View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives
5 December 1911

4^th Parliament · 2^nd Session

QUESTION
- LEGAL EXPENSES : VEND CASE
QUESTION
- TELEFUNKEN PATENT RIGHTS
QUESTION
- INFLAMMABLE PIECE GOODS
PAPERS
QUESTION
- FREE SHIPPING TELEGRAMS
DEATHS OF PAPUAN NATIVES
AUSTRALIAN NOTES BILL
COMMONWEALTH OFFICES IN LONDON
INVALID AND OLD-AGE PENSIONS BILL
ARBITRATION (PUBLIC SERVICE) BILL
LAND TAX ASSESSMENT BILL
- Second Reading
PURCHASE TELEPHONE LINES ACQUISITION BILL
- Second Reading
ELECTORAL BILL
- Second Reading
INSCRIBED STOCK BILL
ADJOURNMENT
- Conductof Business

Mr. Speaker took the chair at 10.30 a.m., and read prayers.

page 3680

QUESTION

LEGAL EXPENSES : VEND CASE

Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

asked the AttorneyGeneral, upon notice -

Whether he will state -

The total amount paid to the counsel in connexion with the Vend case, and the amounts paid to each?

The total amounts paid for witnesses’ expenses, and the amount paid to each witness?

Mr HUGHES:
Attorney-General · WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

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

£7,451 19s.- Dr. Cullen, K.C., £181 18s. 6d.; Mr. Wise, K.C.,£2,19712s; Mr. Shand, K.C., £2,098 8s.; Mr. Starke, £1,522 8s.; Mr. Bavin, £1,451 12s. 6d.
The information will be obtained.

page 3680

QUESTION

TELEFUNKEN PATENT RIGHTS

Mr PAGE:
for Mr. Carr

asked the Postmaster-General, upon notice -

Has he received any intimation that Siemens Bros., as owners of the British rights of the Telefunken wireless system, have already taken proceedings against Marconi for an infringement of Telefunken patents?

Mr FRAZER:
Postmaster-General · KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

– Yes. I have been so advised by the Australasian Wireless Company Limited.

page 3681

QUESTION

INFLAMMABLE PIECE GOODS

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

asked the Minister of Trade and Customs, upon notice -

In View of the amendment of the Tariff, Item No. 123, Piece Goods, where the present protection to manufacturers on made-up garments is 40 per cent. and 35 per cent., what will be the reduced” percentage of protection on such goods if the amendment be carried?
What are the prescribed departmental tests for piece goods placed in the schedule as “ Noninflammable according to tests prescribed by departmental by-laws”?
Does the Minister consider that the suggested amendment will confer a boon on the importers of ready-made inflammable goods?

Mr TUDOR:
Minister for Trade and Customs · YARRA, VICTORIA · ALP

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

Fifteen per cent if the inflammable material which it is desiredto discourage is used, and 35 per cent if the non-inflammable material is used.
The tests proposed are as follows : -

By-law.

Tariff Item 123f. Piece Goods n.e.i., &c, non-inflammable.

Piece goods classifiable under Item 123f shall be entitled to entry as non-inflammable only when they comply with the following test : -

Two samples of the material to be tested, comprising each about 1 yard square, shall be washed with soap and water, and air-dried or ironed; this operation to be repeated five times.
The samples shall be ironed once with an ordinary household iron within three hours (but not less than one hour) before the test, and shall be dry to the touch immediately before testing.

The samples thus prepared shall be carefully measured and their areas shall not vary more than 10 per cent. over or under a yard square.

The samples shall be suspended vertically by one edge by means of three tacks, clips, or other metal fastenings; care must be taken that the position of the sample is free from draughts.
Fire shall be applied at the centre of the bottom edge from a taper1/8 inch in diameter, not more than 12 inches nor less than 6 inches long.
The lighted end of the taper shall be held at the edge until the material becomes well ignited ; or, if it does not become so ignited, for approximately thirty seconds.
At the end of sixty seconds the flame, if any, shall be extinguished.
If not more than 15 per cent. of the area under test is consumed within sixty seconds, when taken on the average of the two samples, the material shall be classified as noninflammable; but if more than 15 per cent. be consumed the material shall be dutiable as inflammable.
1. That is certainly not my intention. If, however, there is any possibility of such a development, the case may readily be met by the prohibition powers of the Customs Act, provided Parliament endorses our desire to discourage the use of this highly dangerous material for clothing.

page 3681

PAPERS

MINISTERS laid upon the table the following papers: -

Statement of Works carried out at the Federal Capital site, and preliminaries for initial works to date.

Ordered to be printed.

Lands Acquisition Act - Land acquired under, at Wivenhoe (Burnie), Tasmania - For Commonwealth purposes.

Defence Act - Military College - Report for 1910-11.

page 3681

QUESTION

FREE SHIPPING TELEGRAMS

Mr FRAZER:
ALP

– On the 30th November the honorable member for Capricornia asked - (1) If the Gladstone Chamber of Commerce had been informed that it had been decided not to extend the system of free shipping telegrams; (2) if free shipping telegrams are sent within the Commonwealth, and, if so, to whom; and (3) in that event, what objection there was to granting the same privilege to Gladstone? The following information has been furnished by the Deputy Postmaster-General, Brisbane, in reply to those questions: -

Yes.
Shipping telegrams, for which the PostmasterGeneral’s Department has not so far been paid, are sent to various ports in Queensland and elsewhere in accordance with the practice of the Department when under State control.
There is no discrimination against Gladstone with regard to shipping intelligence, the same being supplied to that port as to Maryborough, Bundaberg, Rockhampton, Mackay, Bowen, Townsville, &c, &c.

page 3681

DEATHS OF PAPUAN NATIVES

Motion (by Mr. Palmer) agreed to -

That all papers in connexion with the expedition of the Honorable Staniforth Smith to the Kikori district, Papua, during the months of November and December,1910, and January and February, 191 1, together with the depositions taken at the subsequent judicial or magisterial inquiry into the death of some fourteen aboriginal natives, be laid upon the Library table.

page 3682

AUSTRALIAN NOTES BILL

Motion (by Mr. Fisher) agreed to -

That leave be given to bring in a Bill for an Act to amend section 9 of the Australian Notes Act 1 910.

Bill presented and read a first time.

page 3682

COMMONWEALTH OFFICES IN LONDON

Mr THOMAS:
Minister of External Affairs · Barrier · ALP

– I move -

That this House approves of the purchase of the following site, and the erection of a permanent building thereon for Commonwealth offices, viz. : - That part of the London County Council’s property included within the Strand, Aldwych, and Melbourne-place, London.

– - We do not propose to obtain a lease, but to buy the freehold. In order to obtain expert advice as to the best means of utilizing the space to advantage for offices for the High Commissioner, and for the Agents-General of the States, and to provide for surplus accommodation which could be let to Australian business men until otherwise required, and thus recoup a proportion of the outlay, instructions were issued to the High Commissioner to prepare sketch plans of buildings showing the space required for Commonwealth purposes, and for State purposes, and the space available for letting to the public; and also to obtain estimates showing the probable cost of building, and the probable rentals to be derived from the States and from the public. Should we decide to buy .the block, the price will be £364,000, and the cost of a building to cover the area is estimated, approximately, at £223,000 ; so that the total cost of the freehold and the structure will be £587,000, or, in round numbers, £600,000. If a building is erected according to our ideas, in the basement there will be provided, for the Commonwealth and the States, store-rooms, strong-rooms, furnace-chambers, and cellars under pavements approached by one passenger lift and one freight lift and two staircases; or, in all, a superficial area of 6,700 feet. The space for letting will include storerooms and cellars under pavements, approached by two lifts and two staircases, and comprise a superficial area of 17,350 feet. On the ground floor, for the Commonwealth and the States, we propose to have an exhibit hall, approached from several entrances, with a superficial area of 12,325 feet. The exhibit hall on plot four will have a superficial area of 7,380 feet. There will be space available for letting as show-rooms and offices, with entrance from each of the three streets, and containing a superficial area of 6,576 feet. On the first floor, there will be, at the east corner, for the Commonwealth, eight rooms, with fifteen rooms on the second floor, or, in all, twenty-three rooms, with a total superficial area of 7.316 feet. On the site which we propose to buy, the Victorian Government haveerected a building on a leasehold tenure, and, of course, when we buy the site, we shall become the landlord of the Victorian Government on the terms of the lease. Next to the Victorian Government Building, with frontages to the Strand and Melbourne-place, for Tasmania there will be six rooms, and for Western Australia eighteen rooms. On the second floor, at the east corner, there will be, for the Commonwealth, twenty-three rooms, and next to the Victorian Government Building there will be eighteen rooms for Western Australia, with space for letting. On the third floor, at the east and north corners, there will be twenty-seven rooms for New South Wales, and next to the Victorian Government Building there will be eighteen rooms for South Australia. On the fourth floor, at the east and north corners, there will be twenty-five rooms available for Queensland, and next to the Victorian Government Building there will be eighteen rooms for South Australia. On the fifth floor there will be available, for the Commonwealth and the States a conference and lectureroom approached by two staircases and two passenger lifts, with an ante-room. There will be space for letting facing the Strand, Aldwych, and Melbourne-place, consisting of twenty-nine rooms, with a superficial area of 7,636 feet. On the sixth floor there will be space for letting, consisting of twenty-four rooms, with a superficial area of 6,450 feet, and on the seventh floor are the caretaker’s quarters. The summary of accommodation is as follows : -

Mr THOMAS:

– Yes. We can charge the States 4 per cent. if we choose in lieu of the rental that we shall charge the public. The Government favour something being done upon these lines because we do not desire to make money out of the States. We merely wish to submit a fair business proposition. If we meet them in that spirit we ought to have very little difficulty in inducingthem to stand in with us. I feel sure that when once the building has been erected and the offices have been opened, business people will gladly avail themselves of the opportunity to secure accommodation there. I am confident that a fine building erected upon this site would be a good advertisement for Australia. Most, if not all of those honorable members who were fortunate enough to visit England recently, have inspected the site, and I believe they are all agreed that it is an admirable one. Consequently the risk of financial loss to Australia is very small.By securing the whole of the block we shall be in a position, should it ever be desired, to enlarge our office accommodation on our own freehold. That is the reason why I am submitting this larger scheme to the House. In view of the advantages which it offers to Australia, I feel confident that honorable members will accept it.

Debate (on motion by Mr. Deakin) adjourned.

page 3686

INVALID AND OLD-AGE PENSIONS BILL

In Committee:

Mr FISHER:
Prime Minister and Treasurer · Wide Bay · ALP

– I move -

That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue and moneys be made for the purposes of a Bill for an Act to grant and apply out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund a sum for invalid and old-age pensions.

This motion is merely intended to make provision for the transfer of money to the trust fund.

Mr Atkinson:

– What is the amount which will be so transferred ?

Mr FISHER:

– About £4,000,000.

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Swan

– I know exactly the object the Treasurer has in view. It is to permit any money that the Treasurer may have to be appropriated in the usual way and placed to the trust fund.

Mr Fisher:

– To put it into a big bag.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Yes, and spread it over a long time. Has the Treasurer considered the question of submitting annually, if not in the Appropriation Act, Estimates of the expenditure from the Trust Funds? In that way we might be told how much money the Treasurer intends to draw from the Trust Funds during the year and the objects on which he proposes to spend it. In that way Parliament would know exactly what amounts were being taken from the Trust Funds. I do not say that one well acquainted with the public accounts could not arrive at what the

Treasurer is doing by a study of the ordinary Estimates and of the Budget statement. At the same time it is advisable in Federal finance to adopt, with regard to the Trust Funds’ expenditure, a system somewhat similar to that adopted in all the States with regard to expenditure from Loan Funds.

Mr Fisher:

– I think I put the estimate in this case very clearly.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I am referring not so much to the Old-age Pensions Fund, but to all big trust fund items. I do not see why the Treasurer should not be able to estimate what he is going to spend from any trust fund, just the same as he has to estimate what he will spend out of the Consolidated Revenue. It is not always easy to do that, but it has to be done. The Trust Funds are getting into very large figures now. There is the Fleet Construction Fund, the Old-age Pension Fund, and others from which large sums are appropriated from year to year. These are not like the ordinary appropriations, that lapse at the end of the financial year. There is, of course, no objection to the proposal now before the Committee. It is merely to make a big hole for the Old-age Pension Fund, in which to place any sums voted by Parliament, and get them away from any further parliamentary control, to be expended by the Treasurer under a certain law. There is a law in this case, but, in the case of the Fleet-, the trust fund money can be spent without any law at all, so far, at least, as the details are concerned. The Treasurer can spend a million pounds on one thing or a hundred pounds on another. So long as the money is in the trust fund, it is at his disposal for the specific purpose for which it has been voted. This is a loose way of doing business, and, by means of it, Parliament loses definite continuous direct control over immense sums of money, seeing that the expenditure is continuous from year to year. That practice was broken down long ago in all the States. It is now provided that the vote shall cease at the end of the year. It would be very convenient to allow votes to continue, but it was found that the practice took away from Parliament that control which it should have. It is sometimes very inconvenient that votes should lapse at the end of the financial year, but, in order to maintain the control of Parliament over the public finances, it is very necessary.

Mr. FISHER (Wide Bay- Prime Minister and Treasurer) [11.16J. - I think that any remarks on a point such as that raised by the honorable member for Swan ought to be replied to. The honorable member is quite correct in saying that this is a provision which specially concerns the Commonwealth. The honorable member, when Treasurer, took full advantage of it. With the particular point which he raises - that the details of the estimated annual expenditure shall be in the hands of this House and the Senate - I am entirely in sympathy ; but I do not agree with his suggestion that there has been any covering up of the expenditure for invalid or old-age pensions, or even for the building of the Naval Unit, or other purposes for which Trust Funds have been established. I rose to state that, wherever it is possible, the Government will bring the matter directly before the House, as we have done before, showing the estimated expenditure out of Trust Funds for the year, and affording honorable members every opportunity, not only to criticise, but to review the proposals in any way they think fit.

Sir John Forrest:

– We do not know how you are going to spend money on the Fleet this year. We have had no statement of the detailed expenditure.

Mr FISHER:

– No, except that we give the number of ships, the cost of the ships, and the proportionate payments that will be made during the financial year.

Sir John Forrest:

– We have not received even that information yet.

Mr FISHER:

– It has, I think, been supplied. No doubt the honorable member is right when he says that the expenditure under the invalid and old-age pensions fund is a more straightforward matter, because the Treasurer and the officers in the Pensions Department are bound by the terms of the Act. . If more applications which comply with the Act are made, the expenditure will be greater, and an annual estimate of expenditure is always made. Honorable members will see by the statistics published this morning that we have a grand army of invalid and old-age pensioners, from 85,000 to 87,000 strong. That is a very remarkable thing, and yet the country seems to be the better for the expenditure. I shall take into consideration the question raised by the honorable member for Swan this morning, and if anything can be done to give Parliament fuller opportunities for discussion and review, I shall do it.

[*3T]- 2

Mr SAMPSON:
Wimmera

.- Is it the intention of the Government to bring in an early amendment of the Oldage Pensions Act?

Mr Fisher:

– Not this session.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Resolution reported and adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Fisher and Mr. Hughes do prepare and bring in a Bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill presented by Mr. Fisher, and read a first time.

page 3687

ARBITRATION (PUBLIC SERVICE) BILL

In Committee: Consideration resumed from 4th December (vide page 3632).

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2 (Definitions).

Mr DEAKIN:
Ballarat

.- I notice that this clause includes in the definition of “ the Public Service of the Commonwealth “ the Public Service of the Northern Territory, and of the territory of the seat of Government,- and then proceeds to refer to institutions and authorities. There is no reference here to Papua.I wish to know if the omission is intentional. I have no desire to see any public servants included, but thought it well to call attention to the fact that there is no reference to Papua.

Mr Hughes:

– i shall look into the matter, and, if it is necessary to include the Public Service of Papua, that can be attended to later on.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 3 -

Employees in the Public’ Service of the Commonwealth, or any division, class, grade, or branch thereof, or in any calling, service, handicraft, occupation, or avocation in the Public Service of the Commonwealth, or any division, class, grade, or branch thereof, shall be deemed to be employees in an industry within the meaning of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904-1911.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses11 to 17, and title, agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment ; report adopted.

page 3689

LAND TAX ASSESSMENT BILL

Second Reading

Mr HUGHES:
AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

– I move -

That this Bill be now read a second time.

This is a Bill to amend the Land Tax Assessment Act 1910, and it is almost entirely a machinery measure. The only clause concerning which there could be any discussion is clause 3, and that we propose to delete. Recently a judgment of the High Court was given, dealing with the liability of trustees in connexion with joint estates. The High Court, in delivering itsjudgment, put a construction upon the section of the principal Act which, in the opinion of the Government, was not intended by Parliament. It is, therefore, proposed to amend the Act in that respect. It may be within the recollection of honorable members that, when the clause which is now section 25 of the principal Act was going through this House, the position of a tenant for life was the subject of considerable discussion. A proviso was inserted to enable a tenant for life, without power to sell, on a settlement made prior to the passing of the Act, to have the unimproved value of his land calculated upon the basis of the rent obtained for the land. In the section dealing with joint tenants and the liability of trustees in respect to joint estates, the Court held that where a trustee was trustee for a. tenant for life, and for the remainder man, for the same piece of land, then the property was to be regarded as separate pieces of land within the meaning of the section ; and that consequently he was entitled to the reduction set forth in the section. The Government consider that that construction

Was not intended- Consequently, it is now proposed to alter the section. The object of the proviso will be to make a concession to tenants for life, who, by reason of their limited title, are unable to make full use of their land. This does not cover the persons who have only a beneficial life interest, where there is a trustee who has an estate in fee simple. It is, therefore, proposed to limit the section to legal tenants for life, who are the only persons for whom the concession is, or is intended to be, provided. Sub-clause a of the clause to which I have referred effects this purpose ; and sub-clause c is consequential. I ought to have mentioned that in clause 2 of the Bill it is proposed to amend section 3 of the principal Act by adding after the words “joint owners,” the words “ and includes persons who have a life or greater interest in shares of the income from the land.” That doubtfully alters the law. Probably it .does not. It makes clear that the beneficiaries who share among themselves the income from land are assessable jointly ; which, as the interpretation stands at present, is doubtful. The matter was referred to in the judgment of the High Court, but was not settled. Sub-clause 2 of clause 4 is intended to validate certain assessments made for 1910-11 under regulations which were ultra vires. That is to say, the Commissioner has been advised that, owing to the judgment, those regulations are ultra vires. Tenants for life entitled to the concession under section 25 were assessed on their expectation of life interest in the fee simple. It is now proposed that they shall be assessed on the fee simple, but it is not proposed to apply that assessment to 1910-11 assessments, because, as taxpayers were led to believe that they would be assessed on the lower rates, it is considered that it would be harsh to make that alteration for last year. It is, however, proposed to make it in future. The matter is relatively unimportant, but of course it concerns those persons who hold land either for their own life, or during the life of another. Clause 5 amends section 27 of the principal Act. Here it is intended to cover a case where a lease is created, not by an actually executed lease, but by an agreement. There are cases where merely an agreement for a lease is made, but the lease itself is not executed. In such cases it is proposed to include such an agreement as if it were an executed lease. Clause 6 amends section 28, and deals with premiums payable in respect of lessors or lessees of land leased before the commencement of the Act. These are practically premiums payable in respect of the renewal of leases. They ought to be considered part of the rent, and be included in it. The proposal is to include them in the rent. Clauses 7 and 8 deal with joint beneficiaries. It is proposed to transfer to section 38 what now stands as the third proviso in the principal Act to section 33. Honorable members who turn to section 33 will see that it deals with trustees. A case has been brought before the High Court, in which questions were raised as to tha interpretation of the proviso. Under the new provision, £5,000 will not be deducted in each case, though- it will be deducted whenever the total value of the land held by the beneficiary does not exceed that sum. For example, a beneficiary’s share in an estate may be worth £4,000, and as the Act stands he would be entitled to a. deduction of £5,000, that is, if he held £10,000 worth of other land in addition to the beneficial interest, he would have a deduction of £5,000, or would, in effect, be assessed on a valuation of £1,000 less than that on which he should be assessed.

Sir John Forrest:

– If a, beneficiary’s share is valued at £4,000, that sum will be added to the value of his other property, if any, and there will be a deduction of £5,000.

Mr HUGHES:

– Yes, in his separate assessment. Clause 9 deals with mutual life assurance policies. To prevent a possible leakage of revenue, provisions were inserted in the Act imposing on mutual life assurance companies an obligation to furnish information which experience has shown is not needed, and the effect of the clause is to relieve them of this responsibility and trouble.

Mr Atkinson:

– What will be the posi tion of a policy-holder in, say, the Australian Mutual Provident Society? Will he have to make any return ? Policy-holders have been asked to do so.

Mr HUGHES:

– The clause does not take from any policy-holder any protection which he now enjoys; it merely relieves mutual life assurance societies of an unnecessary duty. Clause 10 amends section 43 of the principal Act, which says -

Where under this Act -

any person is deemed to be the secondary taxpayer in respect of any land or interest; and

it is provided that there shall be deducted from the tax payable by the secondary taxpayer, in respect of the land or interest, such amount (if any) as is necessary to prevent double taxation, the amount of the deduction (if any) shall be the amount by which the tax payable by the primary taxpayer is increased by the inclusion of the land or interest in his assessment.

For the sake of clearness it is proposed to omit from the section the words -

The amount by which the tax payable by the primary taxpayer is increased by the inclusion of the land or interest in his assessment :

Provided that the amount of the deduction shall not exceed the amount by which the tax payable by the secondary taxpayer is increased by the inclusion of the land or interest in his assessment, and to insert in their places these words -

The lesser of the following amounts : -

the amount of tax payable in respect of the land or interest by the secondary taxpayer; or

the aggregate of the amounts of tax (if any) payable in respect of the land or interest by the primary taxpayer and by any precedent secondary taxpayer.

It is thought that the provision when amended will more effectively express the meaning of Parliament, by making the liability of the secondary as well as of the primary taxpayer clearer and more definite. No doubt the section may now be regarded by some as to a certain extent ambiguous, although its meaning is abundantly clear to those who have taken the trouble to study it. Clause 11 implies that where a tax is levied on an aggregate parcel of land or interest, the tax apportionable to a particular part or interest is a proportionate part of the whole. It introduces, after section 43, a new section to deal with parcels of land ; and the tax payable by an individual in regard to a particular parcel will be a proportionate part of the whole, and will not be based on the particular rate otherwise leviable on his own particular interest. In regard to appeals, clause 12 provides that an inferior Court of a State shall not have jurisdiction under section 44 unless it is constituted or presided over by a Judge authorized in that behalf by the Governor-General. The object is to secure uniformity by having one County Court Judge assigned to hear land-tax appeals, and to exclude Magistrates’ Courts. It seems to me a very good and very proper amendment of the law. Clause 13 amends section 50 of the Act to enable the Commissioner to waive for good reasons the penalty for non-payment of the tax on the due date. That, too, is a very necessary power to take. Clause 14 provides that the Bill is to take effect from the beginning of the current financial year, so that any alteration in the law will not apply to the last financial year.

In Committee:

Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.

Clause 3 negatived.

Clause 4 (Tenants for life) .

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Swan

– This raises the same point to which I have previously called attention. What is the meaning of the words “ which would produce the same rent “ ? Suppose no rent is being received, but that a man is living in. his own house, how then can the rent be arrived at?

Mr HUGHES:
AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

– The point raised by the right honorable member is not relevant to the clause, because we are not altering the basis of assessment. The principal Act provides that the unimproved value of the land shall be calculated on the basis of the rent obtained, or which, if the land were let, ought reasonably to be obtained. The section was intended to apply only to legal tenants for life, who, without power to sell, were in a very curious position. The application of the section, however, was extended to beneficiaries - to persons who held an equitable title, and legal estates vested in trustees. A trustee is the owner of the fee-simple, and must be treated in exactly the same way as any other owner of a feesimple.

Sir John Forrest:

– A trustee is subject to the trust, and cannot sell.

Mr HUGHES:

– It all depends; in some cases he is trustee both for the tenant for life and the remainder man. We provide for cases where there is no power to sell, but we cannot go on indefinitely encouraging the tying up of land in order to evade taxation. We provided that the section should apply ‘only to settlements made before the passing of the Act. It is now proposed to confine the provision to legal tenants for life. When a man lives on his own land he is in exactly the same position as if he lived on the land of another and let his own. In the eye of of the Jaw, what difference does it make? A tax is imposed, first for the purpose of revenue, and secondly for the purpose of discouraging great estates. If a man lives on his own land is he to escape the tax on the ground that he pays no rent? Sir John Forrest. - No.

Mr HUGHES:

– He is, therefore, taxed on the rental value which he would get if he let the land, as provided in the principal Act. The rental value is arrived at by comparing it with the rental paid for adjacent and similar properties.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

.- Wilis and deeds that tie up property might now, in view of present legislation, be held to be ultra vires, because they are against the principles recommended by Parliament as in the public interest. A will might be made tying up a property for a couple of generations, and it might be executed at a time when there was no general feeling that large holdings were against the public interest. Perhaps a generation later, however, a change may come over the spirit of the country, and the people realize the necessity for closer settlement and subdivision. Is not a will which prevents closer settlement and subdivision against the public interest, and, as such, ought it not to be declared as ultra vires ? I submit the point for the consideration of the AttorneyGeneral, not in connexion with this particular Bill, but in connexion with all such proposals. In other classes of business, if a man makes a bargain which is against the public interest, that bargain is null and void, and ought not bargains, whether of this or past generations, that are held to be against public interest, to be similarly declared void?

Mr Scullin:

– There is no declaration in the Act that large estates are against the public interests - it simply provides that the tax must be paid or the land sold.

Mr KELLY:

– There is no such declaration, because, in order to prevent trouble with the High Court, we say that this tax is for revenue purposes. The general idea is that the Act is designed primarily for revenue purposes, and, secondly, for splitting up estates. In addition to this measure, there are a number of others in the State and Federal spheres which make it extremely difficult for persons bound by dry legal documents of by-gone generations. Instead of the clumsy way proposed for doing justice to immediate beneficiaries, such documents might just as well be declared null and void. All these clauses are necessary to do common justice to persons, who, through no fault of their own, are pre* vented from doing that which the Govern^ ment of the country now asks shall be done.-

Mr HUGHES:
AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

– All that is proposed in this clause is to confine the concession which is contained in the proviso of section 25 of the principal Act to legal tenants for life. It is not proposed to extend it to cases of wills or instruments made after the passing of the principal Act. We merely desire to extend the benefit of the proviso to legal tenants for life, and not to those persons who may hold a beneficial interest

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 5 to 11 agreed to.

Clause 12 (Appeals to inferior Courts).

Sir JOHN QUICK:
Bendigo

– I would like some explanation of the meaning of this clause. Section 44 of the principal Act provides that any taxpayer may appeal to the High Court, to the Supreme Court, or to a County or District Court of a State, against any’ assessment made by the Commissioner on tile ground that he is not liable for’ the tax or any part thereof, or that the assessment is excessive. That is a very useful provision in the case of appeals against assessments, but the clause which is now under consideration proposes to give the GovernorGeneral power practically to select Judges of inferior Courts to hear these appeals. It seems to me that the power to select any particular Judge or Judges of the County Court or of a District Court, or of any State Court, to hear and determine appeals against assessments, is a very invidious one to bestow upon the Executive of tha Commonwealth. Why does the Executive desire authority to determine which County Court or which District Court Judge shall hear appeals? It is .a power of a very questionable kind, and appears to me to cast a reflection upon the Judges of those Courts.

Mr HUGHES:
AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

– Every one will admit that the principal Act -is a highly complicated and intricate piece of legislation. I do not wish to cast any reflection upon the magistrates of this country, but I cannot avoid saying that ninety-nine out of every one hundred of them to whom that Act was submitted would be incompetent to construe it aright. We do not wish to have a series of appeals against decisions, and the object of the clause is to insure that one Judge - a County Court Judge, at the least - shall be assigned to hear appeals. Under these circumstances, we shall get uniformity of decision, and an informed expert opinion from one who is versed in the Act. In my own State, it is quite a common thing to practically reserve one Judge to hear cases in regard to land values. He thus becomes familiar with the law and the facts which continually come before him. The object of the clause is not improperly to limit the opportunities of the taxpayer, but to insure .that when he does appeal against an assessment he shall appeal to somebody who is able to give him an intelligent and competent decision. I know that the honorable member for Bendigo appreciates the difficulties which confront a magistrate who is called upon to interpret such a complicated Statute as is the principal Act, and whose daily work is as diverse from ploughing in such difficult fields as it is possible to be.

Sir John Quick:

– But this clause gives jurisdiction to Courts which are presided over by fudges, and not by magistrates.

Mr HUGHES:

– The idea is that the Court shall be presided over by a County Court Judge, and that we shall thus insure competent decisions being given.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 13 agreed to.

Clause 14 and title agreed to.

Bill reported with an amendment, and, by leave, passed through its remaining stages.

page 3694

PURCHASE TELEPHONE LINES ACQUISITION BILL

Second Reading

Mr FRAZER:
PostmasterGeneral · Kalgoorlie · ALP

– I move -

That this Bill be now read a second time.

– And. give: justice all round.

Sir JOHN QUICK:

– I have no objection, if the occasion arises, to justice being done ali round, but this Bill is being limited to purchase lines-, and does not cover any line that has been erected partly at the expense of the Government and partly by contributions from private individuals. Where private individualshave made advances towards the construction of Government lines I do not see why, when those become remunerative investments, the Department should not see its way clear to refund the advances so made. It might be difficult, however, to trace the original contributors to the cost of such lines.

Mr Sampson:

– Not at all.

Sir JOHN QUICK:

– Where it is possible, and the demand is made, I see no reason why there should not be a refund. Sometimes, however, these contributions are made by, so to speak, “ sending round the hat.” That course has been followed very extensively in some of the country districts. I have pleasure in supporting the Bill as it stands.

Silting suspended from1 to 2.30 p.m.

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

.- In the Sydney network of exchanges there are many lines constructed by private persons, and their continued existence would make the substitution of the metallic circuit system difficult, because the Department has not complete control over them. Therefore, it is quite right to make provision for their resumption. But the Bill does not go far enough. In the country districts, as many honorable members are aware, a contribution towards the construction of telephone lines is asked by the Department in nearly every case, and very often the local people, to show their bona fides, and their desire for better communication, make a contribution in cash, labour, or material. But no provision is made in the Bill for repaying that contribution after the line has been made, and is returning a profit. That is a serious injustice. Those who contribute to the cost of country lines have to pay the usual charges for services, but when the lines become profitable their contributions should, be refunded. I propose, therefore, in Committee, if the honorable member for Wimmera, or some other honorable member does not forestall me, to move an amendment providing that when a line towards whose cost the local people have contributed has proved profitable, on the departmental basis of a return of three- fourths of 10 per cent. of the capital cost of construction, the Department shall repay the original contribution. The lines in Sydney, constructed at the cost of private individuals, are to be taken over at a valuation.

Mr Thomas:

– If the Department desires to take them over.

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– From the departmental stand-point, it is highly desirable that they should be taken over, and the Bill will be carried out to the letter. My point is that if it is desirable to repay private persons who have constructed tele phone lines at their own cost the expenditure which they have incurred, it is right that private contributors to the cost of country lines should have their contributions refunded when the lines become profitable to the Department.

Mr WEST:
East Sydney

.- I think that what the Government propose is quite right. My object in rising, however, is to. draw the attention of the PostmasterGeneral to the fact that those who provided their own lines were some of the earliest to have telephones, and consequently their numbers in the telephone list are very low, most of them coming within the first 1,000 subscribers. Business men who have had low telephone numbers for many years wish to retain those numbers. The possession of low numbers is evidence that the businesses in which they are associated have beer, long established, and the persons concerned wish to continue their present numbers for reasons of convenience also. I ask the Postmaster-General to give attention to this matter.

Mr THOMAS BROWN:
Calare

– I am not satisfied with the Bill, which seems to me lop-sided. The Department takes power to resume telephone lines constructed at the cost of private citizens, but there is no provision for the repayment of contributions to the cost of lines. In many instances, private persons have put up lines themselves, and have ever, incurred the expense of making connexion with the departmental system, although the regulations provide that that shall be borne by the Department. In country districts the tendency is to throw a large part of the cost of constructing telephone lines on the local community, and private individuals have generally been found ready to furnish money, labour, or material. ‘ The work of the Department is so congested that it is within my own knowledge that persons who have lodged in the hands of the authorities money for the erection of a line have been told that they must wait until next year’s Estimates have been considered. Naturally, in getting subscriptions, they concluded that when the money had been found the Department would undertake the work. In my opinion, the Department should obtain power to take over all private lines, and should refund all contributions towards the cost of construction. As it is the departmental policy to obtain contributions towards the cost of new lines, the Government, when the lines commence to pay, should compensate the contributors.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In Committee:

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2 -

The Postmaster-General may . acquire any purchase telephone line which was erected by the Department of Posts, Telegraphs, and Telephones of any State at the expense of the owner

Mr KELLY:

– The Minister is endeavouring to give you, Mr. Chairman, a lead.

Mr Fenton:

– The wording of the clause is wrong. It ought to read “ acquire or purchase any telephone lines.”

Mr KELLY:

– The honorable member, who is a supporter of the measure, has fallen into a very natural error, owing to the absence of any definition of what a purchase telephone line is. The wording of tha clause suffers from no printer’s error.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– A man purchases his telephone line every day when he pays his fees.

Mr KELLY:

– That is essentially the case when a number of men put up a guarantee to insure the Government against loss before they are allowed to use a line. They have the line installed by the State at the expense of the owners, and they pay an annual maintenance fee for the service they are receiving. Surely that fits in with the broad meaning of the language of the Bill. I deeply regret that the Chair’s assumption of an inner knowledge, which I do not possess, of what the Government really mean by those words, has prevented this other matter, which is of vast importance to people in country districts, being settled in this Chamber. I fear that if I were to go more freely into the difficulties of the position of a private member of the Committee in connexion with the phrase “any purchase telephone line,” I might be incurring your wrath, Mr. Chairman, and I shall therefore conclude with an expression of regret that the Committee has been deprived of an opportunity to go more fully into the matter.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
Parramatta

– I cannot understand the provision contained in sub-clause 3, that -

The compensation, if the amount cannot be agreed upon, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the laws relating to arbitration of the State in which the line is situated.

– Telephones are general Commonwealth property. We shall have, however, to accept this provision, and I do not think; there is much danger associated with it, since the Bill relates really to telephone lines in only one State. The trouble is that if these lines are being acquired in all the States we shall have six different State laws operating, and some of them may be as wide asunder as the poles. There may not be any general difficulty arising under this Bill, but this “ very small measure,” as it has been called, ‘ seems to me to have been faultily drawn. We have in it no definition of what a “ pur chase telephone line” is. I am confident that any lawyer in Court could show that the words - any purchase telephone line which was erected by the Department of Posts, Telegraphs, and Telephones of any State, at the expense of the owner or his predecessor in title, and in respect of which the owner pays an annual maintenance fee - meant an ordinary line for which an ordinary maintenance fee was charged. The words are just as susceptible of that meaning as of any other. There is nothing in the clause to differentiate the old lines that were erected entirely’ at the expense of the owner from those now being erected under the guarantee system. If there is an undertaking to foot the loss on any lines constructed by the Department, such lines must come under this definition, and if they do not, another means of bringing them in is provided by the words “ in respect of which the owner pays an annual maintenance fee.” If a man in the back country constructs a line under a guarantee to the Department that whatever it costs he will foot the bill, and pays the annual fee which the Department charges, he will be liable under this clause to have that line taken over at any minute. Indeed, this is a far more accurate description of lines built to-day under guarantee than it is of lines built without a guarantee in the early days.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported with an amendment.

Mr FRAZER:

– I desire to move that the report be taken into consideration forthwith.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Is it the pleasure of the House that the report be taken into consideration forthwith ?

Mr Joseph Cook:

– I object.

Motion (by Mr. Frazer) proposed -

That the Standing Orders be suspended to enable the remaining stages to be passed without delay.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

page 3709

ELECTORAL BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 4th December (vide page 3638), on motion by Mr. King O’Malley) -

That this Bill be now read a second time.

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Swan

.- This Bill is undoubtedly most important, since upon our electoral law the foundation of our parliamentary system is based. The electoral law should be above party considerations, and should not be viewed from any party aspect. That is not the case now, but the time will come, and I hope soon, when persons of all shades of opinion will be convinced that the subject should be dealt with apart from party interests. If any officers should be directly responsible to Parliament, instead of to a Ministerial head, those of the Electoral Branch should be so. No one regards our electoral law as perfect, although it has been amended several times, and for that reason the Bill cannot be condemned altogether, but. to many of its provisions grave exception must be taken. I am convinced that its foundation is the desire of the Government to give an advantage to the party in power. I would prefer not to have to say that; but I feel convinced that what I have stated is true. The industrial organizations which support the Labour party are scattered all over Australia, and are political agencies. Each of us knows that that is true of these organizations in his own district, and the conversations which I have had with representatives from other States make it clear that it would be difficult to separate the industrial from the political organizations which support the Labour party. This state of things is of great advantage to the Ministerialists.

Mr Cann:

– There are many Socialists connected with these organizations.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– The party is a Socialistic party.

Mr Cann:

– The Socialists do not say so.

Mr Page:

– I have known “ dead “ electors to vote.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– The fact that some people break the law is no reason why the law-abiding should be disfranchised. Of course, the present system is somewhat cumbrous; but if it were made too easy abuses might be more prevalent and detection more difficult. We cannot have everything arranged exactly as we desire, and the present system is far better than none.

– Then I will say the sick and infirm. The honorable member for Adelaide, basking in the sunshine of Ministerial affluence, can afford to sneer at the poor just’ now.

– I am positive that the Labour party would never have undertaken, to deprive these poor sick’ and infirm persons of their votes unless they .thought they would gain a political advantage by doing so.

There is another matter in our electoral legislation which, I think, is very unwise. The penalties all trough seem to be too severe. The law makes criminals of people for doing things which are not criminal at all, and. in this Bill, we add more penalties, whereas we ought to have modified them. For instance, will honorable members believe that if a candidate bought electoral rolls, and omitted to include the amount in his return of expenditure, he would be liable to be sent to gaol ? If a member distributed electoral rolls all over Australia, he would do more good than harm, and yet the purchase of rolls is included as an expenditure which must come out of the small amount allowed for “electoral expenditure.”

– No. There was a mistake, I believe, in the first print of the Bill as introduced in the Senate, but that has been- rectified. The procedure under clause 8 is clearly described. The only objection is that under it an elector ought to be prevented from voting in respect of an electorate from which he has removed his residence for one month. Under clause 9 -

A roll may be altered by the Commonwealth electoral officer for the State by striking out the name of any person, if he has proof that the person has ceased to be qualified for enrolment on that roll and has secured enrolment on another roll.

I think that there should be inserted in that clause a provision that the person so dealt with shall be informed of the action of the officer. The matter is not very important, but is worthy of notice. The next important provision with which I propose to deal is contained in clause 17, which gives the right to vote after the issue of the writ, and before polling-day, to electors who will be absent from the Commonwealth on polling-day. No doubt this provision has been introduced to give seamen on the coast an opportunity to record their votes. It is only right that they should have an opportunity to vote, and should not be disfranchised merely because of a temporary absence from the Commonwealth. The Government have been properly careful in that respect, although they have not been so careful to preserve the rights of other persons to whom I have referred. It seems to me that proposed new section 139 a is surrounded with danger. It declares that - (1.) On polling day, an elector shall be en titled to vote at the polling place for which he is enrolled or at any prescribed polling place for the subdivision for which he is enrolled, or he shall be permittedto vote at any other polling place within the Commonwealth at which a polling booth is open under and subject to the regulations relating to absent voting.

That means that if I were visiting the electorate of Maranoa or any other remote part of the Commonwealth, I should be able to go to the polling place there and demand the right to vote for an electorate in the south-west of Western Australia. There is nothing in the Bill that would require me to prove my identity - to show that I was identical with the person in whose name I claimed the right to vote.

Mr Chanter:

– The right honorable member’s signature would be attached to a document there, and would be compared later on with his signature on the voter’s card .

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– But I might have removed to another part of the Commonwealth in the meantime. I do not know why the Government have made this provision so wide. I draw attention to it because I think it is surrounded with great danger, and will not. be availed of to any large extent. It is far better that we should disfranchise the few persons who might avail themselves of it, than that we should disfranchise, as the Government propose to do, the sick and the infirm, and practically all the women who are ill throughout Australia. It would be better to disfranchise these nomadic persons, who travel so far from home, than to run the risk of improper voting. Hundreds of people under this proposed new section would be able to vote in Melbourne in respect of a far-distant electorate, and their signatures might be written so hurriedly that they could not be identified by comparing them with the signatures on the cards.

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
Minister for Home Affairs · DARWIN, TASMANIA · ALP

– Then their votes would not be allowed.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– But in the meantime their votes would have been counted.Why are honorable members opposite so anxious to secure to every wandering person the privilege of recording his vote, when they are so unmindful of those who are so sick, and especially women who are so ill, that they cannot attend a polling booth ?

Mr King O’Malley:

– When a man is very sick, he does not want to vote.

Mr Roberts:

– The right honorable member thinks that the very sick would vote for him.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I do not knowwhy the honorable member should make such a suggestion. He cannot deny that my criticism of this Bill has been perfectly straightforward.

I come now to clause 32, which provides that - (1.) Every trades union registered or unregis tered, organization, association, league, or body of persons which has, or person who has, in connexion with any election, expended any money or incurred any expense -

on behalf of, or in the interests of, any candidate, or
on behalf of, or in the interests of, anypolitical party, shall in accordance with this section make areturn of the money so expended or expense soincurred.

Mr Roberts:

– It is they who are most susceptible to the influence of paid canvassers.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– If a candidate uses paid canvassers, the money must come out of the £100 which he is allowed to expend. Of course, we know that organizers are sent all over the country in the interests of candidates of one party and another, and they are paid by their organizations. If it is intended that nothing shall be done or said on behalf of a candidate at election time, that should be made clear.

I take exception to the provision in proposed new section 208a, allowing prosecutions for offences under the Act or regulations to be commenced at any time within three years after their commission, because it gives opportunities for blackmailing. These prosecutions should be commenced within a reasonable time - say, six months. A member cannot be disturbed in his seat after a short period, and it is absurd that he should be worried by threats of prosecution for minor offences.

Altogether. I am disappointed with the Bill. For more than twenty years in Western Australia electors who have been infirm or sick or absent from their homes have been able to exercise the franchise; and on the passing of the Commonwealth law this provision was extended to all electors, male and female. Now, after eleven years, this “humanitarian” Labour party, which claims a monopoly of interest in the poor and distressed, proposes to abolish this privilege.

Mr FULLER:
Illawarra

– I have listened with great interest to the speech of the right honorable member for Swan, and I think his criticism calls for some reply from the Ministerial benches. The right honorable member has made out a strong case, and he is entitled to the courtesy of a response. Apparently we are to have the same sort of performance that we have had in connexion with other Bills. No matter how strong, or how trenchant, the criticism, members on the Ministerial side sit silent, confident in the fact that they have the necessary votes. The country, however, will later on have an opportunity to say what it thinks of conduct of this kind. It is fair neither to the House nor to the country that Ministers should receive the observations made from this side with silence, which amounts to discourtesy. This measure, instead of a step in advance, is of a retrograde character. Facilities for voting are, to some extent, and in many cases to a large extent, taken away; and in the forefront we have the proposal to abolish postal voting. If there have been any abuses since the Minister of Home Affairs came into office, he should produce such evidence as will justify the proposal now before us. When I was Minister of Home Affairs, owing to the length of time since an election, I had no necessity to look into this matter, and certainly no abuses were mentioned to me. If, however, the present Minister has any evidence of corruption, it is his duty to the country to bring it forward at once. Postal voting is a great convenience to a large number of electors. No fewer than 29,000 electors availed themselves of the privilege at the last election; and yet they are to be deprived of their rights without a particle of evidence being offered in justification. We have heard generalities and assertions, but we have been told nothing which would lead us to accept this clause in the Bill. It has been stated that, at the first election after the establishment of the Federal Parliament, a large number of postal votes were misused, but the Committee which inquired into the matter were unanimous in1 the recommendation, not that the System should be abolished, but that it should be surrounded with necessary safeguards ; and those safeguards are embodied in our present Electoral Act. It is for the Government to show that the Act is not sufficient to prevent corrupt practices. I agree with the right honorable member for Swan that we ought to be very careful before we take away from the women and the sick and infirm, facilities which enable them, to exercise the dearest right of citizenship, namely, the right to vote for their representative in Parliament. It is suggested that a substitute for postal voting is incorporated in the Bill; but, as a matter of fact, it is ho substitute. What sort of satisfaction will it be to a sick woman, or any other infirm person, to be told, if they live in New South Wales, that they may exercise the vote in Queensland or Western Australia? On the other hand, ample provision is. made for electors who are leaving Australia ; and the position is somewhat peculiar in this connexion. Before reading clause 17, however, which touches this matter, I may say that, in my opinion, it is most unfortunate that so many matters should be left to regulation. When we instituted postal voting, all the conditions and safeguards were set forth in the Bill, whereas now, in the case of a person who will vote in any polling booth in the Commonwealth, hundreds of miles away from his electoral division, everything is left to regulation. I

*Electoral* [5 December,1911.]3717 have no desire whatever to be offensive to the present Minister of Home Affairs, but I may suggest that possibly some one in that position might be influenced by the interests of his party when drawing up the regulations. I contend that all that we require in connexion with this absent voting should be set forth in the Bill. Clause 17 provides - >An elector who has reason to believe that he will not on polling day be within any Commonwealth electoral division may, subject to the regulations, be permitted to vote at any time after the issue of the writ and before polling day, if he attends before any prescribed Commonwealth Electoral Registrar and makes a declaration in accordance with the prescribed form. The same clause also provides - >A ballot-paper under this section having a vote marked thereon shall not be informal by reason that the surname only of a candidate appears thereon, or by reason of any mistake or error in spelling, if the elector's intention is clear. What kind of ballot-paper is going to be submitted to the elector? Is it to be in blank, on which he may write the name of any real or supposed candidate? It certainly looks as though a person about to leave Australia is to have given to him a piece of blank paper on which he may write the name of some person, who may, or may not, be a candidate. Apparently he is to guess who the candidate is to be. {: .speaker-JW6} ##### Mr Cann: -- A postal voter has to write the name of the candidate now. {: .speaker-JZF} ##### Mr FULLER: -- I do not think so. On all the ballot-papers I have seen the names of the candidates appear, although, of course, I speak subject to correction. At any rate, at the time a person hands in a postal vote he knows who the candidates are. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- Eat he writes the name of the candidate for whom he votes. {: .speaker-JZF} ##### Mr FULLER: -- In the case of persons leaving the Commonwealth a blank piece of paper is to be given, on which is to.be written the name of somebody who may, or may not, be a candidate. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- That is so now, in the case of postal votes. {: #subdebate-12-0-s2 .speaker-JZF} ##### Mr FULLER:
ILLAWARRA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910 -- It is not so, as the candidates are known. It appears to me a curious way in which to conduct an election ; and I should like to know from the Minister of Home Affairs whether such is the intention of the Government. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -The elector will write down the name of- the candidate for whom he votes justas he does now in the case ofapostalvote. {: .speaker-JZF} ##### Mr FULLER: -- How the elector is to know who the candidates are I cannot imagine. Such a plan may work satisfactorily with organizations who choose their candidates and send them round the country months beforehand; but when a candidate is chosen at the last moment, the elector, under this clause, may be in absolute ignorance of the fact. If I am correct in my reading of the Bill, the system appears to be most objectionable. We are informed that 3 per cent. of the electors of Australia used the postal vote at the last election, and we ought to hesitate before we take away a privilege which has proved so useful to such a large number. Under certain conditions, I have no hesitation in giving my adherence to a system of compulsory enrolment, but the necessary corollary is compulsory voting - if we are to have the one we ought certainly to have the other. The object is to get not only as full and complete a roll, but as' full and complete a poll of the electors as possible. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- You may take a horse to water but you cannot make him drink. {: .speaker-JZF} ##### Mr FULLER: -- That objection is always urged to a proposal for compulsory voting. . I do not see how an elector could be prevented from spoiling his ballotpaper, but the chances are that if compulsory voting were introduced, there would be very little justification for the use of the old adage which the honorable member has quoted. In the vast majority of cases it would be found that men and women, when compelled to go to the poll, would exercise their franchise according to their honest convictions. {: .speaker-KYD} ##### Mr Poynton: -- They are sure to vote for the men who passed that law ! {: .speaker-JZF} ##### Mr FULLER: -- I do not think that would influence many people. We have our duty to perform, and the duty of voting is perhaps the most sacred which people owe to their country. While I do not like the idea of compulsion, we have it in connexion with our educational system in every State, and in the Commonwealth in defence matters. Our boys are compelled to undergo training to qualify themselves for the. defenceof the country, and it would be a queer state of things if, when the circumstances arose, our trained soldiers should please themselves as to what they should do, Having adopted the system of compulsory enrolment, the Minister would be wise to . adopt it's proper corollary : cpmpulsory voting. There are of course, objections to compulsory enrolment. It is easy for people in towns and cities who have facilities for reaching the registrars. The difficulty comes in with people living away in the back-blocks. The Minister ought to alter the provision in some respects so as to insure that no more hardship than is necessary is entailed on people who live far away from facilities for enrolment. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- The country people realize their obligations in this regard better than the city people do. {: .speaker-JZF} ##### Mr FULLER: -- 1 am glad to say that is often the case - more particularly among those who favour the side of politics to which my honorable friend belongs ; the way in which they will make sacrifices, travel long distances, give up a day's work, and often more than a day's work, in order to carry out their duty as citizens, is remarkable. The Minister might at any rate have given us a sketch of how he proposes to establish the compulsory enrolment system. He was very brief in dealing with that" portion of the Bill, and I should haveliked to hear him much more fully on the subject. The privilege granted by proposed new section 130a to an elector to vote as an absent voter at any polling booth in the Commonwealth, is also subject to regulation, but the Minister ought to see that the proper safeguards are put in the Bill. It was provided in the principal Act that even if a man voted as an absent voter at another subdivision in his own electorate, he must make a declaration before a Returning Officer or else use a Q form. How much more necessary, then, are safeguards when a man may be voting in a constituency a thousand miles or more away from that for which he is enrolled? I feel that there is a strong probability of this absent voters' right being much abused unless proper safeguards are embodied in the measure. The provision for the return of expenses by newspapers appears to have been put in by the Government because they feel that the newspapers of Australia have not given them a fair deal. Whether it is right or wrong, they have often expressed that opinion, and they appear to have taken this way to get at newspapers which may happen to be their political opponents. I would point out that no limit is specified in the Bill as to either the time or the amount to be received or paid for this purpose. The provision seems to cover any length of time, and practically anything affecting an election. We certainly ought to have a time limit and limitations in other respects. It appears that under the clause newspaper proprietors are to make returns at all times regarding publications which may affect elections. That would cause them1 great inconvenience, but would it be to the public benefit? We ought always to be guided by the consideration of whether, a proposed law will be for the public benefit. If it is not, it merely resolves itself into a matter of idle curiosity. I indorse what the honorable member for Swan has said as to the amounts made by newspapers in connexion with elections. If other honorable members have paid them only as much as I have paid them in the past, the papers have not made much of a harvest out of elections in Australia. All I ever pay newspapers in my constituency for are advertisements for halls, and I believe the same applies to other honorable members. It never struck me that we should approach newspapers to bribe them in any way to write articles to benefit us in our candidature. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr Scullin: -- Then there is no harm done by the Bill if that is true. {: .speaker-JZF} ##### Mr FULLER: -- I agree with the honorable member for Swan that the amounts made by the press at election times are grossly exaggerated. No good purpose can be served by the disclosure of their receipts for all time. When they are disclosed, I think the size of them will be a source of great disappointment to some honorable members, and to others outside. I shall say nothing about the position, of the Labour press. I read the debate, on the Bill in the other place, and anybody who wishes to ascertain the correct and full position of the Labour organs can do so by reading *Hansard.* Of course, if Labour organizations choose to run newspapers of their own, and if their members are prepared to pay portion of their subscriptions to run papers distinctly in their party interests, they are absolutely entitled to do so. The party to which I belong has exactly the same right, although it is not exercised. I do not believe that the great 'newspapers of Sydney, Melbourne and other capitals are influenced in the slightest by any payments made to them by political organizations for advertisements or articles. It is ridiculous to think that newspapers like the *Sydney Morning Herald,* the *Daily Telegraph,* the *Age,* and others of that character would be influenced in the tone of their articles, or in their conduct, by any money that might be offered by political organizations, although I do not admit that any is ever offered. The newspapers stand on too firm ground financially to be influenced in the way suggested. The provision allowing prosecutions for electoral offences for three years after the commission of the offences extends the time far too much. It is not at all fair that men elected to this Parliament should have the sword hanging over their heads during the whole of their term. It must be remembered that these are not offences, such as burglary, or crimes of that character. They are offences in connexion with the Electoral Act. It would be very difficult for us, after a period of even twelve or eighteen months, to refute a charge of committing an offence against the Electoral Act during the course of the previous campaign. {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr Hall: -- - The opportunity to prepare our defence has gone. The people who know about it are perhaps dead. {: .speaker-JZF} ##### Mr FULLER: -- The evidence may often be absolutely gone, as the honorable member for Werriwa suggests. A political opponent, in order to damage a successful candidate, might bring up against him some charge relating to the last election just when a new election was about to take place. We ought not to allow an opportunity of that sort to be given. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- It cuts at the other side as well as at us. {: .speaker-JZF} ##### Mr FULLER: -- It cuts at all candidates, to whichever side they belong. . It would tend to make our positions very unhappy if, during the three years that we occupy our seats, we were open to be charged with an offence that might have occurred during the last election. I hope the Minister will see" his way clear to considerably reduce the time in which a charge can be made. {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr Hall: -- Omit " years " and substitute " months." {: .speaker-JZF} ##### Mr FULLER: -- That would be more reasonable. I feel sure that the good sense of the Minister, supported by the suggestions of some members of his party who appear to indorse my view of this matter, will lead him to reduce the time very considerably. I do not wish to labour this question. I have had an opportunity of administering the Electoral Act, and am familiar with what has happened under it in various directions. I am not satisfied, however, that there has occurred in con tra]- 2 nexion with it any grievance so substantial as to justify the proposal to take away from those for whose use it was originally brought into existence the right to vote by post. Nor am I satisfied with the provisions in this Bill relating to absent voters. I have forgotten the beautiful language which the Minister . used last night in referring to what must result from having the blood of pure elections running through the veins of the nation. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr Deakin: -- Give him a moment, and he will repeat it. {: .speaker-JZF} ##### Mr FULLER: -- I do not know that he could. I hope, however, that, in order to give effect to the high ideals which he expressed last night - in order that every facility may be given to the people to record their votes - he will think twice before he does away with voting by post, and that, in order to keep our elections as pure as possible, he will not leave to regulations the methods of dealing with absent voters. The Minister claims that he conducts his' Department quite independently of the advice of his officers - that he is absolutely a law unto himself - and 1 trust that he will take steps in this Parliament to provide such safeguards as will make practically impossible any corruption in connexion with the absent-voting provisions of the Bill. {: #subdebate-12-0-s3 .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I am not at all surprised at the character of this Bill, coming, as it does, from a party which, in our experience in this House, has always been a party of class legislation. The Bill is designed specially to promote their ideals in that regard. The Federal Labour party has always believed in restriction rather than in liberty. Whenever the opportunity has offered, we have always found in the legislative efforts of the party now in office a desire to curtail rather than to extend the liberties of the people. We have, in this Bill, another, example of that tendency. This barefaced attack upon the franchise, however, is likely to come as a rude shock to a great many people, and particularly to those weak-kneed" Liberals who, at the last general election, voted for the Labour party in order to " give the other fellow a show." "The other fellow" has had a show, and one of his first acts has been to put before Parliament a proposal to lop off the opportunity of some of these weak-kneed Liberals to give the other fellow a show in future, even if he still, wants to do so. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- Does the honorable member want these weak-kneed ones back again ? {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- The trouble is that they will not, if this Bill is carried, have an opportunity to effectively repent of folly. They are not to be allowed to retrieve the error of their ways, and to regain the sound position which they occupied before, in a moment of weakness, they voted for the Labour party. This Bill, like a number of other measures that have been brought down by the Labour party, has been wrongly named. Nearly every Bill introduced by the Labour party since they have been in office has. had a misleading title, and honorable members have been unable to gather from their titles a fair index of the matters to which they really relate. The title of this Bill ought to be " The Liberal Disfranchisement Bill," because it cannot be disguised that its whole aim and purpose is simply to disfranchise many thousands of supposed Liberals. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- I am glad that the honorable member used the word " supposed." {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- This is an attempt to disfranchise as many supposed Liberal electors as the Government possibly can. Figures from the official returns quoted by the right honorable member for Swan supply what is undoubtedly one of the main reasons why this Bill has been brought down. It was discovered from, an examination of the statistical returns that a preponderance of the postal votes cast at the recent referenda was in favour of the Liberal side in politics. And now, because of that discovery, a mean revenge is to be .taken upon the infirm and the sick - upon all inmates of hospitals, and' upon all the womanhood of our community who may be in a delicate state of health, and rendering to the Commonwealth the highest natural service in the fulfilment of their natural destiny. All these will have to suffer because qf this mean, small-minded, and revengeful act on the part of the Ministry. They are to be deprived of one of the dearest rights of citizenship which should belong to them as citizens of the Commonwealth. The proposal, however, is likely to be a boomerang in its operation. It must be remembered that all . inmates of charitable institutions are not necessarily opposed, to the Labour party. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr Scullin: -- So that the honorable member is really answering his own argument. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 **- Senator Rae** declared it would demolish the last stronghold of the Liberal party. I am pointing out that honorable members opposite, in their haste to be revenged on the Liberals who are unable to vote except by post, are bringing down a measure which, although in intent aimed only at the Liberal party, will, in its actual effect, strike a blow at quite a large number on the other side. If, for instance, a painter happens to fall off a ladder and break his leg - if a wage-earner in any other occupation happens to be injured whilst following his daily employment - and is carried to a hospital about election time, he will, under this Bill,be deprived of the franchise. It was the recognition of such disabilities that led to our providing in the original Act for cases of the kind, so that the victims of misfortune should not be debarred from exercising their most important right of citizenship. What gratitude are those members of political Labour organizations and trade unions likely to show the Labour party for bringing in a measure that is going to deprive them, in the circumstances I have named, of the right to exercise their votes at a general, or any other, election ? These are points which, no doubt, escaped the observation of the present Government when devising ways and means of " dishing " the Liberals. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr Scullin: -- The honorable member is judging us by his own party. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- -It is to be hoped not. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I should be very sorry to be a party to the introduction of anything of this kind. Nor has the Liberal party ever been a party to such practices. Honorable members opposite also overlook the fact that they are not likely always to be in possession of the Treasury bench, and that if they want to take advantage of their majority to perpetrate an injustice on one section of the electors there will be nothing to prevent the other side, if they are so disposed, to make use of 'their majority on some future occasion to place the Labour party and their following in an equally unfortunate position. *Sitting* *suspended from 6.30 to 8. p.m.* {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I was endeavouring to show that the Bill was framed in a spirit of revenge. {: #subdebate-12-0-s4 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- Order ! {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Read- ing its provisions, one cannot help coming to that conclusion. It is certainly not framed in a spirit of broad- statesmanship, nor in the interests of the community at large. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr Scullin: -- The honorable member was trying to prove that it would disfranchise Labour supporters. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Although that is not intended by its framers, it will probably be to no small extent the effect of its provisions, though the majority who will suffer will be Liberals on the figures quoted. The abolition of postal voting will disfranchise those who fill our hospitals, benevolent asylums, and similar places, who are certainly not the capitalists whom honorable members opposite regard as the arch enemies of Labour. The Bill strikes at the halt, the sick, and the blind, the aged and infirm. Although the measure has been framed to strike a deadly blow at that section of the Liberal supporters which makes use of the postal voting facilities, it cannot be said of it that - >True to the hand that flings it forth It flies to its intended mark. It is rather like a boomerang flung by an unskilful hand, which, in its gyrations, returns and does injury to the thrower. The Bill is unworthy of any political party, and especially of that party which professes to be the last word in Democracy. It sets an extremely bad precedent. Honorable members opposite frame their legislation purely to secure party advantage, forgetting that they cannot occupy the Treasury bench in perpetuity, and that the weapons which they are fashioning to injure their opponents may, at no distant date, be turned against themselves -when in the cold shades of Opposition. Although the Parliamentary Labour party claims to be democratic, I have always regarded its members as Tories, and they have certainly fully earned that reputation. If the abolition of postal voting is proposed because the system has been used corruptly, there must be evidence of the abuses alleged ; but no authenticated instance has been brought under our notice, and I have no knowledge of any affording justification for this proposal. That there have been minor abuses is very likely, but they have not been confined to the supporters of any party. Even Labour members will not claim that their supporters are perfect. The Ministry proposes no adequate substitution for postal voting, and this omission gives good ground for the charge that they are trying to curtail the' voting privileges of their opponents. While the Labour party wishes to curtail the franchise, the Liberal party has always been for widening and extending it. The Liberal party was responsible for manhood suffrage, the secret ballot, the abolition of the property qualification,- womanhood suffrage, and the principle of one adult one vote, and every adult a vote. The party has always had the interests of the whole people at heart. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr Scullin: -- It claims these reforms now that they have been carried. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- It alone is responsible for them. They were not obtained by Labour, Tory, or Conservative votes, but were introduced, fought for, -and carried by Liberals long before a Labour party was in existence. The party has progressed from one reform to another. It has broadened the franchise, putting the claims of flesh and blood before those of bricks and mortar. The Labour party owes itsvery existence to the path being opened for them by the Liberals. It is because of what has been done by the Liberal party, in the widening of the franchise that the Labour party has been able to get into-. politics, and to rise to the position which it now occupies. Therefore, it comes with anil 1 grace from the Labour party to proposea retrograde step, and to try to re-impose on the Democracy of the country the trammels, from which the Liberals have freed it. If Ministers insist on carrying these proposals,.; they will recoil on their own party in a way which they do not anticipate. John Bright correctly defined the Liberal position when' he said that the Liberal party " legislates always for the whole people and for the' general good." Can it be said that this legislation of the Labour party is for thegeneral good, or for the whole people? {: .speaker-K8L} ##### Mr Thomas: -- Yes. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Is it for the general good that 29,000 women will be disfranchised by the Bill? JohnBright further said' that the Liberal party " brings no measures into. Parliament that' are exclusively for' the advantage of one' portion of the people."/ That is the essence' of Liberalism, which is being assailed by these proposals. I am ashamed to be associated with a Parliament - fortunately, I am not associated with the implicated party - that is asked to consider a proposal to curtail the franchise which has been fought for and won, after so many hard battles and at such great cost to the people. Parliament should be the last to curtail popular rights by a hair's-breadth ; if there is an opportunity to amend the electoral law in this connexion, it should be in the direction of extending - not reducing - the franchise if that were possible. We on this side realize that, no matter what reason, logic, or proof there may be in our contentions, we cannot prevail against honorable members opposite, who, perhaps, behind closed doors have come to a decision by which they are bound. I do not expect that we shall make much impression upon them; nevertheless, it is our duty to try to rouse public opinion to what is being done in Parliament by those who profess to legislate in the interests of the people. It is our duty to warn the electors of the assaults on their political liberties - assaults by a party who ought to be the last to make any attempts of the kind. However, I pass away from that matter in order to say a few words about another portion of the Bill. I realize that it is not of much use extending myself, even in a second-reading debate, on a measure of this kind. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- It is not an appeal to reason ! {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Quite so; it is an appeal to forces which, unfortunately, are too strong for us. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- Are there any postal votes in New South Wales State elections? {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- We have nothing to do with State elections. Postal voting was another extension of the franchise brought about in this Parliament by a Liberal Administration ; and it was safeguarded in every possible way that human ingenuity could devise. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- It has been very "liberally" maladministered since! {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- We have assertions but no proof - there is not a single Court case in which any assertion of the kind has been proved. If there have been numerous cases of maladministration and corrupt abuse of the system, why have not the powers of the Court been invoked? There has been no attempt on the part of the Ministry, or ofany private member, either in this Chamber. or in another place, to substantiate any of these wholesale charges. Clause 7 provides - (2.) The regulations shall prescribe anything necessary or convenient to be prescribed for carrying a system of compulsory enrolment into effect and may prescribe penalties not exceeding Two pounds for any contravention of any regulation made in pursuance of this power. Too much, in my opinion, is left to regulations, by means of which we are setting up a bureaucracy in place of Parliament. The regulations may have all sorts of irritating effects. We have no knowledge of what they are likely to be; and they may lead to all kinds of disabilities quite beyond our ken at the present time. I should like to know whether, if this clause is to be insisted on, the Government will follow the plan adopted, I believe, by the Queensland Parliament, of attaching the regulations as a supplement to the Bill, so that Parliament may have an opportunity to consider them. Under present conditions, we have no knowledge whatever ofthe regulations until after a Bill is passed, and then they are often entirely beyond our control. It is true that honorable members have copies forwarded to them from time to time; but Parliament may be in recess, and no opportunity presented to raise a protest. I suppose that when the Government framed this measure they had in their minds the character of the regulations to be embodied ; and, if so, it would now be an easy matter to attach the regulations to the Bill as I have suggested. If my memory serves me rightly, a protest was raised some time ago in the Queensland Parliament in this connexion, and since then the practice of attaching the regulations as a supplement was adopted, thus giving them the full force of the authority of Parliament. Will the Minister, even at the present stage, consider the advisability . of adopting this course? There are many other provisions in the Bill to which serious exception can be taken, but I do not propose to refer to them at the present juncture, seeing that we shall have an opportunity, when the Bill is taken into Committee, as I suppose it will be in spite of all our protests. Clause 17 provides - 139a. (1.) On polling day, an elector shall be en titled to vote at the polling place for which he is enrolled or at any prescribed polling place for the subdivision for which he is enrolled,, or he shall be permitted to vote at any other polling place within the Commonwealth at which a polling booth is open under and subject to the regulations relating to absent voting. This opens the door to more wholesale abuse than has been possible under any section of the original Act, especially in the case of well -organized political associations, who can make use of the provision, if they feel so inclined, to dump hundreds, and even thousands, of voters into any one electorate without running very much risk of detection or even of checking. To allow a voter to poll at any place within the Commonwealth is to give him too large a sphere within which to operate; and I suggest that, in the place of " Commonwealth," there shall *be* substituted " State." {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- A voter may poll at any place within a State now ; this is an extension of the facilities for voting. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- It is an extension of the facilities for the misuse and abuse of voting, unless safeguarded by some form of declaration like Form Q which it is now proposed to abolish. Under this clause 1,000 men in Kalgoorlie, Perth, or Fremantle may swamp an electorate like that of South Sydney or East Sydney, through their political organizations. I am not so simple as to suppose that this clause has been innocently framed without any appreciation of the opportunities it affords for certain practices that may be indulged in if they suit the political party warfare of a certain party. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- There is such a provision in operation now. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Only within a State; and it is very much easier to check abuses in a State than when they extend throughout the Commonwealth, besides which there is the safeguard to which I have referred. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- The honorable member means that he is a different man when he is away from New South Wales? {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- The honorable member, with his usual sophistry, tries to draw a red herring across the trail. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- No vote will be allowed unless the signature of the voter corresponds. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- What is to happen after the vote is recorded, and the voter is not to be found ? Is the vote to be allowed if the signature does not correspond ? {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- Certainly not. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- There is nothing, so far as 1 can see, in the Bill to prevent such a vote being recorded. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- The honorable member knows that there is a card system as a check. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- The card system, properly used, might be, to some extent, a safeguard, but I doubt whether it will be found as effective as the Minister thinks if the practice of outside voting is resorted to to more than a limited extent. It will become increasingly necessary, under this amending Bill, to employ scrutineers, and the cost of scrutineers is a very heavy item in some election expenses. If it is to be included in a candidate's returns, it will be a formidable amount, and leave very little for advertising, hall hire, and the other necessary expenses of a campaign. I therefore suggest, in the interests of all parties, and in the public interest, seeing, that scrutineers are so . necessary in connexion with elections, that the Government should provide for their services. The scrutineer should be an impartial person employed to act as agent for both parties, and for the Government. He should be an umpire to see fair play between all parties, and from that point of view his fee should be a legitimate charge upon the Government. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- I think it would be necessary to have one for each party. **Mr. W.** ELLIOT JOHNSON.Either the expense of scrutineers should not be included within the limit of £100 allowed to members for election expenses, or they should be paid by the Government. This applies particularly to large electorates. The matter does not affect me, because I have only a few polling places in my electorate, and can, therefore, speak on the subject disinterestedly. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- One volunteer is worth twenty paid men. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Quite true; and personally I am fortunate in getting friends to act in that' way, but a number of honorable members, I understand, have to pay a considerable amount for scrutineers.. I hope that when the Bill reaches Committee, radical changes will be made in some of its provisions. {: #subdebate-12-0-s5 .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- The first duty of this Parliament should be to secure the greatest possible simplicity, impartiality, and effectiveness in its electoral machinery. The voting machine of the nation should be as free and as accessible, subject to essential safeguards, as the right of each free citizen to exercise the franchise is indisputable and absolute. The slightest evidence of any trace of partisanship is an offence against the public interest. {: .speaker-K8L} ##### Mr Thomas: -- Hear, hear. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- I am glad to have the approval of the other side, because all the main features of the Bill are in direct opposition to the principles I have laid down. In the case of many measures introduced to this Parliament, we have had an absence of official information regarding not only details, but vital principles. It is so in this case. When the Minister moved the second reading of the Bill last night, fie gave very little information to the House upon its cardinal points, and when he was asked for information, it was not forthcoming. .During the debate, this afternoon, similar attempts to elicit information from him were equally futile and fruitless> I asked by interjection last night if the Minister could give us an indication as to whether any of the principles embodied in the Bill were recommendations of the Chief Electoral Officer. The honorable gentleman's reply was that in South Australia Ministers were guided by their responsible officers, but that, in the case of the Commonwealth, Ministers " went on their own." I should like to remind him that if there is one public officer more than another whose recommendations ought to be submitted for the guidance of the Minister himself, and of honorable members, it is the Chief Electoral Officer. Before the advent of Federation, we had in South Australia about as complete and perfect an electoral system as was to be found in any part of the world. That system, of which the- honorable member knows a good deal, was the result of life-long study on the part of the late **Mr. Boothby,** one of the most competent and best-known electoral experts. {: .speaker-JM8} ##### Mr Archibald: -- He did not believe in postal voting, though. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- I ' assure the honorable member that if the late **Mr. Boothby** were living to-day, he would be an ardent advocate of the postal voting system, which has proved so beneficial and democratic' an instrument throughout Australia. **Mr. Boothby,** when in charge" of the Electoral Department, and **Mr. Boothby's** successor up to thé present day, so;far as r know, were always sought by the Ministry of the day for -their advice 'in the perfecting, of. the- electoral machine.' I -do not believe that the Parliament of. South Australia even now would look at a Bill to amend the Electoral Act unless it was accompanied by the recommendation of the Chief Electoral Officer. That is his special duty as an expert. In some instances a lifetime of concentrated effort has been devoted to this subject. Is not such an expert likely to be an unpartisan guide, infinitely more to be recommended for the consideration and guidance of Parliament than is a Minister who is here to-day and gone to-morrow? It would be much better for the people of Australia if Commonwealth Ministers were guided by their responsible officers, who know their business, and who, by training and experience, become experts at their work. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- Were you so guided ? {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- I was-, very much guided by the men who knew better than myself. The Honorary Minister, who has had no experience whatever, would probably feel himself eminently suited to ignore men who have had, possibly, a lifetime of experience. While he would have a great deal of self-satisfaction, the public would have mighty little satisfaction, unless he had a great deal more definite experience behind him. I know that on this question, as on others, we speak in this Parliament to deaf ears; but it is our duty on this side to speak to the House; and through the House to a wider tribunal, which will judge, not only this, but other proposals that have been, and will be, submitted. We have a right to the advice and guidance of the Chief Electoral Officer, but it is denied to us. The Minister is not treating either this Parliament or the people of Australia with that respect and courtesy that we are entitled to expect of him. We have a right to know, not only the Ministerial mind on what should be a non-party question, but the mind of the unbiased man at the head of the ElectoralDepartment, who is an expert on this matter. We know, from what has already been submitted to Parliament, that the Chief Electoral Officer has not been consulted - that* he has rather been .directed by the Minister to adopt, a .certain course. We have evidence of that in some suggestions of his, as to the form which the sm>stitution for the proposed repeal of the postal voting principle should take, since,' in making his statement to the Minister, this' officer' prefaces his remarks with the words, "-In consequence of the abolition of postal voting'.".. The system of voting- by post has not yet been abolished, but the Ministry of the day, with, shall I say, a stubborn, determined majority behind them - a majority that will not listen to argument, that will not be influenced by any appeal - have fairly good standing ground when they make a statement to the officer controlling the Electoral Department, from which he assumes that what they say is to be done will be done. And so he begins, " In consequence of the abolition of postal voting." He does not say that he believes in the abolition of postal voting. We have a right to know whether the Chief Electoral Officer, out of the experience of his work - as the result of a close and intimate knowledge of the system and of his complete fitness to advise this House - recommended the repeal of the system. We have a right to know whether he approves of anything of the kind. The assumption is that he does not, since he prefaces his. statement with the remark to which I have referred. {: .speaker-L0P} ##### Mr Sampson: -- I do not think the Minister is game to ask him for an independent report. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- I am sure that he is not. I challenge the honorable gentleman to ask the Chief Electoral Officer to give us, not a report to order, but his own independent report for the guidance of Parliament. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- That would not be fair to him. We should not make a politician of him. ' {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- Therein lies the scandal of the whole matter. There should be no politics in this business. The people of Australia demand that in matters of this kind there shall be no politics. The principle of voting by post - a democratic principle, which has given completeness and effectiveness to our electoral system - is to be surrendered, and there is to be a substitution. It is to be repealed, we are told, because offences have been committed under it. {: .speaker-KTT} ##### Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Alleged to have been committed. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- The Government have not submitted a single case of corruption in connexion with it, and are not likely to be able to do so. If they could find such a case, it would constitute a dainty morsel to roll under their tongues. They would proclaim it from the housetops. {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr MASSY-GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- That is why we are treated tb a conspiracy of silence by honorable members opposite. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- Could we expect anything elsa? Honorable members opposite have no heart in this matter. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- We do not desire that ever' honorable member shall make an exhibition of himself. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- The honorable member is a constant exhibition. I do not blame the silence of the Labour party. I am inclined to think that they have some twinge of conscience, and that, because of their silence, there is yet some hope. Indeed, there is a good deal of wisdom in their silence. There is, in this Bill - save the name - principles which they cannot defend, and that being so, they could not do better than remain silent. Because of alleged acts of corruption and malpractice in connexion with postal voting, they propose to substitute for it a system that will open wide the flood-gates to possibilities of corruption in every direction. Under it we shall have offences that cannot be traced. It will be impossible to prove identification, and, therefore, impossible to enforce the penalties. That portion of the Bill which repeals voting by post, and substitutes for it other provisions, is a mockery, and nothing else. Those dealt with in paragraphs *b* and *c* of the clause relating to the substituted provisions for postal voting cannot get to the nearest voting booth, and that is why they desire to avail themselves of the system of postal voting. The mockery of it is that, while postal voting is to be repealed, every polling booth throughout the Commonwealth is to be open to those poor unfortunates who cannot get to the nearest one - most of whom cannot get out of their own dwellings, and many of whom possibly cannot leave their sick rooms. It is the intention of this Democratic, Socialistic Labour party- {: .speaker-L4X} ##### Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
INDI, VICTORIA · ALP -- We were told just now that we were Tories. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- And the Labour party are Tories a century old ; they are, in short, the Tories of Tories. It is the intention of this Democratic Labour party - this franchise reform party - to put limitations on the franchise, and to say to these distressed, unfortunate, but worthy people, " You cannot get to the nearest polling booth, but we will open to you polling booths 1,000 miles away." Let us look briefly at the history of the absent voting principle. It originated, so far as I know, in connexion with the electoral machinery of the South Australian Parliament. At the instance -of **Senator Guthrie,** the State Ministry of that day introduced into theState Electoral Act a system of absent voting to provide for seamen. That was a very proper provision to make, and was appreciated, as it deserved to be appreciated, by the community generally, since, if there is a section deserving of consideration, it consists of those who do their business on the high seas. {: .speaker-JM8} ##### Mr Archibald: -- They will be able to vote under this Bill. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- I did not say that they would not be able to. do so. Possibly the seamen will be accommodated under it, and there are others covered by paragraphs *a, b,* and *c* of the clause to which I have referred, who may be accommodated by the substituted provisions. But the greater part of those coming under paragraphs *b* and *c* cannot, and they are to be absolutely disfranchised. The introduction of the principle of absent voting for seamen was generally in the interests of the Labour party. We did not object to it because of that, because every honorable man ought, to rejoice at the extension of the franchise to these worthy men. The first step in this direction was all right for the Labour party, and the principle was extended from time to time, and appreciated by the Labour party, until it was found that the growing percentages of those who voted by post began to be against that party. As soon as the tide turned, and it was supposed by the Labour party that the use of the absent voting' provisions of the Act was rather in favour of their opponents, they called for a halt. They have been calling for it for some time, and have now taken the final plunge. In order to rectify matters, they say, in effect, " Because the operation of this principle gives our opponents an advantage, we shall cut it off, and substitute for it provisions that will be applicable only to a small proportion of those who have hitherto voted by post, leaving the rest of those who have availed themselves of the system to be disfranchised altogether. Our own women of the Labour party shall be disfranchised, in order that we may get even with the other side." I desire to show how the principle has operated in connexion with Federal elections. At the Federal election of 1903, votes were recorded by 527,999 males, as against *359,315* females, or53.09. per cent. of males, as against 39.96 of females. At the general election in 1906, the numbers grew to 628,135, or 56.38 per cent. of males, to 431,033or43.30 per cent. of females. In 1 910 there were 802,030 male voters, or a percentage of 6.7.58, as against 601,946 female voters, or a percentage of 56.17; so that the percentage of women was growing in a bigger ratio than was the percentage of male voters. Taking the totals, we find that from 1903 to 1910 the female vote increased from 359,315 to 601,946, or from a percentage of 39.96 to 56.17 per cent. The postal voting in 19 10 was as follows: - 12,690 males, 15,459 females, or a total of 28,149; whilst at the referenda, in April last, 10,540 males, and 14,257 females, or a total of 24,797, recorded their votes in that way. {: .speaker-JWY} ##### Mr Chanter: -- What was the percentage to the total number of votes polled ? {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- Exactly 3 per cent. It is remarkable that Victoria claims the largest percentage of women voters by post. Out of a total of 15,459 who voted by post, 7,708 votes were so recorded by females in Victoria at the 1910 general election; whilst at the recent referenda, out of a total of 14,257 votes by post recorded by females, 7,748 were cast in this State. This so-called national humanitarian Labour party is taking fright at this democratic ideal. It is afraid of a percentage of 3 per cent., and desires to repeal postal voting. As a justification for repealing it. they are bringing up the bogy of corrupt practices. {: .speaker-JWY} ##### Mr Chanter: -- Nine-tenths of that 3 per cent. would still be able to come under the absent voters' provision. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- Not half of them will be able to do so. They are being disfranchised because it is thought that some of them vote against the Labour party. There has been a wholesale slander by Labour men of those who have used the postal vote. This has been said by one of their number - >I believe that many women belonging to the Women's National League have gone so far that on resurrection day God Almighty will deny that he ever had a house for them. In that respect Ananias and Sapphira were gentlefolk in comparison, with some of these women. The suppression of these canvassers would have a wonderful moral influence on the community. That was said by **Senator Henderson.** {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr KING O'MALLEY:
Minister for Home Affairs · DARWIN, TASMANIA · ALP -- He is a good, Christian man: {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- If good, Christian men speak like that, I do not wish to live with them. No one possessing a spark of chivalry in his composi? tion would speak like that of the women of the country. Yet the Minister of Home Affairs indorses the statement! What proof is there that there has been corruption in regard to the postal vote? I do not say that electoral offences are not committed. There must be some, and they should be punished, whether the offenders have been working in the Labour or in the Liberal interest. Let the penalties be enforced every time. The real reason for the abolition of the postal vote is the Liberal awakening throughout Australia. The Liberal party is closing its ranks, and is organizing as it never did before. The forces of Labour never met organized Liberalism until the referenda campaign, when they went down. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- Organized boodleierism {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- No; hut there is in the Bill a great deal too much Americanism, which we should keep out of Australia. In few parts of the world have politics been cleaner, and we should try to improve our record. Let offences be reduced by proper safeguards to the minimum. The imposing of disabilities on electors will not keep back the Liberal advance. This Bill, with its shameful partisan provisions, will do more to solidify the ranks of Liberalism than the organization which has been going on. {: .speaker-KXO} ##### Mr Page: -- Then why worry about it? {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- I am not worrying. I am delighted that the enemy is digging his own grave. Is it to be wondered at that the women of Australia are awakening to the fact that the Labour party, the so-called friends of humanity and helpers of the weak, are not their friends ? {: .speaker-KYV} ##### Mr Riley: -- Cheer up. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- I am more cheerful than honorable members opposite, who could not be cheerful if they tried. Why was there not an inquiry into the roll-stuffing in South Australia? Why is there no amendment proposed in this Bill for meeting corruption of that kind? {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- South Australia is a wicked State. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- It is the State which is responsible for th'e political creation of the Minister. Are the proper penalties going to be enforced by Labour Administrations for offences of that kind? The safeguards which should be in this Bill are not in it. Their provision is left to a Ministry which- is not being guided by its expert and experienced adviser in these matters, the Chief Electoral Officer. Penalties are not going to be enforced for the roll-stuffing which has taken place in Adelaide, because the Labour Government there has not the courage to offend the Trades Hall. {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr Hall: -- The honorable member knows that there is no provision in the law for punishing the offence. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- The State Attorney-General and Crown Solicitor say so; but I do not believe either of them. Were the late Right Honorable C. C. Kingston alive and in power in South Australia, he would have had penalties enforced, no matter what side was responsible for the crime. It is nonsense to say that there is no penalty for forgery. Let the honorable member read the statements about what took place, and say what he thinks of it. {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr Hall: -- I would put the opinions of the law authorities of South Australia before that of the honorable member. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- So should I, if they were law authorities. Honorable members forget that it does not pay to he corrupt. Last Saturday there was a municipal election at the place where the rollstuffing took place, and six of the seven Labour candidates were defeated, including die leader of the roll -stuffing business, as well as two members of the Legislature. {: .speaker-KXO} ##### Mr Page: -- Cheer up. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- I have reason to do so, because things are going right. Right will always win in the long run. Dishonest practices and partisan tricks may succeed for a time ; you may deceive all the people for a time, and a few of them for all time, but you cannot deceive all of them all the time. That is why Labour rule and authority is declining in Australia. At the last Federal election the majority said, " Let us give them a chance." But having been weighed in the balance, they have been found wanting, and the handwriting is on the wall. They are frightened that they are going down. They got here by the skin of their teeth, but had there been a proper electoral law, they would not have their present majority. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- That is the sore point. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- It is honorable members opposite who are sore. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- These classical references by cultured Liberals are admirable. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- The culture of the honorable member's utterances depends upon whether he is speaking in the Botanical Park in Adelaide or elsewhere. With regard to absent voting, the substitution for the 5-mile provision of the provision that every polling place shall be open, and provision shall be made for electors to vote immediately on the issue of the writ, will cover the ground pretty well. What is proposed in regard to women in ill-health who cannot attend polling places is very different. Probably most of these women cannot attend the polling places because of their functions of motherhood, and they should have the sympathy of every one possessing a spark of manhood. Their condition should make an eloquent appeal even to the hard-hearted and unthinking partisans of the other side. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- The honorable member is talking twaddle, and he knows it. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- It is only men of the honorable member's stamp who would reflect on the womanhood of the nation.. What honorable members opposite say may take with the unthinking rabble, but not with the true men and women of the Commonwealth. This Bill practically declares to a section of the community that, because they have the strongest claims, they shall be disfranchised, and charged with wholesale corruption; and I cannot allow such legislation to pass without raising a vigorous protest. The next point is that of serious illness and infirmity; and this is scarcely less pathetic than the other. Here we have the friends of humanity - the uplifters of humanity - afraid of 3 per cent, of the voters of the Commonwealth ! They are afraid of losing ground politically; and, therefore, they propose to disfranchise the seriously ill, and the infirm; besides, as I have already said, charging them with corruption. As to the proposed substitution for postal voting, it simply means opening the flood-gates for possible corruption. It is a known fact that right in the centres of population there are men who do the impersonating business. I know that in my own district there was impersonation. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- Has the honorable member a case in his mind? {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- Yes, I have. I do not deny that there are offences against the Act ; But we ought to perfect the Act, and minimize the opportunities for offences. I am informed credibly and officially that a member of this Parliament, when in London, was impersonated in Australia, I am not, of course, inferring that the honorable member was responsible in any way, but merely pointing out that impersonation is carried on. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- Who is the honorable member's authority? {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- As good an authority as the honorable member can ever be. I am simply speaking of evils that honorable members opposite know to exist; and this Bill will increase the possibilities of impersonation and corruption a thousandfold. No single reason has been given for this legislation. There are some other provisions in this Bill of a technical character, which are by no means an improvement, apart altogether from principle ; and I hope that these provisions will be dealt with by some one else. Now, what about the proposal to harass and suppress the newspapers? The Minister of Home Affairs has talked about the day when newspapers charged four guineas a column for recording election speeches. The honorable member, no doubt, was referring to South Australia; but, even in those days, there were not more than three or four men who employed newspapers in that way. The Leader of the Government and the Leader of the Opposition were reported fully without charge; and there is now practically no payment made to the metropolitan newspapers of South Australia ; at any rate, what is paid is not worth consideration in connexion with elections, either Federal or State. I indorse entirely what has been said by previous speakers in this connexion ; and I do not believe that there is any metropolitan newspaper throughout the Commonwealth which makes a profit out of elections in the way indicated by the Minister of Home Affairs. Of all people in the world, the Labour party should be the last to suppress a free press; they ought to appreciate in the highest degree the advantages of such an institution. If it were not for the free press of Australia in our election campaigns, what sort of disadvantages would the people in the interior not suffer ? Those are the people who reap the most benefit from the free publication of election addresses, and if. these are suppressed they will be entirely shut off from information. What is the object of this provision? It effects no real purpose, except that of satisfying a sort of inquisitorial desire that seems to consume honorable members opposite. It is an application of the same principle underlying the Tariff administration - a getting behind everybody's business. {: .speaker-L1R} ##### Mr Agar Wynne: -- It is the "gag." {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- It is intended to be the "gag," and honorable members opposite are the very last who ought to resort to that. kind of thing. It is a partisan business; the Labour party have subsidized papers of their own, which are not allowed to "run" any other party, but represent only one side of the question, and are paid for doing so by the rank and file of Labour. The Government wish to harass the newspapers, not for three months, during the course of an election, but indefinitely, by requiring returns which can be of no value, and which, so far as I can see, can serve no purpose, except a gratification of that inquisitiveness which is born of undying jealousy. This legislation is a twisting of the electoral machine for party purposes. Honorable members opposite, however, need not think that the intelligent Democracy of Australia cannot see through the subterfuges. There may be a few who do not see the position ; but, as to these, the Labour party have them hooked by the nose, and they cannot get away. Another purpose of the Bill is to cripple political organizations other than those of labour. As a matter of fact, however, the efforts of the Government, instead of crippling those other organizations, will make them stronger by a thousandfold. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- Then what is the honorable member growling about? {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- I am not growling. I am not talking to honorable members opposite, but to the public of Australia - it would be a waste of time to talk to the supporters of the Government. {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr Hall: -- Then the honorable member is wasting his time. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- It is not a waste of time to put these unpalatable and unpleasant facts on record. Why should the Labour Government harass political organizations other than their own? The Labour party did very well for a time. What has made the difference? There was never any political activity on the Liberal side in Federal matters until the Labour party challenged Australia on the referenda. Then Australia awoke, and it is awake to-day. Liberal organizations are growing in force, cementing and consolidating; and their acceptance of the challenge of Socialism at the referenda, and its results, are only a foretaste. Those Liberal organizations are now only getting into their stride ; and at the ensuing general election, for the first time in their experience, the Labour party will be confronted with a solidly united Liberal party from one end of Australia to the other. The reason for this legislation is not bribery and corruption, but the fact that the people of Australia are awakening and uniting in their distrust of the Socialistic Labour party and its legislation. Why, then, these miserable subterfuges on the part of the Government - this pretence of bribery and corruption, which is a slander on the people? Then we have the attempt in this Bill to suppress all official political workers outside the ranks of Labour. I desire to. appeal forcibly to the sense of honesty on the part of honorable members opposite. They have their own organizations, which were at one time industrial, but are now political. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- The honorable member does not like it ! {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- I neither like, nor dislike it; I never interfere with another man's business. Those on the side of Labour have a perfect right to organize, and they are now reaping the reward of their industry. They have, however, abused their power, and this the people resent. I have no desire to say one word against Labour organizations, but merely to point out that they are primarily political- {: .speaker-K8L} ##### Mr Thomas: -- Hear, hear. I hope so. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- And secondly industrial. The honorable member agrees with me. Why then does he not leave alone other political organizations that are conducting their business on straightforward lines? {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- Oh, spare us ! {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- These insinuations always come from a certain section of the community. The people are sick of them, and are refusing to believe them or even to notice them. I challenge any one to say that the Liberal Union of South Australia is not clean-handed and above board in all its practices from A to Z, as it always has been. The sneering slanders of a certain section of the community are not worthy of them. When men make insinuations they ought to be prepared to go a bit further and state a case. That is the kernel of this legislation. I wonder what the real manhood of Labour, to say nothing of other sections of the community, thinks about it. I wonder whether the best of the rank and file of Labour throughout Australia believe in it. {: .speaker-JW6} ##### Mr Cann: -- What did they say in Western Australia? {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- Western Australia has its experience to come. My honorable friends will see a different opinion in Western Australia in three years time, as has happened in other places, where they have had a trial and the principles of the Labour party have been put to the test. There is not a shadow of justification for these proposals. There is not a scintilla of honour or manliness in them. They have for their purpose the harassing and destruction, if that is possible, of all organizations outside the Labour party. The Labour party's organizations are sheltered, just as their newspapers are sheltered, under the industrial business. They go on as they like, and spend as much money as they like. In spite of all the wild talk about Liberalism commanding capital, I tell the House that organized Labour throughout Australia commands and employs far more capital for electioneering expenses. The men who shear the sheep of Australia spend five times, aye, ten times more money in politics than do the men who own the sheep of Australia. I say to honorable members opposite, "Why cannot you do things fairly and squarely? Why cannot you give a fair deal? Why don't you be men and show a bit of manliness and a bit of principle in these provisions? " 1 have yet to touch on the question of the employment of canvassers. Honorable members opposite have their paid canvassers, but they call them organizers, just as they call their political organizations industrial organizations, and so they bring themselves under the shelter of the law. They have taken all sorts of care in the construction of this Bill that that shelter and protection shall not be taken away, and then, in the most unprovoked and unmanly fashion, they aim a blow at the organizations on the other side, because those organizations are opposed to them in politics. They say to our side, " You shall not do honestly in the open daylight, as you have a right to do, what we are doing under a cloak." If they curtail the privileges and opportunities of the people of Australia, because they are outside the Labour political fold, they will be cutting away every principle of true Democracy which they themselves ought to stand by unflinchingly and uphold more strenuously than any other section of the community. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- Which clause is all this in? {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- I know all about it. I have known the honorable member for many a day; Everybody in South Australia knows him, and knows his peculiarities, and his strength. I have no time for him. I am not discussing clauses. I am discussing general principles, and the honorable member is .trying his old game of bluff and misrepresentation, which is about the only political stock-in-trade that he ever had. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- I ask you for proof and you give me abuse ! {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- A child is easily amused. {: .speaker-KZG} ##### Mr Roberts: -- Let the Opposition come to the honorable member's assistance like a pack of dogs. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- Is that in order ? {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- A good many interruptions have taken place. I ask honorable members to cease interjecting across the chamber. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- In conclusion let me say to the Ministerial party : "You can try to crush the organizers, you can try to crush the workers of Liberalism, and if you succeed in reducing the number of men and women who are paid for good honest work, it will be plain that the humanitarian Labour party do not want them to be paid." {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr Fenton: -- Then they are paid? {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- Of course, some of them are, but where one is paid one hundred or even five hundred are not paid. In the Liberal forces to-day there is an awakening, there is a wealth of devotion {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- How many Labour organizers are paid ? {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- They are paid all over the States. There is in the Liberal party a wealth of devotion, of patriotism, and of sacrifice, that is growing every day. That is what is tormenting my honorable friends on the other side. The offence that is troubling them is not bribery, but the growth of all these forces, which are increasing the power and influence of Liberalism. {: #subdebate-12-0-s6 .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL:
Werriwa .- I can only congratulate the Opposition upon the possession of so vigorous a supporter as the gentleman who has just resumed his seat. I cannot hope to be able, in the course of my few remarks, to work up such an amount of stage indignation as he did. I have, personally, felt the weight of criticism against our electoral system in the past, to the effect that a good number of the provisions of the existing Acts have been notoriously evaded, not by one party, but by all parties inside and outside the House. I do not propose to support any principle or provision of this measure unless I am satisfied that it will be reasonably effective. Two things are necessary - first, that the aim should be good, and, secondly that the means we take to reach the end we have in view shall be reasonably effective. I cannot help thinking, on looking at some of its provisions, that the Bill is one through which you could drive, not merely a coach-and-four, but even a bullock team and a load of wool. I, for one, am not going to support a mere pretence at legislation, which I know will not be effective. If we can reach the end we have in view, well and good, but it is a bad thing for a community to have on the statute-book laws of which no one takes the slightest notice. I do not hesitate to say that there are to-day on the statutebook electoral laws that are notoriously evaded, including some over which honorable members opposite have put up such a fight to-night. Everybody on the other side of the House knows that postal voting has been the subject of continuous abuse since its provisions began to be understood. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr Deakin: -- Give us a proof. {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- These matters, although well known, are sometimes difficult to prove. I have had the same experience as other candidates running for Parliament. I had occasion to see how the postal vote was operating, and my experience coincides with that of nearly every other ardent worker in politics. The postal vote has been the subject of abuse. It is more often the expression of the canvasser's opinion than of the opinion of the individual purporting to esercise it. I know that that is so. I was a justice of the peace in my own electorate. I was the only one on my side, but there were five justices of the peace on the other side. We would rush around to the sick people in the electorate. We would hear that some one wanted to vote by post, but when we got there we would find that the person had never expressed a desire to vote. Some ardent canvasser on one side or the other had seen that a postal voting-paper was supplied. When I got there I said " I arn here as a justice of the peace to witness your signature," and several asked me " What is it all about, sir?" I am only saying what the honorable member for Swan said in this House on the Address-in-Reply, that the provisions of the Electoral Act are not observed either in spirit or in letter by the organizations in the fight. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- The honorable member would not regard what he has just quoted as legal abuses. What is wrong with them? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- Many illegal things were done. It is the kind of law to which I object. It is on a *far* with some of the other proposals made in this Bill - the kind of law of which nobody takes the slightest notice. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- We are still without a case in which the law of postal voting has been broken. {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- The honorable member needs to be told of no such case. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- The honorable member cannot bring one. {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- I can produce a case. If the honorable member liked to make a little inquiry on his own side, he would find, just as I could find on this side, that scores of votes have been witnessed without the actual signature having been seen. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- There have been many more abuses with regard to absent voters than with regard to postal voters. Why abolish one and leave the . other ? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- That may be so. We shall deal with other cases as they arise. Wherever the postal vote is in operation, and there is a keen party fight, you can see opportunities for the evasion of the law that justify us in altering the system. Let us take the experience of Queensland. It was not a Labour Government in that State that decided to repeal postal voting. It was not the party that were afraid of what the poor women or the sick would do if they had not a vote. Let we quote from the Queensland *Hansard* a few words spoken by the Premier of that State in August, 1907. {: .speaker-JWO} ##### Mr J H Catts: -- - Was he a Liberal Premier ? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- I am not quite sure what he is in politics. I am referring to a speech made by **Mr. Kidston,** and his testimony appeared to agree with that of almost every one who took part in the debate in the Queensland Legislative Assembly on the occasion in question. **Mr. Kidston** said - >The thing that I wish particularly to point out is this : Whatever evils resulted during last election from postal voting is not a circumstance compared with the evils that will take place at the next election if postal voting is still in existence. > >Government and Labour Members. - Hear, hear. > >Mr.Ryland. - They are getting ready already. > >The PREMIER. - I venture to assert that, if another election takes place with the postal vote provisions in the Elections Act unrepealed, then all parlies - and all candidates for that matter - will do their best to get the great bulk of the women to vote by post. Other honorable members went on to point out the evils of the system. The Home Secretary, in introducing the matter, said - >It has been found in practice that the provisions for the postal vote are of such a nature that fraud is made easy. It is known that there was considerable abuse of the provisions during the last election, and it is therefore suggested that the best way to deal with the postal vote is to wipe it out altogether. > >Government and Labour Members. - Hear, hear. I do not hesitate to say that if honorable members opposite were perfectly frank and candid in referring to their own experiences in this regard, we should hear honorable members on both sides of the House cheering this statement. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr Fenton: -- What did the reports of the Returning Officers show? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- They amply bore out the statements made during the debate. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr Deakin: -- Where are they ? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- I refer to the report of the Returning Officers in Queensland. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- Was their form the same as our own ? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- Practically. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- Had a postal vote to be witnessed, as it must be under the present Federal law? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- Yes. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Does not the honorable member think that it would be desirable to have the system reported on by the Electoral Officer here before making this change? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- If the majority needed to be convinced it would be necessary. {: .speaker-L0K} ##### Dr Carty Salmon: -- We know that the majority has already been convinced in another place. {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- I have no doubt that honorable members on both sides of the House are, in reality, convinced of the unwisdom of the postal voting system. But the Opposition think that they see in this measure a chance to make a little political capital, and their stock being so small, no one will blame them if they imitate the honorable member who has just resumed his seat, and shout as loudly as they possibly can, and endeavour to make it appear that they are exceedingly indignant. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- Can the honorable member explain why the absent voters' form should remain unaltered when it gives rise to more opportunities for corruption than does the system of voting by post, which is now being repealed? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- I shall deal with that when we are in Committee. Every honorable member who knows anything of the working of the postal voting system, knows that it is one of the most convenient vehicles for wrong-doing. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I have never heard of a single case of abuse. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- How is it done? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- I have heard of the case of one man - I shall not say which side he was supporting - who said, " I have 300 postal votes in my hand. Can you get me any one to witness them?" {: .speaker-L0K} ##### Dr Carty Salmon: -- I stake my reputation that no man could possibly get 300 postal votes under the Commonwealth electoral system. I am not talking of a system in force at some place like Timbuctoo. {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- Nor am I. If honorable members opposite are as simple as they would have us believe in this regard, let them interview their organizers, who met in Melbourne a few days ago. They will enlighten them further as to what can be done in respect of postal voting under the Federal law. Every one of those organizers could a tale unfold regarding the methods of securing postal votes. I can understand honorable members opposite fighting hard to retain the system, because at least one of their number owed his election to it. The honorable member for Lang grew very indignant to-night when discussing the proposed abolition of postal voting, and, as a matter of fact, he would not have been here at all but for that system. I can well understand his anxiety to retain a system which retained for him his seat in this House. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Those who vote by post are surely as much entitled to vote as is any one else ? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- Every man who has an independent view of public affairs has a right to express it; but a large proportion of those who cannot go to a polling booth tqo often consist of people who have no views of their own on political questions, and their votes represent the view of the organizer who collects their ballot-papers. The right honorable member knows that very well. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- But is that peculiar to postal voting ? Will the honorable member swear that his constituents knew what they were voting for when they voted for him? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- My constituents had about as good an idea of what they were doing as did the constituents of any other honorable member. They might have made mistakes, but they deliberately selected me as against my opponent. Of those who went to the poll, the majority deliberately placed a mark opposite my name. But many of those who vote by post do not even know the names of the candidates, or anything concerning them. {: .speaker-L0K} ##### Dr Carty Salmon: -- Where is that - in New South Wales? {: .speaker-KYV} ##### Mr Riley: -- In Laanecoorie. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- But where does that sort of thing take place? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- If the right honorable member will only read the reports of some of his own speeches as to how the electoral law was broken, according to him, by all of us, he will know. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Oh ! {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- We are to assume, then, that the right honorable member did not mean what he said ? I desire now to make a brief reference to one or two other features of the Bill. ' I cannot see my way to support the provisions for compulsory enrolment. They seem to me to be due to a lack of appreciation of the real position of a very large number of electors. If we provide that it shall be an offence for an elector to fail to place his or her. name on a roll, or to fail To register removal from one electorate to another, we shall create for ourselves a lot of trouble, and shall not do much good. Let me refer again to the sick, concerning whom so much has been said to-night. Let us consider for a moment the position of a large section of the community who never vote at all. I dare say I should not be wrong in saying that fully 25 per cent. of the people do not record their votes. Of these, some are sick, and some take no interest . in public affairs. If we enact that every one who fails to place his or her name on a roll shall be liable to a fine, we shall undertake a big contract, and one that, in my opinion, we should not enter upon. I see no particular merit in resorting to compulsion for the mere sake of cumpulsion. The provisions for compulsory enrolment seem to me to be merely an attempt to introduce further compulsion where no good effect can be secured from it. I cannot believe that honorable members realize how the provision requiring a man who moves from one electorate to another to register his removal will work. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Under this Bill, a man who buys a roll and does not include that item in his electoral expenses may be sent to prison. {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- The men who take a keen interest in public affairs are very well able to manage for themselve; but I am alluding now to that section of the community who take no interest in public affairs. Of the 25 per cent. of the electors of the Commonwealth who do not vote, at least20per cent, have never been Known to vote, no matter how hard an election has been contested. The only thing that is likely to make them record their votes is the passing of a provision to fine them for not securing enrolment. When that is done, and they discover who supported such a provision, they will probably take the trouble to. exercise the franchise in order to recordtheir votes against them. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Will the honorable member explain why it is proposed to disfranchise the sick and the infirm ? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- -The reason for it is that the provisions that enabled them to record their votes have been found to be so liable to abuse that, as a matter ot fact, for the sake of enfranchising the few sick people who have definite views on public affairs, we have been making it possible for smart electioneering agents to poll the votes of many people who have no views on public questions. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- What about electors who are away from their own polling places ? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- The same remark will apply to -them. The party to which I belong have in the past had the admiration of honorable members opposite because their supporters have taken such a keen interest in public affairs that resi-' dence at a distance from polling booths has not prevented them from voting. We have been told by the honorable member who immediately preceded me, however, that there is now much enthusiasm among the Liberal party - that they are going not merely to rival us, but to outshine us. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Eleven thousand postal votes were cast last year in the Labour interest. {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- I am aware of that, and I believe that 90 per cent. of the postal votes deliberately recorded will stillbe polled under the 'new system, since an elector will have a right to vote atany polling place. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- Then the honorable member does not think that a sick person has a right to vote? {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- He should have a right to vote if we could provide for him in a way that would not permit of fraud in that connexion. But the right honorable member knows as well as does every one else that hard cases make bad laws. This appeal for the sick is merely a case in point. 1 think we have a very improper provision in proposed new section 6ie, which declares that in any prosecution for nonenrolment, the averment of the prosecution shall be deemed to be proved in the absence of evidence to the contrary. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- The Labour party have been passing legislation of that kind all through the session. It is time that some honorable member opposite " jibbed " on it. {: .speaker-L6Z} ##### Mr HALL: -- I do not believe that we have been doing so. I shall be indebted to the honorable member if he will show that we have. I can well understand that there may be cases in which special methods of proof are necessary, or. in respect of which it may be necessary to shift the onus of proof. I see no reason why averments should not be proved in connexion with these as with other offences. The efforts to harass the press do not meet with my approval. No doubt in the past the newspapers have tried to be our worst enemies, but their unfairness has benefited us. So long as we deserve to live, we shall do so in spite of their opposition, and when we cannot fight that opposition, it will be time for another party to take our place. I hope, in Committee, to move an alternative provision in regard to the ^25 deposit. While it may seem desirable to prevent candidates from standing who are mere adventurers, or put up only to make a fight, it is unfair that any body of earnest citizens should be penalized for trying to have their opinions stated. The persons whom I have in mind are sufficiently in earnest to sacrifice in connexion with every Senate contest, although they know that they have no chance of winning. They put up their money in order that their-principles may become known. The people of Australia are not so much in earnest in regard to politics that we can afford to penalize those who will make sacrifices for the sake of their political views. The honorable member for Hunter has given notice of an amendment in this direction, and I hope that, in Committee, an undesirable provision will be struck out. There are other matters with which I should like to deal, but I shall reserve my remarks in regard to them until the Committee stage is reached. {: #subdebate-12-0-s7 .speaker-KCP} ##### Mr GORDON:
Boothby .- Truly, if I might be permitted to apply an aphorism which should have been patented by an honorable member .here, " When things are different they are not the same." I come from a State where, for years, the cry of a certain party was " We want the franchise"; and now its members are supporting a Bill to restrict the franchise in order to checkmate their political opponents. On many occasions I have heard the Minister of Home Affairs to better advantage than last night, when he failed to give a reason for the introduction of the Bill. He explained its clauses, and suggested they were to meet corrupt practices, the -existence of which he did not prove. He told us that Democracy rests upon the franchise, but forgot to add that the foundation of the great and progressive nation which is formed by the Democracy ot Australia was laid by the Liberal party, which gave the Federal Constitution to the Commonwealth. The Government seeks to disfranchise 30,000 persons who have been using the postal vote, and offers the miserable excuse that it wishes to check a tendency towards corrupt practices. I deny the existence of that tendency,- and no evidence of it has been given. The Minister spoke of a desire to prevent the introduction here of Tammany Hall practices, and in the same breath explained a card system - a one-card, not a three-card system - calculated to make the Tammany Hal< bosses green with envy. The " Q " fora system is to be extended so that an elector may vote in any division, no matter where he may be on election day. This opens the door to all sorts of corrupt practices. The Bill is wrongly described as one to amend the Commonwealth Electoral Act; it is really designed to dish the other fellow. What we need is an electoral system, broadbased on a liberal franchise, with every safeguard for purity. A fault of the measure is that so much is left to regulation which ought to be done by legislation, introducing methods which may lead to bureaucracy. When I study some of the provisions of this Bill I cannot help thinking that, so far as electoral amendment is concerned, it marks a retrograde and reactionary step. We are told that if standing still is childish folly, going backward is a crime, and many of the clauses of the measure undoubtedly extend backward almost to the beginning of electoral affairs in this country, when the facilities for voting were few and far between, and when every obstacle was placed in the way of electors exercising the franchise. I notice that the Bill provides certain penalties in the case of Returning Officers who fail to discharge their duties in a proper manner. That circumstance enables me to point out to the Minister that if he intends to enforce these penalties against Returning Officers the least he might do is to see that they receive adequate recompense for the work which they perform for the Commonwealth. Many of them are rendering excellent service without receiving adequate remuneration. I agree with the honorable member for Werriwa in a dislike of the word " compulsion," which appears in clause 7 of the Bill. I regret to note that in this seagirt island of Australia, with its boasted liberty, this objectionable word is being introduced to a considerable extent in our national life. For example, we are getting our share of a compulsory military system. We have a compulsory arbitration system, and now we are threatened with a compulsory enrolment system, the corollary of which we have been told this evening is a compulsory voting system. I have heard this matter talked about a good deal, especially from the public platform, but I have never heard anybody explain how effect is to be given to a compulsory enrolment system, to say nothing of a compulsory voting system. I ask the Minister whether he thinks it is possible for him, or for any Government, to enforce penalties to insure compulsory enrolment? We all know that there is one large religious body in Australia, the members of which refuse to vote, and decline to be enrolled Is the Minister prepared to enforce the penalties provided in this Bill in respect of persons, who, from conscientious, sentimental, or other reasons, refuse to take part in the political affairs of the nation? {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr KING O'MALLEY:
Minister for Home Affairs · DARWIN, TASMANIA · ALP -- We make them register the births and deaths of their children. {: .speaker-KCP} ##### Mr GORDON: -- If the Bill becomes law in its present form the Minister will find that he has introduced a system which will bring the electoral laws of this country more or less into contempt, because of the absolute futility of attempting to enforce its penal clauses. This is the kind of legislation which will be more honored in the breach than in the observance. I come now to proposed new section 6ie which reads - >In any prosecution in any Court of summary jurisdiction in respect of any contravention of any of the regulations relating to compulsory enrolment instituted by any officer or by any. person acting under the direction of an officer, the averments of the prosecutor contained in the information or complaint shall be "deemed to be proved in the absence of evidence to the contrary. I join with the honorable member for Werriwa in seeking to have thijs provision altered, if not expunged from the Bill. It seeks to lay the onusof proof upon the defendant. It is the sort of law which we apply with very good reason to a smuggler who is attempting to defraud the Customs revenue, but it is not the kind of law that we should loosely incorporate in the Statutes of Australia. I ask honorable members whether they think we are acting wisely in introducing into British laws the French system, under which the onus of proof is laid upon the defendant? I notice that **Mr. Justice** Higgins, in referring to a similar enactment, described it as " being subversive of the first principles of justice." Another proposalin the Bill is to fix Saturday as polling day. That has been the practice in South Australia for a good many years, and I see no reason why it should not be embodied in Commonwealth law. I observe that, on religious grounds, some members of the community object to voting on Saturday. Were it not for the abolition of the postal voting system their objections might easily be overcome. I do not know whether it is possible by a slight amendment of the measure to attain that desirable end. The Minister has pointed out that under the Bill these citizens will have several hours after sunset during which to record their votes. If it be possible to meet their wishes in any way I think that we should meet them. Although I listened with close attention to the deliverance of the Minister in moving the second reading of the Bill I failed to hear any explanation of the reason underlying clause 13, which introduces a new form of nomination. I ask him wherein lies the necessity for the proposed alteration of the existing law? To alter the form of nomination contained in the principal Act, particularly by a new form in an amending Bill, is a very risky procedure. Candidates who are not aware of the alteration which is embodied in this Bill . may be very easily misled. When the honorable member for Wakefield was speaking, and pointing out that this Bill discriminated 'between political organizations, the honorable member for Adelaide referred him to clause 172a, wherein occur the words " every trades union, registered or unregistered." If I remember rightly, these words were not in the Bill as originally introduced in another place, but were inserted by the Senate as an amendment. Further, they are not repeated iri any of the other sub-clauses; and, that being so, " trades unions, registered or unregistered," may not have to send in returns of expenses in connexion with' the printing, publishing, or issue of electoral advertisements or notices. The honorable member for Wakefield also referred to the omission on the part of the Minister of Home Affars to give any illustration of the corrupt practices which are alleged to be the reason for this attempt to purify the electoral' laws by the abolition of postal voting. I do not know of any corrupt practices, but if there are any, we may fairly say there is no political party that has the monopoly of all the virtues. They may pretend to have a monopoly, but there is a good deal of human nature, not only on both' sides of the House, but in every political party. The honorable member for Wakefield, at least, was prepared to bring forward some evidence as to practices which have been proved up to the hilt before a Select Committee which recently concluded its sittings in South Australia. I have no wish to pursue that matter further beyond pointing out that, if we are to have laws providing penalties for electoral offences, the least the Government of the day can do is to find some means 1 of "carrying out those laws. If the Minister knows of any case of corruption, no matter to which party it can be charged, it ought to be proved up to the hilt and the guilty person punished. It is of no use complaining here that the law has been broken, and declaring that some provision must be abolished, because some person or persons have abused it; the Government of the day must be prepared to get hold of the offender and prosecute him to the last letter of the law. I was surprised to hear the honorable member for Werriwa, who, I understand, is a member of the legal profession, interject, when the honorable member for Wakefield was speaking, that one of the reasons why the State Labour Government is not carrying out- the instructions of the Select Committee in South Australia is that no penalties are provided under the law for offences committed. The offence referred to, how1 ever, is that of forgery, for which, no doubt, other Acts provide a punishment. Before we abolish any system that is being largely availed of by the" people of Australia, we should have, at least, some proof that there have been corrupt practices, and that, as it is impossible to prevent these, the only course is to abolish the system. We' have had no proof to that extent ; and I am surprised that we should live to see the day when a Labour Government brings down a Bill" which seeks to place restrictions on party organizations, and to remove some of the facilities enjoyed by the people for recording their political opinions, more particularly when I remember that it was largely due to a former Labour member of the South Australian Parliament, who now sits in the Senate, that this system of absent and postal voting was introduced into Australia. Amongst the campaign literature circulated at the last Federal general elections was the following leaflet, flanked by the portraits of three candidates: - >Labour wants women to' use their votes to help themselves. The ballot-paper is a powerful instrument. Women can either help or hurt themselves and all belonging to them wilh it. Labour appeals to all women to vote the Labour tic:ket because the Labour party will, when it attains power, make the lot of women better. ' The greatest workers and the most sweated are mothers. If the Labour party were in power it would at once begin to improve the lot of mothers. If Labour were in power there would be constant employment for every one. If Labour were in power housewives would always have a few pounds to spare, and would not have to worry about money matters. It will be said that these proposals are' materialistic. But Labour says it is only hypocrisy to prate about the sanctity of the home and the holiness of motherhood, if you do not give the mother enough money to carry out her noble functions. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- Is the honorable member going to connect this with the question before the Chair? {: .speaker-KCP} ##### Mr GORDON: -- Yes, **Mr. Speaker,** and in a most effective manner. These are splendid sentiments and magnificent promises ; and yet, under this Bill, it is the mothers and women of Australia, practically, who will be disfranchised by the abolition of the postal voting system. {: #subdebate-12-0-s8 .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY:
Wentworth .- I had not proposed to join in this debate until I heard the speech of the honorable member for Werriwa, wherein he referred in an almost piteous way to the manner in which decrepit and aged persons were induced by justices of the peace to sign postal voting forms for candidates they had never heard of, and for political pauses they did not understand. I pick up that extraordinary statement made in the course of the one exception to the conspiracy of silence which has been maintained on the Ministerial benches throughout this debate. We are now beginning to find out exactly why this postal vote is being repealed. It is well that the House and the country should be reminded that it was not only justices of the peace who could witness postal votes, but that practically any person of known credibility or respectability was entitled to act as an authorized witness. The following persons were permitted by the Act to act in that capacity: - >All Commonwealth electoral officers for States; all Commonwealth returning officers? all Commonwealth electoral registrars ; all postmasters or postmistresses or persons in charge of postoffices; all police or stipendiary or special magistrates of the Commonwealth or of a State ; all justices of the peace; all head teachers in the employment of a State Education Department; all officers of the Department of Trade and Customs; all members of the police force of the Commonwealth or of a State; all mining wardens and mining wardens' clerks in the Public Service of a State; all legally qualified medical practitioners; all officers in charge of quarantine stations; all officers in charge of lighthouses; all pilots in the service of the Commonwealth or of a State, or of any local governing body ; all telegraph line repairers permanently employed in the Public Service of the Commonwealth who are in charge of working parties; all railway station masters and night officers in charge who are permanently employed in the Railway Department in any of the States; all superintendents of mercantile marine and their deputies while permanently employed in the Public Service of the Commonwealth or of a State. Then paragraph *b* adds to that large class of persons as follows: - >All persons or classes of persons employed in the Public Service of the Commonwealth or ofa State who are declared by proclamation to be authorized witnesses within the meaning, of this Act. Every one of those persons and classes of persons could witness a postal vote. Yet the only member on the Ministerial benches who has defended the abolition of this privilege has had the colossal effrontery to get up, and, without a blush on his countenance, tell us that because there was only one justice of the peace on his side, and six on the other, the postal votes in his electorate were, for the most part, recorded against the Labour party ! Could there be any clearer proof that the Labour party have some other reason for the abolition of the postal vote than those which have been suggested either in the course of this debate, or in another place, or in the extraordinary plea put forward by the honorable member for Werriwa? In the face of the section which I have quoted, can it be contended by the most disingenuous person that the difficulty of getting a postal vote witnessed is a bar to the efficient working of the system? . {: .speaker-L4X} ##### Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
INDI, VICTORIA · ALP -- Does not the honorable member believe in the secrecy of the ballot? {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- Certainly I do. {: .speaker-L4X} ##### Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
INDI, VICTORIA · ALP -- We cannot have that with postal voting. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- The Standing Orders prevent me from properly describing that statement ; but I will nail it to the counter out. of the Act itself. That Act took care to provide that there should be no scrutiny of the ballot-papers by unauthorized persons. We have had so many misstatements on this matter that we. may as well clear up this one from the Statute itself. Section 118 of the principal Act, which is now to be repealed, lays it down that - >The following directions for regulating voting by means of postal ballot-papers are to be substantially observed. Those directions are - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. The elector shall exhibit his postal ballotpaper (in blank) and his postal vote certificate to an authorized witness. 1. The elector shall then, in the presence of the authorized witness, but so that the authorized witness cannot see the vote, mark his vote on the ballotpaper in the prescribed manner, and shall fold and secure the ballot-paper so that the vote cannot be seen. Under the principal Act there are specific safeguards against scrutiny by outside persons of the intentions of the voter. The persons who were to have the privilege of the postal vote under the principal Act, and from whom that privilege is being taken away, are mentioned in section 109 - >An elector who - > >has reason to believe that he will not during the hours of polling on polling day be within five miles of any polling place for the division for which he is enrolled ; or > >being a woman will, on account of illhealth be unable to attend the polling place on polling day to vote ; or > >will be prevented by serious illness or infirmity from attending the polling place on polling day to vote, may make application for a postal vote certificate and postal ballot-paper. The next sub-clause still further makes for safety by providing - the application may be in the prescribed form, and must be signed by the elector in his own handwriting in the presence of an authorized witness, and must be made and sent after the issue of the writ for the election and before the polling day for the election to the returning officer. In a case where a man simply said that he would not be within 5 miles of a polling booth, his application had to state his reason for his belief. A woman who expected to be ill on the polling day was given the same privilege. Ample provision was made in the Act against any malfeasance of any kind whatsoever. But what is going to happen under this proposal of the Labour party ? A man who is ill, or a woman who expects to be ill, on polling day is debarred from voting. But in the case of a man or woman being absent from the proper polling place, what does the Labour party propose as an alternative? They can vote as early and as often as they like ! The Labour party are going to extend the opportunities for absent voting. What are those opportunities? Under the absent voters' provisions of the principal Act, whichare not being repealed, any person, by simply filling up a form, may vote at any polling place where heor she is not known, where his or her identity cannot be checked, where *bona fides* cannot be guaranteed ! This Form " Q," which is not being repealed, is as follows : - Then this person who is absolutely unknown signs the form, registers his vote, and is at liberty to go off and vote at some other polling place for some other person. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- No, because his signature can be compared with that on his card in the central office. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- That is to say that months after he has voted at half-a-dozen places in an electorate, the Chief Electoral Officer may discover that something is wrong, but he will be unable to discover which of the half dozen votes recorded in the same name, was recorded by the right person, and no one will be able to find out how the vote should have been counted. This Bill aims at making the electoral rolls complete, andforthat purpose we are to have compulsory registration. Perhaps the Minister will say whether it is not his intention in proposing compulsory enrolment to perfect the rolls. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- Yes; and to make the Department responsible for seeing that every qualified elector, man and woman, is on some roll. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- We may take it that the primary object of the provisions for compulsory enrolment is to secure a perfect roll, but there is no provision in this Bill for the compulsory purging of the rolls. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- Why not? Because every person whose name is on the roll must have signed a card, which will be kept in a cabinet in the State in which he resides. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- And it may be turned up six months after an election. My point is that the purging of the rolls is of the utmost importance for the decent conduct -of our electoral business. What happens in every metropolitan electorate in Australia? First of all, the organizations supporting our honorable friends opposite go round amongst the house agents, and find out who has left the district. Having discovered who has left the district, they then arrange that that person shall be voted for at the next election. This practice of the organizations supporting our honorable friends opposite of polling persons who have left a district would make it somewhat inconvenient to follow up the principle of compulsory registration to its logical conclusion by arranging for the compulsory withdrawal by an elector of his name from the roll for a .division which he has left. Yet if we do one thing we ought to do the other. If the intention is to make a complete and perfect roll we should- take all necessary steps to that end. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- It is all in the Bill. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- It has been singularly enough omitted from the Bill ! What is included in the Bill will assist' con uption by glutting the rolls with names that .ought not to appear upon them, and thus enabling the absent voters' forms to be used more corruptly and recklessly than they have ever hitherto been used, whilst the one chance "which under the existing Act a sick person has of recording his vote is to be taken from him. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- The honorable member is talking like a calamity person. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- The last thing I could regard as a calamity to my party would be anything so transparent as is this Bill. It will not stand the fire of public investigation and criticism. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- Then what is the honorable member growling about? {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- I am not growling. I am doing something which apparently the honorable member for Melbourne Ports is not permitted to do. I am addressing myself to the House. If he will permit me to do so without making what I might call kindergarten interjections, I suggest most strongly to the Minister that if he wishes to escape responsibility for the introduction of the methods of Tammany into this country, to which he has come to live, he will 'do well to make the compul sory system complete, so that the rolls may be made perfect, and may not be merely glutted for the party purposes of our honorable friends opposite. I rose solely for the purpose of exposing the casuistry of the honorable member for Werriwa in connexion with the question of absent voting. We heard from him the splendid story of how, because my honorable friends opposite had not as many justices of the peace as their opponents, they ' could not get their postal voting forms witnessed. But I have shown conclusively that no such reason as that can operate against the postal voting form.. I have informed my honorable friends - and no person can seriously contest the truth of what I am saying - that the absent voters' form has been used in the metropolitan districts for corrupt voting. I have kno wn instances of persons to walk to places where they were not known to vote on this form. {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- Does the honorable member know that? {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- I do. In my own electorate I know an instance of a man who walked some 4 miles from his place of residence to vote at a place where he was not known. There is no check on the voting. When thousands of persons are voting throughout a great' metropolitan area, what chance is there afterwards of proving that some particular man forged a signature? {: .speaker-KTU} ##### Mr LAIRD SMITH:
DENISON, TASMANIA · ALP; NAT from 1917 -- The honorable member seems to be well up in it. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- I had to be, or I would not be able to live in politics with my honorable friends' methods in electoral organization. {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- The honorable member's electorate was formerly the home of impersonation. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- I am trying hard to inform my honorable friend that my electorate is still suffering in this respect from the influence of his friends outside the chamber . {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- There was no Labour party at the time I speak of. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- I dare .say that the persons who are now impersonating belonged at that time to some other party, and have since found themselves in appropriate surroundings. I have known of members of my committees being impersonated, and all under the absent voters' form. That is done every time. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- Did the honorable member let the Electoral Officer know that? {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- I did not hear of it until four months after the event. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- I do not believe a word of it. It is all the honorable member's imagination. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- I wish I could think the honorable member had any imagination. If he had more imagination and more generosity he would be a better man. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- The Electoral Officer in the Wentworth division is an honest man, and would soon find out what the honorable member refers to. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -He is an honest man, but he cannot be expected to find out all these things. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- Will the honorable member for East Sydney cease interjecting. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- The honorable member will do the Electoral Officer more harm by defending him when he is not attacked, than he will do by remembering his constitutional slowness, and trying laboriously to find out what is being said. I have made no attack On the Electoral Officer. I have not made the slighest attack on any electoral officer throughout Australia. I am attacking the Electoral Act, which, I dare say, with the honorable member's friends, helped very materially" to secure his return. No electoral officer can be held responsible for corrupt practices under the absent voters' form. It is manifestly impossible for any electoral officer to know every elector by sight among 40,000 or 50,000 voters in a great metropolitan electorate. The thing is so transparently ridiculous that it would be seen at once by everybody except the honorable member for East Sydney. I do suggest that my honorable friends opposite should be a little more direct and straightforward with regard to their methods of electoral change. I do not see any reason for abolishing the postal vote. I think that it is hedged about by infinitely more restrictions than are other forms of voting in Australia. I believe that the method of voting in the Mother Country is to have a number of polling places with the organizations on each side carefully scrutinizing the identity of every person registering a vote, and, if the *bona fides* of any person is suspected, challenging his vote. They can then swear him. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- It is the same under our Act. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- It is not. Our Actprovides for a simple declaration under the " Q " form, which a man can sign. We cannot challenge him ; we cannot say that he is not the man ; we. cannot swear him ; we can do nothing. He simply signs the declaration. As a matter of course, he walks into the polling booth, takes his ballot-paper, registers it; and goesoff, and, if he is dishonest, he can go off and do the same thing somewhere else. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- He can only record one vote, as I have told the honorable member half-a-dozen times. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- If the honorable member tells me forty' or fifty times, he will not alter the fact by one iota. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- It is the truth. Only one vote will be counted. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- Which vote will be counted ? {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- The first vote which comes in. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- Only one vote will be counted if a man votes twenty times, and the firstvote is the one that will be counted. A man who gets up very early, and goes to work, is perfectly safe to secure the return of acandidate! {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- Do not try to be funny. I have given the honorable member a bit nf information. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- Of course the honorable member has. The first vote which is given is the one to be counted ! I do not know whether the Government need a more transparent farce.I think that we have just about reached the depth of absurdity when we pretend to be regulating electoral matters in this way, all the time having only one object in view, and that is how honorable membersopposite may enhance their own chances, and their party's prospect at the poll, by an abuse of the power which they possess in this Chamber. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- We are absolutely impartial. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- I am not going into the record of the honorable gentleman, but, according to his tenets of impartiality, only one section of the community is to have the right to earn a livelihood ! What this Bill means is that only one section of the community is to have the right to organize its politics, and to record its votes. It is the natural *sequitur* of the other method introduced from America by the Minister of Home Affairs. {: .speaker-JNV} ##### Mr Bamford: -- He is more impartial than they are in his own country, because the votes are counted. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- As far as I understand from the honorable member for Melbourne Ports, it is only the first vote which is counted. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- I tell the honorable member again that there can be only one vote counted. He professes not to believe my statement, although he knows that it is a fact. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- What the honorable member told me was that it is the first vote which is counted. Perhaps I might have leave to continue my remarks to-morrow. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- Leave is refused. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- There are one or two clauses in the Bill which I think might be deleted. 1 cannot understand why the clause relating to voting on Saturday was inserted-. {: .speaker-KX9} ##### Mr Watkins: -- The clauses can be taken in Committee. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- I have realized, during the year or two I have been here, that one can take the clauses in Committee, but I have also realized that it is supposed to be the right of an honorable member to discuss the principles of a Bill at its second reading. I may be entirely wrong, but I hope that I shall be permitted to exercise a right which I think I possess. I cannot see why Saturday should be fixed as the polling day. Undoubtedly it will disfranchise a large section of the community. {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- Not so many persons as would be disfranchised if any other day were taken. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- I fail to see that. Why not declare any other day a half- holiday or a holiday ? {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- Because men cannot afford to lose their time. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- There are all sorts of reasons given for this provision. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- Tons of them. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- Order ! I appeal to honorable members to cease interjections, otherwise I shall have to take some course which will prevent continuous interjections being made. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- I cannot see any reason why the Government should not make the polling day a half-holiday. Honorable members would then be satisfied that their friends could vote. In any case, I fail to see why Saturday should be prescribed. Not only will persons, on religious grounds, have to refrain from voting, but a number of persons who use Saturday afternoon to play cricket and football, and to do various other things - a number of persons who do not, as a rule, support my honorable friends opposite - will be under a temptation not to record their votes. That is known to everybody in the House, and that may be the reason why this clause was inserted in the Bill. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr Scullin: -- That is the reason why, the honorable member is opposing it. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- My main reason for opposing the provision is that it will disfranchise persons who cannot conscientiously exercise the suffrage on Saturday. There is an additional reason in the fact that a large section of persons who do not vote for honorable members opposite - persons who use Saturday afternoons for playing {: .speaker-JNV} ##### Mr Bamford: -- They do not deserve a vote. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- Because they do not vote for the honorable member's party? That is the only reason the Labour party can submit for any of the provisions of this measure - that the persons who do not v.ote for them deserve no consideration. Surely it is rather a blow at the reputation of the party that they should be thinking only of how to cater for their own friends, and how to prevent or discourage their opponents from voting. There are a number of. other features in this measure to which I should like to refer, but there will be a Committee stage, and I hope the Government will give honorable members a reasonable opportunity of criticising the clauses in Committee. I strongly urge honorable members opposite, if they do manage to relax the bond of silence under which they are all shackled, and put up one of their members to speak - just to maintain the pretence of debating the subject - at least to put up somebody who will put the matter fairly and .directly, and not endeavour to deceive the House and the country as to the effect of the Bill. I should not have kept honorable members here to-night so late, but for the fact that the one man who did speak from the Ministerial benches in this debate used speech to deceive and not to enlighten the House. Debate (on motion by **Sir John** Quick) adjourned. {: .page-start } page 3742 {:#debate-13} ### INSCRIBED STOCK BILL **Mr. SPEAKER** announced the receipt of a message from His Excellency the Governor- General recommending an appropriation for the purposes of this Bill. {: .page-start } page 3742 {:#debate-14} ### ADJOURNMENT {:#subdebate-14-0} #### Conductof Business Mr.FISHER (Wide Bay- Prime Minister and Treasurer) [11.3]. - I move - >That the House do now adjourn. The first business to-morrow will be the debate on the second reading of the Electoral Bill. {: #subdebate-14-0-s0 .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER:
ALP -After that Bill is disposed of. {: #subdebate-14-0-s1 .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr MASSY-GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 .- A large number of honorable members left for Sydney last week, believing that there was a distinct understanding that no Bill should go to a vote on Monday. I believe every member on our side understood that was to be so, when the arrangement was made that no quorum should be asked for, and that the debates should be confined to second readings only. I was astonished this morning to see that a Bill had been put to the vote yesterday, and had gone through on the voices. It was my intention to call for a division on it. {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- What Bill? {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr MASSY-GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- The Arbitration (Public Service) Bill. I was very sorry to find the understanding had been broken. Some explanation should be made by the Prime Minister. {: #subdebate-14-0-s2 .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
Parramatta -- I went away on Friday with the distinct assurance of the Prime Minister that there would be no vote taken. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr Fisher: -- On Monday. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK: -- It is Monday's proceedings that are now in question. I rubbed my eyes this morning when I saw that the second reading of the Arbitration (Public Service) Bill had been passed, because I distinctly asked, the Prime Minister across the table, when he was speaking, if it was a fact that no vote was to be taken, and he said that no vote whatever would be taken. Apparently, no vote was taken, but precisely the same result was accomplished, in that the second reading of a very important measure was passed. The compact made by the Prime Minister on Friday was not kept. {: #subdebate-14-0-s3 .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr WEBSTER:
Gwydir .- I am concerned not so much about the second reading of the Arbitration (Public Service) Bill having gone through yesterday, as about the manner in which the Government rushed the Bill through its Committee stage to-day. It was not fair. The Bill was brought into the House hurriedly, and those of us who cared to look minutely into its provisions had little time to prepare for the second-reading debate. That debate was not adjourned, as is usually done to enable honorable members to study the speech of the Minister in moving the second reading, but the worst feature of the affair is that, when I and others returned from Sydney this afternoon, we found that all opportunity for us to criticise the Bill in detail in Committee had gone. I feel much hurt at the tactics that have been pursued by the Government. They have been veryunfair to me. It may be very clever on the part of the AttorneyGeneral to get these troublesome measures out of the way, but the Government should rather try to make them as complete and perfect as possible before they are passed. That result cannot be achieved unless full and fair discussion is allowed in Committee. Some members had no chance whatever to speak on the second reading. If those are the tactics to be adopted in order to get Bills through this House, I, as a member supporting the Government, do not feel that we have been treated fairly, or that those of us who give time to our work in this Parliament are being given the consideration to which we are entitled. {: #subdebate-14-0-s4 .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY:
Wentworth .- This unfortunate occurrence seems to prove that the old practice of passing a measure through stage by stage, giving reasonable time for honorable members to consider it at every stage, is, after all, the wisest. We have got into a new practice whereby the majority can suspend the Standing Orders, and can force a Bill through all its stages in a very brief passage of time. It is singularly unfortunate that reasonable opportunity for consideration has not been given to the measure now under discussion. A measure of such importance, and affecting the Public Service to a vital extent, should not have been made a means of showing political dexterity, but should have been given a fair passage through this Chamber. {: #subdebate-14-0-s5 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- The honorable member must recollect that the House took the course of which he complains. He must not question its fairness. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- It was hardly fair for the Ministry to enter into a solemn undertaking that no Bill should be passed through a vital stage on Monday, and then to pass a measure like this through the secondreading stage on the voices, when opponents like the honorable member for Gwydir were ascertained not to be within the precincts of the Chamber. This morning, when that honorable member's whereabouts again had no doubt been accurately spied upon by the party outposts, the Bill was rushed through the Committee stage. Tt is a lamentable way of transacting public business, and I sincerely trust that the Prime Minister, who, no doubt, is really ashamed of the whole transaction, will prevent such a thing occurring again - at any rate, when matters so vitally affecting the Public Service of the Commonwealth are at issue. {: #subdebate-14-0-s6 .speaker-JWO} ##### Mr J H CATTS:
Cook .- As you are aware, **Mr. Speaker,** I rose in my place time after time on Friday afternoon with a view of speaking on the motion for the second rending of the Arbitration (Public Service) Bill, but, unfortunately, other honorable members received the call. About 4 o'clock, T expressed to the AttorneyGeneral a strong desire to speak, and asked him. as he was in charge of the business of the House, to allow the proceedings to be carried on until, perhaps, 4.30 p.m., so that 1 should have an opportunity briefly to express my views upon the measure. The Attorney-General assured me, however, that I need have no apprehension, since it was not proposed to take the Bill into Committee until Tuesday. He knew when he mentioned Tuesday to me that I understood him to mean that it would not be taken until after the arrival of the Sydney express. I should have been here yesterday, but that I had made my arrangements for Monday some little time in advance, and had not sufficient notice of the proposed extension of the days of sitting to enable me to recast my Monday's arrangements in Sydnev. Many persons in my electorate are interested in the Bill, and I was very anxious to discuss it. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- It can be recommitted. {: .speaker-JWO} ##### Mr J H CATTS: -- That is a very happy suggestion. If the Bill is not recommitted, I shall have to speak on the motion for the third reading. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- It should be recommitted to give the honorable member an opportunity to deal with the Bill. {: .speaker-JWO} ##### Mr J H CATTS: -- The fact that the honorable member takes that view is probably a good reason why I should adopt a different view. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- Is not the honorable member considering his constituents ? {: .speaker-JWO} ##### Mr J H CATTS: -- If they were left to the tender mercies of the honorable member they would not be well looked after. He need not worry over my constituents. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- We cannot help worrying over them when they are worrying the honorable member. {: .speaker-JWO} ##### Mr J H CATTS: -- The honorable member is in the seventh heaven of delight because he thinks I am a little troubled. As a matter of fact, however, there are only some half-a-dozen malcontents out of 10,000 men. The daily press of Sydney is only too happy to distort what occurs in this connexion, and one of them has descended to absolute lying. News in reference to myself was printed under big headings, and a certain newspaper has absolutely refused to publish either of two replies that I forwarded to it. Not only is that the case, but it printed what purported to be an interview with a gentleman who is on the council of the Railway and Tramway Association, and who asserts that he gave no one an interview, so that the whole statement was a mere concoction. If the honorable member for Parramatta thinks he can get much satisfaction out of the tactics of the unscrupulous press who so unhesitatingly and unquestionably supports everything he does, let him have it. As a matter of fact, I am here in spite of the press that is now howling in Sydney. As to the Arbitration (Public Service) Bill, I am not aware of the arrangements in regard to the business of the House, but probably some of the measures have been passed more speedily than it was thought they would be on Friday last, and the Government, perhaps, found it necessary, therefore, to proceed with the further consideration of that Bill this morning. I should have liked very much to take part in the discussion of the Bill in Committee, as there are various clauses that seem to me to require a good deal of explanation, and in respect of which I have been unable to obtain that explanation. {: #subdebate-14-0-s7 .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- In common with other honorable members on both sides of the House, I received something in the nature of a shock this morning on reading that, contrary to the express promise made by the Prime Minister when the House adjourned on Friday, the Bill, to which reference has been made, had been pushed through to the Committee stage. Prior to the House adjourning on Friday last, it was known to every one that a large number of honorable members would not be here yesterday, and. that the majority of the absentees would be members of the Ministerial party. That being so, the promise made by the Prime Minister was not wholly out of consideration for the Opposition, but mainly to convenience members of the Ministerial party. The Prime Minister promised that no Bill should be pushed beyond the second-reading stage. On that understanding the Opposition agreed to help to make a .House, and not to call for a quorum - a compact which was honorably observed on .this side, though not on the other. Several members of this party asked me, as Whip, if it would be safe to go home, and, on the faith of the Prime Minister's promise, I told them that they could do so without troubling about pairs, as no vote would be taken that day, and, not being well, I went home myself. Had I had the slightest suspicion that the Bill would be taken into Committee at yesterday's sitting, I should have remained to protest against such a violation of the Prime Minister's promise. {: #subdebate-14-0-s8 .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER:
Prime Minister and Treasurer · Wide Bay · ALP -- The right honorable member for Swan is in a position to say what took place yesterday. The honorable member for Lang asserts that the promise was made that no measure should be pushed beyond its second reading, and no measure was pushed beyond the second reading. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- I asked if a vote would be taken on the Arbitration Bill, and the Prime Minister said " No." {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER: -- That is correct. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- But a vote was taken. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER: -- No division was called for, so that I do not consider that a vote was taken. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Members on both sides desired a division, and the honorable member deprived them of the opportunity to speak. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- The Prime Minister was not here. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER: -- I was here, and took every proper step to see that there was no breach of faith. Had any one objected, I should not have allowed the second reading to go. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- We were not here to object. We stayed away on the strength of the Prime Minister's promise. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER: -- The right honorable member for Swan was present, and about a dozen other members of the Opposition. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- What would have been done had any one called " No"? {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER: -- Had a desire for a division been indicated we should not have gone further. A suggestion has been made that the business-paper was manipulated, and that we schemed to get measures through. That . is not so. I announced that the Bill would be taken first, and it stood at the head of the list. To protect honorable members' interests I proposed to deal with another matter, should that suit them better, but they preferred to go on with the Arbitration Bill. This is the first time in my experience thi'! a complaint has been made about the acceleration of business. I am sorry if honorable members have been misled by anything I have said, but the Bill passed its second reading without the slightest demur. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- I and the honorable member for Bendigo and others called " No." {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER: -- Every opportunity will be given for the discussion and the challenging of Government proposals ; but in the future I shall take care that I know clearly what is meant by any understanding. I thought that a measure which was allowed to go on the voices unchallenged might well be taken further. The British Constitution walks on two legs, the Government and Opposition parties having each a leader, and that leader has the right to say, irrespective of any promise that may have been given, that he has no objection to any course that may be proposed from the other side. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- Did the honorable member say to my leader what he said to me - that the vote would not be taken until 1 we returned ? ' ' {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER: -- I did not say anything i of the kind. The honorable member for Parramatta is too clever by half. Only an honorable member who has a mind to be " slewed " could put a question like that. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- I ask that this insulting statement be withdrawn. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- I ask the Prime Minister to withdraw the statement, and the honorable member for Parramatta not to interject. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER: -- I withdraw the word " slewed," and apologize to the honorable member for having used it, although I do not regard it as an offensive term. But the question which was put to me did not convey what has been stated at all. The honorable member for Ballarat can speak for himself without any leading from me. I say that no objection was taken to the motion for the second reading of the Bill. In reply to the suggestion that the Government manipulated the business-paper this morning, I merely wish to point. out that we postponed the further consideration of the proposal to acquire a site in London for Commonwealth offices at the request of the Opposition, and proceeded with the next business listed. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- I am not talking about what took place this morning, but about the division which was taken last night. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr FISHER: -- Could anything more have been done short of adjourning the House until the absent members had arrived ? {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- I desire to make a personal explanation. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- The honorable member, I anticipate, wishes to do what he should have done before the Prime Minister replied. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- I wish to explain my action in reply to the statement of the Prime Minister- {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- If I permit that it is likely to lead to other troubles. Of course, an honorable member is always entitled to make a personal explanation. {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr MASSY-GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- The Prime Minister particularly referred to the right honorable member for Swan. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- I would remind the honorable member for Richmond that when the Speaker is addressing the House he must not interrupt. The right honorable member for Swan wishes to reply to something which was said in the debate upon the motion for adjournment, and he will not be in order in so doing. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- I rise to a point of order. Do you rule, sir, that the right honorable member for Swan will not be in order in making a personal explanation ? {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- I have not ruled that. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- Then why is he not allowed to proceed ? {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- That is my business. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- And it is my business - the business of the House. Anything which concerns the privileges of honorable members is the business of the House. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- The honorable member is at liberty to dispute my ruling if he chooses so to do. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- I ask whether the right honorable member for Swanmay make an explanation in regard to a matter as to which an appeal has been made to him by the Prime Minister ? I submit that he is entitled to make such an explanation. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- The position is that a debate has taken place upon . I motion for the adjournment of the House, and the right honorable member for Swan now wishes to reply to some statement which was made during that debate. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- No. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -The honorable gentleman does not know. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- Nor does **Mr. Speaker.** {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- The right honorablemember for Swan has already admitted it. If he wishes to make a personal explanation he has a right to do so, but it must not be in reference to any matter that has just been dealt with. {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- In reply to the statement which has been made by the Prime Minister I desire to explain the action which I took. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- Then the honorable member will not be in order. Question resolved in the affirmative. House adjourned at 11.35 P.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 5 December 1911, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1911/19111205_reps_4_63/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives 5 December 1911

QUESTION

LEGAL EXPENSES : VEND CASE

Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr HUGHES:Attorney-General · WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

QUESTION

TELEFUNKEN PATENT RIGHTS

Mr PAGE:for Mr. Carr

Mr FRAZER:Postmaster-General · KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

QUESTION

INFLAMMABLE PIECE GOODS

Dr MALONEY:MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

Mr TUDOR:Minister for Trade and Customs · YARRA, VICTORIA · ALP

PAPERS

QUESTION

FREE SHIPPING TELEGRAMS

Mr FRAZER:ALP

DEATHS OF PAPUAN NATIVES

AUSTRALIAN NOTES BILL

COMMONWEALTH OFFICES IN LONDON

Mr THOMAS:Minister of External Affairs · Barrier · ALP

Sir John Forrest:

Mr THOMAS:

Sir John Forrest:

Mr THOMAS:

Sir John Forrest:

Mr THOMAS:

Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr THOMAS:

Mr Deakin:

Mr THOMAS:

Mr Deakin:

Mr THOMAS:

Mr Atkinson:

Mr THOMAS:

Mr Atkinson:

Mr THOMAS:

Mr Deakin:

Mr THOMAS:

Mr Hedges:

Mr THOMAS:

Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr THOMAS:

Mr Fenton:

Mr THOMAS:

Mr Archibald:

Mr THOMAS:

Mr MASSY-GREENE:RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr THOMAS:

Mr MASSY-GREENE:RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr THOMAS:

Mr Bamford:

Mr THOMAS:

INVALID AND OLD-AGE PENSIONS BILL

Mr FISHER:Prime Minister and Treasurer · Wide Bay · ALP

Mr Atkinson:

Mr FISHER:

Sir JOHN FORREST:Swan

Mr Fisher:

Sir JOHN FORREST:

Mr Fisher:

Sir JOHN FORREST:

Sir John Forrest:

Mr FISHER:

Sir John Forrest:

Mr FISHER:

Mr SAMPSON:Wimmera

Mr Fisher:

ARBITRATION (PUBLIC SERVICE) BILL

Mr DEAKIN:Ballarat

Mr Hughes:

Mr DEAKIN:Ballarat

Mr Hughes:

Mr DEAKIN:

Mr Page:

Mr Hughes:

Mr DEAKIN:

Mr HUGHES:AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

Mr DEAKIN:Ballarat

Mr HUGHES:AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

House of Representatives
5 December 1911

Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr HUGHES:
Attorney-General · WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr PAGE:
for Mr. Carr

Mr FRAZER:
Postmaster-General · KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

Mr TUDOR:
Minister for Trade and Customs · YARRA, VICTORIA · ALP

Mr FRAZER:
ALP

Mr THOMAS:
Minister of External Affairs · Barrier · ALP

Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr FISHER:
Prime Minister and Treasurer · Wide Bay · ALP

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Swan

Mr SAMPSON:
Wimmera

Mr DEAKIN:
Ballarat

Mr DEAKIN:
Ballarat

Mr HUGHES:
AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

Mr DEAKIN:
Ballarat

Mr HUGHES:
AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

Mr DEAKIN:
Ballarat

Mr HUGHES:
AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

Mr DEAKIN:
Ballarat

Mr HUGHES:
AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

Mr DEAKIN:
Ballarat

Mr HUGHES:
AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

Mr HUGHES:
AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Swan

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Swan

Mr HUGHES:
AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

Mr HUGHES:
AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

Sir JOHN QUICK:
Bendigo

Mr HUGHES:
AttorneyGeneral · West Sydney · ALP

Mr FRAZER:
PostmasterGeneral · Kalgoorlie · ALP

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth