obliged during, the last two weeks to listen to the same old speeches which Opposition members have been delivering in the Senate for years. The Leader of the Opposition, (.Senator Collings) made a very good speech,, and so he should, because he has made it so often. Honorable senators generally are always glad to listen to him, hut I suggest that it is about time that he put on a new record’. “We have heard from honorable senators opposite all about the misdeeds of this Government and its predecessors. They have related their usual tales about sweating in industry in England in midVictorian days, and have told the same old stories about social reforms. But their speeches lacked constructive criticism which might have been of some aid to the Government. I recognize that the debate on the budget affords honorable senators an opportunity to speak on almost any subject. As time goes on, however, I trust that all of us will recognize the magnitude of the responsibilities which we shall be obliged to shoulder in the present crisis. In that task the Government will need the active assistance of every honorable senator, and every section of the community, irrespective of party political divisions, and it confidently anticipates that such assistance will be forthcoming. I deplore the fact that right at the outset of this crisis, certain members in this chamber and in the House of Representatives, in order to obtain a little party advantage, have caused two of the Government’s financial measures, whereby it sought fo obtain an additional £2,000,000 of revenue, to b<? rejected. ‘The Government is badly in need of that money as a contribution towards the effective prosecution of the war. Without wishing to anticipate a later debate, I say definnitely that the Government accepts full responsibility for its financial programme, and intends to go ahead with it in its own way. But no government can be expected, in a time of national crisis, to tolerate the upsetting of its financial programme, merely for party political gain.

The Leader of the Opposition referred to the resumption of land at Wagga for the purpose of establishing an air force station. He suggested that the Government had paid too big a price fer the land. The- resumptions branch of the Department of the- Interior effected this transaction. Since- I have been the ministerial1 head of that department, this is the first occasion on which any complaint has been made that a price paid by the Government was too large, but I can. recall many instances in- which members, both in the Senate and in the other chamber, have made representations to me on behalf of owners whose land ha; been resumed that the price paid1 by the Government was- not high enough. In this particular case, the Government paid £12,000 for land, compulsorily resumed from occupants who were farming it for a livelihood1. The Government picked the eyes out of the properties concerned in order to obtain a level stretch of country suitable for the establishment of an allweather aerodrome. A local resident stated that he was quite prepared to pay £20 an acre for any of the land taken by the Government. The valuations placed by the owners on the areas resumed were - Brunskill Estate, £23 an acre; Sackville Proprietary Limited, £25 an acre; and Mount Blake, £25 an acre. The prices agreed upon were respectively £14, £17 10s., and £15 an acre. The Leader of the Opposition sug_gested that this land should have been made available to the Government at what he termed a. peppercorn rental for the period for which it was required for air force purposes. I point out that it is the Government’s intention to establish a permanent air force station on this site, ft would have been unfair for this, or any other government to take this property in the way suggested by the honorable senator, particularly in view of the fact that the occupants were depending on the land for their living. A similar transaction was effected in respect of resumptions at Amberley, outside Ipswich, Queensland, for a site for an air force station. The majority of the occupants of that land were struggling farmers. It would have been most unfair in that case, as in the case mentioned by the honorable senator, had the Government simply taken that land at a peppercorn rental, and paid no regard whatever to the fact that, as it was driving the occupants off that land, it should allow something for goodwill.

Senator Collings:

– I agree with the Minister on that point.

Senator FOLL:
UAP

I regret the absence from the chamber of Senator Aylett, who seems to take a delight in referring to the supposed wrongs of Tasmania. The late Premier of Tasmania. Mr. Ogilvie, was a. close friend of mine, and I found him always most optimistic about the future of his State. Members of the State Ministry do not share the gloomy outlook of Senator Aylett ; they, too, are optimistic about the future of their State. Their optimism is justified. 1 have visited Tasmania on a number of occasions during recent years, and .1. believe that that State lias a great future. T imagine that Senator Aylett, who is new to this chamber, thinks that he is breaking new ground when lie makes his suggestions. I pay a tribute to you, Mr. President, aud other honorable senators from Tasmania, who, over a. number of years, have a fine record of accomplishment on behalf of the State that you represent. I remind the Senate of the success which attended the efforts of representatives of Tasmania to secure the connexion of that State with the mainland by telephone. The Lyons Government also removed the obnoxious provisions of the Navigation Act, which had operated so harshly against Tasmania. Moreover, this Parliament has made available to Tasmania considerable sums of money for road construction, and for a bounty on apples and pears, in addition to a financial grant to the State each year.

Senator KEANE:
VICTORIA · ALP

– Lt also assisted to establish the paper pulp industry in Tasmania.

Senator FOLL:

– I appreciate that interjection. That industry was established in Tasmania as a result of plans drawn up by the Lyons Government.

Senator E B Johnston:

– Tasmania has also benefited in the matter of airmail charges.

Senator FOLL:

– So much has been done for Tasmania that I have not time to mention nil of the details.

Senator Clothier referred to the supply of materials required by the Department of Supply and .Development. T discussed this matter recently with the Minister in charge of the department (Mr. Casey) and he assured me that, subject to the necessity to obtain supplies when required and to prices being reasonable, orders will as far as possible be placed with suppliers in the States in which the goods are required. The honorable senator will realize that the time of delivery and the price arc important factors, particularly in respect of defence requirements. i should also be remembered that some factories do not want government orders, as they are no; sufficiently profitable.

Senator Courtice referred to the cotton industry. T hope that the Tariff Board’s report, on this subject will be tabled before long.

As negotiations are still proceeding, it. is impossible for me to discuss5 at this stage the sale of Australian wool, to which Senator Ashley referred. 1 hardly think that the honorable senator meant that all neutral countries should be supplied with the wool that they require, although he said so. He will realize that the requirements of the Motherland must come first at a time like the present. 1 wish now to refer to what I thought was an unfair attack upon members on this side by Senator Sheehan, when he said that the Government had neglected all social legislation. I do not claim that the party to which I belong has been entirely responsible for all the social legislation that has been placed on the statutebook. On the contrary, I- give credit to honorable senators opposite who claim to have worked to improve the lot of the workers, but ask them, in turn, to give some credit to the Government and its supporters for the part that they have played in improving the social conditions of the people. I remind them that the original legislation, providing for the payment of invalid and old-age pensions was introduced by a government, whose political outlook generally was similar to that ot the present occupants of the treasury bench, and also that every increase of the pension was the result of action by a similar government. One of the finest pieces of legislation for the protection of workers is the Navigation Act, for which ;< government similar to the present administration was responsible. Amendments of that act, to make it compulsory for vessels to carry wireless plant for the greater safety of men at sea, were introduced by the Lyons Government. Moreover, the Public Service Superannuation Act, which I think may fairly be described as one of the finest pieces of social legislation ever introduced into this Parliament, originated with the same party, which also established arbitration courts and appointed judges in order that the lot of the workers might be improved and harmony exist in industry. The party to which I belong has nothing to apologize for in relation to its social activities. Whilst we give credit to honorable senators opposite for what they have done in this connexion, I’ claim that our record in the amelioration of the social conditions of the people compares more than favorably with theirs. Instead of seeking every opportunity to criticize the Government, honorable senators opposite should try to find some good in us. I am always glad of the opportunity to relate what the Government has done to improve the social conditions of the people of Australia. We on this side are truly representative of all sections of the people, and while we occupy the treasury bench, it will be our desire always to assist in improving the lot, of those who need our help. [ conclude by expressing my appreciation of the free and full discussion that has taken place, and I hope that when we meet again toward? the end of the year, we shall do so under happier circumstances than now exist. In the meantime. 1 assure honorable senators on all sides that thu Government looks forward to receiving their help and support in the difficult times that are ahead.

Question resolved in the affirmative. 1 1 OKE Of M EETING.

Motion (by Senator McLeay) agreed io -

That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn till 1(1 a.m. to-morrow.

A D J OUR N Al 15 N T .

Vote on Gold Tax Bill - Senate Business - -Post.m ‘aster-General’s Department: L. O’Neil - Government Borrowing.

Motion (by Senator McLeay) proposed

That the Senate do now adjourn.

Senator COLLINGS:
QueenslandLender of the Opposition

– I take this opportunity to say a word or two in reply to some of the remarks that have been made by honorable senators on the other side of the chamber in relation’ to what happened last night to the Gold Tax Bill. I do not want any misapprehension, nor will I allow, without protest, any misrepresentation of that occurrence. I definitely announced in this chamber, without any reservation, that the Opposition would not oppose the bill. I announced also that, hs we did not approve the measure, we would criticize it. Therefore, Ministers knew that, so far as wo were concerned, there would be no opposition to the bill. But opposition came from Government supporters. It was -obvious that the Government was unable to secure unanimity among its supporters with regard to the measure. That being the position, we refused to pull the Government out of its difficulty. If Ministers cannot carry their own taxation measures without our help, they are asking too much when they expect us to come to their aid.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– That is a helpful spirit!

Senator Dein:

– That is the Labour Opposition’s idea of co-operation in a time of crisis!

Senator COLLINGS:

– I wish as briefly as possible to nail down the misrepresentation that obviously will be made concerning Labour’s attitude to the bill. We are told that the Government needs money to carry on the war. We have never impeded the passage of a bill intended to finance the war, but we have at all times declared that that is the Government’s responsibility. To nsk us to be ready to assist the Government with its tax bills when its own supporters are not prepared to support them i.s to expect too much of the Opposition. We know now what is going to be done. As an Opposition we have thrived on the misrepresentation of our opponents. We have reached where we are now because . we were lied about, slandered and misrepresented on every possible occasion during the last half century; therefore misrepresentation in respct of our attitude to the Gold Tax Bill will be no new experience. I refer to the matter now in order to make sure that the facts will be recorded so that, in the days to come, when statements are made, as they will be made for electioneering purposes, we shall have an accurate record of all that has happened, and of our attitude.

I wish also to say a few words about this morning’s happenings in the Senate. We refused to give the Government power to suspend , the standing order which precludes the introduction of new business in the Senate after half-past ten o’clock at night. I was busily engaged at the moment and had no opportunity to ex plain why we objected to the motion, so we merely called “No “. We took that stand because we know that a rush is being made to get into recess. We believe that the Government is determined to adjourn Parliament to-morrow and we want the world to know - the Australian world, at any rate - that Labour senators are here to do the job which the people expect us to do. We are prepared to sit next week, the week after that, and, indeed, right until Christmas, helping to pass legislation, and criticizing measures which we believe should be criticized. We are willing to stay here until the job is done. To suggest that we have done nothing but block the Government in the conduct of business is to suggest something that is not in accordance with the facts. The Senate is about to adjourn now, at 11.30, and the intention is that, we shall meet again to-morrow morning at 10 o’clock. We are prepared to meet at 9 o’clock, if necessary, and to sit until 11 o’clock to-morrow night; or on Saturday. We know that to-morrow the Government will be forcing measures through this chamber, but if it is within our power to block them, we shall do so, because we do not believe in legislation by exhaustion, nor do we approve of passing legislation without proper scrutiny and criticism. Ministers now know what is ahead of them.

Senator LAMP:
Tasmania

.- On the 6th September, on the motion for the adjournment of the Senate, I mentioned the victimization of Leslie O’Neil, a Launceston employee of the Postmaster-General’s Department. Last night I made a further inquiry, and to-day I received from Senator McBride, representing the PostmasterGeneral, a reply which I regard as unsatisfactory. Mr. O’Neil, the postal official in question, some time ago made application for a certain amount of back pay; he received it, but because he had made the application, he was put off and refused further employment. The reply given to me last night was to the effect that the PostmasterGeneral had made some inquiries following the receipt of a letter from me, and he was unable to find any justification for the impression that Mr. O’Neil bad been victimized by the department. Mr. O’Neil is a. returned soldier. As 1 have already told the Senate, he was dismissed from his temporary employment whilst others, including non-returned soldiers, were kept on, and another man was engaged on the day . following O’Neil’s dismissal. I am prepared to make a statutory declaration that a man named Weldon saw O’Neil in my presence and requested, a signed declaration to the effect that he was not concerned in O’Neil’s request for back pay. If Weldon had not secured that declaration, he would have been dismissed also. I am satisfied that the Postal Department has not made any effort to inquire into this complaint of victimization, and I appeal to the Minister representing the Postmaster-General to take steps to have the matter cleared up.

Senator DARCEY:
Tasmania

. -On page 2 of the budget, there appears this statement -

Referring to the public debt, the Treasurer said that the outstanding operation for the year was the cash and conversion loan in December. This loan, which included £67,600,000 conversion and £4,000,000 for defence, was floated at £.3 17s. 6d. at par and constituted the biggest operation conducted by the loan Council on the Australian market since the NationalDebt Conversion of 1931. The holdings converted amounted to £53,000,000, public cash subscriptions, including £5,650,000 provided by the Commonwealth Bank, amounted to £16,000,000 and£2,600,000 was provided from the Sinking Fund.

That statement is entirely wrong and misleading. I have on other occasions proved that in connexion with the recent loan of £4,800,000, £3,750,000 was bank-created credit. How could there be a cash conversion loan of £53,000,000 when there is only £57,000,000 worth of cash in Australia? The statement is entirely misleading and I do not think that it should be allowed to pass unchallenged. It shouldbe expunged from thebudget papers.

Senator FOLL:
Minister for the Interior · Queensland · UAP

– My colleague, Senator McBride, who represents the Postmaster-General, is not at the moment in the chamber. I shall direct his attention to the matter mentioned ‘by Senator Lamp and I am sure that he will . bring it to the notice of the Postmaster-General.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 911

PAPERS

The following papers were pre sented : -

High Commissionerfor Australia in London - Report for 1938.

Salvage of Torpedoes - International Convention, signed at Paris, 12th June, 1934 - Additional Protocol, signed at Paris, 12th January, 1938.

Lands Acquisition Act - Land acquired at - Rottnest Island, Western Australia; - For Defence purposes.

South Arm. Tasmania - For Defence purposes.

Seat of Government (Administration) Act - Statement of Receipts and Expenditure of the Australian Capital Territory for the year ended 30th June, 1939.

Senate adjourned at 1 1 . 40.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 21 September 1939, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1939/19390921_senate_15_161/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate21 September 1939

GOLD TAX

Senator McLEAY:Minister for Commerce · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

HOSTEL AT CANBERRA

Report of Public Works Committee

TARIFF BOARD REPORTS

Cotton Growing Industry

Wire Netting

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN WHEAT BOARD

Senator CUNNINGHAM:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator McLEAY:UAP

QUESTION

NATIONAL INSURANCE

Senator AYLETT:TASMANIA

Senator McBRIDE:Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Commerce · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

QUESTION

CONTROL OF PRICES

Senator E B JOHNSTON:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator FOLL:Minister for the Interior · QUEENSLAND · UAP

Senator CAMERON:VICTORIA

Senator FOLL:

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH RAILWAYS INQUIRY

Senator CLOTHIER:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator FOLL:UAP

QUESTION

NEW GUINEA AIR SERVICE

Senator COOPER:QUEENSLAND

Senator McBRIDE:UAP

QUESTION

COTTON-GROWING SUBSIDY

Senator COOPER:

Senator FOLL:UAP

QUESTION

EXPORT OF HIDES

Senator COOPER:

Senator McLEAY:UAP

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH SUPERANNUATION ACT

Senator KEANE:VICTORIA

Senator McLEAY:UAP

QUESTION

INVALID AND OLD-AGE PENSIONS

Senator SHEEHAN:VICTORIA

Senator McLEAY:UAP

QUESTION

WHEAT INDUSTRY

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

Senator McLEAY:UAP

QUESTION

NEW BUSINESS AFTER 10.30 P.M

The PRESIDENT:

GOLD TAX COLLECTION BILL 1939

SUPPLY AND DEVELOPMENT BILL’ (No. 2) 1939

COMMONWEALTH PUBLIC SERVICE BILL 1939

Second Reading

Senator COLLINGS:QueenslandLeader of the Opposition

Senator SHEEHAN:Victoria

Senator Collett:

Senator SHEEHAN:

Senator Herbert Hays:

Senator SHEEHAN:

Senator Herbert Hays:

Senator SHEEHAN:

Senator Herbert Hays:

Senator SHEEHAN:

Senator HERBERT HAYS:TASMANIA · NAT; UAP from 1931; LP from 1944

Senator SHEEHAN:

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:Western Australia

Senator A J McLACHLAN:SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator Collett:

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:

Senator COLLETT:Minister in charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

Senator COLLETT:Minister in charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

Senator AYLETT:Tasmania

Senator Collett:

Senator CAMERON:Victoria

Senator Allan MACDONALD:

Senator CAMERON:

Senate
21 September 1939

Senator McLEAY:
Minister for Commerce · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

Senator CUNNINGHAM:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

Senator AYLETT:
TASMANIA

Senator McBRIDE:
Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Commerce · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

Senator E B JOHNSTON:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator FOLL:
Minister for the Interior · QUEENSLAND · UAP

Senator CAMERON:
VICTORIA

Senator CLOTHIER:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator FOLL:
UAP

Senator COOPER:
QUEENSLAND

Senator McBRIDE:
UAP

Senator FOLL:
UAP

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

Senator KEANE:
VICTORIA

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

Senator SHEEHAN:
VICTORIA

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

Senator COLLINGS:
QueenslandLeader of the Opposition

Senator SHEEHAN:
Victoria

Senator HERBERT HAYS:
TASMANIA · NAT; UAP from 1931; LP from 1944

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:
Western Australia

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

Senator AYLETT:
Tasmania

Senator CAMERON:
Victoria

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in charge of War Service Moines · Western Australia · UAP

Senator ASHLEY:
New South Wales

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator FRASER:
Western Australia

Senator DARCEY:
Tasmania

Senator COLLINGS:
QueenslandLeader of the Opposition

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator KEANE:
Victoria

Senator FRASER:
Western Australia

Senator BROWN:
Queensland

Senator BROWN:
Queensland

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator AMOUR:
NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator WILSON:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Senator SHEEHAN:
Victoria.

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in Charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in Charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator COLLINGS:
Leader of the Opposition. · Queensland

Senator COLLETT:
Minister in Charge of War Service Homes · Western Australia · UAP

Senator COLLINGS:
Leader of the Opposition · Queensland