House of Representatives
14 October 1908

3rd Parliament · 3rd Session



Mr. Speaker took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 1126

QUESTION

BEXLEY TELEPHONE BUREAU

Mr JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES

– A considerable time ago approval was given for the establishment of a telephone bureau at the Bexley Post-office, but I have to-day received a letter stating that the work has not been carried out, and asking me to make urgent representations to the Department on the subject. I therefore wish to know from the Postmaster-General what is the reason for the delay. Will he make inquiries, with a view to ascertaining whether funds are available, in order that the work may be expedited ?

Mr MAUGER:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA · PROT

– As I have already informed the House, authority has been given for the completion of all small works in New South Wales, and a list of the larger works will be laid on the table, for the information of honorable members, when the Estimates are being discussed.

page 1126

QUESTION

CADET ENCAMPMENTS

Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– Has the Minister of Defence yet come to a decision in reference to the cadet encampments in New South Wales, to which I referred yesterday? Are these encampments to be held, or has the holding of them been definitely postponed?

Mr EWING:
Minister for Defence · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · Protectionist

– Provision is made for. them on the Estimates. As I explained yesterday, I thought it unwise to permit commandants to proceed with the expenditure of money without the authority of the Minister, and in anticipation of the appropriation of Parliament. Ishall endeavour to provide for these encampments as speedily as possible. There are nine months of the year yet remaining in which to hold cadet camps.

Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– Were not the encampments to which I have referred a regular arrangement? Was it not proposed to hold them at the usual time of the year?

Mr EWING:

– Yes, but money must be voted by Parliament in each case.

page 1126

PAPER

Mr. DEAKIN laid upon the table the following paper: -

Kalgoorlie toPort Augusta (Transcontinental) Railway Survey - Progress report by Mr. H. Deane.

page 1126

QUESTION

PAPUA: MISS GRIMSHAW’S PAMPHLET

Mr BOWDEN:
NEPEAN, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I wish to know from the Prime Minister, what arrangements have been made with Miss Beatrice Grimshaw for the writing of a pamphlet on Papua ? Were opportunities given to others to offer to undertake the task? As this work is to be issued by the Government, will the statements contained in it be subjected to Governmental supervision ?

Mr DEAKIN:
Minister for External Affairs · BALLAARAT, VICTORIA · Protectionist

– Miss Grimshaw is a literary lady who has already published several interesting and popular works relating to the South Sea Islands. She has spent some time in Papua, and is now preparing a work on the territory, which she intends to publish. She has also undertaken to write one or more descriptive pamphlets for the Government. She has had a good deal of practice in this kind of writing, having published similar descriptive works, describing ports of call and countries visited, for one or two of the largest steam-ship companies in the Mother Country. Miss Grimshaw is returning to Papua to prepare, amongst other things, some pamphlets and articles setting out the attractions of the territory, of which she has made a considerable study. The outlay involved will hardly reach three figures.

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA

– I have no animus against Miss Grimshaw, and acknowledge that her books are splendidly written ; but as it was pointed out to me when I visited the New Hebrides that she had accepted some statements about the country without verifying them, I wish to know ifprecautions will be taken to have her statements about Papua verified by the Government authorities.

Mr DEAKIN:

– Anything written by Miss Grimshaw will be approved by the Papuan officials.

page 1126

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH OFFICES IN LONDON

Mr KELLY:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Is there any objection to laving on the table the papers connected with the amended offer of the Trafalgar Square site for the Commonwealth Offices in London ?

Mr DEAKIN:
Protectionist

– There are obvious objections, unless that site is accepted. If we do not purchase it, or make some arrangements regarding it, we have no right to disclose to others the terms on which it has been offered.

Mr Kelly:

– I wish to know, not the terms, but what led up to the offering of them.

Mr DEAKIN:

– I do not know what led to the offer. I am aware only that an offer was made.

page 1127

QUESTION

FEDERAL CAPITAL SITE

Mr HUTCHISON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Has the Prime Minister yet looked into the question whether Jervis Bay is within the 100-miles limit prescribed in the Constitution?

Mr DEAKIN:
Protectionist

– I understand that, although the sites in the Yass-Canberra district are more than 100 miles from Sydney, Jervis Bay is within 100 miles of that city, as the crow flies. I promised yesterday to make a statement regarding the procedure proposed to be taken in the determination of a site, and this may be a convenient time to do so. On consideration, it appeared to the Government that the Senate should be placed on the same footing as this House, and the Vice-President of the Executive Council will to-day invite it to hold an open exhaustive ballot in the same way. We recognise that the question is one for Parliament as a whole, and hope that time will be saved by dealing with it in this way. If the Houses are not in agreement on the subject, it will be well to know it as soon as possible ; if they are, the knowledge of the fact will be the best prelude to immediate action.

Mr JOHNSON:

– Referring to the question of the honorable member for Hindmarsh, I would ask if it is not a fact that the Constitution enacts only that the Seat of Government must not be within 100 miles of Sydney ; that it is not therefore declared that the Federal territory must be wholly without the 100-miles limit? Further, is it not within the power of the State to grant any extent of territory in any part of the State, irrespective of its distance from Sydney ?

Mr DEAKIN:

– As to the last part of the question, there can be no doubt whatever, that it is within the power of the State at present, to grant land anywhere ; but the exact terms as to the Seat of Government are that it shall be determined by the Parliament within territory - omit ting certain words as to the method of its acquirement - in the State of New South Wales, and be distant not less than 100 miles from Sydney. The further provision is that such territory shall contain a certain area ; that clearly refers to the site and its territory, and does not refer to any place that may be connected with the site.

page 1127

QUESTION

POST AND TELEGRAPH DEPARTMENT

Instrument Fitters

Mr BOWDEN:

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that the curriculum of an examination, which is to be held for junior instrument fitters to qualify for the position of instrument fitter, and thus receive an increase in salary of £4 per annum, consists of turning, screw cutting, plumbing, carpentering, and an advanced knowledge of theoretical and practical electricity ?
  2. Is this considered a fair means of testing the efficiency of these officers’ work ?
  3. Is there any machinery or plant in the Sydney Telephone Workshop whereby these officers can obtain a knowledge of the subjects set for the examination?
  4. Is it not a fact that these officers who, in some cases, for years have been known as junior fitters, are performing the same class of work as the fitters?
  5. Does the Minister know of any officer of the Department in Sydney who could pass the examination in every subject?
  6. Who is responsible for such an examination being set?
  7. Has this examination been made so severe for the purpose of preventing these officers being advanced to another grade?
  8. Is it a fact that three telephone fitters in Sydney, who applied for country positions which were advertised for in the Gazette at £138 per annum, were appointed to the positions at£132 per annum and told that they would have to accept?
  9. Who was responsible for the amount being reduced ?
  10. Will the Minister undertake to restore the positions to the salary that was advertised ?
  11. Is it a fact that the annual leave due to telephone fitters in New South Wales for the year 1906 has lapsed because it was not taken in the year following that in which it fell due?
  12. Were not these officers prevented from taking their leave owing to pressure of work and shortage of staff?
  13. Did not the Minister promise that the officers would not lose their leave as it was the action of the Department which caused the leave to be suspended ?
  14. Will the Minister keep his promise and restore the leave and also make provision for a relieving staff whereby the leave can be taken regularly ?
Mr MAUGER:
Postmaster-General · MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA · Protectionist

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

  1. The examination which is to be held for the advancement of junior instrument fitters to the position of instrument fitter includes lathe work, simple turning, metal screw making, soldering of various materials, and an elementary knowledge of electricity as applied to the work of an instrument fitter.
  2. The examination prescribed is considered a fair means of testing the efficiency of these officers’ work.
  3. Yes.
  4. The officers for whom this examination has been prescribed are not performing the same class of work as the fitters.
  5. The Department knows of many officers in Sydney who could pass the examination.
  6. The Public Service Commissioner. The curriculum of the examination was prepared by the Chief Electrical Engineer.
  7. No. The regulations prescribe that a junior instrument fitter, before promotion to the full rank of instrument fitter, must demonstrate his efficiency for the performance of higher class work. As instrument fitters advance by annual increments to £156 per annum, it is necessary that they should be competent to perform the better class of instrument fitting work before being permitted to advance from the junior to the higher grade. The examination prescribed is merely of the same standard as that which new entrants to the Service are required to pass.
    1. and 10. Prior to the recent amended General Division grade, three (3) instrument fitters were offered country positions at£138 per annum, but in the meantime the amended grading became law and fixed £132 per annum as the commencing salary. On the matter being referred to the Commissioner authority was issued for payment at the rate at which the positions were offered.
  8. Yes, that is the effect of Public Service Regulation No. 76.
  9. Yes.
  10. I promised to see what could be done in the matter, and steps are being taken to make special arrangements in the case of those who were prevented from taking their leave owing to the exigencies of the Department.
  11. See answer to No. 13.

page 1128

QUESTION

ADULTERATED CHAFF

Mr McDOUGALL:
WANNON, VICTORIA

asked the Minister of Trade and Customs, upon notice -

Whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the Victorian State Parliament is taking steps to prohibit the sale locally of mixed or adulterated chaff and other foods for stock; and, if so, will he state if it is his intention to prevent the export from Commonwealth ports of mixed or adulterated chaff and other stock foods?

Mr DEAKIN:
Protectionist

– The answer to the honorable member’s question is as follows : -

I have observed that action is being taken in the Victorian Parliament.

The question of taking steps to prevent the export of adulterated chaff and other stock foods will receive consideration.

page 1128

QUESTION

SILVER AND COPPER COINAGE

Dr MALONEY:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

  1. Whether, in view of the fact that silver is quoted in the Age of 12th October at 2313-16d. per ounce, would he inform the House what would be the profit on the minting of One million pounds (£1,000,000) worth of Australian silver at such price?
  2. In view of the fact that copper, spot, is quoted in same issue at£5911s. 3d. per ton, what would be the profit on the minting of One thousand pounds (£1,000) worth of Australian copper at such price?
Sir WILLIAM LYNE:
Treasurer · HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · Protectionist

– The replies to the honorable member’s questions are as follow : -

  1. The profit after providing for rehabilitation of the coins would be about£440,000. With silver at as. 7d. per oz., as it was in July, 1907, the profit would only be about£310,000. In consequence of the fluctuating price of silver it is not considered advisable to anticipate a greater net profit than 35 per cent, on the face value of the coin issued.
  2. The net profit would be about £500.

page 1128

QUESTION

IMMIGRATION

Control of Land and Railways

Mr McDOUGALL:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice-

  1. Whether he has recently communicated with the heads of the various State Governments in order to ascertain what such Governments are doing in the matter of providing land for prospective immigrants?
  2. Does he think that the State Premiers have any serious intention of assisting; to develop the Commonwealth’s immigration policy by providing land for attracted settlers?
  3. Have the State Governments submitted any scheme, up to the present, showing how they propose to assist the Commonwealth Government to fill up the empty places of Australia?
  4. Is he aware that even now thousands of Australians are seeking for land in several of the States, and cannot be supplied. Has he noticed that in certain States there have been as many as forty and fifty applicants for a single block of land?.
  5. Is the Commonwealth Government still publishing alluring advertisements in British newspapers in order to attract settlers? If such settlers should come to Australia, has the Commonwealth Government land to offer them ?
  6. In view of the fact that the Governments of the various States are unable to find suitable land for their own people,and seem indisposed to assist in developing the immigration policy of the Commonwealth Government, will he consider the question of amending the Constitution so as to give the Commonwealth Parliament control of the land and railways of Australia?
Mr DEAKIN:
Protectionist

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

  1. Yes.
  2. Some of them have expressed that intention.
  3. The State Governments have policies differ ing in accordance with their circumstances; three of them have replied ; several of them are now proceeding with immigration schemes.
  4. It is well known that in certain States the local demand for Crown land is greater than is being met. Many more applicants desire selections than are able to obtain them in these States.
  5. The Commonwealth Government is continuing to advertise Australia, though on a comparatively small scale, pending an agreement with the States. Its object is and will be to attract many more settlers. The Commonwealth Government has no land of its own to offer except in Papua, but probably will havea very large area hereafter in the Northern Territory, for the making of suitable homesteads upon fertile soil.
  6. It is not admitted that the Governments of the States are unable to find suitable land, or that they will all decline to assist in developing the immigration policy of this Government. The amendment of the Constitution about to be proposed in connexion with the New Protection is in itself sufficient to employ the best consideration of the electors. The far-reaching alterations suggested by the honorable member do not come within the range of practical politics.

page 1129

DEFENCE BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 13th October (vide page 1083), on motion by Mr. Ewing -

That this Bill be now read a second time.

Upon which Mr. W. H. Irvine had moved, by way of amendment -

That all words after the word “That” be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words - “ in the opinion of this House, the defence of Australia depending primarily upon control of the sea, it would be unwise to commit the country to any scheme of compulsory universal military service until Parliament is in a position to determine the naval policy of the Commonwealth.”

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Swan

– I approach this important and difficult question with a certain amount of anxiety, because I am free to confess that the subject is not one that can be easily mastered, nor one on which it is easy to get unanimity. I have given the matter much consideration; and I may say at once that I regret that I am not able to give my support to the scheme of compulsory service proposed by the Government. I should have very much preferred to assist the Prime Minister in the ideal he has placed before us of universal service, based on patriotic sentiment - apart from any other consideration. That ideal, however, is not, in my opinion, founded on practical experience, and I am afraid that what the Prime Minister expects will not be realized, not be cause the people of Australia are not as patriotic as other British people, but because we know that similar proposals have not been adopted by the Mother Country, where the necessity is certainly far greater than here, and because we feel that such a scheme is not necessary at this stage of our existence. I do not believe that the public mind in Australia is convinced that universal compulsory service is essential to our safety. I am convinced that the programme sketched out by the Prime Minister has not been sufficiently well considered, that the attendant expense has been altogether underestimated, and that when the facts and figures placed before us come to be analyzed, they will prove not to be based on solid ground. There is a good reason for believing that the present system of military defence that has grown out of our experience is a good one, based on a sound foundation, and that if it has failed to realize all our expectations, it is because it has not been well administered, and has not had a fair chance. On that point I myself have no doubt; and I shall try to prove it before I sit down. Only for a very short time has the defence system had a proper military controlling authority. We began with a General Officer Commanding, but his time had, to a very large: extent, tobe devoted to organizing - to merging the six separate systems of the States into one complete system. I may say that one thing, at any rate, has been done, namely, the Defence Forces have been unified for years past, so that every man, whether he be private or officer, and on whichever side of Australia he may happen to be, knows his position, and is treated in the same way as others of like rank. No sooner had we passed the Defence Act of 1903, and brought our organization to a pitch at which its efficiency could be demonstrated, than the whole scheme was, to a large extent, upset. We abolished the office of General Officer Commanding - that was the initial blunder - and intrusted our military forces to a Board, of which, so far as I know, very little has since been heard. I do not suggest that the members of that Board are not capable men. No doubt they are as efficient as are other officers of the forces, but although they may be. faithfully discharging their duties, they are seldom heard of, and have no personality. Since the departure of MajorGeneral Sir Edward Hutton our forces have been practically without a general commanding officer.

Mr Ewing:

– That alteration was made when the present Opposition were on the Treasury benches.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I am in accord with the amendment moved by the honorable member for Flinders, believing that the naval policy of the Commonwealth is as important - aye, more important - than is the military side of our defence system. Why should we deal with an expensive military scheme, which, in my opinion, has not been well thought out, before we know what is likely to be the complete naval policy of Australia? To do so is to put the cart before the horse. This Bill has for its main object compulsory service, and the Government anticipate that it will result in a very large body of trained troops being raised at a cost that will not be very much greater than is that of maintaining the 21,000 men of the military forces at the present time. A cardinal feature of the new scheme is that the young men of Australia are expected to be sufficiently single-minded and patriotic - although it seems to me that any patriotism that a man may possess is likely to be knocked out of him when he is told that he is compelled, nolens volens, to serve for the long period of eight years - to come forward and prepare themselves for the defence of their country, without pay, not of their own free-will, but by compulsion. That is the high ideal which the Prime Minister has set before the youth of Australia. To my mind, however, the Prime Minister has no rightto expect such a sacrifice, and I believe this Bill will not only be unsuccessful, but will, to a considerable extent, for a time injure the present system.

Dr Carty Salmon:

– Is the right honorable member satisfied with the present system ?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I am quite satisfied with it provided that it is well administered. I have read the speech made by the Minister of Defence, in moving the second reading of this Bill, but it is so indefinite that I have not been able to gather much from it. I have the greatest friendship for the Minister, and, because of my personal regard for him, have some diffidence in criticising his attitude on this question, even from a political point of view. I think, however, thatI may fairly claim that in order to bolster up his case he went out of his way to dis parage the work of the 21,000 men of the existing militia and volunteer forces. Those who have taken an interest in the military system of this country must have listened to the honorable member with a great deal of pain, for, instead of devoting his attention to the new scheme, he laboured hard to prove that the present system was almost useless.

Mr Ewing:

– Will the right honorablemember show me where my facts were wrong ?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I intend to do so. From the initiation of the volunteer system, in the early sixties, up to the present time, there has been displayed by the men of Australia a measure of self-denial and enthusiasm in connexion with the military movement that deserves the highest commendation.

Colonel Foxton. - The Minister said that.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– But he made other statements as to the present system that were wholly unwarranted. The militia and volunteers’ deserve our best thanks. For over forty years the volunteers have done a great deal of work without fee or reward, ultimately the militia were created, and now form the bulk of our citizen soldiery, receiving what isbarely out-of pocket expenses.

Mr Ewing:

– That sounds like an extract from myspeech.

Sir JOHN FORREST:
SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · PROT; WAP from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– As clearly pointed out by the honorable member for Brisbane, the volunteer movement, as time went on, lost much of its attractiveness, and, in the larger towns of the Commonwealth, was, to a considerable extent, superseded by the militia. It is generally stated that the twosystems do not work very well together. There is a general consensus of opinion throughout the military forces of Australia that our citizen soldiery should be partially paid. When the Defence Bill of 1903 was being framed by me, I went very thoroughly into this matter, and found that there was a general feeling among the forces all over Australia that those who took upon them selves the burden of defending their country should receive some small honorarium. They said, “ We are willing to give our services and to do our duty in that respect, but we do not think it is reasonable to ask us to be out of pocket by it. We cannot afford that, and it is not right to expect it from us.” They were nearly all in favour of some small remuneration being paid to the militia citizen forces. The Minister of Defence said a good deal about the 5,000 volunteers who were, I think, at camp, and half of whom had less than a year’s service. If that were so, it is no reason why anything should be said in disparagement of that branch of the forces. A year’s service is something. It is far better than nothing, and if all the people in Australia who are fit for training were given a year’s service we should be in a farbetter position to defend Australia than without them. Seeing that those volunteers did not get anything for their loss of time, instead of saying that half of them had less than a year’s service, we should be glad that matters are as good as they are. There was no reason why the Minister should go out of his way to disparage them.

Mr Ewing:

– I simply stated the fact.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– But the honorable member made capital out of it, as proving how inefficient the system was. Does the honorable member think that when his National Guard is established none of those enlisted or registered will be absent from parade or camps? Does he believe that, having changed the name, he will make the men more attentive to their duties by means of compulsion or attempted compulsion? After all, the present proposal is nothing more than an attempt at compulsion. The penalties will not compel compliance. It will fail far worse than if no penalties at all were provided, because the penalties suggested will be found to be ineffective. If the Minister thinks that he did not say anything against the present forces, why did he go out of his way to poke fun at them - to ridicule their uniforms and general appearance? He need not go as far as those officers who have served their country in the Defence Force to find persons arrayed on special occasions with a gooddeal of gold lace.

Mr Hall:

– The right honorable member himself, for instance.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I am not talking about myself.

Mr Reid:

– I understand that the officers wear these uniforms according to the regulations. It is rather hard to attack them for obeying the King’s regulations.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– The Minister’s observations were absolutely unnecessary, and ought never to have been made.

Mr Ewing:

– Perhaps the phrasing was unfortunate, but the question of clothes is one of the greatest scandals in connexion with our forces, in a country like this.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– The question of clothing is a matter of opinion, which we need not discuss now. I am dealing at present with the organization of the forces. The Minister made another serious reflection on the forces, of which I must take notice. He could not have said anything worse about them, or, in fact, about the whole of the people of Australia, than that the strength of the militia increased when a camp with certain payments and a free trip to Sydney or Melbourne was near at hand. It does not reflect much credit upon the Australian people if those considerations influence them.

Mr Wise:

– Is the statement true?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I sincerely hope it is not. The Minister said that after an encampment the numbers decreased, and to prove his case mentioned that in August last the forces were short by 260 officers and 2,000 men. The inference is that they resigned immediately after the camp.

Mr Ewing:

– I gave the dates. The statement was made to me officially.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Do the dates appear in his recent speech, as published in Hansard? The inference which he conveyed was that the men enlisted when there was a camp about to be formed, certain payments to be received, and a trip to Melbourne or Sydney to be obtained for nothing, and that as soon as it was over the numbers immediately decreased. If, after the encampment, 260 officers and 2,000 men left at once, there is some ground for the Minister’s statement, although it is a serious reflection upon the people of Australia if they are men who enlist for a short while to gain some little advantage, and, having gained it and taken the money out of the public purse, go away, showing that they joined the forces for a dishonest purpose.

Mr Ewing:

– The facts had to be stated. I could do no less than lay them before Parliament.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I should like to see the evidence that immediately after the last encampment those officers and men went away.It is due to the House that the Minister should give the date they enlisted, the date of the camp, and the date when they left.

Mr Deakin:

– The same thing was shown to have occurred in England in the territorial army.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I want ro know what has happened here. I doubt the accuracy of the information supplied to the Minister.

Mr Ewing:

– I refer the right honorable member to Hansard, page 442.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I know sufficient about the defence question to be aware that the numbers of the militia arc regulated by the amount of money on the Estimates, and that if an effort is made, and men are advertised for, they are easily obtained. If no advertisement is published, and no effort is made to obtain recruits, it is likely that very few men willoffer, as it will be thought that there are no vacancies. I believe that if an effort were made, it would be easy to get, not only 15,000 or 16,000 militiamen, but double and treble that number if there were vacancies and money sufficient to pay them. The established strength - that is, the strength for which pay was provided on the Estimates - of the militia and volunteers lastyears was 23,559. The actual strength was 20,992. Notwithstanding the* Minister’s statement that the present forces tlo not attend camp sufficiently, I shall show that out of that actual strength 18,858, or equal to 90 per cent, attended camp last year. A total of 16,997, or 81 per cent, of the actual strength, attended the ordinary camp, and thd New South Wales Light Horse, to the number of 1,861, attended, not that camp, but another, making 18,858 out of 20,992.

Mr Batchelor:

– Did they continue in attendance right through the camp?

Mr Deakin:

– No.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I do not know how long they stayed, but I expect that they attended for the most part the full period. It is not likely that mein would go to camp and leave again directly. The figures which I have given, and for which I can vouch, disprove the Minister’s statement that the militia and volunteers have no desire to go into camp.

Mr Ewing:

– My statement was that 80, 90, and even too per cent, are willing Co attend camp.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Those who mw the Light Horse parade in Sydney, when the American Fleet was there, will agree that there is not a finer body of men anywhere. It would be a credit to any country. The questions I have to ask myself in reference to the measure are, first, do I think compulsory training necessary? To that I reply emphatically, No.

Secondly, will the scheme, if the Bill passes, succeed? To that I again reply, No. If service in the militia at 8s. a day for 16 days in the year is not sufficient attraction to induce men to join, will the National Guard be more attractive with 18 days of compulsory drill without pay? I deny that the militia is not attractive, and say that it would be easy to increase its numbers. The Government evidently regard our present Forces as inefficient, because they propose to sweep away both the militia and the volunteers, substituting for them one force, to be called the National Guard, ;ind to be composed of men compulsorily trained and without any pay. Sir Edward Hutton, who was in command of the Forces in New South Wales, and, later, after serving in Canada and in the South African war, acted as General Officer Commanding the Forces of the Commonwealth, said in the last speech he made in Australia, at the Town Hall, Melbourne, on 9th November, 1904 -

You h.ive a military system which has hardly been sufficiently long in existence for the public to realize its importance, but which we who are soldiers realize as the best and only practical solution of a national citizen system of defence.

Mr Ewing:

– Major-General Sir Edward Hutton says that we are now going on right lines. He approves of this procedure.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– If the Minister has a statement by Sir Edward Hutton of a later date than that I am quoting, and expressing a different view, he should make it public. Sir Edward Hutton continued -

Those who have studied this question believe that the system which the Commonwealth has now adopted is practically that which will be found the most satisfactory solution of the Defence question in the Old Country. The complete equipment has been promised in the near future, and as soon as it is received and the organization completed in its smaller details the force will be one of which you may well be proud.

No one will deny that Sir Edward Hutton is a brave and experienced military officer who has heard the cannon boom, and of much experience both in peace and war. I have not heard that he has changed his opinions.

Mr Ewing:

– We have his approval.

Mr Roberts:

– Of the Bill ?

Mr Deakin:

– Of the scheme.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– When I was in England, a short time ago, he did not approve of compulsory training. During the South African war, 18,000 men were sent from Australia to assist the Mother Country there. For the most part they were untrained, having been neither militiamen nor volunteers. Nevertheless, they acquitted themselves well, and we received great kudos for their achievements. I should be sorry for it to be thought that I regard training as unnecessary. The more a soldier is disciplined and trained, the better should he perform his duties, but it must not be forgotten that men who had only a ‘short period of training before embarkation and on board ship, did their work well in South Africa. In confirmation of this statement I refer again to a speech of Sir Edward Hutton’s, who said that -

I-Ic hari hardly expected to have had the honour of leading such a force as it fell to his lot to lead in South Africa - consisting of Australians, New Zealanders, Canadians, and Imperial Mounted Infantry - as fine a fighting force as has ever fallen to the lot of any General to command,

He also said, as one of the lessons taught by the South African war -

That compulsory service is quite unnecessary for the British race and that compulsion was unnecessary to obtain fighting material.

He also remarked that the South African war had proved -

That .the Australians had valuable characteristics as soldiers - which could not be manufactured by any course of drill - and that they had strong individual it)’ which was most valuable.

He, of course, does not minimize the importance of drill, discipline, and organization, nor do I wish to be thought to do so. If virtually untrained Australians could fight well in South Africa voluntarily, would they not fight equallywell if called upon to defend their hearths and homes? Of course, the South African contingents received a small amount of pay, and any one who serves his country in time of peace, at any rate, may fairly ask that he shall not ]ye out of pocket by doing so. I should like to repeat a statement made by the honorable member for Brisbane last night. When the strength of our forces is given as 20,000, or a little more, it must not 1:ie thought that we have only 20,000 trained men in Australia, since from the early sixties men have been passing through the ranks, and a large number of these trained men are available in time of emergency, and, in a few days, would be quite as good as those who are now gaining experience. We have far more than 20,000 trained and disciplined soldiers - probably 200,000 is nearer the mark. So far as this scheme is concerned, Ave are only now at the talking stage. The Minister does not .hold out hopes of anything being done for two or three years, even if the Bill is passed at once. For a long time to come no practical effect is expected to result from the Government proposals j while they may do a great deal of harm. The Minister’s speech was most indefinite, and yesterday he could not even say positively whether the annual cost of a National Guardsman, which he said would be £5, included any pay or not. When I asked the Minister what the cost would be, he said it would be ^5 ; and then I asked him whether that amount included any pay. At first the Minister answered in the negative, but corrected himself by saying that he would require to make an explanation before he could answer.

Mr Ewing:

– I said that I did not want to reiterate.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I have the Hansard report here, from which it appears that the Minister said-

A moment or two ago the right honorable member asked me across the Chamber whether pay was included in the amount which I quoted.

Sir John Forrest:

– In the .£5 I meant.

Mr EWING:
Protectionist

– An answer to that question would necessitate my making a much fuller explanation. It would also require my statement to be qualified.

Mr Ewing:

– So it would.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– The Minister has not yet told me whether the £5 includes any pay.

Mr Ewing:

– It includes some pay to the militia.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– But I mean the National Guardsman - the new man ?

Mr Ewing:

– There will be pay to those men of the National Guard who perform special services or serve longer than the period laid down. On page 450 of Hansard will be found a definite statement of what is proposed by the Government.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Surely the Minister is able to answer a simple question ; and the fact that lie does not do so forces one to the conclusion that the honorable gentleman does not know.

Mr Ewing:

– There is no pay except for special services, or when the men serve a longer time, or have responsibilities other than those included in the days of training.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I asked a question as to what was the cost of a militiaman now, as compared with the estimatedcost of a National Guardsman, and the reply I got was that it costs £20 for a militiaman. I should like much more definite information before I can accept that as a fact. A militiaman, a private, receives pay at the present time of £6 8s. per annum ; and does the Minister mean to say that£13 12 s. is spent on administration and the instruction of that man? It must be remembered that this amount does not include arms, accoutrement, stores, guns, ammunition, works, and buildings, or repairs; and yet we are told that, although the present cost is£20, all similar requirements for a National Guardsman are to be met for £5 under the new scheme.

Mr Reid:

– If labour is got for nothing, work can be done very cheaply !

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– The Government have been in power a long time, and it is presumed that they regard the present expenditure as economical ; and, that being so, I cannot see how the work is to be done at a cost reduced from£13 12s. per head to £5 per head.

Mr Ewing:

– That cost excludes items common to the whole service.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– But such items are excluded in the case of a militiaman, as well as in the case of the National Guardsman.

Dr Carty Salmon:

-A big body of men can be handled relatively cheaper than can a small body.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– But at present, owing to the cost of transport and other reasons, it is impossible to get a. big body of men together; and I cannot see that the cost will be much less under the new system than under the old.

Dr Carty Salmon:

– It will be less.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– It may be a little less ; but will it be as £5 compared with£13 12s. ? I shall probably take an opportunity to ask the Minister how the £20 is made up, and how the£5 is made up; but I am afraid that I shall be simply referred to a page of Hansard. There is so much indefiniteness over the whole scheme that, really; if the plan were a good one I should feel inclined to vote against it. So far as I can see, even the sweating pay of1s. 3d. a day, proposed by the honorable member for West Sydney, is not included in the£5. It has been pointed out to me that in the explanatory memorandum, it is stated that men up to the age of twenty-one will not be paid. But men have to be trained up to the age of twenty -six; and in the later years also I presume they will not be paid.

Dr Carty Salmon:

– Men will not be paid for the first three years.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– But there are five more years. Am I to understand that the men are not to be paid during that period ?

Dr Carty Salmon:

– Men ought not to be paid for training to defend their country.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– What is to become of our 17,000 trained militiamen are they to be disbanded? When I asked the Minister what is to become of the militia light horse, the field artillery and foot, he referred me to a page of Hansard, but even there I could obtain no definite information.

Mr Roberts:

– According to the Prime Minister, every member of the militia force is to be an officer of the National Guard.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– How is that to be done?

Mr Roberts:

– I do not know.

Mr Ewing:

– If the men are fit, we could not refuse them.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– There is no information in regard to the approximate time the existing forces will remain in existence or what is to become of them when they are disbanded. These men are well trained, and many of them, doubtless, served in the South African War; and are they to be got rid of and National Guardsmen put in their places? There are 18 regiments of Light Horse - 6,000 splendid men, fit for active service. Are they to be disbanded? No one can tell us.

Mr Roberts:

– According to the Prime Minister, the whole of the effective strength of the militia will be absorbed, being required to supply officers and noncommission officers to train the new force.

Mr Ewing:

– Only such as are fit, surely ?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Every militiaman is not a drill instructor. One would suppose, in view of a scheme to turn every young man into a soldier under compulsion, that there was some great national danger or emergency. We must not forget that our danger lies in an enemy who must come across the sea ; but we hear very little of that from the advocates of the new system.

Mr Batchelor:

– That is to come later.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– It ought to come first. The only enemy we have to fear is the enemy which will come across the seas to demolish our cities and destroy our trade. Our land forces could not prevent a descent on our 10,000 miles of coastline. With the exception of Melbourne, Sydney, and a few other places, our coasts are absolutely undefended, and there is nothing to prevent an enemy landing at Port Darwin, Port Essington, the Gulf of Carpentaria, or on the north-eastern or north-western coasts of Australia.

Mr Johnson:

– Except the prospect of starvation after they land.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Those regions are not so infertile as the honorable member’s statement implies, and ships that can bring soldiers can also bring the means of subsistence. However, my point is that our coastline is open to descent, if the invading force is strong enough ; and, with our present means, we could not even go to try to turn the enemy out. We could resist invasion in Victoria and New South Wales, or other settled parts, where we have railways, but not elsewhere. We are not, however, so insecure as might appear from what I have said, because we have behind us the fleets of the Mother Country, which are not only able, but willing and determined to defend us. That is the reason we have had peace and security in Australia all these years, and if any enemy has turned attention to Australia, we have not been made aware of the fact. Disaster would have to befall the British Fleet before we could suffer ; and that being so, and acknowledged by all, one would suppose that practical English-speaking people, knowing that danger must come from across the sea, would set to work to find some means by which we could not only defend ourselves, but assist the Mother Country in defending this continent from aggression. It would be thought that a practical people would direct a great deal of their attention to our vulnerable points; and, in this connexion, I, to-day, by chance came across an extract from a speech made some twenty years ago by the late Sir Graham Berry when in England. The feelings then entertained by our public men in regard to our ability and willingness to assist the Mother Country do not seem to have been so selfish as are those which appear to animate some honorable members of this House. It would seem that we are anxious that all our contributions to the Navy of the Empire shall be expended within our own borders so that we ourselves may secure the benefit of every penny of that expenditure. We were not always unwilling to assist the Motherland by helping to maintain an Empire navy, and the warning which Tennyson gave the people twenty years ago is just as necessary now as it was then -

You, you, if you should fail to understand

What England is and what her all-in-all,

On you will come the curse of all the land

Should this old England fall

Which Nelson left so great.

Tennyson was inspired to write those lines after reading a speech delivered by the late Sir Graham Berry. And what was it that he had said -

But the keystone of the whole was the necessity for an overwhelming powerful fleet and efficient defence for all coaling stations. This was as essential for the Colonies as for Great Britain. It was the one condition for the continuance of the Empire. It was to strengthen the fleet that the colonists would first readily tax themselves, because they realized how. essential a powerful fleet was to the safety not only of that extensive commerce sailing in every sea, but ultimately to the security of the distant portions of the Empire: Who could estimate the loss involved in even a brief period of disaster to the Imperial Navy? Any amount of money timely expended in preparation would be quite insignificant when compared with the possible calamity he had referred to.

We may well ask who could estimate the loss. One great result of disaster to our Navy would, I fear, be the dismemberment of the Empire of which we are all so proud, and which has been built up so largely even in our own day. Disaster to the British Navy would mean disaster to Australia and the rest of the Empire. As the late Sir Graham Berry well said : “The command of the sea is the one condition for the continuance of the Empire.” The Government programme with respect to naval defence has been approved by the Admiralty, but it does not reach far enough to be of material use in averting national disaster in time of war. The proposed torpedo boats and destroyers may be both necessary and desirable for the defence of a few of our cities, but they will not prevent a descent on our coasts, or the destruction of our trade across the ocean. A national disaster following the defeat of the British Navy thousands of miles away from us. will not be averted by such a flotilla. Those who are content to rely upon small flotillas of torpedo boats and destroyers in the several harbors of Australia for the real defence of the Commonwealth are much like the ostrich hiding its head and leaving its body exposed to its pursuers. The small fleet which it is proposed to create will serve a useful purpose in the defence of our harbors and coastal cities, but they will not be able to co-operate with the British Navy on the ocean with a view to preventing an enemy destroying our trade and commerce across the sea. We need to fight an enemy, not on our own coast-line, but as far away as possible, so that our people may avoid much of the losses and disasters of war; and in order that we may do that, we must assist the Mother Country in her great work of protecting, not only her own shores, but the shores of every portion of the Empire.

Mr Batchelor:

– What does that mean - an increased subsidy?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– It certainly does not mean the abolition of the present subsidy under the Naval Agreement of £200,000 per annum.

Mr Batchelor:

– Is the present subsidy sufficient ?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I do not think that it is. The Governmentproposal means the discontinuance of the present subsidy of £200,000 per annum and its absorption in a system of local naval defence. I strongly object to. such a proposition, and should like the present subsidy to be increased. There is a very important matter affecting our military organization to which I should like to allude, and that is in regard to the cadet movement. This Bill does not provide for the compulsory training of cadets. The Government practically say that the increase in the number of our cadets is already too rapid, and that the application of the volunteer system to the cadet movement is working well. We have no control over the State schools of Australia, but negotiations are proceeding between the Governments of the States and the Commonwealth, whose interests in this matter are identical, with a view to arranging for the training of all school boys. I see no reason why we should not apply the system of compulsory training to school children. We have a compulsory system of education, and there is no reason why it should not go hand in hand with compulsory training. Boys are compelled to attend school, and would not suffer any hardship by being compelled to drill. I am certain that their parents would not object, and that the training would be beneficial to them. Such a system could be carried out at very little cost. Our school boys should be trained in military evolutions, and, before they leave school, in the use of the rifle. In that way a useful work would be carried out without much trouble or expense. In many cases the head masters would be prepared to give such instruction without any reward, but, at the most, all that they would require would be a small honorarium. Masters could be compelled to qualify as drill instructors. The Minister said that compulsory training was not likely to be applied to the cadet movement because the cadets were already increasing to the extent of about 10,000 per annum. We were told that there were 270,000 boys of cadet age in Australia, and 40,000 enrolled as cadets, the cost of the present system being about £60,000 a year.

Mr HANS IRVINE:
GRAMPIANS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910

– Or 30s. per head.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Quite so; but that is exclusive of the cost of rifles. It will thus be seen that, under the present system, it would cost about £400,000 per annum to train the 270,000 boys of cadet age now in Australia. That, in my opinion, would be an unjustifiable expenditure, since we could train the boys for next to nothing in connexion with the educational system. There is no reason why military training should not be part of the curriculum of all schools, whether public or private. Military inspectors could be appointed, just as we have inspectors under the present State school system, and there would be very little difficulty in formulating a scheme by which in this way an immense number of boys would commence their military training. They would probably acquire a great liking for the work, and, on leaving school, join the senior cadet corps, and ultimately the militia. They could be taught how to carry themselves - how to walk well - how to use arms, and, most important of all, to appreciate discipline. If the present defence system were abolished - and I do not think that is likely - they would be ready, soon after leaving school, to enter the National Guard. In 1906, there were 7,000 cadets in the Commonwealth, and 28,000 were provided for in the Estimates for 1906-7. In the Estimates for 1907-8, provision was made for no less than 37,000, so that honorable members will recognise that we are not likely to experience any difficulty in regard to the cadet movement. The number of our cadets may be largely increased at small cost if a system such as I have advocated be adopted. Another source of defence which I think has not had sufficient sympathy and assistance is to be found in the rifle clubs. With reasonable encouragement, we should have no difficulty in securing 100,000 riflemen. In Western Australia, at the present time, we find it almost impossible to secure rifle ranges. In 1906, we had 37,000 riflemen ; and, in 1907-8, 45,000; an increase of 8,000 taking place in seven months. The cost of maintaining these clubs is ^50,000 a year, but I dare say that a large proportion of that expenditure relates to the cost of ranges. The riflemen themselves receive nothing. When I was in office, I arranged that they should receive 5s. per head; that money was not intended to go into their own pockets, but to provide for the general administration. In last year’s Estimates, provision was made for 17,753 militia, an increase of 2,350 on the previous year. Those figures do not suggest a falling off. In all these matters - it is true of the Naval Agreement, and also of military defence - so soon as a new scheme is promulgated interest in the old one, if it does not die out altogether, at least wanes for the time being, and almost as much harm is done as if the existing system were swept away at once. People take no interest in a dying cause. They look forward to what is coming. The Prime Minister has therefore - I am sorry to say it, but he knows my views, and will not be surprised - done a great deal of harm in trying to undo the Naval Agreement. He has made people take less interest in it, and, even if it is continued, as I am sure it will be, to the end of the ten years’ period, it has been considerably injured by having the sword of Damocles suspended over its head. It will not be half as effective as it would have been if it had had a free and enthusiastic course, as we hoped it would have when we introduced it.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– It will not be hurt finally.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– It has been greatly retarded and injured in the meantime. I think I have made it clear that I am in accord with harbor defence in the way proposed, but hand in hand with that we must help the Navy of the Empire as much as we can. Let us provide men an officers also. Let us be a junior partner, increasing our share as our position and importance require. The main differences between the existing system and that which it is now sought to introduce are that one is voluntary and the other is compulsory; one is partially paid, and the force proposed is not to be paid. We all know that in the Act of 1903 provision is made by section 60, that in time of war or imminence of war the whole male population between the ages of eighteen and sixty may be called out. I am told that that has always been the law. I believe that our fathers brought it with them to this country, but, be that as it may, it was re-enacted in South Australia and Queensland, and finally in 1903 applied to the whole Commonwealth. It is the law of the land now in time of emergency, but in time of peace there is no compulsion, and we have been accustomed to a voluntary system as in the Old Country. There is a great difference in feeling at a time of danger and a time of peace. In a time of national danger there is a feeling of patriotism, which inspires men to sink love of self and devote themselves to the common interests, but in time of peace other considerations and other influences come into play. We_ do not like coercion. It is against our principles. We are a free people, and to coerce us to do a thing is about the readiest way of making us dissatisfied with having to do it, especially if we believe that there is no necessity for it. We . are willing to fight, to volunteer, to join the militia of our own free will, but compulsion goes against the grain of most British people. If this system had been introduced and proved successful in the Old Country, or Other parts of the British Empire, we might have had some guide. Why it should have occurred to the Prime Minister to introduce it in this far-off country, when there is no necessity for so extraordinary a step so far as I can see, I cannot understand. The people have never asked for it, not has it ever been submitted to them. Surely so vital a change in our military system, from voluntary to compulsory service, should be introduced after being well discussed on the hustings at a general election, and not almost in the last days of a Parliament, when there is certainly no necessity for such undue haste. Imagine what the young men of Australia are asked to do under this scheme. All those who are eighteen years of age have to register themselves, to be allotted to corps, to attend at fixed times for inspection, to give their addresses, and any change of addresses, to be examined and reported as lit, to take an oath before a justice of the peace, and then , to attend drill for eighteen days in each year for the first three years, or fifty-four days in all. During the last five years they must attend for seven days per year, or a total of thirty-five days, making altogether eighty-nine days between the ages of eighteen and twenty-six. There are 40,000 young men of the age of eighteen in Australia at the present time, and I suppose that number will go on increasing as our population grows. Still, taking the number at 40,000, a total of 120,000 will be enrolled by the end of the third year, if they all enroll. No pay is provided for them. Are the members of the Labour Party willing that people should be compelled to serve without pay for eightynine days during eight years?

Mr Carr:

– They have not said so.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Then what shall we pay them? Suppose we pay them 5s. a day.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– One shilling and threepence per day !

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– That is the proposal of the honorable member for West Sydney, who is a member of the Labour Party. If we pay them 5s. a day for eighteen days, it will cost, in, pay alone, j£i 80,000 in the first year, £360,000 for the second year, and £540,000 for the third year. This would increase the Prime Minister’s estimate of the cost of the whole scheme to £2,345,000, of which £1,6:14,000 would be for the land forces, and £731,000 for the naval forces. I question very much whether we are prepared at the present time to spend so large a sum on our military and naval defence. Our interests rather require that those figure’s should be reversed -that we should spend more upon sea defence than upon land defence. On land we have all the advantages. We nave to meet a foe who does not know our country. We have local knowledge and experience.

Mr Fowler:

– The foe will probably know our country better than we know it ourselves.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I do not think he would. I never met a man who knew a country better than did the man who lived in it. Why should the 40,000 young men who are eighteen years of age at this date bear all the burden of our national defence to begin with? Young men on the threshold of life do not like coercion more than do those who are older. A boy who begins work when he is fourteen or fifteen will probably find it just as incon venient at eighteen to give up his employment and go into training as would an older man. At any rate, he will not like it, for he will have reached a very important period in his industrial life. According to my. figures, in eight years 320,000 would be enrolled, of whom 12,000 would be doing eighteen days’, and 200,000 seven days’, drill a year, and the annual cost would amount to’ millions of pounds. When I spoke of an expenditure of £540,000 at the end of the third year at the rate of 5s. per man per day, I was calculating only the actual pay. The annual cost of 320,000 men upon anything like the basis of the present expenditure - and we are told that it costs £20 per year to teach a man to be a militiaman under the present system - would be enormous. Accoutrements, rifles, stores, ammunition, and other things would have to be provided, and the expense would run into millions. But the Prime Minister says that 800,000 men can be obtained, drilled, and made effective for £1,200,000, although it costs £700,000 a year now for 20,000 men ! The Minister of Defence admitted that it would cost per head for members of the National Guard, for instruction and the central administration only. Even that would amount to £600,000 for -the 120,000 men at the end of the third year. I asked him the difference between the cost of a militiaman and a National Guardsman, and he said that while the one cost £20, the other would cost £5 per annum for administration and instruction only. But assuming that there would never be more than 320,000 men at any one time under training, at £5 a head for instruction and administration only, with no provision for rifles, accoutrements, stores, ammunition, and all the other paraphernalia, the cost would be £t, 600,000 per annum on the Minister’s own showing! Yet the Prime Minister says -

Ultimately we may see .a time arrive when, reckoning men under forty, we shall have 800,000 who are either in or have passed through the ranks.

We estimate that 800,000 men can be obtained, disciplined, drilled, and made effective for j£i ,200,000 a year, as against the present defence expenditure of ,£800,000 a year.

Mr Deakin:

– The honorable member is calculating on the whole 800,000 men being under training at once, whereas, as a matter of fact, there would never be more than 80,000 under training at one time.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– At any rate, 40,000 per year for eight years makes a total of 320,000 men. How 80,000 is arrived at I cannot understand, seeing that there are 40,000 of eighteen years, and the compulsory training is for eighteen days during the first three years, and seven days’ training during the remaining five years.

Mr.Deakin. - There is not the same expenditure on the others, while on many there would be no expenditure.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I should like to know how the honorable member brings the cost down to £1,200,000, seeing that it costs £700,000 now for 20,000 men. After looking into it, although I have not been able to go into the details, I am convinced that the scheme, so far as I have been able to understand it, will come to nothing. It will break down of its own weight. It makes one smile to read the penalties for non-attendance. The first is the loss of the right to vote. That, on the face of it, appears a great disability. Will the Labour Party support that?

Mr Hutchison:

– Certainly not; but it should not be forgotten that youths of eighteen have not the right to vote.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– A youth of eighteen is not far from the age when he will have the right to vote, but as he has not a vote until he is twenty-one years of age, it must mean that he will be permanently disqualified from voting.

Mr Roberts:

– Fifty per cent, of those who have the right to vote do not exercise it.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– That may be so; but there would be a great clamour if we attempted to take that right from them. What would happen if the Act were passed, and the honorable member for Hume, or any member of the Labour Party, for example, found in his electorate, just prior to an election, a large number of persons disfranchised because they had not enrolled in the National Guard? How long would it be, with a House constituted as it is now, before the Act would be repealed? The threat that the youth who refuses to enroll will not be eligible for an old-age pension is the most amusing of all. If any one said to a young man of eighteen, “ If you do not enroll, you will lose your right to an old-age pension,” his reply would be, “Do not insult me; I do not think of qualifying for an oldage pension. My intention is to win a position in the world, and to make myself independent of such assistance.” Furthermore, those who do not enroll are not to be eligible for positions in the Public Service. I do not know whether that threat would force persons to enroll ; certainly the other two would be ineffective. I have investigated the financial side of the scheme, and I find that last year the cost of paying the existing militia was only £115,000. Yet, any one listening to the speeches of the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defence, would have thought that a great saving would have been effected by not paying these men. Although the National Guard is not to be paid, the expenditure upon clothing, ammunition, rifles, and encampments, would be at the same rate as now, unless some change of administration results in greater economy, for which, no doubt, there is some room. The Prime Minister told us that a National Guard of 80,000 men would cost £819,000, while the cost of our present force, of about 20,000 men, is £696,000. The Prime Minister’s estimate of the total military expenditure - including special defence provision - for the third year of the new arrangement, is £1,074,000, and, in addition, £200,000 is set down as the contribution under the Naval Agreement, £60,524 for local Naval Forces, and £471,200 for the new naval flotilla, making a total expenditure of £1,805,724. I notice with pleasure that the Prime Minister has not yet decided to terminate the Naval Agreement. The new scheme of a National Guard, the Minister of Defence informs us, cannot be brought into working order for two or three years to come, and the decade for which the Naval Agreement has force will be almost at an end then. I should like to know how the great difference between an expenditure of £1,805,724 for 80,000 men, and an expenditure of £696,000 for 20,000 men has been arrived at. The cost of maintaining the Central Administration, the Head-Quarters, Military Districts, the Ordnance Department, the Instructional Staff, the Accounts and Pay Department, and the Rifle Range Staff, is to be the same under the new system as now, although twice as many men will have to be dealt with during the first year and six times as many at the end of the third year.

Mr Ewing:

– There is to be an alteration of system.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– It is proposed to reduce the expenditure on the permanent men employed at the forts and in instructional work from £106,000 to £50,000

When I was Minister of Defence, I found it very difficult to reduce this branch to its present limits. The reduction was made against the wishes of the General Officer Commanding ; but was necessitated by want of fund’s. I question if it is possible to make a further reduction combined with efficiency. We have no information as to how it is to be made, and, indeed, no one seems to be responsible for the figures which have been given. The present cost of camps and schools of instruction is, at a low estimate, 5s. per man per day, not including any pay, though the actual cost is nearer 6s. or 7s. The expenditure last year was about £29,000, and at the end of the third year for 120,000 men for eighteen days would come to £540,000. But the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defence allow only £85,000.

Colonel Foxton. - That is without providing for pay.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Yes. The figures cover merely travelling expenses, rations, and other outgoings in connexion with encampments. The honorable and learned member for Flinders in his amendment asks us to affirm the truism that “ the defence of Australia depends primarily upon the control of the sea.” None will deny that. It is a proud thing for us tobe able to say that our country has had command of the sea for centuries. Under the Naval Agreement we are a shareholder in the British Navy, holding a1-150th share. Therefore, when we speak of it as “ our Navy,” we are, if not telling the whole truth, telling some of it. We have an interest in every British warship afloat.

Mr Fowler:

– But what control have we in their management ?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– None; just as we have no control in the management of the mail steamers. When we agree for the performance, of a. mail or any other service, we do not stipulate for the internal management of the steamers. The British Government have undertaken to perform certain services, and so long as they are performed, the contract into which we have entered is being fulfilled. I am surprised that my honorable friend, who has himself come from that grand Old Country whence my father came, which we are accustomed to think of as Home, should make such an observation. We are not receiving from the Mother Country assistance to which we are not entitled. We are rather like a son in his father’s house, who does not regard his dependence as humiliating, but is proud of it, and glad to be of service to his parent and to his home.

Mr Fowler:

– I wish to relieve the weary Titan of part of his load.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– That could be done in a way of which the Home authorities will approve, and not only in the way favoured by the honorable member’s party, independently of whether satisfaction is given or not.

Mr Fowler:

– But agreement was signified.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Yes ; that is so, and is satisfactory as far as it goes. However, that is not the point with which I am dealing. My views on naval defence were expressed six years or more ago, when Minister of Defence; in a. minute, addressed by me to the then Prime Minister, Sir Edmund Barton, dated 15th March, 1902, and I have seen no reason to change them. That, of course, is not put forward as a virtue, because in a new country, we very often have reason to change our mind. In the present case, however, I remain practically of the same opinion ; and if I see any reason to change it, I shall do so, and give the reason. Probably some honorable members have read these words of mine before, but stillI think that they should be placed on record, even though they are not in accordance with the opinions of some honorable members on the question. Of the permanent naval defence of the Empire, I said -

In regard to Defence, we must altogether get rid of the idea that we have different interests to those of the rest of the Empire, and we must look at the matter from a broad common standpoint. If the British nation is at war, so are we ; if it gains victories or suffers disasters, so do we, and, therefore, it is of the same vital interest to us as to the rest of the Empire that our supremacy on the ocean shall be maintained. There is only one sea to be supreme over, and we want one fleet to be mistressover that sea. We are bound also to consider and to fully realize that we belong to a nation which for centuries has been mistress of the sea, and that the position we occupy in Australia to-day in being all British territory, and having always enjoyed peace and security, is absolutely attributable to the protection given to us by the British flag.

Mr Reid:

– I hope that bound the Ministry at the time !

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– It was not submitted to Ministers, as far as I know -

We are accustomed to travel about the world for the purpose of trade or in pursuit of pleasure, and to feel when we visit foreign countries that our lives and property are secure and in specially safe keeping. We then realize fully the great privilege and advantage of being a British subject, and feel proud when we see the flag of our Motherland everywhere in evidence, ready, willing, and able to protect us.

Of course, the retort to such sentiments as these, from a section of this House, is that they seem to infer that we should pay others to defend us. I do not at all agree with that view. As I said just now, we are a young nation, somewhat like the son in the house of his parent, dependent to a large extent, but helping wherever we can. On the same occasion I said -

It is, I think, our plain duty to take a part in the additional obligations cast upon the Mother Country by the expansion of the Empire, and the extra burdens cast upon her in maintaining our naval supremacy. lt would be advisable that means should be provided for training boys in Canada, Australia, :ind other places, and for the drafting into the Navy of a certain number annually, and greater facilities might possibly be given for officers entering the Navy. By these means the personnel of the Navy would consist to some extent of British subjects from different parts of the Empire, and this might in time have the effect of a greater personal interest in the Navy being taken by people living outside the British Isles than has hitherto been the case when all have been recruited from the Mother Country.

As to the harbor defence scheme proposed by the Prime Minister, and approved by the Admiralty, I regard it as workable ; and, so far as it goes, I can give it general approval. It overcomes one great difficulty, which was foreseen by every one who has looked into the matter, namely, the officering and manning of the ships. In my memorandum of 15th March, 1902, above referred to, I used almost the identical words which were used by the Prime Minister. I said -

I am not prepared to recommend under existing conditions the establishment of an Australian Navy. Even if it were established, I nin afraid it would not be very efficient, for besides the enormous cost of replacing the fleet from time to time with more modern ships, there would be no change for the officers and crews, who would go on year after year in the same ships, subject to the same influences, and,

I fear, with deteriorating effects.

The Prime Minister, on page 9 of the pamphlet containing his speech, used these words -

I think that the more honorable members reflect upon it the more they will see how difficult must be the condition of a little “ land locked navy,” if one may so call it, of a” small flotilla cut off by itself, ‘its officers and men removed from the pcssibilities of promotion or advancement, except by the slow and often unsatisfactory process of seniority, and with few opportunities to keep themselves abreast of the rapid advances made in their branches of the service.

It will be seen that the Prune Minister realized the same difficulty that I have referred to, namely, that the officers would, as it were, “go to seed,” in a . little land-locked navy. This difficulty has been got over by the proposals of the Admiralty, which have now been submitted to the Government. The flotilla is intended to consist of six destroyers, costing £473,500 > nine submarines, costing £496,000 ; and two depot ships, costing £[308,000; or, a total of .£1,277,500. I suppose that is the cost in England, where, doubtless, the vessels could be built more cheaply than in Australia ; and, therefore, we may put the cost down at the round sum of ,£1,500,000, with an annual expenditure of £’.346,000. For this expenditure we shall have fifteen fighting ships for harbor protection, giving, say, one destroyer for each capital city, two submarines for Sydney, two for Melbourne, two for Brisbane, and one for each of the other States. I suppose that the estimate is low ; but, though the cost may prove larger, it is certainly a step in the right direction. This force, of course, will lae of no use except for the purpose of local harbor defence; it will be useless to protect our floating trade throughout the world, and can only be relied on in time of attack to prevent invasion, and the raiding of our’ ports. What I mean is that, with such a force, we cannot strike anywhere except on our own coasts; but, for. all that, such a flotilla will be a valuable asset in time of war, because the more important cities of the Commonwealth will have some protection. Of course, no one can say exactly- how effective such a force will be, but, together with the land forces, it will do good service in affording a little security. But, after all, the destruction of the enemy wherever he may be found is what we have to aim at in national defence. What would be the use of our being able to repel a cruiser or two for a while, if disaster had fallen on the British Navy, and, with the destruction of our commerce, we were isolated from the world, and liable to invasion? I am willing to help in promoting the local defence of the principal cities of Australia; but I have no sympathy with the idea that the present . proposals mean the national defence of our commerce from the only enemy we have to fear - the enemy from over the ocean. I notice that the Imperial Government do not wish to be understood as encouraging any idea that they desire the existing Naval Agreement to be broken ; and I hope they will never entertain such a thought. This engagement was entered into by both Houses of this Parliament, after an agreement had been made in London; and there should have been no whisper of any undoing by the Prime Minister, unless the approval of Parliament was first obtained. As a matter of fact, this Naval Agreement has never had a fair chance from the beginning ; and its usefulness has been impaired to a large extent by the suggestion that it’ was to be annulled. I am sure that the Prime Minister is actuated by a patriotic desire .to do what he thinks is best, but I very much regret that he ever had anything to do with a suggestion to abandon the Naval Agreement of his own notion, without consulting Parliament, because he might have proposed additional defence without interfering with the scheme already agreed on, and approved of by both Parliament and the people Speaking generally, I think the changes proposed by the Government have not been well thought out, and that they are not suited to our conditions. In my opinion, the Government ought to have left the foundations alone, and .taken their stand on the Act of 1903, as amended. We should have restored the General Officer Commanding, -and enthusiastically set ourselves to improve the organization, by the exchange of officers and by visits of inspection from those accustomed to war Had this plan been pursued, I think a great deal of good would have been done; at any rate, we should have been going forward on lines to which we have been accustomed, and which we well understand. As it is, all is uncertainty ; my own belief is that the proposed system will never come into force. Even if we carry it now, two or’ three years must elapse before it is consummated ; and I am quite sure that it will be undone before then. In the meantime, however, we shall have uncertainty - chaos will prevail, as it has prevailed for the past two years, in our Defence Forces. I regret very much the continued desire to tinker with things that are going on well. We had a good Naval Agreement; and a good Defence Act ; and all that was required was good administration. I hope the Minister does not think I am trying tounduly blame him, because, although he is responsible for a good deal of what has occurred, we all know perfection is not gained in a day. If, however, those responsible are always turning their eyes in other directions than the direction before them, they cannot attain success. If the Minister had devoted himself to the organization in existence, and had given asmuch enthusiasm and work to the building up of the organization on the lines he found already prepared, he would not have said what I think he was very unwise and not justified in saying the other day. I am afraid that the Prime Minister has that turn of mind that cannot leave matters asthey are. Reformers are always desiring something different from that which exists, and, though that may be something good in its way, the action taken often leads to unsatisfactory results. The Prime Minister, with all his abilities, and many estimable qualities. doe* not seem to know how to “let well alone.” He had bequeathed to. him a good Naval Agreement, built on a solid foundation, which, at its termination in 1903 could have been altered and. improved, and he had a good Defence Act, suited to our requirements and conditions. As I have already said, all that was required was good administration. I do not believe in hysterical or panic legislation. One would think that we were on the eve of a great national calamity - that something terrible was coming upon us. and that every man must be at once armed to the teeth. That is what the Government proposal means, although, whit’s all this is going on on land, the coasts of Australia are to be left practically open to the enemy. I hope that we shall have none of this hysterical legislation. We have plenty of practical work to do. Let us go on as self-reliant, practical people-, trying not to please one party or another, but to work on the basis of a firm and reasonable judgment. Why should we, in this off-hand and hurried way, be called upon to subscribe to the principle of compulsory service or training as put for- ward by the Prime Minister? Who has asked for its application to Australia? The Prime Minister has evolved this scheme in his own mind, and, having got his fidus Achates, the Minister of Defence, to help him, and to swallow all his former opinions as to naval defence, he appeals to us to approve of it at a time when we should be- dealing with more practical and more pressing matters. Why should the honorable member for West Sydney be a guide to us on this subject? Is he a great military authority, or one with any special military knowledge and experience? Is he going to revolutionize Australia,.,arid to place it on the highway to prosperity and to an adequate system of defence, by paying the men of the National Guard the sweater’s pittance of is. 3d. per day ? We are told that we are not to follow the lines on which we have worked for nearly half a century. We are to abandon all we have done, and build on a new foundation. Notwithstanding all his ability, I do not think that the Prime Minister has any right to coerce us into this action. He has not consulted the people of Australia. Before he calls upon us to proceed further with this measure, let him consult the people, and if he comes back with a verdict in favour of it, he will then have some justification for the course he is asking us to pursue. At present he has no mandate from the people for compulsory service,, and no right to ask us lo approve of it.

Mr Wise:

– Were the people consulted with regard to the Naval Agreement?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– That was merely the continuance of an agreement, made at the termination of one that had been in existence for fifteen, years. The Prime Minister has no right to expect us to consider or adopt his ideas with regard to compulsory service until he has a mandate from the people. Let us stand firm and self-reliant, following the well-trodden paths of experience and knowledge, and always “hands across the sea” with our kinsmen in the Old Land.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

.- The Minister of Defence, in moving the second reading of this Bill, said that the Defence Forces were in a much better condition under State control than they are to-day.

Mr Ewing:

– No ; I said that they are “better now than they were then.

Mr JOHNSON:

– If the Minister will turn to the report of the opening sentences of his speech, I think he will find that he partially admitted that our defence system was more satisfactory under State administration than it has been since. But the whole of his speech was directed to an effort to show that the forces were in a most unsatisfactory condition, and that it was because that state of affairs was growing worse year after year that the Government had found it’ necessary to bring down a Bill providing for a complete reorganization. The whole aim of the Minister was to show that the psychological moment had arrived for stepping in and preventing the process of deterioration continuing indefinitely. I think, therefore, that I was correct in saying that the Minister in the course of his speech admitted that the defence system was better under State control than it has been since.

Mr Ewing:

– My statement was absolutely the reverse, but I said that the system to-day was hopeless.

Mr JOHNSON:

– The gist of the honorable member’s remarks was in the direction of showing that our defence system was becoming hopelessly worse year after year, and that the time had arrived for its reorganization on a new basis.

Mr Mathews:

– Would the honorable member undertake the work of reorganization?

Mr JOHNSON:

– There may be need for a slight alteration of the present system, but certainly not for a revolution. I do not think that there is any real necessity for a large citizen army in Australia. As long as the British Navy exists a force of from 40,000 to 50,000 will be ample to meet the most extreme emergency.

Mr Reid:

– That would be the war establishment ?

Mr JOHNSON:

– Certainly. It is admitted by all recognised authorities that as long as Great Britain has command of the seas the largest force that an enemy could land here would be 1,000 men, and that that force could be landed only with the assistance of, possibly, four cruisers that might manage to evade the vigilance of the scouts of the British Fleet. Even if we were to arm every man, woman and child in Australia we could not hope to resist a real invasion without the protection of the British Fleet. To resist a serious invasion the whole of the troops that we could put into the field would be absolutely inadequate whilst we have so much unoccupied territory and such a sparse population as we have at present. We have close at hand little Java with a population of 30,000,000 ; Japan, with a population of over 46,000,000, and other contiguous nations with their teeming millions, whilst on our vast continent we have a population below that of London - a population of a little over 4,000,000. We could not, with any land force that we could put in the field, . possibly hold this country for twenty-four hours against hostile invasion. But would any nation that is likely to be engaged in war withGreat Britain be able to spare the vessels and the naval force necessary to bring an invading army to our shores? To imagine such a thing we have to presuppose the destruction of the whole British Fleet. That is unthinkable, and therefore it is simply a waste of time to attempt to deal seriously with the Ministerial proposal. The Minister of Defence has said that it is the duty of every man who has interests in the country to prepare to defend “ his hearth and his home.” That, after all, is a mere platitude. Every man recognises that he has such a duty. The same duty applies to the protection of property, but would any one suggest that it is the duty of every citizen to enlist in the police force? It is the duty of every citizen to defend his hearth and his home from burglars, but we have a police force trained specially for the service, andwe should have a military force trained to protect the lives and the property of the people against outside aggression. There is no necessity for a compulsory system of training under which every man in the community up to sixty years of age will be enrolled in either the National Guard or the Reserve. If it is necessary for every citizen to enroll in the defence forces to protect his hearth and his home from foreign invasion, then it is equally necessary that every citizen should enroll in the police force to protect his household from thieves and robbers. Yet, even the present Government are hardly likely to table such a proposal. Although they claim this precious scheme as their own, the credit or discredit for originating it really belongs to the honorable member for West Sydney, who propounded itin 1901. At that time, the present Minister of Defence was absolutely against it, and his speeches then are a complete answer to his arguments now. It will be interesting to read quotations from his criticisms of the scheme then put forward. According to Hansard, he said, on 5th August, 1903 -

The honorable member for Bland made reference to New Zealand, but I find that thePremier of New Zealand, in a memorandum which he wrote for submission to the Conference of Prime Ministers, pointed out that the want of capital has prevented him from dealing with rifle clubs and similar institutions as he desired to do. . . .

Many of the 23,000 men provided for on the Estimates might as well be armed with blunderbusses as with the rifles they have.

The Minister’s object was to show that the existing system was all right, but that the real trouble was one of equipment.

Mr Ewing:

– It was very bad at that time.

Mr JOHNSON:

– The complaint was, not that the system was wrong, or that the Militia or Volunteer systems should be altered - the men were anxious and willing to enrol- but that the administration was wrong, just as it is at present, and the men could not get the rifles. The Minister went on to say -

Why therefore do not honorable gentlemen do the right thing, and assist the Minister to obtain a sufficient sum for the purchase of the necessary rifles?

Mr Watson:

– We will assist him if he proposes to provide for their purchase.

Mr EWING:

– Will the honorable member vote money for the purchase of more rifles?

Mr Watson:

– Certainly.

Mr EWING:

-I wish to draw the attention of the Minister to the fact that the honorable member for Bland and other honorable members believe that it is wiser to arm those who are prepared to train themselves for the defence of the State with modern rifles, and to furnish them with ammunition, than to adopt the method of conscription proposed by the honorable member for West Sydney.

The Minister applied the term “ conscription “ to this very proposal when it was put forward by the honorable member for West Sydney, although he now says that it is not conscription, and that that term could not properly be applied to it. I have made those quotations to show that the Minister at that time condemned the very system which he now attempts to father, and that the present proposals are not his own, but that the credit for them belongs to the honorable member for West Sydney. The’ Prime Minister is also a convert to the new scheme. Not long ago, he was diametrically opposed to it. In September, 1906, when the military estimates were being considered, he said -

We have had a policy which, though it has varied, has gradually been taking a fixed shape.

The present Estimates represent a continuation and the broadening of the policy which had previously been followed, whilst the report of our Military Committee adopts that system as the basis of any recommendation which it makes.

In that speech, made three months before the last general election, so far from proposing an alteration in the system that then obtained, he advocated a “ continuation “ of it. In face of that, he now puts forward proposals which are an entire reversal of the attitude and view that he then took. If he changed his views, as expressed in September, 1906, before the general election, he had an opportunity on the hustings of notifying the electors of the fact. If he did alter his views during that time, it was his duty to make the fact known to the electors, and to ask their indorsement of the new policy which he now springs upon Parliament. He pointed out in the same speech that the various recommendations of the Australian experts involved an outlay for military and naval defence of £1,652,000 per year. At that time, he thought the scheme absolutely impracticable from the stand-point of its financial magnitude alone, and considered that the Government were not justified in involving the country in any such large expenditure. He declared that such a scheme was beyond our means. The report of his speech then continues : -

Mr King O’Malley:

– It would spell bankruptcy.

Mr DEAKIN:
Protectionist

– It would mean the diversion of a large sum of money from reproductive uses. . . Such an inroad upon the public finances would meet with the disapproval of the great majority of the people of the country.

Mr Hutchison:

– No doubt about that.

Sir William Lyne:

– What is the use of reading that?

Mr JOHNSON:

– Its use is to show that the Prime Minister put that statement to the country just previous to the last general election, when he, and all the members of his Government, including the Treasurer and the Minister of Defence, had an opportunity of laying before the people the policy which they now table. So far, however, from putting before the electors a policy of enforced training or conscription as their military policy, they went in the opposite direction and condemned it as too costly, involving too great an inroad upon the pockets of the great majority of the taxpayers.

Sir William Lyne:

– I did not mention the subject at all.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I have quoted the Prime Minister’s announcement, and the Treasurer is a member of the Government who now bring forward a policy diametrically opposed to it.

Mr Mauger:

– That was not the Prime Minister’s policy.

Mr JOHNSON:

– The quotation is from the Prime Minister’s speech on the military Estimates, as reported in Hansard.

Mr Crouch:

– They were only a few casual remarks.

Mr JOHNSON:

– They were a declaration of unqualified antagonism to the very policy which the Prime Minister now advocates.

Mr Crouch:

– What did the Prime Minister say at Ballarat?

Mr JOHNSON:

– He said nothing before the elections in approval of the new policy. He said also in 1906 -

We must also consider whether we should not encourage a purely volunteer force, with a view of advancing by steady strides, in connexion also with the cadet and similar movements, towards the ideal of universal service.

The Postmaster-General will observe that the Prime Minister spoke not of compulsory service, but of a purely voluntary service -

We cannot look forward to an extension of the numbers of our defenders on shore except by curtailment of the expenditure now incurred in connexion with some of the paid branches of the Forces.

The right honorable member for Swan has shown clearly this afternoon that, if the new forces are to be paid at all, an expenditure of over £2,250,000 will be involved in payment alone, at the rate of 5s. a day for the services of the men who are to be dragooned into military training, without making allowance for the cost of equipment, ammunition, arms, and other warlike paraphernalia. It is well that the contradictory attitudes assumed by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defence towards this question, as compared with their previously expressed convictions, should, at this juncture, be emphasized, because there mustbe some powerful influence, not apparent on the surface, to account for so violent a transformation in their views. I do not know whether a certain Conference held in Brisbane a little while ago has had anything to do with the new-born military zeal of the present Government, who have sprung these conscription proposals of the honorable member for West Sydney upon the House as an original scheme of their own. I do not know whether the whole of the members of the Labour Party are in agreement with the proposals of the Government or favour the principle of conscription; but I venture to assert that the majority of working men are against it, and I venture to predict that we shall never see it in operation. I do not believe that it will ever pass into law. I am certain that if an appeal were made to the people on the question, the great majority of them would be found to be absolutely against it. I do not think that either our young or old men desire compulsory military training. There is certainly no evidence of it, and I feel sure that a referendum would show that the vast majority is opposed to a system which is antagonistic to every instinct of the British race. In the past, spontaneous offers of service in aid of the Mother Country have come from Australians, who have not had military training, but who, from an inborn sense of patriotism, offered themselves for military services, in many instances at considerable personal sacrifice; and, if a real necessity were to arise, every Australian would willingly enroll in defence, not merely of this country, but of the Empire. The Minister of Defence has spoken of the inefficiency of our forces, and their deplorable condition, painting a dolorific picture as a plea for his scheme. But the Inspector-General’s last report does not justify this pessimistic outlook. It is dated 28th February, 1908, and i’n it Major-General Hoad says -

During the year the total attendance at my inspections was 45,905, and I was greatly impressed by the evident desire on the part of all ranks to, as far as possible, ensure satisfactory attendances.

That does not agree with what the Minister told us.

Mr Roberts:

– Major-General Hoad refers to his own special inspections; the Minister referred to the general parades of the year.

Mr JOHNSON:

– Those who witnessed the recent reviews in Sydney and Melbourne must have felt proud of the appearance of the men who took part in them. Even the military and naval men who were present expressed themselves in the most flattering terms concerning the appearance, deportment, and marching of our troops. To continue my quotation-

More specially is this pleasing from the fact that at certain periods of the year there were many reasons such as drought, shearing, harvesting, which ordinarily militate against attendance.

Major-General Hoad speaks of the satisfactory attendance, notwithstanding the combination of circumstances which militated against that state of things. He continues -

As showing also the great interest taken, occasionally men rode distances of fifty, and even up to ninety miles, to attend inspection parades.

Those statements are not evidence of want of interest in military matters on die part of our militia and volunteers, but point rather to an eagerness to become proficient in military duties. The report continues -

I am of opinion that war and the preparation of training for war should, like other business propositions, be carried out on practical lines, and I have, as far as possible, kept this view in holding inspections. The Defence of Australia must primarily be the citizen soldier, and, in time of peace, responsibility for command and administration should, as far as practicable, be placed in the hands of officers of the Citizen Forces, who, without doubt, would be charged with such responsibilities in time of war.

Later on, Major-General Hoad said -

During the past twelve months I have, with few exceptions, inspected the whole of the units of the Commonwealth Military Forces. I was present during the whole of the period of the annual camp of training in New South Wales. I also attended the Light Horse camps in Victoria and South Australia, and towards the end of the year visited Port Darwin. When the extent ‘of the Commonwealth and the distances between units are taken into consideration, it will be easily understood that the work of inspection has necessitated almost uninterrupted travelling, the distance covered having been about 50,000 miles.

The Minister says that it is because of the unwillingness of our young mein to undergo military training that he proposes to substitute for voluntary service the conscription system, or, as he does not like that term - notwithstanding that he was the first to apply it to the system here - compulsory military training. But Major-General Hoad says -

During the tours of inspection throughout the several States I met with the greatest cordiality. This I recognise as evidence of the desire on the part of the people of Australia to co-operate with their Military Forces.

The Inspector-General has had opportunities of observation which have been denied to the Minister, and, having met all sorts and conditions of persons, in every part of Australia, he says that he was received with the greatest cordiality, and looks upon that as evidence of the desire of the public to co-operate with the Military Forces.

Mr Roberts:

– That is only an expression of opinion by Major-General Hoad. I think that he has mistaken merely characteristic hospitality.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I shall, later, show that there is ground for believing that his view is the correct one. Unfortunately, the Department has no authority to recruit. It is all very well to say that our young men will not offer themselves for military training, but how can they do so when there is no authority for recruiting? On this point let me quote the report again -

The following shows the establishment authorized for 1906-7, and strength on the 31st December, 1907, of the Permanent, Militia, and Volunteer Forces : -

It will be seen that the Permanent and Militia Forces were 5 and 8 per cent, respectively short of the establishment, and the Volunteer Forces 17 per cent. The establishment provided on the Estimates for this year, 1907-8, is : -

Mr Crouch:

– The honorable member says that 50,000 men are necessary.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I say that the utmost total necessary to meet any possible emergency would not exceed 50,000. The Major-General adds -

But authority to recruit to this establishment has not yet been given.

Therefore it is hardly fair to blame the public for lack of interest in military matters.

Mr Roberts:

– That part of the report is a severe indictment of the administration.

Mr JOHNSON:

– The whole trouble is due largely to the parsimony of the Government in not providing sufficient funds to keep the forces up to the proper strength, and in not properly equipping and arming men. There have been most alarming reports from responsible officers as to the condition of some of the vital equipment of the forces. The Prime Minister, amongst others, has pointed out that the condition of the fixed defences was, for a long time, most deplorable; in fact, the honorable gentleman, on one occasion, said that they were in such a state as tobe more dangerous to the defenders than to the enemy. I do not know whether any practical steps have been taken to improve matters ; and we ought to have some information on the subject. Certainly only two or three years ago, the Prime Minister painted a most alarming picture, and the present Minister of Defence has himself more than once complained of the lack of rifles, while members of rifle clubs are calling out for ranges and tubes. How can it be expected that men, who are willing to equip themselves for military service by proficiency in rifle shooting, and in other ways, can carry out their desire when the wherewithal, which rests on a hard cash basis, is not forthcoming? The Minister of Defence, instead of railing at the want of patriotism on the part of the men of the country, should really blame his own administration. I do not place the whole of the responsibility on the present Minister individually, because his predecessors were no less culpable and negligent than are the present Government in the matter of providing sufficient arms and equipment and facilities for training and instruction. We find that the Inspector-General is not in agreement with the Minister as to the failure of the existing system, because, in his report, in speaking of the training and efficiency of the troops, he says -

My inspections and the associated manoeuvres have satisfied me that the troops have done and are doing much good work, and that, generally speaking, they are very well up in their duties. Much, however, remains to be done before the standard of proficiency which may reasonably be expected can be attained. If the work be continued with the same untiring perseverance as is generally shown, and greater facilities given for practical instruction, the result will be to make the Citizen Forces still more efficient.

That is a very optimistic picture, andquite a contrast to that drawn by the Minister of Defence in his second-reading speech; indeed, the words of the Inspector-General are a practical condemnation of the proposed change of policy ; because it appears that all that is necessary is financial assistance to enable the existing forces to be brought up to their proper strength and made more efficient for the effective defence of Australia. Every word of the InspectorGeneral’s report confirms the idea that the present system is the right system, and that all that is required is money to extend it, . and make it more effective. Speaking of the Australian Light Horse, the Inspector-General says -

The personnel of the Light Horse is good, and generally the men are well mounted. The new bandolier equipment has now been issued, and appears to be well suited to requirements. The Light Horse do not as a rule, bearing in mind the number of days’ training and the instruction available, leave much room for adverse criticism, and all ranks are keen to improve their efficiency.

Here we have a similar statement in connexion with another arm of the service ; and the opinions expressed are diametrically opposed to those put forward by the Minister. In regard to the infantry, the Inspector-General says -

The personnel is good. There has been a distinct advance in practical training, and more attention has been given to manoeuvres, outposts, marches, &c. It is evident that all ranks take great interest in their work.

Here we have the same ‘emphasis on the interest that men of all ranks take in their work. In regard to rifle clubs, the InspectorGeneral says -

I attended the Annual Rifle Association Meetings held at Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane,. Adelaide, and Launceston, and was pleased to note the satisfactory manner in which these meetings were conducted….. The visit of a representative Rifle Team from Great Britain gave a decided impetus to rifle shooting throughout the Commonwealth. Surprise was expressed by members of the British Team that rifle shooting was so far advanced and so universal throughout Australia.

In another paragraph, he says -

There has been a manifest desire on the part of the Rifle Club members to attend ; and at the daylight parades, when asked to do so, they have always taken part with the other troops in field operations and manoeuvres. This has often provided opportunities for demonstrating their usefulness. In addition to the ordinary infantry field work, they have sometimes been used as mounted infantry with satisfactory results, and T am sure that, with but little training, many of the members of Rifle Clubs would be as well lilted to take their places in the ranks or to carry out any other duties which may be assigned to them.

Then, further on -

These men really constitute a valuable reserve to the existing Force, and in time of emergency would, with very little training, be fit to again take their places in the ranks.

Here is an opportunity to increase the available military force for active service in time of war. I suppose that we could count on at least 100,000 men belonging to .rifle clubs, -who would be more or less, and mostly more, proficient in the use of the rifle; and, speaking as a layman who has taken opportunities to ascertain the opinions of military experts, I should say that here we have a force of volunteers which could with great advantage be utilized in time of emergency. If our present volunteer system is thought to be incompatible with the system of a partially-paid militia, it might be advisable to abolish the ordinary volunteers, and establish a general partially-paid service, so organized that in time of war the strength could be increased to the necessary number’s. In addition, there is, or would be in a short time, a reserve, as I say, of at least 100,000 riflemen of the different clubs, who would augment the militia; and such a force in time of war would be more than ample for all the requirements of the Commonwealth without calling on other citizens. But in order to make riflemen of service in time of necessity, there must be opportunities for training and practice ; and ranges should be provided at every suitable spot, contiguous to railways and other lines of communication where practicable, so that valuable time may not be lost by the men in travelling. T am perfectly satisfied, from my contact with members of rifle clubs, that if ranges were provided at suitable places reasonably near the most populous centres, every Saturday afternoon and holiday would find men making shooting their hobby, and enrolling themselves. Most of them would, in course of time, become crack shots, and such a force, combined with the militia, would be of incalculable value.

Mr Storrer:

– They will be crack shots only at fixed ranges.

Mr JOHNSON:

– But riflemen will, in most cases, endeavour to make themselves proficient in shooting at movable, as well as at fixed targets. I know of riflemen so enthusiastic that they have erected targets in the backyards of their premises, and miniature ranges in their basements. The desire to become expert shots is natural to the young men of the country. And, given encouragement, they would take to rifle shooting as readily as to cricket, football, running, and yachting. Another subject of complaint is the shortage of officers and military instructors. I am glad to note that a recommendation has been made that the instructional staff shall be increased, but I do not know what steps the Minister proposes to take with a view to giving effect to that recommendation. In the absence of an adequate staff of officers and instructors, we cannot expect our volunteers to receive the training which they seek, and which is necessary to make them proficient. Regarding this shortage of officers, Major-General Hoad writes in his report -

The shortage of Officers of the Citizen Forces is a matter of great moment, and no Force under such conditions can be said to be in a satisfactory state. I consider that the frequent visits of Commandants to the’ various parts of their commands should do much to remedy a state of affairs the seriousness of which cannot be overestimated.

The Minister might, with profit to the community, give some consideration to this question. Without a sufficient number of officers and instructors, our Military Forces, no matter what their numerical strength might be, would be little better than a rabble in action. With regard to schools and classes of instruction, the Inspector-

General has something of very great interest to say. He writes, at page 17 of !his report -

There is an evident desire on the part of the officers throughout the Commonwealth to improve their Military knowledge, but many officers in the country expressed to me their inability to attend Schools of Instruction, which, as a general rule, have been held in or near the principal city in each State. They could attend local Schools or Classes if such were held. I consider such Schools or Classes should, as far as possible, be arranged, and that they should be carried out in accordance with a syllabus of progressive work, prepared, and published ‘ beforehand. Where it is not possible for officers to attend Continuous Schools or Classes, arrangements should be made to hold them on evenings, Saturday afternoons, and half-holidays (as may be most convenient to the officers), extending over a period of two or three months. The Regulations should, I consider, be amended accordingly.

On the next page, we find a reference to the delay that has arisen in connexion with the supply of arms and equipment -

The following examples will serve to show the delays which have occurred under the present -system of relying on oversea supplies for such of our requirements as cannot at present be made in the Commonwealth.

Then follows a table showing that eight quick-firing guns were ordered for use in New South Wales in November, 1904, and that they were not received until January, 1906. Then, again, eight quick-firing guns were ordered for Victoria in 1904, and were delivered as follows - September, 1905, one gun, one carriage, one limber; “December, 1905 - three months later - six carriages and six guns ; March, 1906, one gun, one carriage, and seven limbers. In November, 1904, four quick-firing guns were ordered for Queensland, and were delivered as follows - four guns and four carriages in February, 1906, and four limbers in April of the same year. In April, 1905, four quickfiring guns were also ordered for Western Australia. Fifteen months later - in July, 1906 - four guns were delivered, and in February of the following year the four carriages and limbers came to hand. Under the heading of “ remarks “ we have the statement -

Guns, Carriages, and Limbers, although ordered in November, 1904, were not received complete until March and (in the case of New South Wales) May, 1906, and even then, owing to the non-receipt of important parts, such as Range Indicators, Fuze Setters, &c, they were not available for use until some time in

As to the guns ordered for Western Australia, the Inspector-General remarks -

Same remarks apply, except that order was not placed until April, 1905, and that guns and carriages were not received until February, 1907.

In these circumstances, how is it possible to have our Military Forces in a complete state of efficiency ? Is it reasonable to expect our troops to take an overwhelming interest in their work when the means to make themselves proficient are not provided for them? These facts show that the real trouble lies, not in the present system, but in its administration. In the absence of proper administration, the best -systems in the world must be abortive. No army can possibly be efficient if the sinews of war are withheld ; no army can be efficient when arms, accoutrements, and all the other paraphernalia ‘of a military department are withheld. If the Minister would address himself to remedying these obvious defects in the present system, he would render a far greater service to the Commonwealth and those engaged in its defence than by anything he could propose in the nature of a new scheme of compulsory military training.

Mr Ewing:

– We do not limit our efforts to that. There is a good deal of other work going on.

Mr JOHNSON:

– My complaint is that these essentials are being neglected - that the Minister is blaming the system when the administration is really at fault. I am referring not to his administration alone, but to the administration of the Department for some years. Some of the matters complained of in Major-General Hoad’s report occurred before the honorable member took office.

Mr Ewing:

– The- Inspector-General makes a recommendation to the Board, on which there are intelligent and- experienced men, and there is frequently a difference of opinion amongst them in regard to these matters. The honorable member will see that there is a conflict in connexion with what he might interpret as the administration. I am not finding fault with the system or the Board, nor do I find any fault with the report; the conflict is inevitable.

Mr JOHNSON:

– That portion of the report to which I have just been referring relates to the supply of rifles, ammunition, and quick-firing guns, and to the shortage’ of officers and instructors.

Mr Ewing:

– There can be no doubt as to the supply of rifles and ammunition ; they are all right.

Mr JOHNSON:

– If they are, the change must be of recent date, because the honorable gentleman himself has, more than once, complained of the lack of rifles, and also of the character of those supplied. The quality of the ammunition supplied has been the subject of complaint in this House.

Mr Ewing:

– There are about 24,000 rifles on order, and they are coming.

Mr JOHNSON:

– They may be here three or four years hence.

Mr Ewing:

– They are coming now.

Mr Roberts:

– They may be following the quick-firing guns - at the same speed.

Mr JOHNSON:

– Quite so. I come now to the condition of the rifle clubs, which should prove a valuable adjunct to our military forces in time of emergency, and ought to receive every encouragement. I have some of these clubs in my electorate, and their general complaint is that there seems to be on the part of the administration a lack of interest in their development. They complain of want of ranges, and that, even where miniature rifle ranges have been set up, tubes cannot be obtained.

Mr Ewing:

– I think that the tubes are here. Will the honorable member let me have details of his complaints ?

Mr JOHNSON:

– I have communicated with the honorable gentleman on several occasions.

Mr Ewing:

– Are there rifle clubs in the honorable member’s electorate which cannot obtain Morris tubes?

Mr JOHNSON:

– They have been promised for months.

Mr Ewing:

– The rifle clubs must have them by now.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I do not think that they have. One club in my electorate was promised a dozen tubes, and received, if I remember rightly, only two. I cannot say whether they have since obtained a further supply. They have probably grown tired of writing to me, because each time that I have received a communication from them I have preferred a request to the Minister that the tubes should be supplied, and have received the stereotyped reply - that they were coming, and that when sufficient were available they would be forwarded.

Mr Ewing:

– When the honorable member asked for them first, there were none in Australia. We sent for a supply, and

I think that when they arrived all demands were met.

Mr JOHNSON:

– When the 500 ordered were about clue, it was complained to me that only two were obtainable. Those were quite insufficient, and sixty or seventy men were unable to join the club because of the non-arrival of the tubes.

Mr Ewing:

– If more are wanted, will the honorable member find out and let me know, giving me the name of the club?

Mr JOHNSON:

– I shall ascertain if the clubs are supplied according to their requirements, and if they are not I will take the opportunity of reminding the Minister of his promise. On the question of the supply of rifles for cadets, Major-General Hoad’s remarks are instructive -

Francotte Rifles - 1,900 ordered in April and June of 1906, received in the Commonwealth from February to July, 1907. 300 ordered in December, 1906, received in May, 1907.

Westley-Richards Rifles - 1,500 ordered in April, 1906, received in May and July, 1907. 5,000 ordered in December, 1906 ; 2,200 ordered in June, 1907 - Received in January and February, 1908.

A long time evidently elapses between ordering and delivery.

Mr Ewing:

– We propose to cure that by making them here.

Mr JOHNSON:

– But it will be a long while before rifles are made here. What should be done, instead of wasting money on revolutionizing the present system, is to devote it towards perfecting the organizations already in existence, and encouraging their extension, especially in the case of the militia and the rifle clubs. As many ranges as possible ought to be provided. Not only should rifles be furnished in numbers sufficient for present purposes, but a reserve stock should be always on hand to guard against possible contingencies. If we wait for the outbreak of actual hostilities before providing the Military Forces with the equipment that will be found necessary in time of war, the probabilities are that we shall not get those supplies at all. As a matter of ordinary precaution, it would be wise to have a sufficient supply on hand in Australia to meet emergencies. Dealing with the question of organization, Major-General Hoad said -

There should under any circumstances be a. continuity of policy in connexion with the defence of the Commonwealth.

I think nobody will find fault with that declaration. If we continually chop and change our policy we shall never .have any system at all worth troubling about. We shall always have greater or less disorganisation. There should, therefore/ be continuity of policy. Major-General Hoad goes on to say -

In my opinion a Scheme of Defence based on strategical and other considerations should already have been decided on, this scheme being carried out as regards establishments of Corps, Guns for Coastal Defences, &c, &c, as funds were available. . . . Further, it is necessary to discuss and decide what Force is required to meet any possible attack as distinguished from a probable attack, the Forces to be raised being in accordance with this scheme. To remedy this, steps should be taken to consider and decide on a General Scheme, the Schemes of Defence for the several States co-ordinating with the General Scheme. This General Scheme should be based on - 1. The probable forms of attack. 2. The Forces required to meet attacks either by land or sea. 3. The steps required to supply reserves to these Forces in the event of war. 4. The best means of sufficiently training the Citizens of Australia so as to be .prepared in addition to meet any attack.

With regard to probable forms of attack, if we were situated like European nations, I could understand it being absolutely necessary to place the greatest reliance upon our military strength and organization for our defence, but we inhabit an island continent many thousands of miles removed from the base of operations of any possible foe, so that the only attack to which we can possibly be subjected will be from over the sea. Such an attack, to be made in force, must be conducted by a large fleet of ships, carrying an immense number of troops. Such a fleet of troop-ships, carrying an invading army to our shores, would have to be convoyed by an immense naval fleet to insure its safety. Are we in Australia prepared to find the means to prevent such an invasion in the only way in which it can be prevented - by providing a fleet at least equal to that of any possible attacking country ? With our population, I do not think that we are prepared to do so.

Mr Bamford:

– Then the honorable member admits the possibility of attack.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I do not admit it while Great Britain retains the command of the sea. I say that it is possible only when the British Navy has been crippled. I cannot conceive that it is possible for any enemy at war with Great Britain to detach from her base of operations in Europe or Asia - and that enemy must be a large naval Power, or we need not fear attack - sufficient ships to convoy the army that it would be necessary to land to take effective possession of Australia. I certainly cannot conceive that. the people of Australia would be willing to subject themselves to the enormous load of taxation necessary to provide a fleet capable of meeting such an attack. It is therefore not the question of land defence with which we ought to mainly concern ourselves. We should not neglect that question, but we have to look at the probabilities of the situation, with, of course, a due regard to its possibilities. But, even having regard to the extreme possibilities of invasion with which we are likely to be confronted, within the next ten or fifteen years, a war strength of 50,000 men would be more than ample to meet any possible emergency. Therefore, if we are to effectively protect Australia, even if we make Australian defence a. purely Australian question, relying solely upon our own resources, and disregarding the existence of the British Navy and its duty to defend Australia in common with other parts of the Empire, that defence must be by means, not of an army, but of a navy.

Mr Reid:

– And to duplicate the British Navy would be rather a stupid form of expenditure.

Mr JOHNSON:

– Unquestionably; but I am looking at the question now from the point of view only of those “ Little Australians,” who raise the cry of “ Australia for the Australians,” and dislike the Imperial connexion. Some of them covertly, and some openly, express a desire to see it severed. That is an open secret. I believe that the Minister has more than once referred to the fact that such a sentiment exists in Australia. Whether it obtains to any large extent I am not prepared to say, but I do net think it does. We have had exhibitions in this Chamber of deeprooted dislike to anything British. We saw ample evidence of it in the Tariff debates. The honorable member for Batman, by the way, turned the debate on this Bill more or less into a fiscal debate, but I should like to remind the honorable member of the anti-British sentiment that was always displayed when the question of preference was discussed in connexion with the Tariff.

Mr Ewing:

– The honorable member for Batman voted for preference to Britain.

Mr JOHNSON:

– The Minister and his colleagues, times out of number, voted against it, and showed in that way their antipathy to Britain in the matter of commerce.

Mr Storrer:

– The honorable member knows that that is not correct.

Mr JOHNSON:

– Whenever there was an opportunity of giving Australia an advantage at the expense of Great Britain, it was taken by the Minister and his colleagues, by their direct supporters, by those who sit in the Ministerial corner, and even by some who sit on this side of the chamber. The Australian spirit was exhibited as against the British spirit all through the debates. I refer to that matter merely as one of the phases of that anti-British sentiment which crops up now and then, and which is largely responsible for. the introduction of the defence scheme at this juncture. I do not think that, outside of Victoria, and outside the brain of the honorable member for West Sydney, there has been any great outcry for a purely Australian system of defence. Outside of Victoria, and, indeed, of a small section in Victoria, no exception has been taken to the subsidy now paid to Great Britain for the protection, of the Australian Imperial Squadron. I am inclined to believe that there is at work in this State a force which was largely responsible for the utterances of the Prime Minister when he misrepresented Australia at the recent Imperial Conference as being opposed to the payment of the subsidy. I do not think that, outside of that small section within this State - and I believe mostly within this city - any considerable section of the people have ever demurred in the slightest to that payment. I am convinced that if a vote of the people were taken to-morrow they would be unanimously in favour, not only of continuing the subsidy, but of considerably increasing it.. The project of an Australian Navy is also a brand-new idea on the part of the Minister of Defence. He has only recently developed it, his political record showing him to have been previously antagonistic to it, and to favour the Imperial connexion.

Mr Ewing:

– So I do now.

Mr JOHNSON:

– Formerly the Minister has always emphasized Australia’s dependence on the British Navy.

Mr Ewing:

– That does not exonerate us from doing our duty.

Mr JOHNSON:

– Nor does it exonerate the Minister from the responsibility of proposing a wrong measure, and plunging the country into expenditure which must bring about “intolerable taxation,” to repeat words which he used on a previous occasion.

Mr Ewing:

– How can it injure England for Australia to put her house in order ?

Mr JOHNSON:

– With a view to making clear the Minister’s former position, let me quote what he said on the Naval Agreement Bill, on 14th July, 1903, as reported in Hansard, vol. XIV., page 2048. His view then was that -

It would be disastrous to Australia to divide Imperial and Australian interests so far as the navy is concerned. . . . The opinions of the Admiralty experts of to-day are in favour of the proposal before us, which virtually contemplates that there shall be no separation of Australian and Imperial interests so far as the navy is concerned. Every honorable member who has spoken has granted that there must be no separation of Imperial and Australian interests generally. It has been conceded by all that if Britain goes down, we must go down, and that if the British Navy loses its power we cannot stand. We could not hope to maintain an independent position among the nations without the aid of Great Britain.

Mr Ewing:

– Does the honorable member agree with that?

Mr JOHNSON:

– Of course, I do.

Mr Ewing:

– Then the honorable member agrees with me.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I agree with the Mr. Ewing of that day; I differ from the Mr. Ewing of this.

Mr Ewing:

– I still hold those views.

Mr JOHNSON:

– At that time the Minister was opposed to any interference with the Imperial connexion. He gave it as a reason for supporting the proposed Naval Agreement that we must rely on Great Britain for our defence.

Mr Ewing:

– I reiterated the same views in my recent speech.

Mr JOHNSON:

– The Minister told us in 1903, that Australia cannot stand if Great Britain goes down ; that our only hope is in the power of the British Navy. Further on he said - page 2049 -

It has been argued that as we have an Army that has done so well, we should also have a Navy. None of the authorities either of a few decades ago, or of the present day, have laid it down that the Army and the Navy should be considered from the same stand-point. The main duty of the Army in Australia is to remain at home ; its main work being very much that of a garrison in a fortress, namely, to protect the country and to destroy the enemy, should he reach here. The object of the Navy, however, is to seek the enemy and destroy him wherever he may be found.

Mr Ewing:

– Does the honorable member agree with those views?

Mr JOHNSON:

– Certainly.

Mr Ewing:

– Then we are still in agreement. _ .

Mr JOHNSON:

– Is the little flotilla of six destroyers, nine submarines, and two depot ships, which is to constitute the “Australian Navy, to seek the enemy and destroy it?

Mr Ewing:

– Those vessels are for coastal defence, such as they have in England and in other civilized countries.

Mr JOHNSON:

– In the speech from which I have quoted, the Minister pointed out that mere coastal defence is useless; that what is needed is a navy which will seek and destroy the enemy wherever he may be found. To continue my quotation - page 2050 -

Some rather homely examples have been used in connexion with this debate, and I will give one which strikes me as fairly applying to the relative positions of the Army and the Navy. When rais are known to infest certain houses their destruction is brought about by the use of traps and cats. The trap is placed in some sequestered spot that it is presumed will be visited by the rat. The rat may not go there, but if he does he is offered such inducements that he will probably remain. The cat, on the other hand, instead of being stationary like the trap, travels from the basement to the ceiling - anywhere that the rat is likely to be found. The usefulness of the trap depends, so to speak, upon the volition of the rat, whereas the effectiveness of the cat, as a destructive agent, depends upon its own volition. Thus, the Army remains at home to destroy the enemy should he land on our shores after having escaped our cruisers abroad. The Navy, however, goes out into the blue water to find the enemy no matter where he may be, and to destroy him there. Since an Australian Navy would have to work in concert with the Imperial Navy it could not stay at home.

Sir John Forrest:

– Was the honorable member a Minister when he made that speech ?

Mr JOHNSON:

– No. It is since he became a Minister that his ideas have undergone transformation. Now he is imbued with a desire for an Australian Navy -df microscopic proportions, which certainly cannot be sent out on to the high seas to seek and destroy the enemy. Is it desired to duplicate the Imperial Navy, or is Australia to leave Great Britain free, in time of war, and look after her own protection?

To do that we must have a navy equal to that of the British Navy.

Mr Ewing:

– It would be absurd to discuss such a proposal.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I think so. The scheme for which the Minister is responsible will not bear discussion. The criticisms already- delivered against it have riddled it, and if a division is taken, I hope the good sense of the House will be found opposing it. The Minister also said -

However, it must be apparent that the control of the Navy, working, as it will, with a world-wide responsibility, and with a world-wide scope, must be different from that of the Army.

In the communication between the Prime Minister and the Imperial authorities, however, the need for Commonwealth control of the Australian Navy has been insisted on, and I suppose that the Minister of Defence does not differ from his leader on that point. It will be seen that at that time the Minister held that there could not be divided control, and that even if we had an Australian Navy, it should be under Imperial command.

Mr Ewing:

– That was not an Australian Navy such as the honorable member has described, but purely Australian coastal defence.

Mr JOHNSON:

– As I understand that the Budget speech is to be delivered tonight, I ask leave to continue my remarks to-morrow.

Leave granted ; debate adjourned.

page 1153

INVITATION TO PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT

Mr DEAKIN:
Protectionist

– I desire to lay on the table a reply received from President Roosevelt, in response to the invitation that was conveyed to him. The reply is as follows -

My telegram of 29th September, President United States of America wishes following message conveyed to your Government in reply to your telegram of 18th September, begins - “President very deeply appreciates courteous invitation thus extended to him, especially in view of more than generous hospitality which people of Australia have everywhere shown to American Fleet. It will not be possible for Kim, after visiting Africa, to visit Australia, but he most earnestly hopes that some day it will be his good fortune to make a trip to the giant young Commonwealth of the South Seas upon future growth and success of which so much depends for the whole civilized world.”

page 1154

ESTIMATES

Mr. SPEAKER reported the receipt ot messages from His Excellency the GovernorGeneral, transmitting Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure for the year ending 30th June, 1909 ; and Estimates of Expenditure for Additions, New Works, and Buildings for the year ending 30th June, 1909, and recommending appropriations accordingly.

Referred to Committee of Supply

Sitting suspended from 6.30 to 7.4.5 p.m.

page 1154

BUDGET

In Committee of Supply:

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:
Treasurer · Hume · Protectionist

– On an occasion of this kind, I cannot expect to present to the Committee anything very entertaining, excepting to those who are fond of figures, and who revel in the beauty of them.

Mr Mathews:

– Chinese puzzles !

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– No; whatever I say I shall make as plain as I possibly can, though it may not be as plain as it might be. I think the House will readily understand that, at this particular stage of the financial history of the Common- wealth, such a task as the delivery of a Budget statement, is not devoid of complications, nor is it of the easiest character. We are arriving rapidly at a time when a new state of things in finance must inevitably take place; and, on the eve of that change, you will see that a straining of financial conditions might very reasonably occur - conditions that will doubtless become easier after the termination of 1910.

To give a succinct statement to the Committee will necessarily take some time; and I have, therefore,, to crave the indulgence and attention of honorable ‘ members, perhaps for a longer period than I did on the last occasion.

Mr Fuller:

– Is it in order for an honorable member to read his speech?

The CHAIRMAN:

– I did not understand the honorable member, the Treasurer, to be reading his speech ; but, so far as I know, there is nothing to prevent the honorable gentleman from reading a statement so important. I may say that in other Parliaments such a course is quite common-

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– In Canada, it is.

The CHAIRMAN:

– Not only in Canada, but in Australian Parliaments, it is quite usual for a Treasurer to read the. whole of his Budget statement.

Mr Fuller:

– But what about our Standing Orders ?

The CHAIRMAN:

– I know nothing, in the Standing Orders to prevent the Treasurer from reading such a statement.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– I am glad, Mr.. Chairman, that you have so ruled, because it is most desirable that I should be able to refer with ease to, and to explainclearly, the great mass of figures beforeme. It is important that the figuresshould be correctly stated, because thisBudget speech will circulate, not only throughout Australia, but in Great Britainand in other parts of the world ; and I feel that I, at any rate, am not competent todeliver such an address without having very copious notes before me. I may say that the same objection was raised on the occasion of the last Budget speech, and a. similar decision given.

Mr Fuller:

– So long as the Treasurer says that he is not capable of delivering: the speech without reading it, I am satisfied.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– 1 should likethe honorable member to attempt to da what I am doing to-night without taking the same course that I am taking. I noticethat on the delivery of the last Budget speech in Canada, the Treasurer read every word, because he desired to have published in Hansard many of the tables, which could not be done unless they were read. I shall now proceed to give a history of the financial position, commencing with last year’s figures. The total revenue received during the financial year ended 30th June, 1908, was £15,015,798. It consisted of - Customs and Excise, £11,645,409; Post Office, Telegraph, and Telephone, ,£3,297,100; Defence, £13,620; New Revenue, £25,784;.. Patents, £17,421 ; Trade Marks, Copy- rights, and Designs, .£8,657; Miscellaneous, .£7,807 - in all, ,£15, 015,798. The following table shows a comparison between these receipts and those of previous years : -

I am giving this table in order to make the history as complete as I can, and with a view of showing, step by step, how the expenditure has increased since Federation. When the Budget was introduced on the Sth August last year it was estimated that the Customs and Excise revenue would be £10,509,000, the actual revenue for 1906-7 - exclusive pf the Western Australian Special Tariff - having totalled j£9>63i,78o. The receipts for the past financial year amounted, however, to the unprecedentedly large figure of £11,645,409, showing an increase on the previous year of £[2,013,629, instead of the estimated increase of .£877,220.

Mr Reid:

– In spite of all the reductions in the Tariff.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– The reductions might have made more revenue, because the Tariff was rendered thereby less efficient in many cases.

Mr Carr:

– It became, in effect, a revenue Tariff. e

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– In parts it was made a revenue Tariff against my wish. I attribute this large increase in Customs duties partly to the new Tariff and partly to the general prosperity caused by the high prices ruling for primary products. Had I felt certain, I should have added the good seasons as a cause, but I have records which show that, during part of that time, the seasons were not so good as might be. Prices, however, were very high ; and, therefore, I think I am right “in attributing .the prosperity to those high prices and to the Tariff. At the time the Budget was submitted it was impossible to make any accurate forecast, as it was not known what effect the Tariff would have ; and my estimate, therefore, had to be of a conservative character. In the case of a continent such as Australia, it is quite impossible, at present at any rate, to make anything like a sure estimate, when altering the Tariff, of the return for the next year. Tha postal revenue amounted to £[3,297,100. The estimate was £[3,190,000, but an allowance of £[117,000 was made for penny postage, being the amount of shrinkage estimated for six months. The estimated revenue - not taking into account the shrink- age likely to be caused by the introduction of penny postage - was, therefore, £[3>307>000> which is a figure but slightly in advance of the actual receipts. “ New revenue” yielded £13,784 more’ than was anticipated. This head of revenue was defined for the first time in the Surplus Revenue Act passed last session. Speaking generally, it includes all revenue which, from its nature, is not credited to any particular State, but is divided amongst the States on a population basis. . For instance, proceeds of sale of Acts of Parliament, costs and fines recovered under the Immigration Restriction Act, most of the fees collected under the Patents Act, and’ interest on moneys placed on fixed deposit by the Commonwealth in London and Australia are all credited to this account of new revenue. The expenditure for the year 1907-8, exclusive of sums paid to the States Treasurers, amounted to £6,158,893. The following table shows the expenditure each year under the various Departments : - 1

The total cost of the Postal Department during .1907-8 was, exclusive of New Works and Buildings, £2,917,847. I have not included in these figures an amount of £15,000 advanced for money order purposes. When the Department was transferred to Federal control, it held £25,000 advance from the Government of New South Wales, which was used as “ tillmoney “ for Savings Bank and money order purposes. The State Government desired that this advance should be returned, as it really belonged to the Sayings Bank Commissioners. It was accordingly repaid, and a similar amount was advanced to the Postal Department to enable it to carry on the money order work. During the year it was found that £15,000 would suffice for the purpose, and the balance, £10,000, was repaid to expenditure. The expenditure during 1907-8 for New Works and Buildings was £426,289, so that the total expenditure on account of the Department, exclusive of the money order advance, was £3,344,136. The revenue collected was £31297,589, showing a balance of expenditure over revenue of £46,547. Not taking into account the expenditure fbr New Works and Buildings there was a credit balance of £379,742. Later on, I will show a table of the expenditure each year. During 1907-8, a new arrangement was made between the Department and the Railways Commissioners. From the 1st of March, 1901, an annual payment of £225,546 had been made to the Railway Departments of all the States, the sum having been fixed by the amount of mail matter carried in 1900. and 1901. From the 1st of January, 1908, the Postal Department has agreed to Pa>’ ^275,000 per annum for such ser- . vices, which is about £50,000 in excess of previous payments.

Mr Fisher:

– Does that include payment for services rendered by railway servants ii» respect to postal work ?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

-No; this sun* relates purely to the carriage of mail matter. Numerous applications were made to. me by the- Department during the past year- for amounts not provided in the annual Appropriation Act. For the most pressing? claims I made advances from the Treasurer’s Advance as far as funds would allow,, in anticipation of Additional Estimates,, which were afterwards submitted to Parliament and passed. On three occasions I nearly exhausted the Advance Account before obtaining supplies from the House.. It was not an easy matter to deal with. »

Sir John Forrest:

– The honorable member practically broke the law.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– I followed a. very good example- that of the right hon.orable member. Acting upon the authority of the Surplus Revenue Act and the Special’ Appropriations for Harbor and Coastal Defences and for Old-age Pensions, the sum°f £441,354 was debited during 1907-* to the States on a population basis. Of this amount, £250,000 was credited to the.-

Harbor and Coastal Defences Trust Account, and £[191,354 to the Old-age Pensions Trust Account. It has been objected in certain quarters that it was not fair to make a debit in 1907-8 for the purposes of oldage pensions to a State which was actually paying pensions in that year. But I may point out that the States have been treated exactly alike in this matter. The amounts accumulated in the Trust Account will not be expended until the Commonwealth commences payment of the pensions, when the States which pay pensions will be relieved of this large annual expenditure.

Mr King O’malley:

– Is that money earning interest?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– Yes. I shall deal with that matter later on. Complaint has also been made that a want of consideration was shown by the Commonwealth Treasurer in not recognising that the finances of some of the States required in the last month the revenue which the earlier distributions of the year led their Governments to rely upon. This criticism is founded on a misconception of facts. In June the Commonwealth appropriated and transferred to Trust Fund an amount of £[250,000 for defence, and an amount of £[191,354 f°r old-age pensions. These amounts were charged to the States on a population basis. The State Treasurers were aware that £[250,000 would be debited for Defence purposes, for the amount was included in the original Estimates submitted on the 8th of August, 1907. During the current financial year the payment to Trust Fund for old-age pensions will be spread throughout the. twelve months.

Mr Hutchison:

– Will that be sufficient ?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– I shall show that, so far as I can judge, by the end of the financial year after next we shall not have overdrawn to any material extent. By that time we shall be approaching the close of 1910, when I hope we” shall have more money. It must be remembered that the State Treasurers received from the Commonwealth, in 1907-8, far more than they were led to expect, as the Treasurer announced in his Budget speech, on 8th August, 1907, that they might expect to receive £[7,779,290, whereas the actual payment made was £[8,859,596. It has also been asserted that the Commonwealth arrangements were inopportune, .in view of the fact that it was desirable to adjust the whole of the financial relations of the Commonwealth and the States, and that such an adjustment should not have been anticipated. But it must be remembered that already six Conferences of the State Premiers .and Treasurers have been held,- in which the Commonwealth Ministers, by their representations, endeavoured to arrive at a basis satisfactory to all parties. It was the State Premiers who” were responsible for the postponement.

Mr Hedges:

– That is very doubtful.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– There is no doubt about the matter at all. The result of those Conferences was extremely disappointing, and the Commonwealth could hardly have been expected - considering the large obligations which it has shortly to meet - to wait an indefinite time, while it was parting with funds it had the right to retain, and which will be absolutely necessary to it in the near future. Deducting from the total revenue received during 1907-8, viz. :- £[15,015,798, the expenditure £[6,158,893, we arrive at a balance of £[8,856,905 returnable to the States. The actual amount paid over during 1907-8 was £[8, 859, 596, the difference being a small unadjusted balance brought over from the previous year, 1906-7.

Mr Wilks:

– What have they to grumble about?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– If any complaint is to be made, it should come from the Commonwealth. The following amounts were paid over to the State Treasurers as surplus balances for the year 1907-8 -

Perhaps I should explain that the adjustments referred to in the second column of the table I have just read are adjustments of payments which have to be made, at the end of June as between, not the Commonwealth and the States, but States and States. This amount of £8,859,596 is by far J:he Largest amount which has been paid in any year to the States, as the following table will show -

That table speaks volumes, and needs no comment from me.

Mr King O’malley:

– - The population has increased.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– Not in the same proportion, as I shall show presently. In any agreement made with the States for the return of surplus revenue, it must be clearly recognised that the figures for 1907-8 are to be treated as exceptional. I must again repeat my conviction that the State Treasurers have not yet realized the fact that in order to pay them the large surpluses they have enjoyed in the past many considerable sacrifices have been made by the Commonwealth Treasurer. In consequence of no payments being made to the State Treasurers during June, it was not possible to adjust the expenditure for that month in the usual way. In the ordinary course, when the final payments to the States are made on the last day of the financial year, adjustments are made on account of Customs and Postal Inter-State transactions and other expenditure - including salary of Governor-General, Ministers, members of Parliament, cost of new Departments, new works - expenditure for King George’s Sound and Thursday Island, &c. The result was that the year ended with certain balances in favour of or against the individual States, namely -

These balances were adjusted in July this year. As far as section 87 of the Constitution - the “Braddon Clause” - was concerned, the obligations of the Commonwealth were more than fulfilled, the amount of £330,613 in excess of the threefourths of the net Customs and Excise Revenue having been handed over to the States. The following table shows the payments made to the individual States : -

The total amount paid by the Commonwealth to the States up to the 30th of June, 1908, in excess of the requirements of the “ Braddon Clause,” was £6,058,962.

Mr Archer:

– Did each State get more than its three-fourths?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– All the States did, except Queensland and Tasmania. This year they will not get a “ twopenny dump” more than their three-fourths.

Mr Reid:

– That is something to be proud of !

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– We want it, and must have it. I should be very glad to help the States ; in fact, we have shown our earnestness all through in that direction, but we must not starve Commonwealth services any longer.

Mr Webster:

– The Treasurer has helped them too much.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– I think so. I shall give the revenues of, all the States before I sit down, and show what a nice position they are in through our handing over all the money to which I have referred.

Mr Wilks:

– The honorable member should give the balance of the New South Wales Treasurer for last year.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– He had a credit balance of nearly £1,600,000 in the one year. I come now to the estimate of revenue for 1908-9. I have made the following estimate of revenue for the current financial year. The detailed figures will be found set forth on pages 25 and onwards of the Budget papers. The principal items are - Customs and Excise, £11,040,711; Post Office, Telegraph, and Telephone, £3,483,000 ; Defence, £5,500; Patents, £16,000; New Revenue, £20,000 ; Trade Marks, Copyright, and Designs, £5,260; Miscellaneous, £6,800; total, £14,577,271. The total revenue received during 1907-8 was , £15,015,798; so that the estimated amount for 1908-9 is £438,527 less than that received during 1907-8. Let me say here that the honorable member for Flinders has twice made an estimate that we would be short by about£1, 000,000 this year, and £2,000,000 next year.

Mr Bowden:

– The honorable member for Flinders took the Treasurer’s own estima te.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

- Hansard shows that that was not my estimate. I said that the revenue would, no doubt, decrease.

Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I did not make any estimate on my own account.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– As I wanted to refresh my memory, I have been reading in Hansard what the honorable member said last session. I am quite aware that he did not propose anything to take the place of what we were doing, but, in a kind of “ breaking-down “ speech, attempted to show that the revenue would be deficient by £1, 000,000 this year, and by £2,000,000 next year. I wish to deal now with the estimated Customs and Excise revenue for 1908-9. The most difficult estimate which a Treasurer has to make is that of the revenue from Customs and Excise. In a country such as Australia, where periods of prosperity, caused mainly by favorable seasons and periods of distress, alternate irregularly, it is impossible to forecast the revenue with any degree of certainty. I have here a table showing the Customs and Excise revenue actually received, omitting the Western Australian special Tariff, in each year since 1900. For the year 1900 it was , £7,762,653.

Sir John Forrest:

– That was before Federation, and the sliding Tariff did not begin until 1901.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– I am giving thatyear to show what has been done, and how the revenue has fluctuated. In 1900-1901, it was £8,189,529.

Mr Wilks:

– What page is that on?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– It is on page 18 of my speech, if the honorable member wants to know.

Mr Fuller:

– The reading of a speech is out of order, and should not be allowed.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I must ask the honorable member for Illawarra not to cast reflections on the Chair. If I thought the Treasurer was out of order, I should take the necessary action.

Mr Fuller:

– I withdraw the statement ; but I rise, at the same time, to a point of order. I wish to cast no reflection on the Chair, and I quite recognise that the Treasurer, in making the financial statement, is entitled to quote largely from notes ; but I submit that he is not entitled to address himself to the Committee in the way he has been doing. I would call your attention, sir, to May, eleventh edition, page 310-

In the Commons, a member addresses the Speaker; and it is irregular for him to direct his speech to the House, or to any party on either side of the House. A member is not permitted to read his speech, but may refresh his memory by a reference to notes. The reading of written speeches, which has been allowed in other deliberative Assemblies, has never been recognised in either House of Parliament. A member may read extracts from documents, but his own language must be delivered bond fide, in the form of an unwritten composition.

It appears to me that a written composition is being delivered to us to-night.

Mr Glynn:

– It is not the Treasurer’s speech. ,

Mr Fuller:

– As the honorable member suggests, they are not the Treasurer’s own words. I regret that it was necessary for you to call me to order, but I contend that the Treasurer is entirely out of order in submitting a written composition.

The CHAIRMAN:

– -Standing order 256 distinctly lays it down that no honorable member shall read his speech. It is also correct that May, as quoted by the honorable member for Illawarra, states definitely that an honorable member shall not read his speech, but I take this to be quite a different occasion. The Treasurer is delivering the Budget statement, and the debate on it will follow. I differentiate between the position in which the Treasurer is placed and the position of those who will take part in the subsequent debate.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– Does’ the standing order make that differentiation?

The CHAIRMAN:

– There is nothing in the standing order to guide me with regard to a Budget statement. In Queensland, it is always read, and copies are delivered to honorable members while it is being read. The matter itself is most important, and, moreover, it is difficult for me to tell when the Treasurer is reading and when he is not reading. There are, at times, large numbers of figures to be quoted, and it would be impossible for any honorable member to keep those in his head. In the circumstances, so long as I have the honour to occupy this position-, I shall make the differentiation between a Budget statement and ordinary speeches that I have already indicated. In the debate which will follow, no honorable member will be in order in reading a speech.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– In other words, what the Minister is doing is out of order, but you, sir, permit it.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I ask the honorable member to withdraw that remark.

Mr Fuller:

– That is what it comes to, anyway.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I certainly withdraw the remark, but that is my interpretation of what you said, sir.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member must withdraw his statement unreservedly.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I have already withdrawn it unreservedly.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– The following figures illustrate the fluctuation in revenue -

In 1906-7, a year which showed an increase of £709,961 on the year before, the receipts amounted to £9,631,780. The receipts last year totalled £11,645,409; but, in my opinion, it would be most unwise for any Treasurer to take it for granted that such a large revenue will continue. There is no doubt, also, that the Tariff agreed to by Parliament - although, to my mind, far from an ideal one, in consequence mainly of protectionist irregularities in the opposite corner - will do much to check importations as more industries are established. In July this year the revenue was less than that received in the corresponding month of last year by

£^232.583-

Sir John Forrest:

– ‘The Minister expected that.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– It gave me a bit of a shock, nevertheless. This was no doubt owing, in a considerable degree, to heavy withdrawals from bond in July, 1907. Since then the revenue has considerably recovered, the gross Customs and Excise revenue from 1st July to 7th October being £3,146,416, as compared with £3,227,784 received in the similar period last year - a shortage of only £81,368. It is very gratifying to find that, although the revenue for the first month of the year fell off so largely, it is reviving, and is now, as! I have said, within £81,368 of what it was last year. After very careful consideration I have arrived at an estimated Customs and Excise revenue for this year of £11,040,711.

This is ,£1,408,931 more than was (received in 1906-7, and £[604,698 less than the receipts of 1907-8. Coming now to the sugar Excise and bounties - and1 to save time I am making these remarks as brief as possible - as some misapprehension appears to exist as to the effect on the Federal finances of the sugar Excise duties and the bounty paid, I would like to explain thai in the year just closed the position was this: The Excise revenue received during 1907-8 was £[741,929 - the one-fourth only which the Commonwealth could legally expend under section 87 of the Constitution being £[185,482, and the bounty paid, including expenses, £[584,630, leaving a deficiency of £[399,148. .This deficiency does not really represent the cost of working the sugar plantations with white labour, but arises from the fact that the Commonwealth can use only one-fourth of the revenue received, and must pay out of its fourth the full amount of the bounty. Up to 1903 there was no bounty, the encouragement given to the growth of white sugar being given in the form of a rebate. Had the rebate system been continued, the result would have been that during 1907-S the Excise revenue received would have been £[741,929, the rebate given £[584,630, and the net revenue £[157,299, one-fourth of which - namely, £[39,327 - would have been available for Commonwealth expenditure. Thus, instead of a deficiency in connexion with Excise sugar and bounty of £[399,148, we should have had ai surplus of £[39,327. Thus the Treasurer would have been £[438,475 better off had a rebate, instead of a bounty, been given. The following table illustrates the quantity of sugar produced and the amount of bounty paid : -

A comparison between the importations and the local production of sugar is given in the following figures - It will be seen that the amount of whitegrown sugar increased from 31,688 tons in 1902 to 190,727 tons in 1907. The amount of black-grown sugar fell from 67,107 tons in 1902 to 23,517 tons in 1907. Taking Queensland alone, the white-grown sugar increased from 12,254 tons in 1902 to 162,480 tons in 7907, whilst the blackgrown sugar fell from 65,581 tons in 1002' to 22,583 tons in 1907. A considerable falling-off is estimated in the quantity of sugar produced this year. The reason of this is partly the failure in planting during 1906 and 1907, partly to a deficiency due to losses by frost, and partly because dairying in the northern rivers of New South Wales has received a great impetus from the high price of butter. I do not, however, anticipate that this will have any effect on the Excise receipts, as there will be sufficient Australian sugar in bond tosupply requirements. It is very satisfactory to know that at" any rate we can produce more than sufficient sugar for our use. The postal revenue for this year is estimated at £3,483,000, or £185,900 in excess of the sum received last year. The following table shows the annual receiptsunder various heads, for the years 1901-2 to 1907-8, and the detailed estimate for the current year - 1908-9 : - The total expenditure for 1908-9 is estimated at £6,513,579, showing an increase of £354*686 over that of 1907-8. The principal items of increase are : - Bounties Act 1907, £14,824; Kalgoorlie to Port Augusta Railway Survey, £i4>472; *Oldage* Pensions - more that provided last year - £219,456; Iron Bonus, £12,000; Advertising resources of Commonwealth, £16,054; Meteorological Branch, £10,413; Works and Buildings: Rents, Repairs, Maintenance, &c, £25,129; Expenses in connexion with the administration of the Electoral Act, ,£16,812 ; Reception of United States Fleet, £3I,323 ; Fisheries, £3>574; Quarantine, £8,388. Then the Military Forces, Cadets, Rifle Clubs, and Associations represent in New South Wales, £21,976; Victoria, £16,113; Western Australia, £3,902 ; Tasmania, £3,131, or a total of £45,122. The in creases in Postmaster-General's Department, under ordinary votes, are in New South Wales, £591892 ; Victoria, £24,632 ; Queensland, £1,758 ; South Australia, £18,748 ; Western Australia, £4,569 ; Tasmania, £1,351; a total of £110,950. Additions, New Works, &c, show increases in Customs, £12,601 ; Defence, £22,840; Home Affairs, £5,896; Post Office, £126,571 ; Commonwealth Offices, London, £5,000; Rifle Clubs and Ranges, £15,658; a total of £717.083. Decreases, which have to be deducted, are *in* special defence material, £34,233; Harbor and Coastal Defences, &c, £311,457 ; Money Order Advance, £15,000; a total of £360,690, showing a' net increase accounted for of £356,393. The total estimated expenditure for the PostmasterGeneral's Department - exclusive of New Works and Buildings - is ,£3,046,751, as compared with the Appropriation of £2,975,475 and expenditure of £2,917,847 last year. The Appropriation for 1906-7 was £2,726,203, and the expenditure £2,690,363. I am making these comparisons to show that each year there have been large sums voted which the Departments have not spent, with the result that the balance of savings has gone to the States. The amount included for New Works and Buildings this year is £552,959, as compared with an appropriation of £524,699 and an expenditure of £[426,289 last year, an increase on expenditure of .£126,670. {: .speaker-JZF} ##### Mr Fuller: -- Where has the money been spent? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- It was not all spent, but a great deal was used in providing works that had been clamoured for, such as telephone tunnels in the cities. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Why was not all the money spent? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Several reasons have been given. The Departments think that the Commonwealth expenditure does not get fair play, because it is dealt with after the States' expenditure, the officials employed being State officials. I do not say that is correct, but that is a reason given to me. The following table sets forth the Revenue and Expenditure of the Department from 1901-2 : - The estimated revenue for this year is £3,483,000; the estimated expenditure £3,046,751 ; and on new works and buildings, ^552,959. It will be seen that when the right honorable member for Swan was Treasurer, the expenditure on "new works and buildings jumped from £146,575 to £275>737, and that after I took office, it further increased to .£426,289, while this year the estimate is £552,959. The total estimated expenditure is £[3,599,710. Honorable members are aware that every Treasurer has found difficulty in. financing the Department, and I have a table here showing, reductions made in the Estimates' originally forwarded. I have, to some extent, been accused of cutting down the Estimates, and I desire to say to honorable members that I have never struck out one item. I told the Departments how much money 1 could find, and that they must keep within that amount - that they must make reductions in cases of least urgency. {: .speaker-KJ8} ##### Mr Hutchison: -- Why return so much to the States? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- The honorable member is referring to last year; but this year I am not returning any. I desire to say that I became Treasurer at a time of the year when I could not very well govern what was being done. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Put the responsibility on some one else. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I am going to put a lot of responsibility on the right honorable member. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Just what the honorable member always does. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- When we got near to the end of the year, I began to see what was happening, and that if this money was not expended, we should have to return to the States a considerable sum, which, I thought, could be better employed in works and buildings for the Commonwealth. This was what made me take the action I did last June, when I was instrumental in having the Surplus Revenue Act passed, which enabled me to put {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Whatever may be the law, the Treasurer broke faith with the Convention. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The CHAIRMAN: -- I must point out that we are in Committee, and that every honorable member will have ample opportunity to discuss these matters. I must ask honorable members to allow the Treasurer to make his statement in his own way. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I was saying that this was the cause of my action in June last, when the Surplus Revenue Act was passed, and I was enabled, legally, I believe, to pay unexpended balances into trust accounts, for certain purposes. {: .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr Crouch: -- Is the Treasurer's estimate on the basis that the Surplus Revenue Bill will be upheld? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Yes. {: .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr Crouch: -- But if it is not upheld? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Then I do not know what will happen. I want to emphasize that I could not go back and take the £350,613 that went as surplus revenue to the States prior to that; I could deal only with the surplus for June. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr Johnson: -- Would the honorable member have touched the £300,000 if he could have done so? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- No doubt I should. I propose now to read a table showing the reductions which have been made by Treasurers in the Estimates originally submitted by the Post and Telegraph Department. In 1901-2, the original draft Estimates provided for £2,570,008 in respect of ordinary votes, and £32,729 for new works, or a total of £2,602,737. The Estimates, as submitted to Parliament, provided for a total of £2,496,912. It will thus be seen that a considerable reduction was made on the draft Estimates, the cutting down being done, I presume, at the instance of the Treasurer of the day, **Sir George** Turner. Then, in 1902-3, application was made for £2,717,998, and the Estimates, as submitted to Parliament, provided for a voteof£2,576,775 {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Is the honorable member now revealing Cabinet secrets? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- No; I am giving Treasury records. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- As between Departments. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- No; as between the Treasury and other Departments. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Cabinet secrets. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- No. A good deal of this matter has already been published. In 1903-4 the amount asked for in the original draft Estimates of the Post and Telegraph Department was £2,768,351, and the Estimates as submitted to Parliament provided for a vote of £2, 655,111. In 1904-5, the original draft Estimates provided for £2,713,370, and the Estimates as submitted to Parliament for £2,688,539. In 1905-6, the original draft Estimates provided for a total of £2,780,682, and the Estimates as. submitted to Parliament made provision for £2,727,988. In 1906-7, the draft Estimates provided for £2,891,017, and the Estimates as submitted to Parliament made provision for £2,863,923. The draft Estimates for 1907-8 - and the right honorable member for Swan was in office during portion of the time that the Estimates for that year were under consideration - made provision for a total of £3,340,061andthe Estimates as submitted to Parliament provided for £3,105,277, so that over £200,000 was struck off. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- By the Treasury officials, I suppose, before I saw the draftEstimates? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- No; the right honorable member's own figures are on the document. Amounts are struck out in his own handwriting. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- This is playing it low down. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- The Treasurer ought to be ashamed of himself. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Nonsense. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The CHAIRMAN: -- I have repeatedly called honorable members to order, pointing out that the Treasurer is making an important statement, and that he should be allowed to make.it in his own way. Unless these continuous interjections cease, I shall have to take further action. The right honorable member for Swan will have ample opportunity to reply to the Treasurer. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- It is a matter oftaste. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- The right honorable member for Swan has accused me of cutting down the Estimates for the year in question, and as the same accusation has been made against me in this House, as well as in the press, I merely wish to show the true position. I am prepared to accept the responsibility for my own acts ; but I am not going to take the blame for something that I have not done. The- original draft Estimates of the Department for 1907-8 in respect of new works, &c, provided for an expenditure of £511,027, and that amount was reduced by the Post and Telegraph Department itself by £86,460. The late Treasurer showed a saving of £20,000, and he himself made a reduction of £77,000. In other wards, he reduced the Estimates by £97,000. That was the position of the draft Estimates when I took the chair which he vacated in the Treasury. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- And then the honorable member further reduced the draft Estimates by , £100,000. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- No. I placed on those Estimates an item of £1,000 for the Tasmanian Cable survey, and made a reduction of £2 8,000 in respect of savings or unexpected balances. That is the only reduction I made. I had nothing whatever to do with the large reduction made in the Estimates for that year. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- Did that saving of £28,000 relate to new works? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- As honorable members are aware, at the end of each financial year there is always an unexpended balance under the heading of "new works." I discussed the matter with the Secretary of the Treasury, and found that he was of opinion that the unexpended balance for the year was likely to be greater than was estimated. I assumed that the amount unexpended would be £28,000, but, as a matter of fact, it was still greater. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- The honorable member is a nice man to succeed a colleague. This is a low-down game. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- What nonsense. I am going to protect myself when attacks are made upon me. The total amount asked for by the Department in the original draft Estimates for 1908-9 was £3,624,323 and that amount I have reduced to £3,312,057. I considered that I should not have the money to provide for all the Department asked. I have done the best that I can, but I cannot possibly provide for an increase of £700,000 or £800,000. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr Johnson: -- Then how is the honorable member going to finance the defence scheme ? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- We have made provision for it. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr Johnson: -- By robbing the Post and Telegraph Department. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The CHAIRMAN: -- Order ! {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- No. {: .speaker-L0P} ##### Mr Sampson: -- The Treasurer has reduced the draft Estimates for this year by over £300,000 as against a reduction of a little over £100,000 made in the Estimates for last year? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- The reduction made in the original draft Estimates for last year was over £200,000. The following table shows the reductions which have been made by the Treasurer in the Estimates originally forwarded by the Department : - The policy of constructing works from revenue only could not, of course, be carried on without some inconvenience. In 1902, **Sir George** Turner introduced a Loan Bill, providing £532,000 for telegraph and telephone works, and £129,180 for post office buildings. Parliament, however, resolutely set its face against borrowing, and the Bill did not become law. The difficulty that the Commonwealth Treasurer labours under in satisfactorily financing this Department will be more clearly understood when we remember the course that was adopted by the State Treasurers in pre- Federation days, and compare that with the present policy. The following table shows the expenditure in the States out of loans in the years immediately preceding Federation : - The State finances were further relieved, as the following table will show, by a similar expenditure from loan moneys on account of the Defence Department : - So that in the year 1898-9, for instance, no less a sum than £313,3*1 was defrayed on account of these two Departments from loan, the strain on the revenue being taken off to this extent. The responsibility thrown on the Commonwealth Treasurer of providing for these works out of revenue, is a very serious one. I have endeavoured to sot apart as much of the revenue as possible for works in the Postal Department, and if revenue comes in more freely than it has in the past, it is my intention to submit Additional Estimates during the present session, so as to enable the balance of the more important works for telephone and other extensions of services to be carried out. According to the way the revenue is now coming in, I shall get something over £200,000 more than I have estimated ; but of that amount, I can -use only £50,000, because it is Customs and Excise revenue. There is, however, just a possibility of my getting an extra £200,000 if the revenue keeps on the same grade as at present. But I am not going to undertake to carry out works involving such excessively increased amounts in one year, unless I can see my way clear as Treasurer to do it. If I do see my way clear, I shall submit, during this session, estimates for as much money as I can possibly add to what has already been provided, with a view to carrying out the more important works, although I have already selected those which, in the opinion of the Department, are the most important. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr Johnson: -- Are the works which have been approved by the Department in connexion with telephones, &c, provided for in the Estimates for this year? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- They have to be approved by me as well as by the Department. We are doing all that we possibly can to meet, during this year, all the requirements of the Department ; but one of the officers states that to put everything in proper order would require £2,300,000, and suggests that it should be spread over three or four years. That would be such an extraordinary demand that no source of revenue could possibly expand quickly enough to meet it. But we are doing all works that we can possibly find revenue for in the only way that is open to us. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr Johnson: -- I refer more particularly to those works which do not involve a large expenditure. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- The PostmasterGeneral asked me recently to provide money for a large number of small works that would cost only a few pounds each. I have done so. They do not amount to a great sum in the aggregate. I have asked the Postal Commission to furnish me, if possible, with an early report on the financial aspect of the Department, with any recommendations which they may see fit to make. I have asked for that report, because it will greatly assist the Government and myself in coming to a decision upon the problems that I have referred to, and especially with regard to the estimate of £2,000,000 odd for Departmental requirements. There has certainly been a considerable increase in the business of the Department during recent years. In 1906 there were 296,433,337 letters posted for delivery within the Commonwealth. In 1907 there were 309,968,936 letters similarly posted, an increase of thirteen and a half millions. In 1906 there were 49,095,169 packets posted ; in 1907 the number was 64,784,495, an increase of 15,689,326. There was a falling off in the number of newspapers, but an increase from 2,120,562 to 2,362,896 in parcels carried. In 1906 there were 10,098,763 telegrams transmitted for delivery within the Commonwealth; in 1907 there were 10,862,585, an increase of 763,822. In 1906 the value of money orders issued to places within the Commonwealth was £4,611,722, in 1907 £5,057,394. In 1906, 5,479,743 postal notes were issued, to the value of . £2,078,356 ; in 1907 there were 6,230,473tothevalueof £2,330,956. The number of telephone connexions in 1906 was 51,285 ; in 1907 it was 61,800. The numerous questions asked in Parliament, and the recent appointment of a Royal Commission, point to the fact that it is necessary that Parliament should have information of the inner working of this Department regularly supplied to it. This can best be done by the publication of an annual report, similar to that published by Railway Commissioners. Such report should give an account in considerable detail of the various changes made in the Department during the year, and of any alterations made in its administration, whether in the direction of decentralization or otherwise. It should also give an account of any important works contemplated, or in course of construction, and a full account of the financial position of the Department. A balance-sheet should be submitted, showing the result of the year's transactions as regards the various branches of the business. Steps have already been taken by the Treasury to bring about a uniform system of accounts in the various States, and a Board representing the Treasury, Audit Department, and the Post and Telegraph Department, is now examining this matter, and will furnish a report. Before leaving this subject, I desire to state that, as Treasurer, I have done everything in my power to make the best financial arrangementsfor this Department. When requests have been made to it in the past for works to be proceeded with, it has been the practice to give a curt, stereotyped reply that " Funds are not available," or that "The works will be carried out when funds are available." The result has been that in many cases a, wrong impression has been given. Quite lately it was stated, for instance, by a gentleman in the district of the honorable member for Riverina, that it was intended to drastically cut down the rural mail services, which is quite untrue. {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -- Hear, hear. We are spending £14,000 more on them this year. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I may perhaps be permitted to suggest to the Department that it would be better to make an effort to meet difficulties which may arise, instead of giving a summary refusal on the ground that there are no funds available. I hope 1 have referred to that matter effectively. {: .speaker-JSM} ##### Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- If the funds are not available, what other reply can the Department give? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- The funds are available for anything like a reasonable expenditure. There is no doubt that, although the toll system and other reductions of charges have been beneficial to the public, the Treasurer has lost considerable revenue thereby, and in my opinion the time was scarcely ripe to carry out some of these changes. I may mention - and in this I think the Postmaster-General will support me- that the checks upon the toll system have not all come in yet. This is causing a good deal of expenditure for extra hands. The checking is now, and I think can be, only imperfectly done. I come now to defence expenditure. The total amount of expenditure required in connexion with the Defence Department is estimated at *j£i,* 102.681. I refer honorable members to page 63 of Budget papers. Exclusive of ,£250,000 for harbor and coastal defence, the appropriation for last year was £[1, 244, 85 7. and the expenditure £1,084,505. The total expenditure connected with the Department is set forth in the following table : - Whilst I am on the subject of the Defence Department, it might be interesting to state that during the last year the actual strength of the senior cadets has increased from 2,178 to 7,613, and the cadets from 16,432 to 21,353. The rifles used by the cadets are of the Westley-Richards aand Francotte type, and they have been increased from 9,095 to 18,417, while 8,000 more are on order. During the year 18c miniature rifle ranges have been estab>lished at various schools throughout the Commonwealth. At the cadet camps held in the several States, 542 officers ana 10,371 cadets attended. Thirty out of the thirty-six 19-pounder ammunition waggons have been delivered. These are of local manufacture, and are quite equal in every respect to the imported article. This brings me to the subject of old-age pensions. An amount of ,£410,810 has been included in the Estimates as a payment during the financial year to the Old-age Pensions Fund. Instead of transferring the amount at the end of the year, as was done in 1907-8, the expenditure will be spread as evenly as possible throughout the year. ' The expenditure is charged, as honorable members are aware, on a population basis. In July .£50,000 was transferred, in August .£50,000, and in September - a heavy month for payments -£40,000. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr Fisher: -- Quite inadequate ; the amount is ridiculous. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- The honorable member should not say that. I have made inquiries from the States, and I assure the honorable member that it will not take anything like £1, 500, 000 to pay old-age pensions. I have information as to what has taken place in all the States. The Commonwealth payments for old-age pensions on the same proportion will come to about .£1,300,000 per year. {: .speaker-KGZ} ##### Mr Hedges: -- Does that include invalid pensions? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- We are not dealing with those at present. That pan of the Act has not been gazetted yet, and consequently we have not to pay under it. Already £[140,000 has been, placed to the credit of the Old-age Pensions Fund this year, making, with the amount of £[191,354 standing to its credit on 30th June last, a total of ,£331,354. Adding the amount of £[410,810 provided this year to that of £191,354 standing to the credit of the Old-age Pensions Fund on 30th June last, the total credit to the fund will be, at the end of the year, at least, £[602,164. Whoever may then be Treasurer would probably be able to set apart at least £[500.000 for this purpose in 1909-10, so that he would have at least £1,100,000 aavailable for expenditure in that year. The total expenditure for the current year is estimated by the State Treasurers at £590,000 for New South Wales, £260,000 for Victoria, and £140,000 for Queensland; or in all, £990,000. But the expenditure in New South Wales, in 1907-8, was only £515,556, and if that rate were maintained - as I think it should be - I should consider that the Commonwealth payment in these three States would probably not very much exceed £900,000. In New South Wales, the expenditure has increased from £508,000 the year before last to £515,556 last year, and to £590,000 this year ; and I am endeavouring to find out the reason for that increase. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- In Victoria, only about 20 per cent, of those who are entitled to pensions go upon the fund. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I do not think that any one who does not deserve and need a pension should get one. In New South Wales, I have known of cases in which the relatives of persons in high positions, drawing good salaries, have been allowed to go upon the fund. {: .speaker-F4P} ##### Mr Reid: -- It is disgraceful that relatives allow that to happen. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- The payments in the other three States, viz., South Australia, Western Australia, and Tasmania, on a similar basis, should not amount to more than £325,000, so that I think we might fairly estimate the total annual expenditure at , £1,225,000. I am aware that this is a smaller figure than that generally quoted as an estimate, but I believe that we can deal generously with the people who will be entitled to these pensions without burdening the public funds to a much greater amount than this. There are, of course, in New South Wales, Victoria, and Queensland, a certain number of people who will claim pensions under the Commonwealth Act, but who are debarred from participating under State legislation owing to the residence clauses. But; on the other hand, I am strongly under the impression that there has not been in New South Wales as careful a scrutiny into the claims of individuals as I think is only right and just, so that I believe that it will be found eventually that the Commonwealth expenditure will not be over the amount I have stated, viz., £1,225,000, and that would include provision for invalid pension's. In order to make this expenditure of £1,225,000 in 1909-10, the Treasurer will have, as I have before explained, the amount of £1,100,000 available. This might leave him with a deficiency of £125,000 on the 30th June, 1910. It would not require a very large inflation of revenue in 1908-9 and 1909-10 to meet this amount, and, considering the fact that we are looking nearly two years ahead, I think that honorable members will agree that I have this year done all that is possible or necessary in this direction. Should there be a small deficiency in 1909-10, it will be easy to finance it, as we shall then be very near the termination of the period for which the Braddon provision has force. {: .speaker-L0P} ##### Mr Sampson: -- Does the Treasurer contend that the old-age pensions payable in Victoria will amount to only one-half of the total paid in New South Wales? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- The figures I have, given are an estimate of the expenditure . for this year under the State Acts, and have been supplied by the State authorities. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr Fisher: -- Such figures are absurd. {: #subdebate-13-0-s2 .speaker-JOC} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Batchelor:
BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA -- As the Treasurer has a heavy task to perform, and is at great pains to make himself heard above the interjections that are taking place, I ask honorable members to give him a better hearing. {: .speaker-JSK} ##### Mr TILLEY BROWN:
INDI, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC -- He is reading his speech. That is not in order. {: #subdebate-13-0-s3 .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- It is disorderly to interrupt the Chairman. {: .speaker-JSK} ##### Mr TILLEY BROWN:
INDI, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC -- I did not do so. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The honorable member is again transgressing. I do not intend to allow any one to disregard my ruling. I ask himto maintain silence when I am addressing the Chamber. {: .speaker-JSK} ##### Mr TILLEY BROWN:
INDI, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC -- I am the most silent manin the Chamber. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.Will the honorable member restrain himself? I think that he should apologize for his constant interruptions. {: .speaker-JSK} ##### Mr TILLEY BROWN:
INDI, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC -- In my opinion, I have done nothing wrong, and, therefore, see no need for an apology. A speech, delivered in this way, provokes interjections. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- A number of new appointments was made to the Commonwealth Public Service during the past financial year, to fill either vacancies, or newly-created positions. They are detailed in the following table : - In all, these new appointments number 1,407. Provision has also been made in the Estimates of the current year for increases in salaries. In the Clerical Division, fourth and higher classes, provision has been made for the class promotion of ninety-five officers in all departments, at an increased annual cost of £2,273. This represents the re-classification of existing positions, and does not include promotions likely to follow the occurrence of ordinary vacancies. In the Clerical Division, fourth and higher classes, provision is made for subdivisional increments to 357 officers amounting to £7,991- There is also a proposal to grant officers who have received the maximum salary of £160 for three years a long-service increment of £10, and after a further two years another longservice increment of £10, bringing the salary up to £180. The total number of officers who will benefit this year is 1,1 88t, and the amount provided for 1908-9 to meet the cost is £11,250. Amended regulation 104 raises the maximum for letter-carriers, postal assistants, &c, to £150, which amount is reached by long-service increments. The proportional grading system has been superseded by the new grading, and 1,100 officers will benefit this financial year, at an increased expenditure of £5,000. The estimated increased annual expenditure in five years' time under the new General Division grading will be £20,000. These increases are independent of the ordinary statutory increments accruing during the year to clerical officers, class 5, up to £160, and to General Division officers apart from the amount involved in the new General Division grading. As to the estimated balances to be paid to State Treasurers, deducting from the total estimated revenue, which is £i4»577>271> the total estimated expenditure - including £410,810, payment to Old-age Pensions Fund - which is £6,513,579, we arrive at the balance payable to the States, namely, £8,063,692. The following table shows the amounts paid to each State since 1st July, 1 901 , and the estimated amounts for 1908-9 : - {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- After offering £6,000,000, the Minister is going to give the States £8,000,000. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I have explained that the revenue now being received is not our normal revenue. It is estimated that there will be returned this year £795,904 less than last year, but £[218,852 more than in 1906-7, and £677,961 more than in 1905-6. It has been said that, during the last financial year, large sums were handed over to the State Treasurers in excess of their actual requirements, whilst money required by the Commonwealth for urgent telegraph and telephone works was not available. In reply to this criticism, I would state that during the year 1907-8 I advanced money to the Postal, the Defence, and other Departments in anticipation of Additional Estimates, up to the full amount available from the "Treasurer's Advance." The real reason that such a large surplus was handed to the State Treasurers was that the Departments did not expend the full amounts voted. In all, the amount of £'422,408 was unexpended. Out of this amount the Postal Department failed to expend £[62,140, the Defence Department £[105,089, and the Department of Home Affairs £212,360. {: .speaker-JWG} ##### Mr Fowler: -- These figures show shameful mismanagement. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- It is not my fault that the money has. not been spent. I got Parliament to vote it, and have put no check upon its expenditure. Had it been spent, we should not have heard so great an outcry. {: .speaker-F4P} ##### Mr Reid: -- We may be sure that it was not the fault of the officials. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Of the amount which the Postal Department failed to expend, the balance unexpended of ordinary votes was £54,771, while that unexpended for New Works was £7,369. {: .speaker-L0P} ##### Mr Sampson: -- Why was the money not spent ? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- The blame is in some cases put upon the State Departments. Do what we may, we cannot get the money spent. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Then there should be some other arrangement. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I think that we should have a Public Works Department of our own. That, however, would be expensive ; but we have been considering the matter, especially of late, and it may be that, if it can be done reasonably and cheaply, we shall have our own Department. No doubt there were exceptional circumstances last year. The Tariff debate occupied a very large part of the session, and could not be interrupted. In consequence, the Additional Estimates for £[571,028 were not introduced until April. {: .speaker-KYD} ##### Mr Poynton: -- The real cause was the delay in getting the expenditure approved by the House. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- While I did not get the expenditure approved until late in the year, I was using the Treasurer's Advance to anticipate votes which were afterwards passed, so that there was not the great delay there might have been. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Then the Treasurer acted illegally. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- That may be, but the House said I did right. I have received strong assurances that the Department of Home Affairs, which has been the greatest offender in this respect, will make every effort to push on the works under its charge this year. It is my intention to introduce the " Works and Buildings " portion of the Appropriation Bill at a very early date, and if the revenue keeps up to add to the works already proposed, in order that there may be no delay in this direction. The estimated Customs and Excise revenue is £11,040,711. Deducting cost of collec-tion, £[289,122, we have a balance of £10,751,589, three-fourths of which is £"8,063,692, which is the amount of the estimated balance to be paid over during the year to the various States. This is the first financial year in which this provision in the Constitution, so lauded by its admirers and so vilified by its critics, has really come into the region of practical politics. Hitherto the Treasurer has framed his Estimates with the knowledge that, whatever happened, his expenditure would not exceed one-fourth of the net Customs and Excise. It will be necessary during the year to keep careful watch over both revenue and expenditure in order that the. requirements of section 87 may be complied with. In consequence of the Trust Funds having been augmented by the payment of £[250,000 into the Harbor and Coastal Defence Trust Account, and of £[191,354 into the Old-age Pensions Trust Account - in all £441,354 - it has been found advisable to place a considerable amount of the Trust Funds on fixed deposit with the banks at 3 per cent. Altogether there is now on fixed deposit £443,000. The honorable member for Darwin asked me a question on this point, and I have taken care that the money is not lying idle. {: .speaker-JSK} ##### Mr TILLEY BROWN:
INDI, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC -- I could get the Treasurer 4 per cent. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- But I am afraid the security would not be good. The funds held by the Commonwealth in London amounted on the 31st of August, 1908, to ,£187,089. In addition there were remittances in transit on that date amounting to £[94,148. As far as was consistent with safety, moneys not immediately required have been loaned to the market through the medium of the Bank of England, which assures the return of the amount loaned with interest. Arrangements have recently been made with the bank under which its charges for commission and insurance have been reduced. When the gross rate earned is 2J per cent, or over, the bank now charges f per cent. When the gross rate earned is under 2 Jper cent., only J per cent, is charged. After deducting the bank's commission, £4,163 was earned as interest during 1907-8. The amount of £[250,000 voted last year remains to the credit of the Harbor and Coastal Defence Fund. Before expenditure is made, the approval of Parliament will be sought. The total estimated expenditure for the current year is £6,513,570. It is certain that this amount will be largely augmented in the future. It is, of course, quite impossible to predict, with any degree of certainty, what the total expenditure of the Commonwealth will be, say, in 1920, but the following figures may be useful in enabling honorable members to form some approximate idea on the subject: - Expenditure for current year, £[6,513,579; less Sugar Bounty expiring in 1913, £[518,900 - leaving £[5,994,679. The increases in expenditure of Post Office and Defence Departments (with the following new services) will probably bring the expenditure to a total of £[9,000,000 : - Increase in Postal Expenditure, Increase in Defence Expenditure ; Northern Territory ; Railway Deficits : Port Augusta to Kalgoorlie, Oodnadatta to Pine Creek, Port Augusta to Oodnadatta ; Old-age Pensions ; Advertising and Immigration ; General Elections (one-third of triennial cost) ; Census (one-fifth of quinquennial cost) ; High Commissioner ; Further State services which may be taken over; Unforeseen. I was asked last session to give details, and- was induced to do so in an approximate way, but I do not think it is fair to ask the Treasurer or the Treasury officials to give Estimates on w'hat must be mere guesswork. I have, therefore, just given the total which the officials believe represents the amount required. I have not included in the above figures any payment to the States in respect of transferred properties, as it is not known what form the compensation to the States will ultimately take. If my Public Debt proposals are adopted, interest amounting to about half-a-million will also have to be borne by the Commonwealth in 1920. The following figures illustrate the operation of the Customs and Excise InterState Adjustment Account during 1907-8, and previous years: - This table will be readily understood when it is remembered that where Victoria, for instance, is debited with £[521,194, it means that Victoria during the year had practically to return to other States that amount of Customs and Excise revenue collected on goods subsequently transferred to such other States. It will be seen that the State of Victoria is still keeping the lead as a distributing centre. During the year the Governments of New South Wales and Victoria were approached to obtain their consent to some concession to Tasmania, in view of the impossibility of crediting to the latter State, duties on goods purchased in Sydney and Melbourne. I regret to state that the negotiations fell through, owing to the refusal of the Premiers of New South Wales and Victoria. The Government is still engaged in correspondence with the States, with a view to arriving at (he best practical means to be employed *lo* advertise the resources of the Commonwealth in Great Britain and elsewhere. No decision has yet been reached, but the Government, by the circulation of publications prepared by the Commonwealth Statistician, by newspaper advertising, and the purchase of a number of special issues of suitable periodicals, are helping to keep the Commonwealth before the eyes of the British public. I have been asked to state that a sum of money has been appropriated with a view to the Department of Home Affairs obtaining suitable Australian timbers and keeping them in a proper place until they are thoroughly seasoned, so that better test can be made of the value of such timbers than there has been in the past, or can be made until the matter is taken up by the Government. I may say that recently I was visiting my electorate, and found there a blacksmith, wheelwright and carpenter, who uses nothing but Australian timber, for which he has a great demand in everything he makes. I asked him the reason, and he said it was because he never used a single piece until it had been three years seasoned, and he declared that the blue-gum which he used was equal to American hickory. I also desire to say that there has been an unexpected demand for the *Commonwealth Y ear-Book ;* it contains a great deal of valuable information, and it is proposed this year to print I 2,000 copies instead of 8,000. {: .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr Crouch: -- And, I hope, sell it at a cheaper rate. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- As n matter of fact, the printing costs more than we get for the book ; but, seeing that it contains so many informative details, which have been obtained at the cost of great research, and that it advertises the country so effectively, I believe it would ' pay handsomely if we gave it away. It is not always easy to perceive the direct result of advertisement; but it must be obvious to all students of the British press, that this country is now receiving a much larger share of attention than at any previous time, and the more the advantages of Australia become known, the more we have to gain. There is no doubt that the visit of the American Fleet was a great advantage to us in this as in other respects. Not only throughout the United States, but in Canada and Europe, attention will have been called to the Commonwealth. Probably no other advertisement which could have been conceived would have been more effective. A very great deal can be done by means of illustrative advertisements in such places as will attract attention, and in the event of the Commonwealth purchasing a site in London, an excellent opportunity will be afforded of following the example of Canada in the establishment of an advertising bureau. As to the valuation of properties transferred from the States to the Commonwealth, I had hoped to be able to inform the Committee of the estimated values of the properties transferred from the States to the Commonwealth; but am told that, as the valuations are not yet complete, it is impossible to give the details at present. The valuations will, I understand - I have seen them as far as they go - be finally completed in a month or two. The total amount will probably be between £8,000,000 and £9,000,000. It has been stated that the amount will be £10,000,000 or £12,000,000; but it will not reach £9,000,000. -The Commonwealth Government has been frequently criticised for deferring the payment to the States of compensation for the transferred properties. But it must be admitted, in the first instance, that the transfer of properties was really only a nominal one. The properties have not been handed over to a foreign body. The Post Office in Sydney is just as much at the service of the people of Sydney as before Federation. All that has happened is that the Commonwealth Parliament is now trustee for properties for which the State Parliaments were formerly trustees. It will, however, be said that the Constitution enacted that the Commonwealth should compensate each State for the value of the properties transferred to the Commonwealth, the method of compensation to be determined by the Federal Parliament, if no agreement could be made. A little reflection will show that the agreement referred to in the Constitution will have to be made by the States, as the question of compensation is one which affects the Commonwealth Parliament principally, because it has to act as umpire in the matter. For, as any payment by the Commonwealth to the States will be made by charging each State on a population basis, it follows that all that is to be done is to effect an adjustment between the States. Even if the extraordinary course recommended by some were followed, viz. : if the Commonwealth borrowed, say, £8,000,000 or £9,000,000, and paid the amount over to the States, the people of the latter would have to contribute the interest on that loan on a population basis. Supposing, again, that the Commonwealth paid interest on the value of these properties, each State would, as previously explained, De debited on a population basis, and the amount due to each State, viz., the interest on the value of its properties, would be credited to It. . But during the bookkeeping period each State is debited with the expenditure in connexion with the departments transferred. It follows that immediately the Commonwealth commences to pay for the properties, it must debit each State - as part of the ordinary expenditure of the transferred departments- with rent for the buildings it uses. That is, each State will receive interest on the value of the buildings, but will be debited with the rent, viz., the interest which the Commonwealth is paying. The two sets of entries will neutralize each other, the consequence being that, during the bookkeeping period, no compensation will really be paid. Put in another way, during the bookkeeping period each State would be debited with the interest - rent - to be paid to it for the property transferred, *i.e.,* the interest would be charged as " transferred " expenditure. The real reason that has kept this subject in the foreground is that there has been an erroneous impression that, if the Commonwealth has to pay the States, *saY-* £320.000 per annum - the figures are used merely for illustration - it would have to pav the amount out of its one-fourth Customs and Excise revenue, and that this would prevent it from taking advantage of the Surplus Revenue Act to that extent. But th;s is not the case. It must be remembered that the Commonwealth Parliament has to finally decide on the method of compensation, and it has been already explained that what is required is merely an adjustment between the States. As each State has to receive the value of its hans.ferred property in some way, and has to pay its proportion on a population basis of the total amount of the transferred properties of all the States, It follows that the balance between these amounts is all that would be dealt with. The interest on that would not be a considerable sum, so the Commonwealth would not be fettered in the way imagine*!. In regard to the question of stamp printing, it is proposed to establish at once a Commonwealth Stamp Printing Office, under the control of the Treasury. All stamps required by the Commonwealth, with the exception of those of New South Wales and Queensland, will be printed in this office. It is intended to transfer **Mr. Cooke,** who has been in charge of the stamp printing in Adelaide, to take charge of this branch, and it is hoped that , a considerable saving in expenditure will result. {: .speaker-JZF} ##### Mr Fuller: -- Where is the Commonwealth Stamp Printing Office to be established ? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Here. We have a report under consideration as to the stamps to be issued, one Board having recommended a certain method, while the Department recommends another. The question has yet to be decided. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr Fisher: -- I hope that we shall have an opportunity of discussing the question of the kind of stamps to be issued before it is finally settled. {: .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr Frazer: -- Why is it not proposed to print in Melbourne the stamps required for New South Wales and Queensland? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- That matter was arranged, I think, by the right honorable member for Swan, when he held office as Treasurer. The reason for making an exception in the case of New South Wales is that there is in that State an exceptionally fine stamp printing plant. {: .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr Crouch: -- The printing of stamps is carried out much cheaper in Adelaide. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- But the plant there is not as large as we require. A Coinage Bill will shortly be introduced, to authorize the introduction of an Australian silver and bronze coinage. I have very carefully considered the relative advantages of coining the silver in Australia, and of accepting the offer of the Imperial Government to coin any silver required, charging only the cost of coining. I have come to the conclusion that for the present, at least, the wisest course before us is to accept theoffer of the Imperial Government. I anticipate an annual profit of £[21,000 on new coins required, that is, on £[60,000 per annum. There will also be an annual profit for a considerable time to come - say for twenty years - on £[100,000 worth of thepresent silver coin, which we shall be at liberty to withdraw from circulation. The annual profit on this would be about £[35,000, so that, altogether, I anticipate an annual profit of £[56,000. {: .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr Crouch: -- When is a start to be made ? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Immediately. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- Will the coinage of silver take place here? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I would remind the honorable member that all the mints in Australia belong to the Imperial Government. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Why does not the Government accept the offer made by the Western Australian Mint? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- A similar proposal has been made by the mints in other States. The work will be done here by the Imperial authorities. Gold is minted in Western Australia, and the coining of silver will be done here. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Will it not be carried out in the Old Country? {: #subdebate-13-0-s4 .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM, LYNE:
Treasurer · HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · Protectionist -I believe that it will be done here. I am informed-- {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr Deakin: -- I do not think that the coinage of silver will take place here. {: .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr Frazer: -- Who is the Treasurer's informant ? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I have very good information. The coinage of silver will not be undertaken in Perth by the Commonwealth Government. {: .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr Frazer: -- It certainly will not if the honorable member has a voice in the matter. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I have a very friendly feeling towards Perth. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- We have therethe biggest mint in Australia, and it mints more gold than do all the other mints in the States. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I believe that there is a very fine plant in the Western Australian Mint. Since I have been drawn into a. discussion of this phase of the question, let me say that I do not feel disposed" to invite Parliament to agree to all the mint buildings in Australia being taken over by the Commonwealth. If they were, when we established our own mint in the Federal Capital, we should have on our hands a number of buildings that we did not require. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- We do not wish the Commonwealth Government to take over the Western Australian Mint. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- The proposal for locally coining silver and for combining with such coinage the manufacture of brass and cupro-nickel cups has been condemned by the Board of Experts to which it was referred. The report of the Board has already been presented to Parliament. The Board came to the conclusion that the cups for the cartridges could be manufactured in Australia, but that it was not desirable that the Mint should undertake it - also that it was desirable that the manufacture of small-arms ammunition, requiring, as it does, technical skill and expert training entirely foreign to mint work, should be carried out in a separate establishment from the Mint. The reports which have from time to time been made public regarding Papua, show that considerable progress is being made in the development of the Territory. During the year a considerable advance has been made in the cultivation of rubber and cocoanut trees, which do not come into bearing for several years, and sisal hemp, for which a large part of the less valuable country appears specially suited, and which has the advantage of offering a speedier return for capital investment. The Government is endeavouring to assist planters by the establishment of experimental gardens, in which may be seen actually growing specimens of all valuableeconomic plants, and from which intending cultivators may obtain close at hand, and without risk attending importation from abroad, young plants ready to be transplanted as the process of clearing proceeds. These establishments will, it is hoped", in a short time be self-supporting, at any rate, to a large extent. It is contemplated, also, to establish hill gardens at different altitudes, so as to illustrate the very diverse possibilities of the country, and in order that the efforts of growers need not be occupied solely with the rubber trees, cocoanut palms, and other products of the low-lying coastlands, but may be extended to the cultivation of the plateaux and hillsides of Papua's great mountain regions. The Government is looking forward to the result of these efforts hopefully, not merely for the prospect they offer of adding to the list of exportable commodities, but also on account of the opening up of healthier regions, which may be utilized as sanatoria by those suffering from the ills necessarily attending the strenuous life in the tropics. The mining resources of the country furnish an interesting theme for speculation. Gold has been found in many rivers, in some in payable quantities. Its only occurrence at present known in reef form is at Woodlark Island, in the eastern part of the, Territory, where several enterprisers are reaping satisfactory rewards. There appears every reason to hope that when the country becomes opened up, the efforts to discover payable gold reefs may be successful. Within the last two years, copper has been found in the neighbourhood of Port Moresby. The Government, by the establishment of a laboratory and otherwise, has rendered much valuable help to those engaged in this industry. A number of representatives of investors are now engaged in more closely examining the country, with a view to testing the mines to a greater depth ; if local smelting works are constructed, the cost of the expensive land transit and long sea voyage to Australian smelting works will be obviated. Much attention is being given to the making of new roads and tracks, for which special provision was .made last year by Parliament. The work is difficult, but excellent progress is being made. The following table contains some interesting information: - {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Freshly cleared acres ? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Yes. The imports into Australia amounted in J9°7 to £51,809,033, and the exports to £72,824,247 - the exports being £21,015,214 more than the imports. Adding these amounts, £124,633,280 represents the total trade of the year. The last available figures for Canada are for 1906, viz. : imports, £60,492,125; exports, £52,742,807, the total trade being £113,234,932. The imports into . British South Africa were in 1907 £28,266,525, the exports £48,390,763, the total trade being £76,657,288. Such a comparison between the trade of Australia and that of the great Dominion of Canada cannot fail to impress the mind with the great advance mad under Federation by the country in which we live. In 1900, the imports into Australia amounted to £41,388,030, the exports being £45,956/882, representing a total trade for the year of £87,344,912, *or £23* Per head. In 1907, the imports amounted to £51,809,033, and the exports to £72,824,247; the total trade being £124,633,280, or £29 per head. Comparing the year 1907 with 1900, there is an increase in 1907 in imports of £10,421,003. and in exports of £26,867,365, or a total increase in trade of £37,288,368. As regards Inter-State trade in 1904, the nee inward transfers were £29,442,926. In 1907 they amounted to £42,280,980, thus showing the enormous impetus which Federation has given to trade communication between the States. During the three years from 1903 to , 1906 the number of hands employed in factories increased by 33,200, from 195,500 to 228,700 - an average increase of, say, 11,000 per annum. Complete figures for the year 1907 are not yet available, but . those so far to hand bear gratifying evidence that this increase has been considerably augmented. Thus, in New South Wales alone, the number of hands employed in factories increased during 1907 by no less than 9,372, whilst in Victoria an advance of 5,674 was experienced, and in Queensland an advance of about 4,000. It may, therefore, be confidently anticipated that when the complete returns for the Commonwealth are compiled, the increase in the number of hands employed during 1907 will be about 20,000, and the total number for whom employment has been found in manufacturing industries at the end of 1907 was little short of 250, coo - as compared with 195,500 at the end of 1903. The increase in the number of factories during 1907 was also very satisfactory, and amounted to about fifty in Queensland, 170 in Victoria, and no fewer than 526 in New South Wales. In the matter of wages paid, the New South Wales figures increased during the year by £1,087,530 - from £5,591,888 to £6,679,418 - whilst in the. same year those for Victoria also showed a substantia! increase of £514,207 - from £[5,468,470 to £-5,982,677. The total wages' bill for 1907 in connexion wilh Commonwealth manufacturing industries may be said to have amounted approximately to at least £[18,000,000. As an indication of the permanent character of the industries which are being established in the Commonwealth, it may be noted that the value of machinery and plant used in the factories is rapidly increasing, and that the horsepower of engines used is also on the increase. Thus, in Victoria, the value of machinery and plant increased between 1904 and 1907 by ,£744,324 - from £[6,027,134 to .£6,771,458- or nearly £[250,000 per annum ; while in New South Wales the increase between 1904 and 1906 was no less than £758,434, or almost £[380,000 per annum. For 1907, the increase in New South Wales was probably considerably larger, than this latter amount. From 1904 to 1907, the horse-power of engines used increased by 11,844^- from 40,859 to 52,703 - or nearly 4,000 per annum, while in two years in New South Wales, from 1904 to 1906, an increase of 12,349 - from 62,407 to 74,756 - took place, averaging over 6,000 per annum. There is every indication that during 1907 this increase was more than maintained. The extent and importance of the manufacturing industry of the Commonwealth is shown by the fact that the total value of the output for 1907 may be stated approximately at £[90,000,000, of which somewhat less than two-thirds represents the value of the raw materials treated, and upwards of £32,000,000 represents the value added in the process of manufacture. Complete Commonwealth figures of this nature for a series of years are not available, but an indication of the rat? of growth may be obtained from the fact that between 1904 and 1907 the value of the total output of Victorian factories increased by £7,273,765; while between 1904 and 1906 the value of the output of those of New South Wales showed an increase of £7,636,939. The satisfactory nature of the increase in industrial activity already noticed is enhanced by the fact that the improvement has taken place practically all along the line, and has not been due to the abnormal and possibly ephemeral development of some one or two industries. Thus, taking one item of growth only, viz., the increase in the number of hands employed, as furnishing an indication of the progress experienced, it will be found that in the case of New South Wales the class of industries engaged in treating raw materials, the products of pastoral pursuits showed an increase of 549 hands. Wood-working establishments, an increase of 984 hands; metal working establishments, an increase of 2,796 hands; factories producing food, drink, and narcotics, an increase of 640 hands ; clothing and textile factories, an increase of 2,225 hands; printing, bookbinding, &c, an increase of 729 hands; Coach building and harness making, an increase of 795 hands ; boat building, an increase of 107 hands; furniture making, an increase of 154 hands ; chemical works, an increase of 109 hands ; jewellery establishments, an increase of 171 hands; heat, light, and power works, an increase of 119 hands. Though perhaps less strikingly than in New South Wales, the Victorian returns for 1907 also show marked increases in the various industries. The following are the increases in the number of hands employed in various establishments, viz., those treating raw materials the product of pastoral pursuits, 350; stone, clay, and glass works, 174; wood working, 430; metal works, 411; factories producing food, drink, narcotics, 825 ; clothing and textile factories, no less than 2,237 ; printing, bookbinding, &c, 330 ; coachbuilding and harness making. 114; furniture making, 202; chemical works, 175; and heat, light, and energy works, 191 hands. Complete details of output for 1907 are, up to the present, available in comparative form for Victoria and Queensland only. These, however, show- a satisfactory progress in the quantities of the various products turned out by the different classes of factory, and indicate that when full returns are available it will be found that the growth of the manufacturing industry during 1907, from whatever point of view it may be considered, was most satisfactory, and furnishes strong grounds for confidence in the future progress of this side of our national development. The estimated population on the 31st December, 1908, is 4,278,000, viz. - This showed an increase on the previous year of 80,962, a quite inadequate figure, as it includes gains from all sources. As the population of Australia in 1900, was 3,745,840, the increase in the eight years, from all sources, has been only 532,160 - It is anticipated that, in the near future, another Conference of Premiers and Treasurers will be held to discuss the financial relations of the Commonwealth and the States. In view of the near approach of the period when the Commonwealth will be unfettered as regards the expenditure of Customs and Excise revenue, I consider it eminently desirable that a settlement shall be arrived at. The main principle laid down by the Prime Minister and myself at the last Conference was that there must ultimately be a complete severance between the Commonwealth and State finances. The scheme proposed provided for this, and it appears to me, as it is better understood the States will recognise the liberality of the scheme. The State Treasurers have not, however, so far realized the advantages offered them. At present the States are paying annually, Interest, £8,840,000; Expenses, £50,000 ; Sinking Fund contributions, £800,000; Old-age Pensions, £990,000, total, £10,680,000. To place themselves in the position which the Commonwealth Treasurer offers to place them in - that is, of being relieved of their debts, now totalling £247,974,624, in thirty-five years - an annual payment to Sinking Fund, accumulating at 3 per cent, interest, would be necessary of £4,101,000. Deducting the amount now paid to sinking fund by the States, £800,000, £3,301,000 is left. So that they would pay in all £13,981,000. The States now receive from the Commonwealth annually an amount of £7,740,000, which is the average for the last seven years, so that if the present payment by the Commonwealth to the States were continued, they would have themselves to provide £6,241,000. The Commonwealth Government, however, offers to put them in the same position, that is, of having their debts redeemed in thirty-five years, asking for the first five years anannual payment from them of only £2,890,000, so that the States would gain annually, during the first five years £3,351,000. The annual payment by the States to the Commonwealth, £2,890,000, being the difference between £6,000,000 and the present annual payment of interest and expenses, is, after the first five years, proposed to be reduced by a sliding scale operating for thirty years, at the end of which time the States gain annually as compared with the present payments made to them the full amount of £6,241,000. They would then be entirely relieved of their debts, but would retain their assets, many of them revenue producing. As regards their future borrowing, they would secure full advantage of the market, as under the proposed arrangement no clashing of loans could take place. It appears to me that, when the State Treasurers fully realize the liberality of the offer made by the Commonwealth, they will be much more inclined to view the scheme favorably. I hope that the matter will be thoroughly ventilated by the State Parliaments, as I am convinced that the more the proposals are examined the greater will be the conviction that, at any rate, a good basis has been laid down for the settlement of this important question. The following surpluses were announced by the State Treasurers on their transactions for the year ending 30th June, 1908 : - £2, 625, 937, most, if not all, of which was paid to them by the Commonwealth. We, on theother hand, are close up to the limit of our one-fourth of the Customs and Excise revenue under the Braddon section. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- That is not so, seeing that the Government are taking a lot of money under the Surplus Revenue Act. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- We could not do what we want unless we took that money. Banking legislation, especially with regard to a Commonwealth note issue, has been engaging my attention. I have discussed the matter with the Prime Minister, and a Bill has been drafted embodying some of the suggestions of the governor and directors of the Bank of England, whom I had the privilege of meeting when in London. It is intended to introduce the necessary legislation at the first convenient opportunity. {: .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr Crouch: -- To what effect? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I cannot say positively, but it will probably be in the direction of a note issue. {: .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr Crouch: -- Then the Government propose to take over the note issue? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Yes ; but I do not want to confine myself actually to that statement. I have estimated that £[12,000 will be sufficient this year to pay the iron bonuses. No one year will be burdened with more than £[50,000. I trust that the policy of granting these bonuses will be of great benefit to Australia, and will open up avenues of employment to a large number of people. This industry is one that Germany, the United States, and Canada, especially have done their best to foster, either by protection or by bonuses, or by a combination of both. Considering the immense deposits of ore known to exist in Australia, instead of importing millions of pounds' worth annually df iron in a raw and manufactured state, the development of these natural resources should, within a short period, place Australia in the front rank of the iron-producing countries of the world j and while we cannot afford to undertake this development at a loss, we can, by means of a bonus, give the necessary impetus to this great industry. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Bv the payment of £[30,000 a year? Will that not all go to one firm? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- No. Provision is made in the Bill that if claims involving more than £30,000 are made the money can be divided equally amongst the claimants. Another great and urgent reason for development is the necessity for having the raw material for defence in time of trouble. The amount of £[12.000 has been included in the Estimates for the current year. Then the expenditure will probably proceed more rapidly - probably at the rate of about .£[50,000 per annum. It is somewhat premature at the present time to express any opinion on the operation of the Bounties Act of 1907. The provisions we made for the encouragement of certain industries by that measure were exceedingly liberal. It should, however, be borne in mind that the bounties were for the encouragement of future cultivation and development of the special' industries we desire to promote. I look forward with great confidence to a substantial increase in the value of our production by reason of the assistance which the bounty will afford, and have no doubt" it will have the effect of permanently establishing several new and prosperous industries. Although the amount paid away in bounties last year was small, being only £[176, it is anticipated that during the current year £[15,000 will be expended. A Bill in relation to the Northern Territory will shortly be laid before Parliament. The great importance of opening up and settling the Territory need not be dwelt upon now, as the matter will be fully considered later on. The expenditure this year will be very small. The steps necessary to determine the precise site for the Capital of Australia are now being taken, and will, it is hoped, result in a choice which will be confirmed bv the whole people of the Commonwealth. The outlay during the present year will bc small, and can readily be met from the " Treasurer's Advance." The loss on the Pacific 'Cable for the year ending 31st March last was £[62,362 10s., the Commonwealth proportion of which was £[20,787 ros. -For the period ending 31 st March, 1903, the loss was £[90,518 14s. 4<3., the Commonwealth proportion being £[30,172 14s. 9d. For the year ending 31st March, TQ04, the loss was £87,751 4s. 5d., the Commonwealth proportion being £29,250 8s. 2d. For the year ending 31st March, 1905, the loss was £75,849 18s. 6d., the Commonwealth proportion being £[25,283 6s. 2d. For the year ending 31st March, 1906. the loss- was £72,556 is. 9d., the Commonwealth proportion being £24,185 7s. 3d. For the year ending 31st March, i9°7> the loss was £54,923 12s. 2d., the Commonwealth proportion being £18,307 17 s. 5d. This year the revenue was considerably increased owing to the earthquake at San Francisco. Communications are at prescent proceeding with our representative in London in respect to the possibility of further popularizing this line of communication. A proposal for the application of a system of wireless telegraphy to the groups of islands in the Western Pacific is now engaging the attention of the Government. Last session a Quarantine Act was passed, to come into operation as soon as proclaimed. The Comptroller-General was directed to proceed to the various States, and - with the concurrence of the respective Governments - to arrange for the performance of duties and transfers of properties. Satisfactory arrangements have so far been made with the States of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, and Tasmania, and, it is expected, will be shortly concluded with South and Western Australia. The object of such arrangements has been, as far as _possible, to avoid duplication of work and undue increase of expenditure as regards the necessary staffs, and as far as practicable to make use of the services of the State officers who have control of local health matters or those relating to stock and plants. The upkeep of the present quarantine stations and plant will involve considerable expenditure, though the exact amount cannot be precisely ascertained at present, and new expenditure will be necessary in order to bring the condition and equipment of such stations up to date. In one or two cases it may be necessary to provide altogether new stations with a resulting expenditure for buildings and plant. The survey for the line from Kalgoorlie to Port Augusta is being proceeded with. **Mr. Deane** furnished a report on roth October that the line has been located for 365 miles, and that he expected to be able to complete the work by the end of last month. The line had been pegged for 220 miles. It is expected- that all field work in this portion of the Tine will be completed before the end of the year. With regard to water, shallow borings have been in progress for about 100 miles, but so far no success has been met with. There appears to be no difficulty in providing catchments for water between Kalgoorlie and the edge of the Nullaboor Plain, and it is probable that dams can be constructed for conserving the water. On the Nullaboor Plain, which is of limestone formation, and full of joints and small crevices, there may be more difficulty, and artificial catchments may have to be resorted to. The Western Australian Government, it is understood, contemplates spending more money on bores in. this region, and should good results ensue the water difficulty will be minimized. Good broken stone ballast can be obtained for the first 100 miles. From there to the edge of the Nullaboor Plain, about 180 miles, it does not exist, but in the plain, limestone will be available. The distance from Kalgoorlie to the border is approximately 460 miles, of which about 273 miles will be across the Nullaboor Plain. As regards the South Australian portion of the line, it is reported that between Port Augusta and Tarcoola it will be possible to get sufficient catchment areas for reservoirs, not only for construction purposes, but also for working the line. From Tarcoola to the border excavated reservoirs with artificial catchment areas will have to be provided. The field work on this portion will, it is expected, be completed by March "next, after which plans and estimates will be prepared for sub-, mission to Parliament. As the actual work of survey was not taken in hand before the beginning of June, it 'may be reasonably anticipated that the whole work will be completed within the period of twelve months estimated as necessary by the conference of engineers. In connexion with railway matters, I might mention that negotiations are now being , entered into with the eminent Australian inventor, **Mr. Brennan,** for the right to use his mono rail throughout the Commonwealth. Should a tentative agreement be arrived at, it will be laid before Parliament without delay. I understand that the Indian Government have already made some such arrangement. {: .speaker-F4P} ##### Mr Reid: -- The Indian Government has control of the railways. There are none under our control. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- We may use the system in the construction of two transcontinental railways.' The vessel which is being built by the Government of the State of New South Wales under contract with the Commonwealth, and to which some additional interest attaches as the first vessel obtained by the Commonwealth Government, was launched at the end of August, being christened the *Endeavour,* after Captain Cook's famous ship. She is now being fitted with boiler, machinery, &c. Experts pronounce the vessel to be a very fine model, and well suited for the purpose for which it is intended. Comment has been made as to the difference in price between this vessel and an ordinary Scotch trawler, but this is evidently made without knowledge of the facts. The *Endeavour* is not an ordinary trawler for commercial purposes, but a vessel for scientific investigation and experimental trawling. Moreover, under the enlightened labour laws of the Commonwealth, she will carry a much larger crew than the trawlers of the Northern Seas, and their accommodation will be of a vastly different kind. Even if the craft has cost more, the money has gone in wages to our fellow citizens, and not out of the country, andhas helped to demonstrate that it is not necessary to send abroad for everything. I think I can fairly claim that the financial position which I have placed before the Committee is one which makes it possible for us to face the demands of the future with confidence. If I may assume that the States will take a reasonable view of the financial situation as a. whole, and that we can arrive at an agreement with them during the current financial year, many of the difficulties that hitherto have seemed insurmountable will be got out of the way. We may look forward to the inauguration of a national system of oldage pensions, to the placing of the public services of the Commonwealth - especially the Post and Telegraph Department - on an efficient and economical basis, and to carrying out our proposals for coastal and harbor defence. Although the financial aspect of the sugar industry is not satisfactory to me, yet the great success of white labour is worth a good deal to us. We have demonstrated that, even in the warmest areas, and at the coast levels, arduous field work can be well done by white men. I have only to say, in conclusion, that I have done, and am doing, my best to smooth financial difficulties, and I think that honorable members may well congratulate themselves that, under all the circumstances, we have done so well, and that we shall so soon emerge into what cannot fail to prove an easier period for the Treasurer of the Commonwealth. I move - >That the item "The President,£1,100," be agreed to. {: #subdebate-13-0-s5 .speaker-F4P} ##### Mr REID:
EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906 .- Until we have been able to read the document which has been read to the House to-night, we shall not be in a position to discuss the financial problems which have been put before us. Therefore, I ask that progress be reported, to give us an opportunity to study the Estimates, and to make ourselves generally acquainted with the position. {: .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr Crouch: -- I point out that, although the first item of the Estimates is before the Committee, the Estimates themselves have not yet been distributed. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · PROT; IND from 1910 -- They should have been circulated while I was speaking. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr Fisher: -- I trust that the Treasurer will have them circulated. We are not children. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- It is not intended to treat honorable members as children, and they are not being asked to consider anything now, because I intend to accept the suggestion to report progress. The messengers are now distributing the Estimates. I could not attend to the matter personally. Progress reported. {: .page-start } page 1181 {:#debate-14} ### SUPPLY BILL (No. 2) 1908-9 Supply Bills - Form of Estimates - Salaries and Contingencies - " Savings." *In Committee of Supply:* {: #debate-14-s0 .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE:
Treasurer · Hume · Protectionist -- I move - >That a sum not exceeding£727,749 be granted to His Majesty for or towards defraying the services of the year ending 30th June, 1909. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr Batchelor: -- Why was not this motion moved earlier? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I did not dare to bring in a Supply Bill until I had made my Budget Statement. I gave notice of this motion yesterday. The Bill grants supply for a period of two months. The last Supply Act provided for a period of three months, ending the 30th September last, the expenditure therein authorized being £1,172,625 on ordinary services, £40,000 for refunds of revenue, and £200,000 as an advance to the Treasurer, or, altogether, £1,412,625. In the present Bill the ordinary expenditure provided for is £717,749, while the refunds of revenue amount to £10,000, making in all £727,749. No increases in salary will be paid on the authority of this Bill, except the ordinary increments to officers who do not receive more than £160 per annum. The expenditure under it will be on the basis of last year's Estimates. It is usual to pay on the 15th of the month, but as the Senate will probably not deal with the Bill until to-morrow, it is proposed to pay this month on the 16th. As it is necessary to pass the measure to-night, and it contains no debatable matter, I trust that it may go through without delay. {: #debate-14-s1 .speaker-F4P} ##### Mr REID:
East Sydney .- If the Treasurer gave notice of this motion last night, my objection to the Bill is removed. I cannot quarrel with him for holding back the Bill until after the financial statement. Considerable objection would have been taken to any other course. On the assurance of the Treasurer that there is nothing but the ordinary expenditure of the Departments provided for-- {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- That is all. {: .speaker-F4P} ##### Mr REID: -- So long as that is understood, I do not object to the granting of two months' supply. {: #debate-14-s2 .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER:
Wide Bay .-I understand that this is a Supply Bill for two months on the basis of the old Estimates, and that the item of " contingencies," so interesting to us all, is on the same scale as previously. Is any money provided in this Bill for the Treasurer's advance ? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- The Treasurer's advance will be in part recouped. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER: -- I understand that a good deal has already been paid out of the Treasurer's advance, and that this Bill will replenish the Treasury chest. Is there any extraordinary expenditure in the Bill ? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- No. I have not been through the Bill, but I am informed by the Secretary that there is no extraordinary expenditure. {: #debate-14-s3 .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr FRAZER:
Kalgoorlie .- This is not the sort of Bill that ought to be put through on one day's notice at such an Interesting stage. We have had a statement from the Treasurer to-night dealing with quite a. variety of subjects, and now we are asked, without having had time to consider the Budget speech to give the Government financial authority to proceed for two months. Although the Treasurer may have justification for not having submitted a Supply Bill prior to the Budget statement, he is not justified in submitting the Bill immediately on the delivery of the Budget speech. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr Deakin: -- It iscustomary. {: .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr FRAZER: -- Not since I have been in the House. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr Deakin: -- It has been done again and again. {: .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr FRAZER: -- I beg to differ from the Prime Minister. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I have to make payments the clay after to-morrow. {: .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr FRAZER: -- That may be. But the Treasurer has been acquainted with the necessities of his office for a considerable period, and, if these were pressing, the Budget statement might have been made at an earlier date. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- We met only on the 16th of last month, and I could not have made the Budget statement earlier. Mr.FRAZER.- I think the Treasurer could have done so. Surely the Treasurer does not say that his Budget speech depends on the date of the meeting of the House? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I have plenty to do - I work hard enough. {: .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr FRAZER: -- If the Treasurer thinks he is overworked, I suppose there are many here prepared to suggest an easier occupation for him. I do not think we shall find many special items in the Supply Bill, but if we once give up our right to express a definite opinion on the finances, we lose our usefulness, and to pass the Supply Bill under the circumstances is to fail in our duty to the Commonwealth. There seems to be no reason why we should not wait until we have had an opportunity of seeing: the Budget statement in print to-morrow. {: .speaker-L0K} ##### Dr Carty Salmon: -- *Hansard* is not published until Saturday. {: .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr FRAZER: -- But the newspapers generally report the Budget speech, and when we have seen it, we shall be in a better position to decide whether two months' supply shall be granted. Some of the items are certainly deserving of investigation. There is a considerable number of "contingencies"; in fact, it is a Supply Bill of "contingencies." The administration of some of the Departments is open; to objection ; and the votes, for instance, under the Post and Telegraph Department require explanation. We find items of £90 for salaries, and £90 for contingencies, followed by £708 for salaries, and £1,000 for contingencies; and, in the case of the Commonwealth offices in London,. £215 for salaries, and £1,310 for contingencies. Members ought to have an opportunity of comparing these votes with the proposals in the Budget statement; and the Government will.be well advised to allow the Bill to stand over for a little time. I do not wish to take up an attitude of hostility towards the Bill ; but, in the matter of the finances, we ought to have the fullest information, and I believe that the majority of honorable members are not agreeable to putting through the Bill to-night. {: #debate-14-s4 .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr BATCHELOR:
Boothby -- - There seems a desire to push this Bill through, but I suppose it has been placed before us for criticism. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- There is nothing in the Bill except votes based on the old Estimates, which were fully discussed. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr BATCHELOR: -- If that be so, it seems quite idle to place the proposals before us in this form, because we might as well have merely an abstract. The votes are divided into salaries and contingencies, and we are given no idea as to what the votes for "contingencies" cover. It is a waste of good paper and ink to put the Bill before honorable members in this form. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- There is nothing in the Bill to discuss that was not discussed .last year. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr BATCHELOR: -- What is the object of submitting the Bill in this form? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- That the public servants may -be paid the day after tomorrow. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- I see that there is £[57,000 down for cables in the Estimates. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- The Bill is not based on those Estimates. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr BATCHELOR: -- When a Supply Bill is submitted to Parliament the assumption is that honorable members will have an opportunity to discuss it if they so desire. But in postponing the delivery of the Budget speech till the last moment and making it necessary to suspend the Standing Orders in order to pass a Supply Bill, the Treasurer has not treated, honorable members with proper consideration. In the circumstances he might very well have delivered his Budget speech a few days earlier. I do not complain that the honorable gentleman is wanting in industry, but of his having left the delivery of the Budget until the Treasury is exhausted, and it has become necessary to pass a Supply Bill within a few hours if the public servants are to be paid. The Treasurer practically says, " Open your mouth, shut your eyes, and trust me." {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- It would be all j right if honorable members would always trust me. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr BATCHELOR: -- It would no doubt be all right for the Minister. The honorable gentleman has given no justification for asking that this Bill should be pushed through as a matter of urgency. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I have said that I require the money to pay the public ser vants the day after to-morrow. If they are not paid they will have to thank the honorable gentleman. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr BATCHELOR: -- Of what use is it for the honorable gentleman to talk in that way? He knows well that he should not have placed honorable members in such a position that if they discuss this Bill they must delay the payment of the salaries of the public servants. Honorable members should not be placed in such a position. The Treasurer knew that a Supply Bill would be required at this time, and he should have made his arrangements accordingly. {: #debate-14-s5 .speaker-JSM} ##### Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- It is not right that the introduction of such an important measure as this should have been delayed until the money in the Treasury was exhausted, or that honorable members at the close of a trying sitting should be asked to rush through a number of important items of expenditure presented in such a way as to give no information. We have been told that this Bill is. founded on last year's Estimates, but it contains merely a number of votes for salaries and contingencies. What is meant by contingencies is left to the imagination. It is well known that the stages of the Supply Bill is required in order that honorable members may be given an opportunity to criticise the action of the Government and the work of the public Departments. The country at the present time is very much dissatisfied with the administration of some of the more important Departments, and, notably, of the Treasury. During last year and the greater portion of this year there has been a game of battledore and shuttlecock going on between the Treasury and Post and Telegraph Department. When 'the Post and Telegraph Department has been blamed for not carrying out its work the officers of that Department have in their turn blamed the Treasury for not having provided them with sufficient money. We had a statement from the Treasurer this afternoon in which the honorable gentleman attempted to explain where the trouble really lies, but it was of so discursive a character that I think it must have left honorable members in as big a fog as ever. Now the honorable gentleman asks us to forego our right of criticism, and I enter my strong protest against this unbusinesslike method of conducting the business of the country. I can quite understand the force of the contention that the salaries of the public servants must be provided for almost immediately. But who is to blame for that ? The blame certainly rests with the Government for having neglected to afford the House a reasonable opportunity to criticise the expenditure upon various Departments. In connexion with the Electoral Office, it is proposed to appropriate £900 for salaries, and £250 for "contingencies." In the same Department we are asked to vote £6,000 for expenses connected with the administration of the Electoral Act, in the absence of any explanation as to what that large sum is intended to cover. We have been informed that the expenditure incurred in connexion with the recent visit of the American Fleet aggregated £30,000, and we are now asked to vote £6,000 to cover immediate demands consequent upon those festivities. The Bill is practically divided into two parts, the first of which relates to " salaries," and the next to " contingencies." Nobody appears, to understand what the latter term covers, and it is only reasonable that particulars should be forthcoming. Under " Transferred Expenditure," we are asked to appropriate £442,000 for the purposes of the Postal Department, in addition to £5,070 under the heading of " Other " expenditure. Yet we are to be prevented from criticising the administration of the Department. I protest against the Bill being dealt with in the hasty manner proposed. {: #debate-14-s6 .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr TUDOR:
Yarra .- I certainly think that we are entitled to an explanation of the expenditure covered by the term " contingencies . ' ' {: .speaker-L1H} ##### Dr Liddell: -- In Victoria, the expenditure under that heading amounts to £30,000, which is equal to the sum expended in all the other States. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr TUDOR: -- I would point out to the honorable member that the salaries which we are asked to vote in connexion with the Postal Department In New South Wales to which he refers amount to £88,000, and the contingencies represent £33,000, whereas in Victoria the salaries total £70,000, and the contingencies are responsible for only £10,000. I should like the Postmaster-General to say why in Tasmania the expenditure under " contingencies " represents almost 50 per cent, of the amount payable as salaries, whilst in Victoria it represents only oneseventh of the salaries payable? Should the Commonwealth public servants not receive the salaries due to them at the middle of this month, I do not desire the responsibility to be thrown upon me. That fault must rest with the Government. I certainly think that it is due to the House that we should know what particular items in this Bill " contingencies " are intended to cover. {: #debate-14-s7 .speaker-K99} ##### Mr JOHNSON:
Lang .- Honorable members have had this Bill before them, for so short a time that they have not been able to go through it. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- All the items were discussed last year. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr JOHNSON: -- We have not had an opportunity of examining those items. The Bill consists of "salaries" and "contingencies," the latter involving the expenditure of immense sums. I should like to know what items are covered by "contingencies." I also desire to know whether the large amount which it is proposed to expend upon defence in New South Wales includes any sum connected with the new defence scheme of the Government. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- The Bill provides for no works at all, but merely for the payment of ordinary salaries. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr JOHNSON: -- I have always protested against these Supply Bills being placed before us in this way. I understood that the Treasurer intended to institute a new order of things. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I have made the Budget statement earlier than it has ever been made before. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr JOHNSON: -- That is perfectly true. But are we to continue dealing with the finances by means of monthly Supply Bills? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- No. I can assure the honorable member that I abhor the system as much as he does. It is only since the 16th September that I have been afforded an opportunity to prepare my Budget. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr JOHNSON: -- If the Treasurer will adhere to his expressed determination, I am sure the House will be exceedingly glad. {: #debate-14-s8 .speaker-KUF} ##### Mr SPENCE:
Darling .-In this Bill, I find that it is proposed to vote no less a sum than £170,000 under the heading of " Contingencies." I feel justified, therefore, in protesting against the continuation of this slipshod method of doing business. Under it the House is robbed of all control of the finances - one of its most important functions. We may take the ordinary running expenditure as based upon the regular Estimates. Just aswe may keep a check upon the turnover in a business, so we say that it is reasonable to estimate that in two months a certain amount will be required. But, as regards how the money is to be spent, we are in the dark, as I believe the Treasurer is. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I have already stated that the vote is based on last year's Estimates. {: .speaker-KUF} ##### Mr SPENCE: -- That is not a good way of doing the business of the country, andit is time that a greater effort was made to do away with Supply Bills, and to let us know the purposes for which we are asked to vote public money. It seems to me that it would have been a far simpler plan to ask for a lump sum for each Department. It is a rough method to ask so much for salaries and so much for contingencies, as that does not leave us in a proper position to control the finances. I do not wish to offer any obstruction to the passage of the Bill as the salaries have to be paid. {: #debate-14-s9 .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE:
Treasurer · Hume · Protectionist -- I did not anticipate any objection on the part of honorable members to proceeding with the Bill to-night. I do not think that any Treasurer has taken such precautions as I have taken on this occasion to stop, if possible, the necessity for passing Supply Bills. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- To begin with, the honorable gentleman is taking three months' supply. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- No, two months' supply. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- The honorable gentleman has had one month's supply already. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Before the close of last session, we took three months' supply in order to enable honorable members to have a recess for that period. I stated then that I would bring down the Estimates as early as possible after the House re-assembled. On the 16th September last, we met again, and I had to prepare a statement of a very difficult character, but within a month from that time I have made it. I refrained from asking for a Supply Bill before I made that statement, because I did not think that it would have been fair to honorable members to do so. Honorable members must not think that we can do without Supply Bills even when the Estimates have been passed. Suppose, for instance, that we passed the new Estimates during this week. The House would not part with the Appropria tion Bill until nearly the end of the session. The power to pay under the approved Estimates would be suspended until the last few days of the session. What would be the practical result? I should have to come down to the House every month, or every second month, with a new Bill based upon the Estimates hanging in suspense. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- The difference is that the honorable gentleman would be proceeding on the basis of Estimates which had been approved of by the House. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Approved, but not passed. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- That is a mere formality. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- We cannot do without Supply Bills. On this occasion, I can pay up to to-morrow. I want the House to pass the Bill to-night, although it is late, so that it can be put through the Senate to-morrow night, and I can pay the money to public servants next morning. Otherwise, it matters nothing to me whether it is passed to-night or not. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- How much of this sum of £700,000 has already been expended ? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Nothing. The Bill covers a period of two months. I have worked very hard, with a view to secure to the Housea, control over the Estimates. If I had not done what I have done, it might reasonably have complained. I am asking, not for two months' supply based on the new Estimates, but for two months' supply based on the Estimates for last year. The Bill does not include any extraneous items or works which are debatable. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- The honorablegentleman is following the usual course. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Exactly. As regards the contingencies, I would remind honorable members that every item of them was debated here at length last session, and explanations given which can be seen in *Hansard.* I did not anticipate that there would be any debate regarding contingencies to-night, because they were debated last year. I expected that the House would vote the sums for which I am asking until such time as we can pass the Estimates. If the state of public business permits, I want the Prime Minister to allow me an opportunity to deal with the Estimates as early as possible, so that we may vote the money, and know what we are going to do before we ask for another Supply Bill. That is the proper course to take with reference to our expenditure, which ought to be controlled by Parliament. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- The worst of the thing is that the honorable gentleman is asking for Supply on the basis of last year's Estimates for a period of five months. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Will the honorable member tell me how it is possible to do otherwise? {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- Surely the Estimates could have been brought down much earlier ! {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- No; they have been brought down within a month from the beginning of the session. It has been an unheard-of thing for a Treasurer to bring down the Estimates and deliver his Budget speech as early as I have done this session. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- I think that the Budget was delivered earlier last year. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- No; not by a month. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Yes ; but the Treasurer had three months' supply before. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- First, the debate on the Address-in-Reply took a long while, and the Defence Bill and the Seat of Government Bill have been debated for a considerable time. I am sure that the House has been thoroughly occupied ever since 'it met. Even if 1 had wanted to make my statement earlier, I could not have obtained the necessary information until the present time. I could not, for instance, form a reasonable estimate of the revenue likely to be obtained from Customs and Excise until the beginning or middle of this month. In the early part of this year, it looked as if we were not likely to have anything like the revenue which we now have a prospect of receiving. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- Last year, we had the Estimates and the Budget speech on the 8th August, that is two months and one day earlier than on this occasion. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- The House had been sitting for some time. {: .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr Frazer: -- That does not matter. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I feel very keenly that it is most unfair to ask me to do impossibilities. I have strained even nerve in order to arrive at the present position, so that we can go on at any moment with the Estimates, and let honorable members vote the money before we ask them to pass another Supply Bill. I would ask' for only one month's supply to-night, but, before we could turn round, we should! have to ask for another Supply Bill, and. the same trouble would be experienced. {: .speaker-KVJ} ##### Mr Storrer: -- Honorable members did not object to the granting of three months' supply in order that we might have a three, months' holiday. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I do not desire to say anything about that, but 1 appeal to honorable members not to press their objections to this Bill being passed to-night, since it is necessary that it should be dealt with speedily in order that thepublic servants may receive their salaries without delay. I promise that, if possible,, the Estimates will be discussed before further supply is asked for. I do not think it. is proper that supply should be obtained,, in the ordinary course of events, until theEstimates have been dealt with, but I have no option in the special circumstances of the case. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr Fisher: -- From1 what item is theTreasurer's Advance Account replenished ?- {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I have advanced certain amounts during the lastthree months, and when this Bill is passedI shall have authority to recoup the Treasurer's Advance. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr Fisher: -- And then the honorablemember will proceed once more to doleout sums? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Quite so. *T* had to adopt that course on three different occasions last year, whilst the Tariff wasunder consideration. When a Supply -Bill was passed I was able to replenish theTreasurer's Advance Account, and I managed in that- way to carry on until, the Estimates were dealt with. I am asking the Committee to grant this supply,, and then to consider the Estimates. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- When? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- As soon as possible. I intend to ask the Prime Minister to afford the Committee an early opportunity of proceeding with the consideration of the Estimates. T have not held office as Treasurer of the Commonwealth for any length of time, and I certainly do not wish to continue a practice to which I have often objected. I desire to secure the reputation of giving the House an opportunity to deal with the Estimates at the earliest possible date. I intend to seek such an opportunity, and I am sure that honorable members will accept my statement. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr Fisher: -- When shall we resume the debate on the Budget - on Tuesday? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- The resumption of the debate will, I think, be set down on the notice-paper for Tuesday next. {: #debate-14-s10 .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 . -I am glad to bear testimony to the truth of the statement made by the Treasurer that, when in opposition, he has always fiercely assailed the system which he is now carrying out. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I could not do anything else than what I am doing. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I am not quite sure that the honorable member could not. I, for one, think that it is time we made a stand for the control ofthe expenditure of the Commonwealth by this House. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I quite admit that. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- In recent years we have lost entirely any real and effective scrutiny of the expenditure of the Commonwealth. It may be to some honorable members a very light matter to vote away large sums as they have been doing of recent years, but it is high time that we applied ourselves in a proper way to a strict investigation of the moneys that the country requires. I object most strongly to the way in which this expenditure is covered up under the heading of " contingencies." I think, **Mr. Chairman,** that the way in which the Treasurer is carrying on in the Labour corner is positively indecent. I suggest that we should elect a chairman for the Corner; we should then be able to proceed. {: #debate-14-s11 .speaker-KYD} ##### Mr POYNTON:
Grey **.- Mr. Chairman,** it seems to me-- {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I have not finished. {: #debate-14-s12 .speaker-10000} ##### The CHAIRMAN: -The honorable member resumed his seat. {: .speaker-KYD} ##### Mr POYNTON: -- I find it refreshing to listen to this outcry against the voting of large sumsunder the heading of "Contingencies." I have a vivid recollection of the stand which I took for three years in the early history of this Parliament in opposition to the practice of voting large sums under the headings of "Contingencies," " Salaries," and " Miscellaneous," without anything like complete information as to what those items covered. **Sir George** Turner, who was then Treasurer, assured us that everything was in perfect order, and I met with little sympathy. We were told by the Treasurer ofthe day that the Supply Bills, as they were submitted to us from time to time, provided for ordinary expenditure, and his assurance was accepted. That is why I am surprised that honorable members to-night are not prepared to accept a similar assurance from the Treasurer. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr Batchelor: -- We have come round to the honorable member's way of thinking. {: .speaker-KYD} ##### Mr POYNTON: -- This discussion recalls to my mind the complaint made tonight by the Treasurer in the course of his Budget statement, that States officials were to blame for the large unexpended balances in respect of votes for the carrying out of public works for the Commonwealth. The delay in carrying out public works is due to the fact that, as a rule, six months of the financial year have passed before the Estimates relating to new works and buildings are dealt with. {: .speaker-K4I} ##### Mr HUME COOK:
BOURKE, VICTORIA · PROT -- That is only partially the reason. {: .speaker-KYD} ##### Mr POYNTON: -- That, at all events, was the cause of the trouble in South Australia. The Treasurer ought to submit the Estimates earlier in the year, so that new works may be proceeded with. We are invariably told that works that are really urgent cannot be proceeded with until the Estimates are passed. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr Fisher: -- That is necessary, otherwise Parliament would have no control over the expenditure. {: .speaker-KYD} ##### Mr POYNTON: -- While it may be necessary, I do not think that we ought to blame States officials for delay in carrying out public works, which is due rather to the late stage in the sessionin which the Estimates are usually passed. The Estimates for new works and buildings will not be dealt with this year until Christmas is close at hand. The States authorities generally have six months in which to carry out these works. And at the end of that time a large amount of the money is naturally unexpended, and a number of people are complaining that the works are not completed. A large amount was not expended last year. The blame really attaches to us for not passing the Estimates in time to allow the work to be done. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I wish to have the Estimates passed in time this year. {: .speaker-KYD} ##### Mr POYNTON: -- With regard to the Supply Bill itself, for three years, on every possible occasion, I raised objections, and was assured that there was nothing new in the items voted. We have had a similar assurance from the Treasurer to-night. He tells us that the votes are based upon the actual expenditure in the previous year. I see nothing to object to in the Bill in that respect, though I should certainly like to obtain fuller details as to the expenditure covered by "Miscellaneous" and " Contingencies." There is one Department as to which the vote for salaries is £1,500, whilst the " Contingencies" are £700 and the " Miscellaneous " £6,000. That is to say the vote for " Miscellaneous ' ' is four times the amount for salaries. {: #debate-14-s13 .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- It is time that we made a protest against the way in which these Estimates are presented to Parliament. I am not saying this for the first time. It is positively absurd for us to attempt to criticise the details. Everything is covered up in "Contingencies," "Miscellaneous," and other items for which we have no details. We are voting this money without knowing what it is for, on the simple assurance of the Treasurer that it is "all right." We have been doing the same sort of thing for eighteen months. Last year we did it until the very closing month of the financial year, when we passed a final Supply Bill, the Estimates not having been dealt with. If we could see any prospect of a reasonable scrutiny of the Estimates during the currency of this Supply Bill, there would not be so much to object to in it. Considering that no very urgent public business is going forward, the Government ought at least to be content with Supply for one month. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- If I asked for Supply for one month, I should have to come to Parliament again before very long. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I suppose that the Treasurer will have to come back again after this Bill is passed. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I hope not. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- The expression of a pious hope brings us no nearer to what we desire. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- The honorable member may take it that I expect to see what I desire attained. {: #debate-14-s14 .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- If I had an assurance that there was a prospect of our proceeding with the Estimates, I should be more content. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- We cannot proceed with the Estimates until next Tuesday. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Is it proposed to do so then? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I have spoken to the Prime Minister about the matter, and he will give me every opportunity to proceed with the Etimates after the Budget discussion is disposed of. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I consider that that is a very reasonable state of affairs. If that is to be the policy of the Government, I can only express the hope that it will be adhered to. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I am in earnest about it. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Then there will be no further need for Supply Bills, and on that understanding I have nothing further to say. {: #debate-14-s15 .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER:
Wide Bay .- It is refreshing to know that the deputy leader of the Opposition is waking up to his duties. Is it not a fact that the form of this Bill is different from any other temporary Supply Bill brought before any other Parliament in Australia, and is not its form occasioned by a desire to please another Chamber? It would be far better if the Treasurer wanted £750,000 for temporary supply purposes, to omit details. The details now supplied' are worthless, as every one admits. On a previous occasion, when the honorable member for Parramatta raised a question about contingencies, I said that we ought not to deceive the public in these matters. The details supplied with this Bill are really nothing more than a placard. They are furnished for no other purpose than to meet the wishes of another place.I admit at once that there ought to be more financial discussion in this House than there has been in the past. I venture to say that had I occupied the fortunate position that the members of the Opposition occupy now, I should have "taken occasion by the hand " and performed that duty. But apparently the duty now devolves upon those who sit on the Ministerial side of the Chamber. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr Johnson: -- Suppose the honorable member were to exercise the dutyof criticism at once. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER: -- I am prepared to doit at the proper time. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr Johnson: -- There is no time like the present. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER: -- I do not propose to ask the Opposition to choose the time that I think proper. We might very well. allow the Bill 'to go through after the assurances that have been given. {: #debate-14-s16 .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr TUDOR:
Yarra .- I interjected a question a few minutes ago as to whether it was not a fact that the Budget and the Tariff were introduced together last year. I believe they were introduced on the 8th August. The Treasurer gives as an excuse for delay on the present occasion that Parliament has not been sitting. But he has had a sufficient recess, and the Budget could have been prepared then. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- How does the honorable member expect that I could do it while the American Fleet was here? {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr TUDOR: -- That is a novel excuse for the Treasurer to make. I do not know how much of the money voted for Works and Buildings last year was unexpended, but I direct attention to one page of the Estimates relating to New South Wales. On page 284 it will be seen that £25,528 was voted, and only £[4,900 was spent. On the next page the total appropriated for New South Wales was £[40,000, of which only £[10,000 was spent. Those Estimates were passed last year earlier than is likely to be the case this year. Do the Government propose any different system in order to expedite the works? For Victoria £77,000 was appropriated, and only £[27,000 spent. Are we to continue to pass Estimates for large sums for works and buildings, of which only about one-fourth or one-fifth will be expended? What is the use of voting money in that way year after year ? We are asked to vote five months' supply on the basis of the old Estimates, without a penny for works arid buildings. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I cannot go into those to-night. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr TUDOR: -- They will be hung up until the ordinary Estimates have been dealt with, and then we shall get' the same treatment as was meted out last year. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I have kicked up enough row about the present system, {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr TUDOR: -- That is all the honorable member does. Having been as long in office as he has, he ought to be able to give the information I ask for. {: #debate-14-s17 .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE:
Treasurer · Hume · Protectionist -- I referred to the question of' lapsed votes to-night in my Budget statement, and condemned what appeared to be a laxity in connexion with the nonexpenditure of a large sum. I said that I had made inquiries, and was astonished to find that the money had not been expended. 1 was informed that it was difficult to get the State Departments to do this work as energetically as they should. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- This is the worst year that we have ever had in that respect. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I think it is. I have urged the Minister of Home Affairs to see that the works are proceeded with without delay, and not to allow votes to lapse, as they did last year. I have emphasized the necessity for action by him in that direction. The Post and Telegraph Department expended within £[8,000 of the vote passed for its purposes last year. {: .speaker-L0K} ##### Dr Carty Salmon: -- Does the Treasurer intend to go on with the Estimates next Tuesday ? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Yes; and the Prime Minister has given me authority to say that, whenever it is possible, I shall proceed with the Estimates until they are completed. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- When shall we get the new works and buildings Estimates? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Immediately the debate on the Budget is concluded, the works and buildings Estimates will be dealt with. I will sit here late, if other honorable members will, to get the work done. I am in earnest, as Treasurer, in desiring to get the Estimates passed in a proper fashion, and at a proper time, instead of having to ask for Supply Bills. {: #debate-14-s18 .speaker-K99} ##### Mr JOHNSON:
Lang .Aftei the strong expressions of dissatisfaction from honorable members in the Labour corner, and especially after the speech of the leader of the Labour Party, I feel that the proper thing to do is to move - >That the proposed vote be reduced by *£i.* {: #debate-14-s19 .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr BATCHELOR:
Boothby -- Will the honorable member for Lang give substantial reasons for the course he is taking ? If he moves the amendment as a joke, of course he cannot expect any support {: #debate-14-s20 .speaker-K99} ##### Mr JOHNSON:
Lang -- I wished to save the time of the Committee. I listened to the general complaints from supporters of the Government in the Labour corner about these Supply Bills. Certain threats were made about sitting late, in order, I suppose, to. " bullock " the Estimates through. Some blank cartridge has been fired from that corner, and we want to see if there is anything in it. Clause 2 of the Bill provides - {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr Fisher: -- I rise to a point of order. Is there any clause before the Committee, or any item which can be amended in the way proposed by the honorable member for Lang? {: .speaker-10000} ##### The CHAIRMAN: -- The question before the Committee is the motion proposed by the Treasurer. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr JOHNSON: -- The clause states that there " shall and may be issued "-- {: .speaker-10000} ##### The CHAIRMAN: -- The motion upon which the Bill will be founded, and not the Bill itself, is before the Committee. {: #debate-14-s21 .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr FRAZER:
Kalgoorlie -I think that I express the opinion of honorable members sitting in this part of the chamber when I say that our desire to-night is to obtain an opportunity for the proper investigation of the Bill, in view of the information afforded by the Treasurer's Budget speech, which will be in print tomorrow. The honorable member for Yarra has shown that in one Department only 25 per cent, of last year's appropriations were expended, and there may be ample justification for inquiry into the contingencies and miscellaneous expenditure set down in the Bill. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I shall go on with the Works Estimates directly the Budget discussion is finished. {: .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr FRAZER: -- Yes ; but it is unreasonable to ask us to vote £750,000 in a Bill of which we received copies only today. The request made two hours ago, that the Government shall report progress to give us an opportunity to investigate this proposal, is a reasonable one. Why should there be any hurry ? {: .speaker-KVJ} ##### Mr Storrer: -- It is necessary that the public servants shall be paid. {: .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr FRAZER: -- I have been in Parliament long enough to know how much there is in that excuse. Both Houses meet tomorrow at half-past two p.m. {: .speaker-KVJ} ##### Mr Storrer: -- Private business takes precedence to-morrow afternoon. {: .speaker-L0K} ##### Dr Carty Salmon: -- The Fire Insurance Bill is one of the measures set down. {: .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr FRAZER: -- That is a most important measure, for which I trust to secure the support of honorable members. I am suspicious of Bills rushed through the Chamber at a late hour. In my opinion, such measures demand the closest investigation.If the Government will not report progress, I am prepared to take definite action. {: #debate-14-s22 .speaker-JSM} ##### Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- Before the Bill isrushed through, the country should be informed inregard to certain matters. I understand that the Schedule is before us. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The CHAIRMAN: -- No: We are now discussing a preliminary motion in Committee of Supply. {: .speaker-JSM} ##### Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- Then I shall reserve my remarks for a later stage. {: #debate-14-s23 .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I appeal to the Treasurer to comply with the request from below the gangway. I agreed to allow the Bill to go through, and, as a consequence, have been subjected to the jibes and jeers of members below the gangway. I have been told that I have not done my duty in not preventing the Bill from passing. The Government should protect its friends on this side when they are attacked in this way. I hope that progress will be reported, so thatwe may meet in a more reasonable frame of mind to-morrow. I should like to know if my honorable friends are serious. The amendment of the honorable member for Lang is a slug for their blunderbuss, and, if they mean business, let them use it. If they do not, let them put away that rusty old weapon, so that we may go home. {: #debate-14-s24 .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr BATCHELOR:
Boothby -- The deputy leader of the Opposition misunderstands our position. We plead for an opportunity to properly criticise the Bill, but do not propose to take action hostile to the Government. From his point of view, no doubt, criticism is absurd, unless its aim is to turn out the Ministry. We have no reason for supporting the amendment. He suggests that itwill test our sincerity ; but it will not do so, and therefore I shall not vote for it. I have a right to protest against being asked to pass this Bill on such short notice. The PostmasterGeneral has taken credit for expending all but £8,000 of the amount voted for his Department last year, but in the Estimates, at page 292,I find the item - Less amount which it is anticipated may not be expended during year, £48,467. First of all, the total appropriation was £411,877, and the, amount actually expended was only £356,041, and the difference is the amount which the Post and Telegraph Department did not expend. {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -That was for new works, and not under the control of the Department. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr BATCHELOR: -- But it is here clearly stated that the expenditure was under the control of the PostmasterGeneral. {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -- I say that £8,000 was unexpended, and no more. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr BATCHELOR: -- -Then who is responsible for putting false Estimates before the Committee? {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -- That expenditure was for works under the control of the Department, but not carried out by the Department. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr BATCHELOR: -- Then what is the meaning of the words " under the control of the Postmaster-General"? The expenditure under the control of the Department of Home Affairs, in connexion with the Post Office, is much larger, and the items are quite separate. On page 292 the figures show that the amount unexpended is £56,000, and not £8,000. {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -- The appropriation there is £363,410, and the expenditure is £356,041, showing a difference of about £8,000. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr BATCHELOR: -- Then what is the £48,467 ? {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -- That is the amount which it was anticipated might not be expended, and it was not. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr BATCHELOR: -- Then there was deliberately appropriated £48,467, which the Department did not expect to spend ? {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -- Parliament did not appropriate that amount, but the amount which I have already stated. {: #debate-14-s25 .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr TUDOR:
Yarra .- What do the figures mean ? We have it before us, in black and white, that £411,877 was appropriated, and that only £356,041 was spent. If these figures are wrong, there is all the more reason why there should be an adjournment in order that they may be investigated. {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -- The figures are not wrong at all ; it was not anticipated that the sum of £48,467 would be expended, and Parliament did not vote it. The actual sum voted was £363,410. {: #debate-14-s26 .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS:
Adelaide -- In view of the Royal Commission which is at present investigating the affairs of the Department, and of the answers which are regularly received from the PostmasterGeneral respecting the non -expenditure of moneys appropriated, that gentleman's recent statement is of exceptional importance. The honorable gentleman must go further in explanation or concede an adjournment for a few hours, in order that the point raised by the honorable member for Boothby may be investigated. Certainly the Postmaster-General, in his brief explanation, has not given anything like a clear statement. He has deliberately in- formed us that the sum of £48,467 was not voted by Parliament; and, if that be the case, the whole of the Estimate, so far as his Department is concerned, is in error. Does the Postmaster-General say that the appropriation of £21,506, as shown on page 290, for the construction and extension of telegraph lines, instruments and material, is wrong? Was that amount voted by Parliament for expenditure during the year 1907-8? {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -- Yes. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- Then the presumption is that on each of the separate items in the Estimates of this Department the honorable gentleman must give the same reply, and, totalling the whole of the items, we must reach the grand total of £411,000, in which case the £48,000 which the honorable gentleman told us was not appropriated by Parliament was really appropriated, judging by the reply which he gave in connexion with the single item. {: .speaker-L0K} ##### Dr Carty Salmon: -- The amounts are voted in sub-divisions. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- That does not alter the position at all. If honorable members will look at page 290 of the Estimates, they will find a sub-division, for which the sum of £116, 892 is set down. If I ask the Postmaster-General whether that amount is correct, his answer will be "Yes"; and if we add together the amounts for the whole of the sub-divisions, we again reach the grand total of £411,000; and yet, when the Minister was asked whether Parliament appropriated that amount, his answer was " No." {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- The answer was quite correct. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- The honorable gentleman must have been wrong in his answer with respect to the particular item if he was right in the answer he gave when asked about the total. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- If the honorable member will permit me, I think I can explain the matter. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- I shall be very glad to hear the honorable gentleman do so. {: #debate-14-s27 .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE:
Treasurer · Hume · Protectionist -- The matter is regulated in accordance with the method adopted in the Post Office, and I do not know that it is the best method to adopt. The honorable member for Adelaide has referred to particular items, but the practice has been to estimate the saving, not upon one or two items, but upon the whole of the items. In this way, the estimated savings on the whole of the items in the Estimates referred to amounted to £48,467. The estimate of expenditure which I brought down, as Treasurer, was £411,000. The savings estimated to be made by the Department, amounting to £48,467, were taken off that amount and were not voted, so that the sum actually voted was £363,000. I referred to the matter today in dealing with a paper which came before the Treasurer just before I took charge of the Treasury Department. I showed that a claim of £511,000 by the Department was reduced by £86,000. **Sir John** Forrest further reduced the amount by £20,000, and that amount represented the general saving, exactly as the amount of £48,467 in the Estimates referred to represented the general savings on the Post and Telegraph vote. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr Batchelor: -- Why is this method adopted by the Post and Telegraph Department when it is not followed by the Home Affairs Department? {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -- Because of the multiplicity of works carried out by the Post and Telegraph Department. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- The Post and Telegraph Department is a very large Department. The officers do not care to be confined to particular items for savings of a particular amount. They prefer to estimate the general amount for savings over the whole vote, which may subsequently be distributed over particular items. I can tell honorable members the practice that was followed in New South Wales when I held office there as Minister for Works. A large sum was voted in the schedule for works, and, at the head of the schedule, there appeared the intimation that the expenditure was not to exceed the total amount, but that the votes might be varied from one work to another. The intention was that if it was found that the amount voted for a particular item was short, something might be taken from another vote to make up the deficiency. {: .speaker-JRH} ##### Mr Bowden: -- A very undesirable practice. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I think it was; But it was continued in New South Wales for many years. In the same way, an estimate is made of the total savings on the vote for the Post and Telegraph De partment, and if it is found that the amount set down for one item is not sufficient, something is taken from another where the amount voted is believed to be in excess of what will be required. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr Batchelor: -- We can understand that explanation ; but it is certainly a new one. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- I happen to know all about these matters. The amount of £48,467 is, if I may so describe it, a general gleaning of savings, not upon one item, but upon the whole of the items for the Department. If the total expenditure did not exceed the £363,000, the Treasurer would not interfere, but if that amount were exceeded, I should step in and require to know why. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr Fisher: -- I presume that the expenditure is only upon works authorized by Parliament. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- Certainly. The Secretary to the Treasury has raised the question whether this is a wise practice to adopt, and the answer generally has been, as the Postmaster-General has indicated, that as the departmental vote covers a multitude of items, it is impossible, in the case of any particular item, to say exactly what the saving is likely to be. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr Batchelor: -- But Parliament might be given a record of the expenditure on every item. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- That is done. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr Batchelor: -- The practice is to load up the total so as to have a little to go and come upon in dealing with each item. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE: -- The practice has been to estimate the total savings and distribute them as required over the various items. I never interfere with a Department, so long as it keeps within its vote. But if the Department went beyond its vote, as the Post and TelegraphDepartment would, in this case, have done if the expenditure exceeded £363,000, when the application was made to me for money from the Treasurer's Advance, I should require to know what it was wanted for, and I should then take control of the matter, and say how much should be spent. I hope I have now made the matter clear. {: #debate-14-s28 .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr TUDOR:
Yarra .Assuming that the honorable gentleman's explanation is correct, I point out that whilst the vote was £363,000 last year, we are thisyear to be asked to vote £356,000 ; and I assume that the amount of estimated savings has not been deducted. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- There are no savings on that amount. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr TUDOR: -- If the Treasurer will look at page 290 of the Estimates, he will find that there is an estimated saving of £4,107 for New South Wales, and of £4,720 for Victoria, and soon down the list. Then the totals appear less the estimated savings during the year? {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- They ought to appear. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr TUDOR: -- The estimated savings are as follows : - New South Wales, £4,170; Victoria, £4,720; Queensland, . £1,795; South Australia, £1,545;. Western Australia, £1,080; and Tasmania, £740. If the total amount unexpended last year was £48,467, why is not a similar line shown upon these Estimates? {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- Because the estimated savings have been deducted from the previous lines, and only £60,000, for example, instead of 100,000 has been carried forward. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr TUDOR: -- Then for this year the total net expenditure is shown as against the total gross expenditure for last year. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I think that the arrangement of the Estimates might be improved. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr TUDOR: -- I am sure that it can be. Before we are afforded an opportunity of discussing these Estimates, we find that several months of the financial year have expired. I joined with others earlier in the evening in requesting an adjournment of the debate upon this Bill, so that we might have a reasonable opportunity of examining the items embodied in it. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- Honorable members will probably have an opportunity of dealing with these Estimates this month. {: #debate-14-s29 .speaker-JWY} ##### Mr CHANTER:
Riverina -- I think that honorable members are a little bitunreasonable to-night. It has always been customary to permit the necessary business of the House to be transacted in time to enable honorable members who reside outside the city to catch their last trains and trams. What can be gained from this debate? Absolutely nothing. As a matter of fact, the Estimates are not before us. I have always objected to the system of delaying the consideration of the Estimates until the fag end of the session. Upon this occasion, however, the Treasurer is entitled to credit for having made his Budget speech much earlier than usual. The Bill merely provides for the carrying on of the ordinary services of the country, the items contained in it being based upon the expenditure of last year. In view of the Treasurer's statement early in the evening that he would confer with the Prime Minister as to when the Estimates were likely to be proceeded with, and of his subsequent declaration that the debate upon his Budget would open on Tuesday next, I think it is somewhat unreasonable to engage in a discussion which can have no practical result. {: .speaker-JOC} ##### Mr Batchelor: -- Does the honorable member think that a debate of two hours upon a Supply Bill covering two months is unreasonable? {: .speaker-JWY} ##### Mr CHANTER: -- The honorable member knows perfectly well that since the opening of the session honorable members . opposite have been pressing the Government to deal with no other measure than the Seat of Government Bill. Two or three days ago it was known that the Treasurer would deliver his Budget to-day, and that he would, subsequently, ask the House to pass a Supply Bill covering necessary expenditure. Wecannot discuss the Estimates for the current financial year at this juncture, because they are not before us. Personally, I have always held the view that the consideration of the Estimates should be the first business with which Parliament should be asked to deal each session. In the face of the Treasurer's statement that he would proceed with the consideration of the Estimates on Tuesday next, and that this Bill only covers necessary items, I think that honorable members should treat him in a' better way than they have done and pass the Bill without this critical debate, which cannot lead to any result or elicit that kind of information which is desired. {: #debate-14-s30 .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS:
Adelaide -- I am very grateful to the Treasurer for his explanation of the method adopted ; but I suggest that we might have something different. It seems to me that it is distinctly - though, of course, not deliberately - deceptive. Suppose, for instance, that we vote £20,000 for a given purpose. An average person would form the impression that within a few pounds that sum would be expended on that item. But, unfortunately, the Minister for the Department decides that he will save a particular sum on the total vote. He is not certain in his mind as to the items on which that sum shall be saved, but on the total vote of, say, £400,000 he intends to curtail the expenditure to the extent of £50,000. The idea of making what he calls that saving is hi his mind when he forms the estimate. The suggestion that he does not know on which item this saving is to be made scarcely meets the case in that he is not confined to the actual expenditure on any particular line. £[20,000 may be voted for one line and £5,000 for another line, but the expenditure may be actually transposed. There is no power to interfere with him then. The only power we have for effective criticism is on the actual total when we come, to deal with the Estimates of next year. But when the Treasurer is forming his Estimates the items given are deceptive, in that when he comes to the total he says, "I am going to curtail that expenditure by £s°,000-" I* is a nne> large way of doing the thing, but it seems to me that when framing the Estimates he might reasonably curtail each item by ,£1,000 or £[2,000. _ {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- That is not practicable. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- It is. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- Well, I speak from a good deal of experience. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- It is just as difficult to curtail the total expenditure at the beginning of the year as it is to curtail the expenditure on the different items. In the case of no particular item is the Minister limited. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- Is he not? {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- The Treasurer will find that on one item the appropriation may be £20,000, and the expenditure £[5,000, and ' that on the next item the appropriation may be £[15,000' and the expenditure £[20,000. There is absolutely no limit one way or the other. The limit is in regard to the total, and that is where the Treasurer steps in- and demands that a' particular Minister shall not overstep .the bounds. Does the Treasurer ever Intervene with a colleague and say that a sum of £20,000 having been appropriated for a particular service, he shall not spend more than that sum on that item? {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -- Yes, decidedly. We should have to wait for a fresh appropriation if we could not carry out the work for the sum voted, unless, of course, an additional sum could be obtained from the Treasurer's Advance Account. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- Did the Treasurer intervene when the Minister exceeded the appropriation of £79,000 for the construction and extension of telephone lines, instruments, and materials, including the construction of conduits and the placing of {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I am quite certain* that I had to step in. I had a pretty good go " with him over that. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- It will be seen that, we are obtaining information all the time. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- Every one but the honorable member knows that. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- When the honorable gentleman made his explanation, he said that he did not interfere with the expenditure on the items- {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- So long as it wasnot over the amount voted. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- So long as the grand, total was not exceeded. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I did not say anything about the grand total. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- That is what I understood the honorable gentleman to state.. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- I stepped in in a great many cases. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- It seems that theTreasurer interferes in the case of every item where the expenditure happens toexceed the vote. He might have saved, some time if he had made a proper explanation to the Committee. There might be some method adopted other than what. really amounts to deception. {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -- A different ' method has; been adopted this year. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- Is there any anticipated saving this year? If there is an. anticipated saving in bulk, the several items must be deceptive. We find that a deduction is made from the total in respect of a probable saving, and the Minister is= quite unable to say on which item that saving is to be effected. People may imagine,, on looking at the Estimates, that in respect . of a certain item £[20,000 is to be expended, but they are unable to say that the Minister may not make a saving in connexion with that very item. This practice enables the Minister when questioned on the subject to reply, "It is all a question of finance." There is no possibility of any one pinning down a Minister to a particular method. He may continue to givethe same stereotyped reply to every question, with the result that a Royal Commission may be appointed to inquire into the administration of another Department. With the honorable member for Bourke as Chairman of the Postal Commission, thePostmasterGeneral may view with the greatest complacency the appointment of that body; but I suggest to the Treasurer that a different system might well be adopted. The present system, it seems to me, affords a Minister an opportunity to mislead honorable members - I do not say that a Minister would do so deliberately - respecting the expenditure on a particular item, and we may continue to receive in answer to questions a reply which I gather from honorable members is becoming somewhat offensive, in so far as the PostmasterGeneral's Department is concerned. The Treasurer said last night that the Secretary to the Treasury had called attention on two or three occasions to the objectionable features of this system. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- The honorable member will note that, in consequence "of the Secretary to the Treasury having done so, an alteration has been made in the old system {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- The Treasurer might well explain the alteration that has been made. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- An alteration has been made in the method of arranging the figures. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- In the method of arrangement which has been attended with some very awkward results in connexion with the Post and Telegraph Department ? I have heard, all over Australia, comments on the replies given to questions by the Postmaster-General. A few days ago, I ventured to put to him a question respecting some work that I had reasonable ground for believing would be attended to. His answer - given in the most off-hand manner - was, " Everything depends upon the finances." I thought to obtain a somewhat clearer statement by writing to him, but his written reply was even more hazy than his verbal one. I shall return to the attack in the hope of obtaining a more definite statement. During my short career as a member of this Parliament, I have had the privilege of addressing two letters to the Postmaster-General's Department, and the replies, for evasiveness, are of a character deserving the highest commendation. Whether such replies are characteristic of the Department, I do not know, but, if they are, the Minister must expect to meet with a little adverse 'criticism. I ask the Treasurer for more information as to the improvement effected under the new system as compared with that of preceding years. {: #debate-14-s31 .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir WILLIAM LYNE:
Treasurer · Hume · Protectionist -- If the honorable member will turn to page 292 of the Estimates he will see that the total appropriated for 1907- 8 in respect of division No. 5 was £411,877. From that a deduction of £"48,467 was made in respect of the amount which it was anticipated might not be expended during the year. Under the heading of New South Wales, page 290, provision is made in respect of the current financial year for items totalling £95,826, less an estimated saving of £4,170, which reduces the amount to- £91,656. That is the item that is voted on. Then, again, turning, to page 292, the honorable member will see that the total for the division No. 5 is £356,140, and that although the words " Less amount which it is anticipated may not be expended during year " follow, in respect of the appropriations for 1907-8 no deduction is made at that point in respect of the vote for 1908- 9. The figures under each heading of the division are adjusted, and there is no readjustment at the end of the division such as there was last year under the system to which I and the Secretary to the Treasury objected. {: #debate-14-s32 .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS:
Adelaide -- There is a distinct improvement, I find, as a result of the explanation made by the Treasurer. The improvement is so noticeable that I am surprised that he has not recognised .that this line called " savings " should not appear at all. Previously we have had the amount given in a grand total. Now it is given under different headings. We learn that the Minister for a particular Department makes an estimate of the amount he expects to spend under a particular division, and afterwards arrives at the conclusion that he will curtail the expenditure by a certain amount. {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -- Not curtail; may possibly not spend the amount. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- I prefer the word " curtail " to the more deceptive word "saving." {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -- How is it possible fo estimate the exact amount to be spent? {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- I am not asking the Minister to do so. Attention has been called to the method of constructing the Estimates. We find on inquiry that the Treasurer's Department has questioned it seriously, to such an extent that the Minister himself has been forced to adopt an improvement. He has gone half-way along the road to effect an improvement. He would complete the work by cutting out the item altogether. {: .speaker-KNJ} ##### Mr Mauger: -- The item is not there this year. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- It is in five places instead of one. It is not placed in the grand total as it was last year. For instance, under "Victoria" there is an alleged saving of £4,720, and under the heading of ' ' New South Wales " there is also a large amount. {: .speaker-L0K} ##### Dr Carty Salmon: -- I rise to order. I desire to know whether it is competent for the honorable member for Adelaide to anticipate discussion upon the EstimatesinChief, which will come on for consideration at a later date? {: .speaker-10000} ##### The CHAIRMAN: -- The honorable member is quite in order in the line of address that he is pursuing. The Committee is entitled to redress of grievances before the grant of Supply, and if the honorable member chooses to adopt his present line of argument he is entitled to do so. {: .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr Frazer: -- It was a ridiculous point of order for an ex-Chairman to take. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- Possibly the honorable member for Laanecoorie considers that he has some justification for his action, as I have not been many weeks a member of this House. But may I say to him that I have had, perhaps, more parliamentary experience than he has had. The Treasurer has a method of framing Estimates that is entirely new to me. I have called attention to it without having had an opportunity of consulting the Secretary of his Department ; but it appears that the method has been questioned by his own officers to such an extent that a decided alteration has been made. But we are still at a loss as to the items upon which the Minister expects to make what he calls a " saving " next year. {: .speaker-KIN} ##### Sir William Lyne: -- Cannot the Minister have a little latitude? {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr ROBERTS: -- He has all the latitude that he desires, because he overestimates expenditure in some instances and under-estimates it in others. The method at present adopted leads honorable members to believe that the expenditure will be up to a certain amount, although by showing what he calls a " saving " the Minister is permitted to withhold expenditure at his discretion by saying that it all depends upon the state of the finances. Under these circumstances the Estimates are not a guide, as they ought to be, to honorable members. Amendment negatived. Question resolved in the affirmative... Standing Orders suspended, and resolution reported and adopted. Resolution of Ways and Means covering resolution of Supply adopted. *Ordered- '-* >That **Sir William** Lyne and **Mr. Groom** do> prepare and bring in a Bill to carry out the foregoing resolutions. Bill presented by **Sir William** Lyne, and passed through all its stages. {: .page-start } page 1196 {:#debate-15} ### PAPER **Sir WILLIAM** LYNE laid, upon the table the following paper : - >The Budget, 1908-9 - Papers prepared by the Honorable **Sir William** Lyne, K.C.M.G., for the information of honorable members on theoccasion of opening the Budget of 190S-9. Ordered to be printed. {: .page-start } page 1196 {:#debate-16} ### ADJOURNMENT {:#subdebate-16-0} #### Personal Explanation : Order of Business Motion (by **Sir William** Lyne) proposed - >That the House do now adjourn. {: #subdebate-16-0-s0 .speaker-KDR} ##### Mr EWING:
Minister of Defence · Richmond · Protectionist -- When speaking, in the House a few days ago, I drew some allegorical sketches on broad lines,, which were not intended for microscopicexamination. An interpretation has beer* given to some of my remarks which, they were never intended to bear. I was dealing simply with the broad question of the serious injury that had been inflicted upon our defence forces, and the impossibility of procuring officers if they were expected to spend large sums on dress. That was the end I had in view. I was dealing with the matter in a nonpersonal way, from the point of view of the system', and not in any way with individuals. I trust it will be recognised' that my remarks were intended to deal solely with the questions of system and procedure, and not to refer in any way to individuals. {: #subdebate-16-0-s1 .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr WEBSTER:
Gwydir .I desire to ask the Treasurer whether heintends to go right on with the Estimates, because the members of the Opposition aremost anxious to get them out of the way. Measures of great importance for the benefit of this country ' are pending, and an effort should be made to dispose of theEstimates at the earliest possible moment. The members of the Opposition are prepared, at any sacrifice, to assist the Government in that direction, so that we may proceed with the Defence Bill, and otherimportant measures. Question resolved in the affirmative. House adjourned at 1 a.m. (Thursday).

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 14 October 1908, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1908/19081014_reps_3_47/>.