View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives
20 September 1917

7^th Parliament · 2^nd Session

QUESTION
- KALGOORLIE TO PORT AUGUSTA RAILWAY
QUESTION
- DUNTROON MILITARY COLLEGE
QUESTION
- ARBITRATION COURT
QUESTION
- INCOME TAX ANOMALIES
HIGH COST OF LIVING
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
QUESTION
- LOADED INVOICES
QUESTION
- UNIFORM TAXATIONRETURNS
NON-COMMISSIONED STAFF OFFICERS
- Extra Duty Pay
QUESTION
- CONTROL OF SILOS
QUESTION
- DISORDER EST MELBOURNE STREETS
QUESTION
- STEAMER COMMUNICATION: WESTERN AUSTRALIA
QUESTION
- WAR PRECAUTIONS ACT: PROSECUTIONS
QUESTION
- POSTAGE ON CATALOGUES
QUESTION
- CARRIAGE OF COUNTRY MAILS
QUESTION
- POLICE AT PARLIAMENT HOUSE : OVERTIME
QUESTION
- SUGAR INDUSTRY: INSURANCE CHARGE
QUESTION
- NAMES OF MEMBERS IN HANSARD
QUESTION
- POSTAGE RATES ON CIRCULARS
QUESTION
- GERMANY’S PACIFIC POSSESSIONS
CONDUCT OF CENSORSHIP
QUESTION
- WAR PENSIONS
QUESTION
- LITHGOW SMALL ARMS FACTORY
QUESTION
- ALLOWANCE POST OFFICES
QUESTION
- COUNTRY MAIL SERVICES
QUESTION
- IMPORTED GAS MANTLES
QUESTION
- WAR LOANS: REFUND OF INTEREST
QUESTION
- CENSORSHIP OF MAILS
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH BANK BUILDING, SYDNEY
QUESTION
- DEPORTATION OF ALIENS
INCOME TAX BILL
- Second Reading
WOOD PULP AND ROCK PHOSPHATE BOUNTIES BILL
SHALE OIL BOUNTY BILL
DEFENCE BILL
RAILWAYS BILL
AUDIT BILL
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS
WAR-TIME PROFITS TAX ASSESSMENT BILL
WAR-TIME PROFITS TAX BILL
ADJOURNMENT
- Order of Business

Mr. Speaker (Hon. W. Elliot Johnson) took the chair at 11 a.m., and read prayers.

page 2341

QUESTION

KALGOORLIE TO PORT AUGUSTA RAILWAY

Investigation of Accounts

Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Will the Minister for Works and Railways, in accordance with the promise ofthe Prime Minister, made some time ago, ask the Committee of Public Accounts to investigate during the adjournment the cost of the east-west railway?

Mr WATT:
Minister for Works and Railways · BALACLAVA, VICTORIA · NAT

– I am not aware that the Prime Minister gave any promise on the subject, but, in any case, it is competent for the Committee appointed to make such an investigation whenever it likes, and my Department will welcome investigation.

page 2341

QUESTION

DUNTROON MILITARY COLLEGE

Graduates on Active Service : Distinctions Won.

Mr PIGOTT:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Last night the Honorary Minister spoke of the distinctions won during the war by the graduates of the Duntroon Military College. Has he obtained fuller details?

Mr GROOM:
Honorary Minister · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · NAT

– I spoke from memory last night, and promised the honorable member to furnish an accurate statement to-day. I find that 148 graduates of the College have goneto the war, of whom thirty-one have been killed and forty-two have been wounded or are missing, and that ninety-four are still serving. Of these graduates fifteen have received the Military Cross, one has received theCroix de Guerre,5th class, another the Serbian Order of the White Eagle, another the Distinguished Service Order, and sixteen have been mentioned in despatches.

page 2341

QUESTION

ARBITRATION COURT

Mr ANSTEY:
BOURKE, VICTORIA

– Has the. Prime Minister any objection to laying on the table a copy of the attack made on the President of the Arbitration Court by the Argus newspaper on the 17th September, and the reply of the President, of the 20th September?

Mr Kelly:

– As it is not in order for an honorable member to attack the President of the Arbitration Court or the Court, would it be in order to make such! an attack in the indirect manner of the honorable member by causing to be laid on the table a newspaper article containing it?

Mr SPEAKER:

– The question is entirelyone for the Prime Minister to answer.

Mr HUGHES:
Attorney-General · BENDIGO, VICTORIA · NAT

– I have not seen any of the reports in the press. These things go on without my knowledge.

page 2341

QUESTION

INCOME TAX ANOMALIES

Mr HEITMANN:
KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Is it the intention of the Prime Minister to bring in a Bill to amend the Income Tax Assessment Act this session, in order to remove some of the anomalies which have crept into the interpretation of various provisions?

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

– The Treasurer has before Parliament a series of amendments which it is hoped will remove many, if not all, of the anomalies to which the . honorable member refers.

page 2342

HIGH COST OF LIVING

Mr BLAKELEY:
DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES

– In view of the want at present in Australia, and of the serious food”riots that have occurred-

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– Where?

Mr Riley:

– Last night.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– In view of the serious food riots which have been taking place in different parts of Australia, will the Prime Ministertake immediate steps to deal with the high cost of living ?

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

– The subject is now being investigated ‘ by a competent tribunal, whose reports will be considered by the Government immediately they come to hand, when such action as may be necessary will be taken upon them.

page 2342

– I desire to make a personal explanation. When by way of interjection I took exception yesterday to a statement made by the honorable member for Cook (Mr. J. H. Catts) he replied, “ Why did you leave the Labour party to support a conscriptionist Government “ ? I wish to remind the honorable member that the issue before the party and the country at the time was not that of conscription, a principle to which I have always been opposed, but as to whether freedom and liberty of opinion and conscience was to be retained within the Labour movement. I was amongst the first to protest when, following on the resolution passed by the Labour Conference in 1916, a notice was sent to members of the Labour party that, unless we opposed conscription both inside and outside of Parliament, we would lose our indorsements. It was at a meeting’ on the 14th September, 1916, that we made a strong and emphatic protest. We said that the threat to withhold our indorsements was without constitutional warrant and opposed to the principles of the Labour party and Democracy. That was the attitude we took up, and I was prepared, if necessary, to go out of Parliament, in support of it. I also said that the honorable member, seeing perhaps that his seat was in danger climbed down and left the room. I have only to add that the majority of the party at that time - including the honorable member for Cook - knew perfectly well that the protest was against tyranny in the Labour movement, and had nothing to do with the issue of conscription itself.

page 2343

QUESTION

LOADED INVOICES

Mr KELLY:

– I asked the Minister for Trade and Customs yesterday whether he would lay on the table of the ‘House copies of the instructions under which all “ loading “ of invoices of British goods is made. The honorable gentleman did not say whether he would or would not, but replied that such instructions were of a confidential character. I desire now to ask him if he can give any public reason why those instructions, . confidential or otherwise, should not be disclosed to honorable members of this House ?

Mr.JENSEN. - I shall be glad to give the honorable member’s question consideration, and to inform the House later on of my decision.

page 2343

QUESTION

UNIFORM TAXATIONRETURNS

Mr WEST:
EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Will the Prime Minister state what steps, if any, the Government have taken to provide for uniform income tax returns for both State and Commonwealth purposes?

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

– The position, as I understand it, is that the Commonwealth and State Governments have agreed that uniformity is both desirable and necessary, and that the hitch which is preventing the completion of the arrangement has arisen through the difficulty of applying it to the varying circumstances of State and Commonwealth taxation. My right honorable friend the Treasurer could tell the House exactly where the trouble is. It lies with the Income Tax Commissioners themselves. The Government have assented to the principle.

page 2343

NON-COMMISSIONED STAFF OFFICERS

Extra Duty Pay

Mr GROOM:
NAT

– On the motion for the adjournment of the House on 6th September last the honorable member for Brisbane (Mr. Finlayson) read a statement with regard to the cancellation of what is known as extra duty pay to noncommissioned staff officers, and I promised to furnish him with a reply. I am now in a position to give him the following answer: -

The allowance referred to was payable only to such members of the Instructional Staff as were employed in Australian Imperial Force Camps and Schools. When it was granted, large numbers of recruits were coming forward, and owing to the shortage of instructors, those available were called upon to work long hours, and for practically seven days per week. As these conditions no longer exist, the allowance has been discontinued.

In lieu thereof, a special allowance of 9d. per diem has been granted to all members of the Instructional Staff for the period of the war.

page 2343

QUESTION

CONTROL OF SILOS

Mr RILEY:

– Will the Prime Minister state whether the Commonwealth Government have any control over the erection of the grain silos, “whether tenders have beer invited for their construction, and, if so, who are the successful tenderers?

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

– I remind the honorable member that under the Commonwealth Statute the control of these silos is vested in a Commission, on which the States and the Commonwealth have representatives. Replying more directly to his question, each State has control of the construction of the silos subject to the design and price being approved by the Commission. The , price of construction is fixed. We do not control the tenderers, and we cannot distinguish between one tenderer and another. The tenders do not come before the Commonwealth’ Government, 30 that in the State of New South Wales, for example, any tender can be accepted, and the Commonwealth has no voice in the matter.

page 2344

QUESTION

DISORDER EST MELBOURNE STREETS

Mr SAMPSON:
WIMMERA, VICTORIA

Mr CONSIDINE:

– Will the - Prime Minister, at the same time, lay on the table-

Mr SPEAKER:

– The honorable member cannot ask two questions in succession to the exclusion of another honorable member.

page 2345

QUESTION

POSTAGE ON CATALOGUES

Mr ORCHARD:

– Has any decision been arrived at in connexion with the postage on catalogues?

Mr WEBSTER:
Postmaster-General · MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– The following is what I have decided to agree to : -

Printed matter to be allowed in catalogues -

One full page containing introductory matter, not in letter form, relative to the catalogue, and information relative to shopping by post;
Other pages to be allowed to bear printed matter, not in letter form, relative to the business of the firm issuing the catalogue, or the items in the letter, to an extent not exceeding 5 per cent. of the area of the page on which it appears; or, in the case of two pages facing one another, an area on either of them to an extent not exceeding 10 per cent. of the area of one page.

Mr Tudor:

– I do not know whether a question upon this matter will be disallowed as being one arising out of an answer already given.

Mr SPEAKER:

– This is not to be made the subject of debate.

Mr Boyd:

– Will honorable members have the opportunity of objecting to the method proposed to be pursued?

Mr SPEAKER:

– Questions arising out of an answer to a question are not in order. I have already stated that there will be no departure from the existing procedure unless it meets with the unanimous concurrence of honorable members. If there is any objection the matter remains where it is.

Mr.CONSIDINE.- Will the Prime Minister give the reasons for prohibiting the publication in the Commonwealth of magazine and newspaper articles which have been previously published after having been submitted to censorship in Great Britain and other Dependencies.

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

– I am not aware of the publications or the magazines to which the honorable member particularly refers, but a broad distinction must be drawn between the circumstances here and those of Great Britain. It is this which differentiates between the policies of censorship in the two countries. In Great Britain there is conscription, and it does not matter what any one says. Here we have voluntary recruiting, and public opinion most materially affects recruiting. There is obviously a fundamental distinction between conditions in Great Britain and Australia in this respect. I can say this on behalf of the Government, and, I am sure, on behalf of the country: That if the honorable member and his friends would agree to conscription they could say what they like.

page 2347

QUESTION

WAR PENSIONS

Mr J H CATTS:

– Is the Prime Minister aware that Mr. Fitzpatrick, the Treasurer of New South Wales, has stated that the £30,000 which the State Government propose to devote to the supplementing of the pensions of soldiers recruited from New South Wales was withdrawn because the Commonwealth Government proposed to increase soldiers’ pensions to such an extent as to obviate the necessity for the State Government making this money available?

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

– I have not noticed the statement, nor have I noticed the paragraph about Mr. Holman. If the honorable member wishes to have my opinion upon any matter, let him put his question on the notice-paper, and Iwill give it for what it is worth.

“THE FIDDLERS”: CENSORSHIP.

Mr HUGHES:

– On Friday last the honorable member for Cook asked me a series of questions in regard to a booklet called The Fiddlers, as follows : -

Is it a fact that a booklet entitled The Fiddlers : Drink in the Witness Box, by Arthur Moe, issued and circulated by the Temperance Alliance, has been suppressed by the Government?
Is it a fact that 20,000 copies of the above booklet have been confiscated?
Is it intended to confiscate copies received through the post by members of the Federal Parliament?
Is it an offence, under any regulation or order, to quote passages of this booklet at any public meeting ?
What are the date and text of any regulation” or order under which matters referred to in the foregoing questions have been dealt with ?

I have just been furnished with the following reply: -

Yes; and also by the Canadian Government.
No.
No.
The quotation of certain passages in this booklet at a public meeting would constitute a contravention of regulation 28 of the War Precautions Regulations.
War Precautions Regulations made under the War Precautions Act 1915, Regulation 28, as amended by Statutory Rule No. 159 of 1916, dated 26th July, 1916-

Regulation 28. (1) “ No person shall, by word of mouth, or in writing, or in any newspaper, periodical, book, circular, or other printed publication -

spread false reports or make false statements or reports or statements likely to cause dissatisfaction to His Majesty, or public alarm, or to interfere with the success of His Majesty’s Forces by land or sea, or to prejudice His Majesty’s relations with foreign powers; or
spread reports and make statements likely to prejudice the recruit’ing, training, discipline, or administration of any of His Majesty’s Forces.

page 2347

QUESTION

LITHGOW SMALL ARMS FACTORY

Mr NICHOLLS:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

Whether it is the intention of the Minister to honour the agreement entered into with the Small Arms Factory employees of Lithgow in connexion with the increase in wages promised them on 21st June last?
If so, will the Minister take the necessary steps to have the increase paid as soon as possible and made retrospective to the 1st July, 1917?

Mr GROOM:
NAT

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

No agreement has been entered into by the Minister. Certain proposals have been made by the Department and accepted by a section of the employees, but finality is delayed pending the receipt of an intimation from the representatives of the other section that the proposals referred to are accepted.
It was intended that the Department’s proposals should have effect as from 1st July, 1917.

page 2347

QUESTION

ALLOWANCE POST OFFICES

Mr JOHN THOMSON:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Postmaster-General, upon notice -

What is the complete scale of rates’ paid to keepers of allowance post-offices, including those where Postal, Telephonic, Postal Note, Money Order, Savings Bank, Old-age, Invalid, and War Pension, and Commonwealth Bank business is transacted?
Is any additional allowance paid where postmasters provide premises?
Does the Postmaster-General consider the scale of rates now paid sufficient for the work and responsibility entailed?

Mr WEBSTER:
NAT

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

The complete scale on which payment to allowance postmasters is made was framed by placing a unit value on thework and services performed, copy of which is available for the honorable member’s perusal.
Payment for premises supplied by the postmaster is provided for in the scale in cases where the volume of work justifies special provision in this connexion.
Yes.

page 2348

QUESTION

COUNTRY MAIL SERVICES

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Postmaster-General, upon notice -

Have notices been issued by his deputies in New South Wales which involve a reduction in the frequency of many country mails unless residents in isolated places make a contribution towards the cost of the mail carrying contracts?
If so, why is this system being inaugurated in places where the mail facilities are poor at the present time as compared with these given to towns and other large centres?

Mr WEBSTER:
NAT

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

No new practice has been inaugurated during the past twelve months in regard to mail services other than my decision in December last that, with respect to non-paying services in outlying districts established prior to Federation, such were not to be interfered with where the disparity between revenue and expenditure had not unreasonably increased in the interval, having in view the effect of penny postage and where contracts could be renewed at existing rates or thereabouts. As regards mail services generally, no discrimination is made in treatment as between services in country districts and those serving towns and large centres.

Considerable reduction has been made in capital cities and suburbs in the number of postal deliveries as compared with pre-war days.

page 2348

QUESTION

IMPORTED GAS MANTLES

Mr FALKINER:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

Whether he will cause samples to be seized of the various sizes and qualities of gas mantles recently imported, and send them to experts for examination to see if they do not contain more than 5 per cent. enemy material in their composition?
The Government having announced its intention to block, all enemy trade, will the Minister see the Customs officials give every assistance to British manufacturers and their representatives here in tracing and blocking goods of enemy origin?

Mr JENSEN:
Minister for Trade and Customs · BASS, TASMANIA · NAT

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

No gas mantles have been received in Australia which were exported from neutral countries in Europe since the allowance for enemy value in goods was reduced from 25 per cent. to 5 percent.
The Customs Department takes every precaution to prevent enemy trade, and is pleased to receive any information which may be of value in that connexion.

page 2348

QUESTION

WAR LOANS: REFUND OF INTEREST

Dr MALONEY:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

Whether he will give the House the following information: -

The amount of money invested in War Bonds lent without interest or theinterest of which is returned to the Treasury?

A list showing by numbers, in lieu of names, the various amounts making such total?

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · NAT

– The following particulars give the information desired by the honorable member:’-

£430 has been invested in the War Loan free of interest, whilst all the interest to date on £30, the interest for one year on a further sum of £250, and the interest for six months on £200 have been returned to the Treasury. In addition, £60 has been lent free of interest for ten years and £150 has been lent free of interest for two years. The total amount lent free of interest or the interest of which has been returned to the Treasury is £1,120. Further sums totalling £79,627 have been received as gifts towards the cost of the war. The amounts totalling £79,627 were not invested in the War Loan.

The number of persons who contributed the £79,627 is not known, as in some cases the amounts have been received through newspaper offices or through associations or organizations.

page 2349

QUESTION

CENSORSHIP OF MAILS

Mr FOWLER:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Whether letters addressed to correspondents in Great Britain are subject to the censorship and are delayed in consequence, so that they are not sent by the mails for which they are intended when being posted?

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

– No.

page 2349

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH BANK BUILDING, SYDNEY

Dr MALONEY:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

Do the Messrs. Kirkpatrick receive any fee for being the Commonwealth Bank’s architects or for the general supervision of the whole of the building?
If so, how much?
What maps do the Bank use requiring an architect to look after them?
What fees have been paid to John Kirkpatrick, or John Kirkpatrick and Son, when travelling to Melbourne or elsewhere either with or without the Governor?
What fees have been paid or payments made to the architect for the building of the Bank’s Head Office in Sydney?

Sir JOHN FORREST:
NAT

– The Governor of the Commonwealth Bank has furnished the following information : - 1, 2 and 3. The Messrs. Kirkpatrick are the Bank’s architects, and the cleaning of the building, maintenance of lifts and electrical appliances, together with the general supervision of the building, are entirely under their control. A large portion of their time is also occupied in conferences with the Bank’s officers on questions of premises and fittings at all branches, and in addition to this ‘they look after all the Banks’ maps and plans of premises, these services being given free in lieu of the payment of rent for the space occupied in the Bank building.

Fares and £11s. per day whilst engaged on the Bank’s business.
The usual Architect’s fees as set out in “The Institute of Architects of New South Wales Professional Practice and Charges.”

page 2349

QUESTION

DEPORTATION OF ALIENS

Mr. Gerald Mussen’s Appointments : Munitions Area, Port Pirie

Mr FINLAYSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Whether it is a fact that Mr. Anthony Theodore Leenders, a Dutchman, and a member of the Australian Workers Union, has been removed from Port Pirie to Adelaide under military escort, in order to be deported?
If so, for what reason, and under what authority, has this decision been arrived at?
Whether it is a fact that Mr. John Somerfield Randolph has been removed from Port Pirie to Gladstone in order to be deported?
If so, for what reason, and under what authority, has this decision been arrived at?
Whether it is a fact that Mr. Gerald Mussen, investor, 362 Collins-street, Melbourne, is - .
1. A representative of the Imperial Government?
2. Legal adviser to the Broken Hill Proprietary Smelting Works?
If so, by whom was Mr. Mussen appointed to those positions?
Has Port Pirie been declared a Munitions Area?
If so, has this been done at the request of the Imperial Government, or by whose authority ?

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

– Inquiries are being made, and such information as can be made available will be furnished to the honorable member.

page 2349

INCOME TAX BILL

In Committee of Ways and Means (Consideration resumed from 19th September, vide page. 2293, on motion by Sir John Forrest) -

That a tax be imposed on incomes derived from sources in Australia . . . [For full text of motion see page 1411.]

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT

– I propose to ask the Committee to deal with the motion in subdivisions, and that will enable us to discuss all parts fully without again having a general discussion on the whole proposal, and making no headway. Until we reach subdivision F, I shall not propose any amendment, except the correction of a clerical error in subdivision B, where £559 10s. should read £599 10s. Subdivision F was the subject of practically the whole of the discussion yesterday, and I asked the Committee to report progress in order that the Government might further consider the matter in the light of the views expressed by honorable members. When we reach that subdivision, I shall propose some amendment, which I hope will meet with the concurrence of the Committee. Perhaps I shall be meeting the wishes of honorable members if I indicate now the alterations I shall move. In sub-paragraph ii of paragraph a, I shall propose to strike out the words “ and was under the age of forty-five years.” That will make the tax apply to every unmarried man or widower without children who is not under the age of twenty-one years. Then, in the following line, I shall propose to strike out the word “ ten,” and substitute “ five.” That will provide for the imposition of a tax “ of £5 or 5 per centum of bis taxable income, whichever is the greater.” In paragraph 6 sub-paragraph 1, as already indicated, I shall propose to add after “ Australia “ the words “ or has enlisted for service outside Australia on a ship of war.” I shall then ask the Committee to strike out sub-paragraphs ii and iii, which read -

that he has since the first day of January, One thousand nine hundred and seventeen, endeavoured to enlist in an Expeditionary Force raised for service outside Australia, but has been rejected solely on the ground of physical unfitness; or
that, notwithstanding that he has not endeavoured to enlist in Expeditionary Force raised for service outside Australia, ho is obviously unfit for any naval or military service whatever; or

We propose to delete paragraph 3-

That, notwithstanding that he has not endeavoured to enlist in an Expeditionary Force raised for service outside Australia, he is obviously unfit for any naval or military service whatever.

We intend to retain paragraph 4 altered in this way -

That a majority of his brothers of military age have been on active’ service outside , Australia during the present war, or are members of an Expeditionary Force raised for service outside Australia, or have enlisted for service outside Australia in a ship of war.

We propose to retain paragraph 5, which reads-

That he is permanently incapacitated for work.

We wish to delete paragraphs 6, 7, and 8, which read -

That he is employed in the police orprison services of the Commonwealth or of a State ; or

That he is employed on a lighthouse; or

That he is a minister of religion.

We propose to add a new paragraph to this effect -

Thathe is in receipt of an invalid or oldage pension.

We propose that subdivision G shall stand as it was on thenotice-paper for yesterday to be followed by this new subdivision : -

There shall be payable in respect of a cash prize in a lottery income tax to the amount of 10 per cent. of the gross prize money.

These are all the alterations which we wish to submit. I would like to get the concurrence of honorable members to this suggestion, that the Chairman should take the motion in parts, because by that means we should be able to deal with the parts in. a far better way than we could by taking them as a whole. I remind honorable members that subdivisions A to E are the law at the present time. I propose to move, sir, that you take the motion before the Committee in parts. It will not deprive any honorable member of an opportunity to speak. It will be very convenient, and, I think, will tend to expedition.

Mr Charlton:

– Do you not think it advisable to alter the title to The Bachelor’s Tax?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I do not.

Mr TUDOR:
Yarra

.- I take it, sir, from the way in which the motion was submitted to the Committee that every honorable member will have the same right as we had yesterday to deal with the proposal as a whole, andthat it will not be competent for you to rule that an honorable member cannot debate subdivision F whilst subdivision A is being discussed. The motion was submitted to the Committee in seven or eight different parts or sections, and I take it, sir, that it will only be possible to do what the Treasurer desires by him asking leave to withdraw the motion, and submitting an amended motion.

Sir William Irvine:

– You agree that it would be the most convenient way to deal withthe proposal?

Mr TUDOR:

– I am in this position, that I have already spoken to the general question. I admit thatpart F is the most vital one, and I am opposed to its adoption, even in the amended form which has been suggested. Other honorable members, however, have not had an opportunity of discussing the motion, and they desire to discuss it as a whole, and not to be tied down to any particular section. If certain parts were passed, they would be prevented from doing that. It is to safeguard the rights of honorable members that I protest against the Treasurer being allowed to take the course which he suggests.

Mr RILEY:
South Sydney

– I wish to speak on the general question. First, I take the objection that, inasmuch as the Government was elected to carry on the business of the war, it has no justification for seeking to impose taxation which has not been submitted to the electors. No honorable member can say that the Government received a mandate from the country to introduce a bachelor’s tax.

Mr McWilliams:

– It is a very good tax.

Mr.RILE Y.- That may be; but the people of this country have not yet had an opportunity to say whether they approve of its imposition or not.

Sir William Irvine:

– On a point of order, sir, I understood the Treasurer to move that the Committee should agree to take the parts of the motion seriatim.

Mr RILEY:

– No; he did not.

Sir John Forrest:

– I have moved a motion.

Sir William Irvine:

– My point of order is that this matter of procedure ought to be decided before a general discussion is entered upon.

Mr Riley:

– I object to the motion being taken in parts.

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I did not understand the Treasurer to submit a motion; but, if he did, I am bound to put it before the Committee. I point out to honorable members that, both in a Committee of the Whole, and in the House itself, the Presiding Officer may, of his own volition, divide a complicated question in order that it may be better understood. This procedure is followed in the British House of Commons, and is sanctioned by our own Standing Orders. .

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT

– I move.

That the motion be put in sections as alphabetically headed.

This procedure is perfectly regular. It will not take away any opportunity to speak.

Mr Riley:

– You had a good say yesterday.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Honorable members had all yesterday to discuss the general question.

Mr Fenton:

– “ The House may order.”

Sir WILLIAM IRVINE:

– The same practice is applied in Committee of the whole as in the House.

Mr Tudor:

– From what is the honorable member quoting?

Sir WILLIAM IRVINE:

– From May, 10th edition, page’ 271.There it is stated -

When two or more separate propositions-

As is the case here ; indeed, I think there are in this motion six or seven entirely distinguishable propositions, each more or less independent of the other - are embodied in a motion or in an amendment, the Speaker calls the attention of the House, to the circumstance; and if objection be taken, he puts the question on such propositions separately, restricting debate” to each proposition in its turn; though to this course resort is unfrequent, because it is generally recognised, if a motion formed of a series of paragraphs is submitted to the House,the question should be proposed on the principal paragraph, which determines the decision of the House upon the various proposals contained in the whole motion.

– I take it that we shall’ be at liberty to debate the first section of the motion in the light of each of the other sections. Therefore, I apprehend that we shall be permitted to traverse the whole ground covered by the motion. Only upon that understanding will I consent to the Treasurer’s proposal. At the same time, I cannot understand what the right honorable gentleman hopes to gain by adopting this procedure.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I do not wish the position to be misunderstood. I have already intimated that each of the alphabetical sections of the motion will be open to legitimate amendment, but the debate upon each alphabetical section must be confined to its subject-matter.

Question - That the motion be put in sections as alphabetically headed - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 41

NOES: 16

Majority . . . . 25

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Section A - rate of Tax upon Income Derived from Personal Exertion.

The average rate of tax per pound sterling for so much of the taxable income as does not exceed £7,600 may be calculated from the following formula : -

Mr TUDOR:
Yarra

.- I should like to learn what alteration is proposed in this section. Great objection is taken by mathematicians to this method of calculation of the income tax, and Mr. Knibbs’ formula is questioned. Yesterday the honorable member for Eden-Monaro (Mr. Austin Chapman) asked whether it was not possible to adopt some simpler method of calculating the tax.

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT

– I have already promised that attention will be given by the Taxation Department to this matter to see whether some more simple form of calculating the income tax than that now in force can be devised. There has been a great deal of complaint, not only with regard to the complexity of the form, but also with regard to duplication in making out schedules forthe Commonwealth and States. The whole matter has been discussed at the Conference of the Commonwealth and State Statisticians and the taxing officers. We hope to be able to do something in the matter, but it is not very easy, because we must secure the concurrence of the six States. There has been some question raised by mathematicians as to the accuracy of the formula, but the only information I can give with respect to section A is that the word “ average “ has been inserted to make the meaning clearer. That is the only alteration shown in this section upon the existing form. I informed honorable members yesterday, and on the 23rd August, that the wording in sections B and C has been altered slightly from that used under the Act of 1916. But the legal effect is the same in each case. I also informed the House that some doubt was raised as to whether the wording used in the Act of 1916 achieved the purpose of the Act. The Department is advised that the desired purpose was achieved, but in order to set the question beyond all doubt the wording has been altered, though the legal effect is in no way changed. The actual rates imposed under this resolution will not in any way differ from those imposed by the Act of 1916.

Section agreed to.

Section B (Rate of tax upon income derived from property).

Sir JOHN FORREST:
SwanTreasurer · NAT

– There is a clerical error in this section which requires correction in the line “ 12.768 pence for one pound sterling between £559 10s.0d. and £600 10s.0d.” I move-

That the figures “ £559 10s.0d.” be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the figures “£599 10s.0d.”

Amendment agreed to.

Section, as amended, agreed to.

Section C -

Rate of Tax in Respect of Taxable Income Derived Partly from Personal Exertion and Partly from Property.

For every pound sterling of taxable income derived from personal exertion, the rate of tax shall be ascertained by dividing the total amount of the tax that would be payable under Subdivision A if the total taxable income were derived exclusively from personal exertion by the amount of the total taxable income.

For every pound sterling of taxable income derived from property the rate of tax shall be ascertained by dividing the total amount of tax that would be payable under the” Subdivision B if the total taxable income were derived’ exclusively from property by the amount of the total taxable income.

Sir William Irvine:

– Perhaps the honorable member will give an instance.

Mr SINCLAIR:

– I can give my own case as an instance. Last year I was asked to pay on an amended assessment, because I happened to have a small income from property in New South Wales, which, when added to my other income, increased the tax out of all proportion to the income I derived from that property. I concluded that the way in which the results were arrived at was that my exemption was divided, £78 going to personal exertion and £78 to income from property. The income from the property in New South Wales was only £8, and was only income at all because it was declared to be so by the Act. As a matter of fact, I did not receive a penny of income from it, but as I said that I owned a house in New

South Wales for pleasure I had to pay taxation on it. One-half of my exemption disappears in the assessment of the New South Wales property. I should likethe Minister to look into this matter to see that no injustice is done to the small taxpayers of the community.

Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter

.- I desire also to call attention to this subdivision dealing with property, and the method adopted of applying it to income. What the honorable member for Moreton has said is perfectly correct. The value of property is to be capitalized at 5 per cent. and treated as income’. In my own district there are many working men who, after a lifetime of struggle, have got a home together, perhaps on money borrowed from financial institutions, and they will have to pay under this measure. A home might be valued at £400, and 5 per cent. on that would represent £20 of income upon which the man would be taxed to the extent of £1, while another man who had been earning perhaps equally good wages during the whole of his life, but did not provide himself with a home at all, would escape this additional (taxation.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– That is a very good conservative argument.

Mr CHARLTON:

– At all events it is a justargument, and we should, if possible, protect men who have been thrifty and have provided a home for their wives and children.

Mr Page:

– It is very strange to hear the Opposition asking the Government to tax the people more.

Mr TUDOR:

– No one in this chamber would ask the Treasurer to divulge information that would be the means of causing the Commonwealth to lose one penny of taxation. But that does not apply to an Income Tax Bill.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– What I meant to indicate was that the Treasurer has already told the honorable member that his taxation proposals are settled for the year.

Sitting suspended from 1 to 2.30 p.m.

Mr TUDOR:

– A magnificent opportunity for obtaining revenue by mean’s of taxation presents itself at this time. No doubt it would be better, in the party interests of the Opposition, not to make suggestions to the Treasurer with a view to improving the taxation proposals of the Government, but to go on to the public platform, and there criticise them.

Sir John Forrest:

– The increasing of taxation will not be very popular when preached from the platform.

Mr TUDOR:

– The honorable member for Flinders (Sir William Irvine) said that if there was one definite pledge made to the people before the election it was that those who had been making excess profits during the war should be called on to repay part of them to the Government, but he said that the War-time Profits Tax Assessment Bill let these people off. The Treasurer, however, does not propose any other taxation to deal with them. The Government makes a tremendous mistake in not proposing a super-tax to get at these people. We. are agreed that no profits should be made out of the war, but we know that many persons are making fortunes out of it, and they should be taxed. The Treasurer could get at them by increasing the super-tax provided for in subdivision d.

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT

– I am astonished that the Leader of the Opposition should attack the Government on the ground that its taxation proposals are not sufficiently heavy. The complaint usually heard from the Opposition is that there is too much taxation, that the people have too great a burden to bear. The financial proposals of the Government were laid before honorable members when I made my Budget Speech on the 8th August last. I then showed exactly what revenue we expected, and what we intended to expend, and I stated what the new taxation proposals would be. I said, further, that additional taxation would have been necessary but for the surplus ‘from last year and the transfer of £825,000 from the London Liabilities Account. The people, as I then pointed out, are already heavily taxed, the Federal, State, and municipal taxation of Australia being equivalent to £7 4s. 2d. for every man, woman, and child within the Commonwealth. Now we have imposed a Wartime Profits Tax.

Mr Tudor:

– That Bill exempts every one.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Honorable members complain of the high cost of living; but do they think that to increase taxation will make things cheaper ?

Mr Fenton:

– No.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Then do you want more taxation in order to make things dearer? Of the income tax 84 per cent, is paid by persons having incomes exceeding £1,000 a year. However, this is not an occasion for speaking on the financial position of the country. The Committee is asked to re-enact taxation which is now in existence. ‘Should the Government need more money than was anticipated when the Budget was made, we shall have to provide it.

Mr WEST:
East Sydney

.- I shall avail myself, of every opportunity to make it plain that the financial proposals of the Government are not what should he expected from the occupants of the Treasury bench. There are times when a community can bear taxation, and other times when taxation is difficult to enforce, but in my opinion there could be no better opportunity than the present for imposing it. There is an immense amount of borrowed money in circulation, and the profits that are being made are much greater than they have been in any previous period of our history. The year 1913 was a prosperous one’, but the bank balances now are higher than they were then. Ministers think that they can carry on with borrowed money, but the people,

I am sure, are against heavy borrowing for any but war purposes. A little later the community will not be as well able to pay taxation as they are now. No one knows what will happen after the war, but we may be sure that an immense amount of money will be needed to carry on the service of government, and to provide for the repatriation of our returned men. Most of these will wish to resume the occupations which they were following when they went away, and thus employment must be found for them. . At) the last election the people were led to believe that taxation would be increased, and they are prepared for extra taxation. A Government that cannot look ahead is un- . fitted to govern. Even the Treasurer must be ashamed of the War-time Profits Tax Assessment Bill as a means of providing revenue, so many exemptions being made in it. Ministers should recognise their responsibilities, and should not allow things to drift. No private member can move to increase taxation, and therefore it is the more necessary that the Government should state the true position, and take steps to prepare for probable eventualities. I am sure that many honorable members opposite are not in favour of land taxation as the sole means of obtaining revenue - I myself” am not - but it will not be long before we have a bigger land tax. Honorable members must abandon the idea that the ordinary services of a country oan be carried on with loan money. We should borrow only for war purposes. If honorable members do not give attention to the financial affairs of the country, the people will choose other representatives. It is proposed shortly to have an adjournment for a period of , five or six weeks, during which time the ; country will ‘be at the mercy of the. Go- .vernment. I do not know why there should be such an adjournment, ‘. when so much work remains to be done. It is not in accordance with the wish of the people. There is too much indifference to public affairs. By shelving things we shall only make the position worse. If honorable members opposite are not sufficiently patriotic to look after the welfare of Australia then at least it can never be said that I failed to draw attention to their lack of duty, and to their want of appreciation of the public demands.

Mr CORSER:
Wide Bay

.- The criticism which the Opposition level at the Government proposals is somewhat amusing. They condemn the Government for their proposals of taxation, but they carefully refrain from suggesting any new scheme by which the requisite revenue should be raised. In the one breath they declare that the cost of living- should be reduced, and in the next they make proposals for taxing every industry, and so increasing the cost of living. I am glad that the Treasurer has amended his motion. He now makes it perfectly clear that the tax on single ‘ men and widowers without children is not, as the Opposition would have the public believe, anything in the nature of economic conscription, but to obtain money for repatriation.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I would remind (he honorable member that the whole motion is not now before the Chair. We are dealing only with subdivision D.

Mr CORSER:

– Then I shall reserve until a later stage the remarks I had intended to make. We have to raise additional revenue, and if the Opposition object to the means proposed by the Treasurer, they should at least come forward with some concrete proposition. The scheme of taxation now under consideration will, in my opinion, bring in considerably more than is anticipated, while the War-time Profits Tax Assessment Bill will affect the very people of whom honorable members opposite have been speaking. The Treasurer has assured us that later on further taxation will be necessary, and that a super income tax will then be proposed.

Mr Fenton:

– Why not have it now ?

Mr CORSER:

– Why should we impose taxation before it is required ? Is it not better that the money that would in that way be collected by the Treasury should remain in industry and give employment to the people?

Mr J H CATTS:
Cook

.- The honorable member for Wide Bay (Mr. Corser ) complained that the Opposition was not prepared to suggest other sources for the raising of revenue. I understand that the honorable member for Grey (Mr. Poynton) when speaking this morning intimated that there had been placed before the Treasurer a return showing those who would escape the War-time Profits Tax. The honorable member assures me now by nodding assent, that that is so, and I would commend that source of additional revenue ,to the honorable member for Wide Bay. There we have an area of taxation embracing the very wealthy people of the community who escape the operation of the war-time profits tax, and who might well be made the subject of additional taxation.

Mr Corser:

– Even now the honorable member does not explain himself.

Mr J H CATTS:

– Then I shall give my explanation in the words of the honorable member for Flinders (Sir William Irvine) who, speaking in this House said -

– The real taxing authority is not the Federal Government, or the State Governments, but the capitalists and large employers outside, who pass all taxation on.

Section agreed to.

Section E -

Tax Payable in Certain Cases by Persons not married and having no Dependants.

Notwithstanding anything contained in the preceding provisions, the tax payable by any person who-

is not married, has no dependants, and is not an absentee ; and
has a gross income of not less than £100, or, in the case of a person carrying on business in Australia, has an income from the business which, after deducting from the gross income the deductions specified in paragraph (a) of sub-section (1.) of section 18 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1915-1916 amounts, together with his income from all other sources in Australia, to not less than £100; and
would, apart from this provision, not be liable to pay an income -tax of £1 or upwards, shall be £1.

Mr BRENNAN:
Batman

. -It must not be supposed that because the next section of this memorandum discloses even graver injustices, I, as a member of the Labour party, can assent for a moment to a proposal to levy an income tax of this kind on men who are receiving less than a living wage.

Sir John Forrest:

– The proposal was originally introduced by the Labour party, and the honorable member supported it.

Mr BRENNAN:

– Whenever the Treasurer is challengedhe always refers to somebody who is alleged to have done something quite as bad as that which he proposes, and he regards that as a complete excuse. I shall have somethingto say in regard to the next section, and I rise at this stage merely to voice my protest against the proposal immediately before us, as one in the highest degree politically discreditable to the Government. In time of war, and after a series of measures of legislation designed to protect their friends and the wealthy people of the community, the Government now seek to penalize men of small incomes, who are receiving, as I have said, less than a living wage. There is not an industrial tribunal in Australia to-day which would declare a living wage to be as low as £100 a year; yet this “ Win-the-war “ Government, who have so sedulously saved from taxation men of large incomes, now propose to tax persons of the class I have referred to.

Mr POYNTON:
Grey

.- The honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) is somewhat late with his opposition.

Mr Brennan:

– I never supported such a proposal.

Mr POYNTON:

-Last year the Labour Government introduced a proposal to levy a tax of £1 on men with incomes of £100. Does the honorable member, really object to a single man, who receives £100 a year, paying taxation to the extent of £1 ?

Mr Brennan:

– Absolutely.

Mr POYNTON:

– Then the only explanation I can conceive of the honorable member’s attitude is that he is “ agin the Government.”

Mr CONSIDINE:
Barrier

.- I should like to move the deletion of section E. It proposes a bachelor tax, pure and simple - a direct tax on those who are bachelors for the simple reason that they have not enough to marry on. The Government seek to increase the single misery of such men by making them pay £1 per annum; and even if paragraph a were deleted a great injustice would remain. We know that, with the cost of living continuously rising, £200 or £250 a year is small enough for the man to live on, especially if he has any children; and yet if a man is unfortunate enough to be too poor to marry, he is to be further penalized. It does not concern me whether this proposal was originally introduced by the Labour party; it is wholly unjust and ought to be rejected.

Question- That section E be agreed to - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 39

NOES: 17

Majority … … 22

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Section agreed to.

Section F -

Tax Payable in Certain Cases by Male Persons Between the Ages of Twenty-one Years and Forty-five Years.

There shall be payable by every male person (whether in receipt of a taxable income or not) who, on the first day of July, 1917 -

was unmarried or a widower without children; and

was not under the age of twenty-one years and was under the age of forty-five years, income tax to the amount of £10 or 10 per centum of his taxable income, whichever is the greater :

Provided further that where the Commissioner is satisfied that by reason of the support given by a person to his dependants the payment of the full amount of tax would impose hardship on the person, the Commissioner may reduce the amount of tax payable by that person to such amount’ as the Commissioner in his discretion determines.

The preceding provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to a person who satisfies the Commissioner -

that he has been on active service outside Australia during the present’ war or is a member of an Expeditionary Force raised for service outside Australia; or

that he has since the first day of January, 1917, endeavoured to enlist in an Expeditionary Force raised for service outside Australia, but has been rejected solely on the ground of physical unfitness; or

that, notwithstanding that he has not endeavoured to enlist in an Expeditionary Force raised for service outside Australia, he is obviously unfit for any naval or military service whatever; or

that all his brothers of military age have been oh active service outside Australia during the present war, or are members of an Expeditionary Force raised for service outside Australia; or

that he is permanently incapacitated for work; or

that he is employed in the police or prison services of the Commonwealth or of a State; or

that he is employed on a lighthouse; or

that he is a minister of religion.

For the purposes of this subdivision “ taxable income “ means the amount which is ascertained by deducting from the taxable income of that person within the meaning of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1915-1916 the sum of £26 in respect of each dependant wholly dependent upon him, and such less sum as the Commissioner allows in respect of each dependant partially dependent upon him.

Mr LAMOND:
Illawarra

.- I move as an amendment -

That after the words “ unmarried or,” in sub-paragraph i of paragraph a, the words “ married or “ be inserted.

The object of the amendment is to include In the area of the tax married persons who have no children. I want an expression of opinion from the Treasurer as to why this section of the community, which is well able to bear taxation, should be exempted. They have not the responsibility that should give them any claim to exemption over bachelors.

Mr.J. H. Catts. - I rise to a point of order. Is a private memberin order in moving for the purpose of increasing taxation ?

Mr LAMOND:

– I expected the Labour party to take that view.

Mr J H Catts:

– The proposal is not one to place the onus of the tax on those able to bear it. It is simply one to increase the area of the tax.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I have ruled on a previous occasion that a non-official member may move in Committee of Ways and Means to increase taxation, but not on a Bill. The honorable member is in order in moving his amendment.

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– If a private member moves an amendment, and the Treasurer accepts it, it becomes a Government proposal.

Sir John Forrest:

– I do not accept this amendment. I submit to the ruling, but I am surprised at it, because I was under the impression that a private member could not move to increase the burden of taxation.

The CHAIRMAN:

– It will save time if I quote the ruling that has already been given on a similar point. If honorable members will look at the Votes and Proceedings for 1901 they will see a ruling which I gave and the authorities I quoted on that occasion in reference to an exactly similar matter in Committee of Ways and Means. For the purpose of settling the point definitely for all time, it was submitted to Sir Frederick Holder, and I shall read what he said in regard to it. This was the ruling he gave -

I may Bay I have known for some few weeks past that this question would arise at some stage of the proceedings on the Tariff, and I have, therefore, given it very careful consideration. When first this was made known to me, I at once conceived that the idea of any unofficial member proposing an increase of an item of taxation asked for by the Crown was contrary to the spirit of parliamentary governmentthe spirit of parliamentary government being that the Crown asks for ah impost to be made on the people, and the people’s representatives in Parliament consider the request of the Crown, and may grant the request, or may grant a lesser amount, but would not conceivably give to the Crown a larger sum than the Crown asks should be imposed. When, however, I went from the question of the spirit of parliamentary government to the practice which has grown up as parliamentary institutions have developed, I am obliged to admit that in the House of Commons, which is the standard of our proceedings where it is not otherwise set out in our Standing Orders, the practice of imposing imposts on items not suggested as subjects of taxation by the Crown, and of proposing increases on items which are suggested as subjects for taxation, has sprung up, and that on several occasions, without any objection being taken, new taxes have been proposed and increases by unofficial members, on details of taxes suggested by the Government. There are cases which I am prepared to quote, but which I understand the Chairman has already cited. One case dates back to 1840, and another can be seen in Hansard, vol. 218, page 1041. Striving to interpret the practice of the House of Commons by the practice in other Parliaments, I find that in Canada the same course has been followed, and also in Victoria, where attention was called to the importance of the matter. In South Australia, according to Blackmore’s Practice of the House of Assembly, the practice was followed in 1870 and on other occasions. Therefore, ruling as I have to rule, that neither standing order No. 171 nor standing order No. 247 applies to this case, as we are now dealing with resolutions in Committee only, and the Bill stage will come later; and, falling back on standing order No. 1, which incorporates the practice of the House of Commons, I am bound to decide that the Chairman has correctly determined the practice of this House, which is that duties on items may be increased, and that other items which are mentioned in the Tariff on which no duty is proposed may be proposed as subjects for duty, and that, in that way, the House will have the freest possible hand in debating the Tariff. I may say I should have been better pleased to have decided the other way had my duty permitted me so to decide, because I can see that the ruling I have given may tend to produce considerable discussion beyond that which otherwise would have taken place. But with the practice of the House of Commons before me I can only rule as I have ruled, that the Chairman is correct inhis decision.

I give the same ruling now. A private member may move an amendment increasing the burden of taxation in Committee of Ways and Means, but not after the Bill has been introduced.

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT

– I wish to say that it would be very unwise on our part to enlarge the area of this tax. It is already proposed to extend the operation of the Bill by striking out the words “and was under the age of forty-five years,” and it would be unwise to go further than that at the present moment.

Mr NICHOLLS:
Macquarie

. -I am altogether opposed to subdivision F. It will inflict an enormous hardship on a section of the community least able to bear additional burdens, and it also has the fault of discriminating between’ different classes of the community. This tax was not framed with the intention of raising revenue for repatriation purposes, because the amount required cannot be collected from those whom the Treasurer seeks to reach.

Mr STORY:
Boothby

.- In order to get the advantages of the exemption, must a widower have children of his own? Although a manmay have no children of his own, he may have adopted somebody else’s children and be responsible for their upbringing. In such cases will the man be exempt from the operation of the tax?

Mr CONSIDINE:
Barrier

.If the Treasurer is anxious to do justice according to his point of view, I, like the honorable member forIllawarra (Mr. Lamond), fail to see that there is any justification, for exempting married men who are without children.

Sir John Forrest:

– A married man has a wife to keep.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– The accusation against bachelors is that by not getting married they are not doing their duty to the country. If the bachelor is a sinner in that respect, and is to be penalized, those who get married and do not do their duty in the matter of rearing children, are far greater sinners. If the Treasurer wishes to stimulate the birth-rate as well as recruiting, he should agree to the tax being applied to married persons who are without issue. I am opposed to the tax in its entirety, but if the Treasurer has any wish to deal fairly with all sections of the community he will accept the amendment.

Mr BRENNAN:
Batman

.- On no logical grounds can the Treasurer refuse to accept the amendment.

Sir John Forrest:

– The tax I propose is directed against men who are untrammelled by responsibilities.

Mr BRENNAN:

– From the Treasurer’s point of view, a widower without children should be no more subject to this tax than should a married man without . children.

Mr Poynton:

– The married man has a wife and home to maintain.

Mr BRENNAN:

– We know the reason for the Government’s opposition to a widening of the scope of the Bill. Only under the strenuous pressure of a few of their own supporters did they consent to remove from the measure some of the crude injustices that it proposed when introduced in its original form. I am opposed to this tax entirely, because it rests upon an unjust and improper foundation. It is crude, class, penal legislation. I rose merely to point out the inconsistency of the Government in refusing to accept the amendment.

Mr TUDOR:
Yarra

.- I am opposed to this special tax, but in reference to the amendment it should be borne in mind that a man who is married is, at least, responsible for the support of somebody, and he has to maintain a home. The tax proposed by the Treasurer is intended to apply only to persons without encumbrances.

Mr Considine:

– Is a married man with dependants in any worse position than a single man with dependants?

Mr TUDOR:

– Certainly not; and in my opinion the single man with dependants should be exempt. I cannot support the amendment.

Mr WALLACE:
West Sydney

– I, also, am opposedto this tax, and I cannot understand why a proposal of this nature should have been introduced. The subdivision to which we have just agreed provides that a man in receipt of an income of £100 per annum shall pay a tax of £1. That is sufficient. It is also provided that a man in receipt of an income of £2,000 per annum shall be taxed only to the extent of 2½ per cent. of his income. Now the Treasurer proposes that, because a man is unmarried or is a widower without children, he shall pay further heavy penalties. The proposal is unfair. The Government might as well tax a man because he has red hair. If revenue is required, I am in favour of equitable taxation, but I cannot support a tax which discriminates between sections of the community.

Mr Poynton:

– This is an endeavour to distribute the burden of taxation.

Mr WALLACE:

– All economists are agreed that taxation should be borne equally by the whole community, and that every man should pay in proportion to his ability to pay. I worked for many years and never earned more than £100 per annum, and I found it very difficult to pay £3 or £4 out of that sum. If a person with that income experienced illness or other adversity, how could he. put by enough money to meet this tax ?

Mr Poynton:

– How would the married man get on inthose circumstances?

Mr WALLACE:

– I confess that I do not know how the marriedman does exist on an income of £3 per week in these days. Why should we not preserve in connexion with this tax the exemption of £156, which is already in operation in connexion with the ordinary income tax?

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Charlton:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– The honorable member must confine his remarks to the amendment.

Mr WALLACE:

– If we are to apply taxation, let its application be equitable, and let us give every man an opportunity to earn sufficient money to keep himself.

Mr McWILLIAMS:
Franklin

– The various excuses and reasons that are pub forward for exempting persons from taxation are amusing to listen’ to. During . my parliamentary life I have heard sympathy expressed with the struggling selector and with the lone widow, and now the members of the Opposition and a few on this side are pouring out their sympathy on the poor bachelor. Of these the honorable member for Fawkner is the worst. He tried to secure sympathy yesterday for the unfortunate University students. The basic principle of taxation should be equality of sacrifice and ability to pay. If of two brothers employed in a business, or working together in a mine or factory or on a farm, one be married and have four or five children, and the other be single, which will contribute the more to the revenue ? A bachelor has nothing to pay for but his board and lodging, his clothing, and his pleasures, and it is mere hypocrisy to talk about his hardships. I have always held, apart from the necessities of the war, that those who are too selfish to maintain homes - and there are men with incomes ranging from £300 to £600 who prefer not to undertakefamily responsibilities- should be specially taxed. It is said that this matter has not been before the electors, but it has been before some of them. Last year I outlined a proposal in connexion with the repatriation scheme-

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Charlton:

– The honorable member cannot discuss that matter on the amendment, which is to include married men.

Mr McWILLIAMS:
FRANKLIN, TASMANIA · REV TAR; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; CP from 1920; IND from 1928

– My opinion is that it is the bachelor whom we . should tax. I have never met a young unmarried man who objected to the proposal that he should pay a fair and reasonable tax. Afterall the foregoing of two or three drinks a week would pay for this tax. I have a better opinion of the young men of Australia than to think that they desire that the taxation of the country shall be paid almost exclusively by the married men.

Mr Brennan:

– Let us deal with those who have money.

Mr McWILLIAMS:

– The honorable member is prepared to exempt every wanderer over the country who is too lazy or too selfish to make a home for himself. I wish to tax these persons specially, and, therefore, I am opposed to the amendment, which would tax married men as well as bachelors.

Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong

.- Like most honorable members on this side, I am against the proposal of the Government, lock, stock, and barrel, and, as I believe that the amendment of the honorable member for Illawarra would only make things worse, I shall vote against it.

Mr PIGOTT:
Calare

.- I do not agree with the honorable member for West Sydney that a bachelor who is earning £100 a year should not becalled upon to pay £1 a year to the War Fund. Such a man is better off than the young fellow who has done his duty and gone to the war.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN:

-I ask the honorable member to confine his remarks to the proposal to include married men.

Mr PIGOTT:

– The married man contributes much more largely tothe revenue than does the single man. Compare two men getting, say, £150 a year, one of whom is single and the other married, with eight children. Our Customs revenue amounts to about £15,000,000 a year, or about £3 per head of the population. Therefore, the married man that I speak of would contribute £30 to the revenue, and his fellow, the single man, only £3. For this reason, I think that single men. should have to pay extra taxation.

Amendment negatived.

Mr STORY:
Boothby

.- In this country .there are hundreds, possibly thousands, of persons -who, having no children of their own, have adopted children, and have assumed toward them the responsibility of parenthood, lt would be unjust to penalize such persons.

Mr Pigott:

– Provision is made for their case.

Mr STORY:

– No; mere discretionary power is given to the Commissioner. In my opinion, the householder who has adopted children in infancy, and brought them up as his own, is entitled to as much consideration as the father of a family. I think that the words “natural or permanently adopted “ should be inserted after the word “children.” That would prevent injustice.

Mr Tudor:

– Are not married persons exempted in any case?

Mr STORY:

– A widower might be left in charge of adopted children, and he would not be exempt.

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT

– The remarks of the honorable member deserve consideration, though I think that hardship is provided against, because, under the income tax legislation, dependants are defined as relations natural or by adoption. Should there be any case of hardship, the Commissioner will have power to deal with it.

Amendments (by Sir John Forrest) agreed to -

That in paragraph a (ii) the words “and was under the age of forty-five years” be left out.

That the word “ ten,” twice occurring, be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the word “five.”

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT

– I move -

That after the words “ raised for service outside Australia,” in paragraph b (i), the words or has enlisted for service outside Australia on a ship of war “ be inserted.

This amendment is to make it quite clear that a man who has enlisted for service outside Australia on a ship of war shall be in the same position as a member of the Expeditionary Force.

Mr MANIFOLD:
Corangamite

– It seems to me that, quite apart from the amendment, the wording of the sub-paragraph makes it quite clear that the exemption is intended to apply to a man who has enlisted for service on a ship of war outside Australia as well as to a member of the Expeditionary Land Forces. The introduction of the amendment, however, raises a doubt in my .mind as to whether Australians serving with the Allies, but not in any Australian Force, will be exempt. Some thousands of Australians are serving in the British Army, as well as with the French. I know of men who have done very fine work in the French air service. One man, whom I knew very well, was sent by the Commonwealth Government to study aviation in Great Britain, and on the outbreak of war was refused an appointment to the British aviation service because he was over age. He then joined the French air service as a pilot, and did very fine work. After serving for two years in that capacity he has returned to Australia, and now holds the rank of major in the Australian Flying Corps. He was unable to obtain a commission in the French service because his knowledge of the French language was insufficient. All such men should come within this exemption.

Sir J ohn Forrest:

– I find that all such men are included in the exemption.

Mr MANIFOLD:

– I accept the Treasurer’s assurance. I merely desired to be clear on the point that any Australian citizen serving with the fighting forces of the Allies would be exempt from this tax.

Sir John Forrest:

– The Commissioner assures me that he will be.

Mr Considine:

– I beg to draw attention to the want of a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment (by Sir John Forrest) agreed to -

That paragraphs b (ii) and b (iii) be left out.

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT

– I move -

That the word “ all,” in paragraph b (iv), be left out with a view to insert in lieu thereof the word “a majority of.”

Under this sub-paragraph as it stands it is provided that the exemption shall apply to a person . who satisfies the Commissioner^ -

That all his brothers of military age have ‘ been on active service outside Australia during the present war or are members of an Expeditionary Force raised for service outside Australia.

– If there are six brothers, then four will have to go to the Front in order to earn the exemption; bu’b six is an exceptional number.

Mr SAMPSON:

– I know families of six sons, not one of them has gone to the Front, and all over Australia we have examples of large families who have not contributed one man while other families have sent the whole of their sons. In my own district there are contrasts of that kind. According to the proposal as it stands, two or three brothers who have offered themselves and have been rejected will be subject to the tax, whereas in a healthy family of six sons, if three go, the remaining three will be exempt.

Sir John Forrest:

– That is not so; where there are six sons four must go.

Mr SAMPSON:

Mr LYNCH:
Werriwa

.- While we are all impressed with the sincerity of the Treasurer in bringing forward this proposal, still the fact was sufficiently demonstrated yesterday that it had at- its base a principle which is repugnant to a true sense of Democracy. If we ask ourselves whether it is really a conscription tax or a bachelor tax, we have to admit that it is a shandygaff. About 50 per cent, of the objections raised yesterday to the original proposals of the Treasurer apply to the proposals put forward to-day. If it is to be purely a bachelor tax, the only exemption allowed should be in reference to a man who changes from bachelorhood into the ranks of the benedicts. Since we are not allowed to capture brides as a blackfellow does, with a nulla nulla, and we have to go upon our knees to do so, some exemption might reasonably be given to the person whose offer of marriage has been rejected, ‘ bond fide, more than twice a year. My objection to the tax is that it is aimed at those people who have not gone to the war. The people of Australia put a bar to our actions, however small, in the direction. of penalizing those who do not go to the war ; but within the limits of the people’s will the Government are deserving of every credit for attempting to raise money for repatriation purposes, and a tax on all unmarried men earning over £100 per annum is a reasonable source of revenue for that purpose. I made a suggestion in December of last year that 10 per cent, of all wealth over a margin of *£2,000 should be conscripted for repatriation purposes. Had that proposal been accepted, the Government would have been strongly entrenched to-day, and could have put a strong object-lesson before those” people who have failed in their duty.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (the Hon. F. W. Bamford).- The honorable member is going beyond the amendment.

Mr LYNCH:

– There is a limitation upon the exemptions under a tax of this kind. I feel constrained by the principles which I support to vote against the amendment as well as against the main proposal before the Committee.

Mr PIGOTT:
Calare

.- I cannot see the analogy that the honorable member for Fawkner (Mr. Maxwell) referred to in regard to only sons. Under conscription, the only son stands in a very different position from that he must occupy in relation to taxation. As a rule, the only .son is far better endowed with worldly goods than the son who has four or five brothers, and he is well able to pay the tax now proposed. A little while ago a young man came to me. He had three brothers at the Front, and he was anxious to enlist. His aged parents did not raise objection to his going to the Front, hut they asked him, before doing so, to seek my advice ; and my advice to him was that he should remain at home, and look after the interests of his aged parents. He accepted my advice, but I do not think that he should be penalized for so doing. The parents of those who have gone to the Front have had a great deal to do ‘with getting them away. In the majority of cases taxation on the remaining son will have to be paid by the parents, who have done their level best to persuade their sons to enlist.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment (by Sir John Forrest) agreed to -

That in sub-paragraph iv of paragraphb, the words “or have enlisted for service outside Australia on a ship of war “ be inserted after the words “ raised for service outside Australia.”

Amendment (by Sir John Forrest) proposed -

That sub-paragraphs vi, vii, and viii of paragraph b be left out.

Mr TUDOR:
Yarra

.-The Treasurer proposes to allow the exemption, of those who are permanently incapacitated for work to stand. The honorable member forCapricornia (Mr. Higgs) has asked me to mention a case that has been submitted to him of a man suffering from some infirmity, who has been prohibited by medical men from’ marrying. There are many cases in which persons refrain from marrying ‘because of some hereditary taint, which they do not desire to transmit to children. I have heard of cases where there has been insanity in the family, and those afflicted have deemed it unwise to marry. Would the Treasurer consider the question of exempting such persons ?

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT

– If I accepted the pro- posal of the honorable member, it would l eave the position very uncertain. I think he will agree with me that it would be very difficult to frame a clause to meet the cases of all those who are prohibited from marrying on account of hereditary taints, and so on.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

.- The Treasurer proposes to leave out the exemption applying to ministers of religion, although they are exempted under the Defence Act and other proposals. As this proposal is practically a tax on bachelors, those members of religious bodies, particularly, one religious faith, who are obliged to live a life of celibacy should be exempted from it.If theyare taxed, it will be a case of taxing those who have, nothing with which to pay the taxation, because they are also obliged to renounce worldly goods. The tax will fall, not upon them, but upon the order to which they belong. I prefer to see no discriminiation made amongst ministers of religion, but it is well for honorable members to understand that this tax is . to be imposed for two purposes - to raise revenue, and to tax bachelors - and in neither case can it be equitably applied in the instance that I have mentioned.

Mr CONSIDINE:
Barrier

– I cannot see any ground for retaining the exemption of ministers of religion. Neither they nor parliamentarians should be exempt from either this taxation or obligations under the Defence Act. In my opinion, all exemptions should be removed. It may be quite true, as the honorable member for Wannon (Mr. Rodgers) stated, that there are ministers of religion whose church requires them to remain single. But that is one of the penalties which attaches to their choice of a vocation. They must bear the consequences of their choice, just the same as any other man who remains single, . apart from religious obligations. Many of the clergymen who are exempt from military service under the Defence Act are very active on the public platform in urging other young men to go to the Front.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– And many others are doing good work in the danger zone.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– Men of all classes in the community and of all creeds and occupations are doing good work, but the mere fact of a man being a minister of religion is no valid ground for his exemption.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– Clergymen have not the same opportunity in commercialism as other men have.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– That is a condition which attaches to their choice of an occupation. If the honorable member had chosen a religious vocation instead of being a member of Parliament he would have to bear the consequences of, that choice.

Mr LAMOND:
Illawarra

.- I should like to hear some explanation of the retention of sub-paragraph v, which exempts persons who are permanently incapacitated. Many such persons are very wealthy. They are not able to go to the Front to defend their possessions, but they should not be excused from contributing towards the cost of repatriating those who have gone. On the other hand, it is hardly conceivable that the Treasury officials would endeavour to extract £5 from men who are permanently incapacitated and are without any possessions. I ask the Treasurer to consent to the deletion of subparagraph v.

Sir John Forrest:

– That subparagraph has been already agreed to.

Mr ATKINSON:
Wilmot

.- There is a good deal in what the honorable member for Illawarra^ said regarding persons who, though permanently incapacitated, are possessed of means.

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:

– Unless the -Treasurer withdraws the amendment now before .the Committee the honorable member cannot discuss sub-paragraph v.

Sir John Forrest:

– Does the honorable member wish me to withdraw the amendment ?

Mr ATKINSON:

– No. But as we desire to raise revenue, and to collect, it from those who are able to pay, the Treasurer would be wise if he were to propose an amendment which would make the tax applicable to those persons who are permanently incapacitated but can afford to contribute towards the cost of the repatriation of our soldiers. I agree with the honorable member for Wannon that the taxation of ministers of religion may impose hardship. There are some clergymen who, by the rules of their church, are not permitted to marry. A man who i6 compelled to he a bachelor is entitled to some consideration. Many ministers of religion have no money, others are very poorly paid, and have little opportunity of saving money. What is the use of asking them to pay?

Mr Considine:

– What about Quakers and Christadelphians, who, although not clergymen, are conscientious objectors, to military service?

Mr ATKINSON:

– The conscientious objector is just as much beholden for his protection to the men who go to the Front as is anybody else in the community, and if he has the means to pay he should not be exempt. There is no analogy between conscientious objectors and ministers of religion.

Mr BAMFORD:
Herbert

.- I had already given notice that I intended to propose the removal of the exemption of ministers of religion, and I am pleased that the Treasurer has forestalled me. There is no valid reason why such an exemption should be allowed. The fact that certain ministers of religion are absolved from responsibility for military service, as well as from the perils of’ matrimony, is no ground, why they should be exempt from the payment of this tax. The Treasurer stated yesterday, in answer to a question, that this exemption had been included in this resolution because ministers of religion are exempt under the Defence Act. It is most illogical to exempt a man from one obligation for no other reason than that he is exempt from another obligation. To carry that reasoning to its logical conclusion, a man who is absolved from liability for active service and financial contribution should be absolved from every liability. There are many men who, although they are in holy orders, felt so strong an impulse to defend their country that they have gone into the trenches. At least one clergyman, the Reverend Hulton Sams, of North Queensland, has been killed at the Front, and there are many other clergymen who have not sought exemption from any liability in connexion with this war.

An Honorable Member. - Thousands of priests are fighting in France.

Mr Tudor:

– Chaplain Gillison, of this city, was killed at the Front.

Mr SAMPSON:
Wimmera

– There is much to be said for the exemption of ministers of religion, but I shall support the Government proposal to strike out sub-para,graph viii. The reduction of the number of exemptions will minimize the difficulties that will present themselves in connexion with the collection of the tax. The exemption of persons who are permanently incapacitated whilst we tax men who have been declared physically unfit for military service will lead to a great deal of confusion in the levying of the tax.

Amendment agreed to

Amendment (by Sir John Forrest) proposed -

That the following new sub-paragraph be inserted: - “ (vi) that he is in receipt of an invalid or old-age pension.”

Mr POYNTON:
Grey

.- I ask the Treasurer whether it would not be wise to fix a minimum below which the tax shall not operate? The right honorable gentleman now proposes to exempt old-age and invalid pensioners, who receive a little over £30 a year; but every other single man in the community is taxable. In my opinion, it would be fair to fix a minimum of £100.

Mr LAMOND:
Illawarra

Mr ORCHARD:

– I do not know. The Mayor of Lidcombe is my authority for the statement.

Mr J, H Catts:

Mr J H Catts:

– A tax upon anticonscriptionists.

Mr MAHONY:

– Exactly. It is a tax on those who have not seen their way clear to join the ranks of the benedicts. Far be it from me to say whether their reasons for not entering into the holy bonds of matrimony are good or bad. This is a proposal to hit a particular class. The honorable member for Nepean is a prominent, and promises to be a leading, member of the Ministerial party, and we must assume that he was put up by his party to threaten the country with what will happen if the single men do not get into khaki. He would literally heap coals of fire on the heads of those who, for various reasons, cannot see their way to go to the Front or to get married.

Sitting suspended from 6.80 to 8 p.m.

– Do you think that is an accurate statement?

Mr BRENNAN:

Mr BRENNAN:

– It is only necessary to read the printed proposal to see that I am right. It is provided -

The preceding provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to a person who satisfies the Commissioner -
That/ he has been on active service outside Australia during the present war, or is a member of an Expeditionary Force raised for service outside Australia; or
1. that all his brothers of military age have been on active service outside Australia during the present war, or are members of an Expeditionary Force raised for service outside Australia; or
that he is permanently incapacitated for work.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– The tax will not touch me very much, but it will touch those who are in the position which I occupied before I came here. It will not be much trouble for me to pay the 5 per cent. The people of this country have placed me in a position where even to pay a tax of £10 would not be a hardship to me, but it would be a great hardship, to many persons outside who are in the same position as I was in before I was elected to the House to pay even £5.

Mr POYNTON:

– That is why we oppose it in the form in which it was brought before the Committee.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– If it was an insult to men at the Front to offer as an alternative to enlistment the payment of a fine of £10, can it be said that the payment of £5 is an equivalent to going abroad to fight for the country?

Mr.Wise. - No; but the exemption is now on the same footing as the exemption from income tax.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– If the suggestion ofthe ‘ Government yesterday that the payment of a fine of £10 could be accepted as an alternative to enlistment is an insult to those who have enlisted, much more is the present proposal that the payment of a fine of £5 shall be regarded as an alternative.

Mr Wise:

– The exemption, like the exemption from income taxation, is a compliment to those who have enlisted.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– The proposal reekswith insincerity. No one believes that it was brought forward to get revenue, or to assist the Repatriation Fund. Its object was to force men to enlist, and for that reason I hope that, it will be defeated by the Committee.. The Treasurer should, by withdrawing; the subdivision, express his appreciation of the conduct of those who oppose it and his disgust at the attitude of those who support it.

Question - That section F, as amended, be agreed to - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 37

NOES: 18

Majority . . . . 19

Section agreed to.

Section G agreed to.

AYES

NOES

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT

.- I move-

That the following new section be added : - “ H.- Tax Payable inrespect of a Cash Prize in a Lottery.

There shall be payable in respect of a cash prize in a lottery income tax to the amount of ten per centum of the gross prize money.”

Taxation is already imposed upon cash, prizes in lotteries, but there has been some difficulty in estimating the amount of the tax. The officials of the Taxation Department believe that a fixed charge of 10 per cent. on the amount of the prize is a better system to adopt than that now followed.

Proposed new section agreed to.

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended and resolution adopted.

Ordered -

That Sir John Forrest and Mr. Glynn do prepare and bring in a Bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill presented by Sir John Forrest, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT

– I move -

That this Bill be now read a second time.

– We could not declare in this Bill that the revenue to be raised by the tax for which it provides shall be devoted to repatriation purposes, inasmuch as section 55 of the Constitution provides that -

Laws imposing taxation shall deal only with the imposition of taxation, and any provisions therein dealing with any other matter shall be of no effect, while section 81 of the Constitution provides that all moneys raised by the Government shall form one consolidated fund, to be appropriated for the purposes of the Commonwealth. As this Bill deals with taxation, no other subject can be introduced in it, because section 55 of the Constitution provides to the contrary. The Treasurer, therefore, proposes to follow the only constitutional course open to him, by providing in another Bill to be introduced forthwith, that the revenue raised by means of this tax shall be appropriated for repatriation purposes.

Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter

.- I do not. intend to allow this measure to pass without making a final protest against it. In the first place, I think the title of the Bill is wrong, since it provides for a tax, not on incomes, but on bachelors. The original motion introduced by the Treasurer provided for a special tax on all single men, and widowers without children, between the ages of twenty-one and forty-five years. Finding that there was strong opposition to that proposal, the Treasurer, in order to pacify his party, so extended the provision as to include every unmarried person in the Commonwealth, with the exception of old-age pensioners and one or two others. I wish to put my protest on record, so that when’ the day of reckoning comes - as it will come when the Government proceed to collect this tax - I shall be able to point to ‘the fact that I anticipated that difficulties would present themselves.

The Government are proposing that aged men, who are obtaining from a little property just sufficient to make it impossible for them to obtain an old-age pension, a tax of £5 per annum. These old men might not have a total income of more than £50 or £60 a year. They might have a little property, to obtain which they have struggled hard, and the income from which, while barely sufficient to keep them, debars them from obtaining an old-age pension, and the Government are now proposing to take from that scanty income £5 a year. A sum of. £5 may not appear of much consequence to honorable members who enjoy a regular income, but it is a big amount to the poor man who is struggling hard to gain his daily bread.

Mr Sampson:

– Such a man asthe honorable member has mentioned would be incapacitated for work within the meaning of the law.

Mr CHARLTON:

Question - That the Bill be now read a second time - put. The House divided.

AYES: 39

NOES: 17

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In Committee:

Clause 1 (Short title) agreed to.

Clause 2 (Incorporation).

Mr TUDOR:
Yarra

– I presume that if we pass this clause we adopt the same exemption as that provided for in other Income Tax Acts, namely, £156 ?

Sir John Forrest:

– That is so.

Mr TUDOR:

– I understand that the honorable member for Maribyrnong intends to raise a point on this clause.

Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong

. This clause provides that the Bill shall be incorporated and read as one with the Income Tax Assessment Act 1915-16, and I desire to test the feeling of the Committee as to whether the exemption should not be raised so as to make it £200.

Mr Kelly:

– I suggest that the honorable member is not in order in seeking to amend the associated Act at this stage. He can only do so, I submit, by means of a new clause, proposed at the time when new clauses may be considered. I wish your ruling, Mr. Chairman, as to whether the honorable member is in order.

Mr FENTON:

– I shall give notice of a new clause.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 3 agreed to.

Clause 4 (Rates of income tax).

Mr TUDOR:
Yarra

.- I object to sub-clause 4, which raises the whole point that we have been discussing on the message this afternoon. This clause, I contend, really seeks to impose a poll tax ; that is, every individual who earns £100 per annum must pay at least £1. I intend to call for a division on the clause.

Question - That the clause be agreed to - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 35

NOES: 16

Majority . . . . 19

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in theaffirmative.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 6 -

There shall be payable by every male person (whether in receipt of a taxable income or not) . . . income tax’ to the amount of Five pounds, or five per centum of his taxable income, whichever is the greater.

Sub-section (1) of this section shall not apply to a person who satisfies the Commissioner -

That a majority of his brothers of military age have been on active service outside Australia ….

For the purposes of this section “ taxable income “ means the amount which is ascertained by deducting . . . the sum of Twenty-six pounds in respect of each dependant . . .

Mr TUDOR:
Yarra

.- On this clause I take the same attitude as that I took towards the message this afternoon - that is, I object to the whole of it as a penal clause.

Sir John Forrest:

– I shall submit that you cannot object now.

Mr TUDOR:

– We may reject the clause.

Sir John Forrest:

– You may not.

Mr TUDOR:

– We may, for up to the present only the message has been adopted, and what is now before us is the Bill. If we cannot amend it, where was the necessity for bringing in the Bill? I hope the Committee will knock out the whole clause.

Six John Forrest. - I submit, on a point of order, that, as the Committee previously passed the clause, and the House adopted the report of the Committee, the Committee has no power to go back on that decision.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Charlton:

– If an amendment would have the effect of increasing the burden upon the people, the right honorable member’s objection would be valid; but the Committee has a perfect right to amend any clause in the Bill, subject to that restriction, irrespectiveof what may have happened in Committee of Ways and Means, or in the House.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

.- I move -

That paragraph 6, sub-clause 2, be left out.

When a schedule of duties has been reported from a Committee, and agreed to by the House, the Committee on the Bill cannot increase such duties, nor add any articles not previously voted; but if the duties so voted are less than those payable under the existing law, it is competent for the Committee on the Bill to increase them, provided such increase be not in excess of the existing duties.

Standing order 170 also provides - 170. Any amendment may be made to any part of the Bill, provided the same be relevant to the subject-matter of the Bill, or pursuant to any instruction, and be otherwise in conformity with the rules and Orders of the House.

I therefore rule that the point of order cannot be sustained.

Mr WISE:
Gippsland

.- I was unable to speak on the motion in Committeeof Ways and Means this afternoon, having to attend a committee meeting in another part of the building, but I thoroughly support the proposal of the honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. Kelly). It we wiped out all the other exemptions, this one ought to go out also. The only one we ought to leave in, apart from the exemptions of those incapacitated from work and old-age pensioners, is the first, which is worded very much like the exemption in the Income Tax Act itself. People who said the object of the tax on bachelors was to make them pay up or go to the war, might just as well have said that provision meant “payyour income tax, or go to the war.” It was put in, not as an inducement to anybody to go to the war, but as a tribute or mark of admiration, or respect, from the House to the man who gave his services on the field of battle. To be logical, we ought to strike out paragraph b. It is indefensible to say that those in a household who stay behind, no matter for what reason, are to be exempt from the tax because of somebody else’s sacrifice. It may be said that they are staying at home to help their parents, yet the only Bon, who has to stay at home to help his parents, is not to be exempted, because he has the misfortune not to have two brothers. In any case a majority of the brothers must have gone to the war. If there are four in a family, and only two have gone, the other two are not exempt. The only exemption should be given to men on actual service, who should not be called upon to pay any taxation whatever.

Mr TUDOR:
Yarra

.- I regret that I cannot support the honorable member. My desire is to delete the whole clause. If I cannot do that, I hope to see as many exemptions as possible included.

Amendment negatived.

Mr ATKINSON:
Wilmot

.- I move as an amendment -

That after paragraph (d) the following words be inserted : - “ or (e) that he is a minister of religion or a student of theology.”

We know perfectly well that ministers of religion very rarely leave anything in the shape of earthly goods when they quit this mundane sphere. I shall not delay the Committee, because this matter has already been fully debated.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The amendment is not in order, the Cpm- mittee having already dealt with this matter.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– I submit that the matter has not been dealt with by the Committee. It has not yet been discussed on the Bill.

Mr GLYNN:
Minister for Home and Territories · Angas · NAT

– If the honorable member for Wilmot (Mr. Atkinson) will leave this matter over, it will be given further consideration. There are not very strong views against the exemption of ministers of religion-. In -fact, clergymen were exempted in the first proposal, but the spirit of that proposal was different from that which is now before honorable members, and under it ministers of religion and others exempted under the Defence Act could scarcely be regarded as eligible for military service. The present proposal is more a bachelor tax than anything else, and, therefore, certain persons previously exempted are not exempted now. If the honorable member will allow the matter to go ‘now, it will be considered in connexion with any possible amendments in another place. In any case, I do not think that the amendment is as wide as the honorable member would desire. There are many members of religious congregations who are not students of theology.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

.- Does the Minister for Home and Territories (Mr. Glynn) intend to have the suggestion of the honorable member for Wilmot (Mr. Atkinson) adopted in another place, because if such is the case I consider that the right place for the opinion of this Committee to be ascertained is here and now. I do not think that the Government, after this Committee has decided this matter, should invite another place to alter the decision arrived at here. Should another place alter it, it will be time enough for us to re-consider our decision. I hope that the Bill will stand as it is.

Mr FINLAYSON:
Brisbane

.- May I, in the most humble possible way, suggest that the Government should tell us what their policy is on this matter ? Yesterday they were in favour of exempting ministers of religion. This afternoon they are not in favour of exempting them.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– On a point of order, I have asked for a ruling as to the competency of the Committee to accept the amendment.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The amendment is not before the Committee; it has been disallowed. “The honorable member is quite in order in dealing with the clause.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– The trouble is that the Government have failed to give the House a lead on the matter. If it is necessary that they should have another consultation in order to arrive at some definite proposal, they should report progress.

Mr LYNCH:
Werriwa

.- I move as an amendment - ,

That the words “ whether in receipt of a taxable income or not,” and the words “five pounds,” also the words “whichever is the greater” be left out.

The clause would then read -

There shall be payable by every male person who, on the 1st day of July, 1917, was unmarried or a widower without children, and was not under the’ age of twenty-one years, income tax to the amount of 5 per cent. of his taxable income.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN:

– I cannot allow this amendment. These matters have been dealt with and decided upon in Committee, and cannot be amended now.

Mr FALKINER:
Hume

.- I move as an amendment -

That in paragraph 3 the words “ twenty-six “ be left out, with a view to inserting “ fiftytwo” in lieu thereof.

I have been so impressed with the fact that the cost of living is high that I am anxious to give a bigger rebate to a man with a large family dependent on him.

Mr LAMOND:
Illawarra

.- I wish to support the amendment.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.This amendment is in exactly the same position as the other. The Committee of Ways and Means agreed to include these words, and the House adopted the resolution. We cannot go back upon that decision.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
Monaro · Eden

– Do I understand you, sir, to have ruled that the amendment submitted by the honorable member for Wilmot (Mr. Atkinson) was not in order ? I have an amendment to insert the following new paragraph : -

If he satisfies the Commissioner that he is a student of theology or minister of religion.

– May I point out to the Chair that, although the . amendment mentioned by the honorable member for Eden-Monaro (Mr. Austin Chapman) may have been before the Committee of Ways and Means, my amendment has not been?

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The honorable member’s’ amendment was embraced in sub-paragraph c of a proposition which was before the Committee of Ways and Means.

Question - That the clause be agreed to - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 36

NOES: 19

Majority…… 17

AYES

NOES

Question, so resolved in the affirmative.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 7 to 9 agreed to.

Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong

– I move -

That the following new clause be added to the Bill:- “ Notwithstanding anything contained in this Actor the principal Act, all incomes under £200 shall not be subject to the provisions of this Act or the principal Act.”

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT

– I am informed by the Commissioner of Taxation that this amendment cannot be moved in this Bill. Honorable members will notice that this measure does not make any mention of the existing exemption of £156. An opportunity of moving this clause will be afforded later, because the Government propose to introduce an amendment of the Income Tax Assessment Act in order to remove some of the anomalies and give effect to the recommendations) of the Inter-State Conference, with a view to having uniform assessment legislation for the States and the Commonwealth. We hope that the States will adopt the same Bill. I understand that that will be the proper measure on which to move an amendment such as the honorable member has proposed. The Bill is already in print, and it is necessary that it be submitted to Parliament as an early date.

Mr Tudor:

– That amending Bill will not be applicable to the income tax for the year 1917-18.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– It will. That is one of the reasons why I am anxious that this Bill shall be passed as quickly as possible.

Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong

– I do not think that the Treasurer is correct in stating that the amendment cannot be moved on this Bill. We are making such excessive demands on certain sections of the community that it is only fair to raise the exemption to £200.

Sir John Forrest:

– I cannot accept the amendment

Mr Glynn:

– I submit that the amendment is not , in order. It is opposed to the provisions of the Constitution, and, in any case, it is an amendment of the Income Tax Assessment Act.

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:

– The amendment appears to be outside the scope of this Bill, and might more properly be moved on the Income Tax Assessment Bill. I therefore rule the amendment out of order.

Schedule and title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment; reportadopted.

Motion (by Sir John Forrest) put -

That this Bill be now read a third time.

The House divided.

AYES: 37

NOES: 16

Majority . . . . 21

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
ParramattaMinister for the Navy · NAT

.- I move -

That the standing order which prevents the consideration of new business after 11 p.m. be suspended, so as to enable the amendments made by the Senate in the War-time Profits Bill to be proceeded with.

Mr SPEAKER:

– This motion can be moved only by the leave of the House. I take it that there is no objection to leave being granted?

Honorable Members. - Hear, hear !

Question resolved inthe affirmative.

page 2404

WAR-TIME PROFITS TAX ASSESSMENT BILL

In Committee (Consideration of Senate’s amendments) :

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT

– The amendments made by the Senate in this Bill meet with the concurrence of the Government, and therefore I propose to accept them.

Mr Boyd:

– Where are they?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Probably the Committee would like to deal with them seriatem, but I prefer that they should be dealt with en bloc. I do not think that they contain anything of which the Committee will disapprove. Consequently I move -

That the amendments be agreed to.

Mr Boyd:

– Is it intended to deal with these amendments en bloc?

Sir John Forrest:

– Yes.

Mr Boyd:

– We ought to have some explanation of them.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I shall be happy to give the desired explanation. The first amendment of the Senate is in clause 4, where it is proposed to leave out the words “ of foodstuffs, the produce of Australia, for the purposes of manufacture or sale.” These words have been omitted because they have been inserted in clause 8, and it is unnecessary to duplicate them. The second amendment by the Senate relates to the definition of “ co-operative company.” It is proposed that the following definition be inserted: - “ ‘Partnership’ includes beneficiaries under a will, settlement, or other deed of trust, who are carrying on business jointly.” That is necessary to protect the beneficiaries. The third amendment made in the same clause inserts after the word “ Australia “ the words “ so far as regards the manufacture, preparation, or wholesale distribution of foodstuffs, the produce of Australia.” That amendment relates to the definition of a co-operative company, to which I have already referred. That seems fair and reasonable, and has been approved by the Government. It is also proposed to insert in clause 8, after paragraphf, which defines the businesses to which the tax applies, the following new paragraph: - “and (g) businesses commenced since the fourth day of August One thousand nine hundred and fourteen for the purposes of mining for wolfram, molybdenite, tungsten, scheelite, or any other rare metal used in the manufacture of munitions of war, if the output of the mine is disposed of to the Imperial Government.”

In clauses 12, 15, 16, and 59 the words “ to the satisfaction of the Commissioner “ or “ it is shown to the satisfaction of the Commissioner that “ have been struck out, the object of the amendment being to give the taxpayers a wider appeal to the Board of Referees or the Court, as the case may be. The amendment does not interfere with the discretionary powers of the Commissioner generally, but prevents a final determination by him on questions on which the taxpayer may appeal. Clause 15 is amended also in respect of deductions for wear and tear or for expenditure of a capital nature for renewals, &c, by leaving out the words - and if allowed shall be only of such amount as appears to the Commissioner to be reasonably and properly attributable to the year or accounting period.

Then after “fire” the word “flood” is inserted. We provided for losses by fire, accident, robbery, or embezzlement, but omitted to include losses by floods,which have often been very serious. The clause is further amended by the addition of the following new sub-clause: - (4a). For the purposes of this section “ income tax payable in respect of the profits “ shall be -

in the case of an individual the amount of tax that would have been payable if the profits had been the only income derived by him from sources within Australia;
in the case of a partnership the aggregate of the amounts of tax that would have been payable by each partner if the share of the profits coming to him had been the only income derived by him from sources within Australia; and
in the case of a company, the amount of the tax (if any) paid by the company, together with the aggregate of the amounts of tax that would have been payable by each shareholder if the share of the profits credited or paid to him had been the only income derived by him from sources within Australia.

In clause 17 this new sub-clause has been inserted : - “ (2a.) Where any money paid into or credited to a business is not being drawn upon for the purposes of that business it shall be excluded from the capital of the business for the purposes of this Act.”

That means that dead capital cannot be counted as capital. “ Shall “ has been substituted for “ may “ in clause 23. An amendment to clause 27, to insert “or Boards “ after “ Board,” empowers the Government to appoint more than one Board if necessary. The amendments have been thoroughly sifted by the Taxation Department and by me, and I have no hesitation in recommending honorable members to accept them.

Mr WISE:
Gippsland

– If the Senate’s amendment is accepted, clause 8 will read -

The business of co-operative companies engaged for the main part in the manufacture, preparation, or wholesale distribution of foodstuffs the produce of Australia, so far as regards the manufacture, preparation, or wholesale distribution of foodstuffs, the produce of Australia.

Mr BOYD:
Henty

.- In amendment No. 15 made by the Senate I find that in clause 17, after sub-clause 2, the following new sub-clause has been inserted - (2a) Where any money “paid into or credited to a business is not being drawn upon for the purposes of that business, it shall be excluded f rom the capital of the business for the purposes of this Act.

What is meant by the money not being drawn upon ? Suppose a man pays out for the purchase of a lease he is unable to draw upon, in the ordinary sense, and may have to write it off.

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT

– I can explain the matter. It sometimes happens that a considerable sum of money may be standing to the credit of the owner of a business, but is not being used for any of the purposes of the business. It would not be proper to treat that money as part of the capital of the business in respect of which a deduction of 10 per cent. on the capital could be made from the war-time profits. As this money is not earning any profits of the business, it should be excluded from the capital of the business in the same manner as the capital which is earning non -taxable profits is excluded.

Mr Boyd:

– It applies only to capital of that kind ?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– Yes.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Resolution reported; report adopted.

page 2407

WAR-TIME PROFITS TAX BILL

In Committee of Ways and Means:

Motion (by Sir John Forrest) agreed to -

That a war-time profits tax be imposed on the war-time profits liable to tax arising from any business at the following rates, namely: -

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended, and resolution adopted.

Ordered -

That Sir John Forrest and Mr. Joseph Cook doprepare and bring* in a Bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill presented by Sir John Forrest, and passed through all its stages without amendment.

page 2407

ADJOURNMENT

Order of Business

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
Minister for the Navy · Parramatta · NAT

– In moving -

That the House do now adjourn,

I desire to state that we propose today to go on with a Supply Bill, which we hope to pass through all its stages before we adjourn.

Mr Wise:

– The Governmentare keeping the Repatriation Bill back until he eleventh hour.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– The honorable member will find that this is being done in the interests of the Repatriation Bill.

Mr TUDOR:
Yarra

.- I understand that the Government propose to endeavour to pass the Supply Bill to- ‘ day, and not to ask the House to meet on Saturday.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– Not if we get the Supply Bill through.

Mr TUDOR:

– But the intention is that we shall meet on Monday morning?

Mr Joseph Cook:

– Yes, and proceed with the Repatriation Bill until it has been passed through all its stages.

Mr.TUDOR.- The Government hops to adjourn on Wednesday?

Mr Joseph Cook:

– If we can do so.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– I trust that the Minister for the Navy does not base his hope of adjourning on Wednesday next on the belief that we shall be able to conclude the consideration of the Repatriation Bill, and frame a scheme by that time. Honorable members will not be content with the discussion of a mere machineryBill after we have been waiting for two and a half years for a repatriation scheme. ‘

Mr Joseph Cook:

– I say plainly and emphatically that there will be no attempt to curtail any bond fide discussion of the Repatriation Bill.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned at 12.7 a.m. (Friday).

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 20 September 1917, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1917/19170920_reps_7_83/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives20 September 1917

QUESTION

KALGOORLIE TO PORT AUGUSTA RAILWAY

Mr RICHARD FOSTER:WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr WATT:Minister for Works and Railways · BALACLAVA, VICTORIA · NAT

QUESTION

DUNTROON MILITARY COLLEGE

Mr PIGOTT:CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr GROOM:Honorary Minister · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · NAT

QUESTION

ARBITRATION COURT

Mr ANSTEY:BOURKE, VICTORIA

Mr Kelly:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr HUGHES:Attorney-General · BENDIGO, VICTORIA · NAT

QUESTION

INCOME TAX ANOMALIES

Mr HEITMANN:KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr HUGHES:NAT

HIGH COST OF LIVING

Mr BLAKELEY:DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr BRUCE SMITH:PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Riley:

Mr BLAKELEY:

Mr HUGHES:NAT

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Mr J H CATTS:COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr Orchard:

Mr J H CATTS:

Mr Hughes:

Mr J H CATTS:

Mr Hughes:

Mr J H CATTS:

Mr Hughes:

Mr J H CATTS:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr Joseph Cook:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr Joseph Cook:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr J H CATTS:

Mr LYNCH:WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

QUESTION

LOADED INVOICES

Mr KELLY:

QUESTION

UNIFORM TAXATIONRETURNS

Mr WEST:EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr HUGHES:NAT

NON-COMMISSIONED STAFF OFFICERS

Extra Duty Pay

Mr GROOM:NAT

QUESTION

CONTROL OF SILOS

Mr RILEY:

Mr HUGHES:NAT

QUESTION

DISORDER EST MELBOURNE STREETS

Mr SAMPSON:WIMMERA, VICTORIA

Mr HUGHES:NAT

Mr TUDOR:YARRA, VICTORIA

Mr SPEAKER (Hon W Elliot Johnson:LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES

QUESTION

STEAMER COMMUNICATION: WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr FOWLER:PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr HUGHES:NAT

QUESTION

WAR PRECAUTIONS ACT: PROSECUTIONS

Mr CONSIDINE:BARRIER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr HUGHES:NAT

Mr CONSIDINE:

Mr SPEAKER:

QUESTION

POSTAGE ON CATALOGUES

Mr ORCHARD:

Mr WEBSTER:Postmaster-General · MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

QUESTION

CARRIAGE OF COUNTRY MAILS

Mr GREGORY:DAMPIER, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr WEBSTER:NAT

House of Representatives
20 September 1917

Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr WATT:
Minister for Works and Railways · BALACLAVA, VICTORIA · NAT

Mr PIGOTT:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr GROOM:
Honorary Minister · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · NAT

Mr ANSTEY:
BOURKE, VICTORIA

Mr HUGHES:
Attorney-General · BENDIGO, VICTORIA · NAT

Mr HEITMANN:
KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr BLAKELEY:
DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr J H CATTS:
COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LYNCH:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr WEST:
EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr GROOM:
NAT

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr SAMPSON:
WIMMERA, VICTORIA

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr TUDOR:
YARRA, VICTORIA

Mr SPEAKER (Hon W Elliot Johnson:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr FOWLER:
PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr CONSIDINE:
BARRIER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr WEBSTER:
Postmaster-General · MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Mr GREGORY:
DAMPIER, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr WEBSTER:
NAT

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr CORSER:
WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr LAMOND:
ILLAWARRA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr WEBSTER:
NAT

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr NICHOLLS:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr GROOM:
NAT

Mr JOHN THOMSON:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr WEBSTER:
NAT

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr WEBSTER:
NAT

Mr FALKINER:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr JENSEN:
Minister for Trade and Customs · BASS, TASMANIA · NAT

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · NAT

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Sir JOHN FORREST:
NAT

Mr FINLAYSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · NAT