House of Representatives
16 July 1919

7th Parliament · 2nd Session

  1. House of Representatives
  2. 7th Parliament
  3. 1919

Mr. Speaker (Hon. W. Elliot Johnson) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read; prayers.

page 10743

SEAMEN’S STRIKE

Attitude of the Government.

MR GROOM:
Minis ter for Works and Railways and Acting. Attorney-General · Darling Downs · NAT

. -(By leave.) - In reaffirming the attitude of the Government in relation to the present disastrous strike, it is both desirable and necessary that the circumstances surrounding it be clearly set out.

Moved by the experience of many disastrous strikes, the -community decided, and has repeatedly indorsed its decision, to adopt arbitration as the means for the orderly settlement of industrial disputes. That decision is embodied in the law of the country, and the necessary legal machinery has been created to give effect, to it. That machinery is available to the members of the Seamen’sUnion, yet they not only decline to avail themselves of such means of obtaining consideration of their claims, but have’ openly declared that they will not proceed by the orderly and regular method’s of arbitration, but intend instead to enforce their decisions by paralyzing the industries of the country.

They seek to win, not through the merits of their case, but from the suffering they hope to inflict. They no longer disguise either their objects or their methods, both of which constitute anopen challenge alike to the law and the community.

From the . inception of the strike the Government has worked with but one object. It has taken every step that offered any prospect of leading to a peaceful settlement of the dispute short of an ignominious surrender to the demand that direct action should be permitted to triumph over arbitration, the law, and the established institutions of the community. In the hope that the good sense of the majority of the men would ultimately reject the sinister advice of their leaders, and that the growing manifestations of public disapproval would convince them of the folly of continuing to follow that advice, the Government has, with great patience, refrained from any action at all likely to complicate or extend the struggle, or to embitter the minds of those who have created it. After the Court had been openly flouted the Government took the action which again enabled the men, without any loss of dignity or prejudice to their case, to again obtain a nearing. But again they made it clear that they were defiantly determined to enforce their claims by war upon the community rather than submit them to the adjudication of the Court. T>he Government is now, as it always has been, willing to further any proposal making for tie proper and orderly settlement of the dispute, but it cannot, and will not, yield bo the methods of direct action, or the revolutionary threats of those advocating that policy.

Tha present position cannot be allowed to continue; Already the strike has caused great industrial dislocation, with the accompanying widespread privation to ‘thousands of innocent people, and serious material loss to the country. Those grave consequences will intensify with every day’s, prolongation of the struggle, which, - if allowed to proceed, would ultimately strangle all industrial activity, and with it the people’s means of subsistence.

The Government realizes fully its duty in the present trying conditions, and is not assisted ki its discharge by the advice of ill-informed critics. It is, however, in possession of information indicating that steps are ‘being taken to secure a peaceful solution of the present distressful problem. It does not intend to jeopardize this movement, but, on the ‘contrary, will do everything in its power to help it to a successful issue. The Government is not without hope that this movement will succeed, but, should it unfortunately fail, it will bake all steps necessary to secure the restoration of industry to normal conditions.

The Government desires at this critical juncture to make a final appeal - to the men immediately concerned to, even now, present their claims to the ‘proper tribunal rather th’an to continue to wage war upon the entire community and the forces of constituted a/uthority.

The Government presses foi” appeal with all sincerity and all earnestness, and it asks -the co-operation of all the leaders of organized Labour, who aire in a position peculiarly fitting them to influence the decision of the Seamen’s Union. It will do what it can to overcome any difficulties which may appear to- exist in the acceptance of this appeal.

Mr TUDOR:
Yarra

.- (By leave). - I regret exceedingly that the Government have seen fit to come down to-day with the statement just read by the Acting Attorney-General (Mr. Groom) without acquainting me, or, so far as J know, any honorable member of our party, of their intention to do so. We have been told in the press, and by hon.orable members on the Ministerial side of the House, that honorable members on this side are. in a measure, at all events, responsible for the unfortunate industrial dispute that at present exists, so that we might at least have been advised through the Government Whip that Lt was proposed to make such an announcement. I do not know whether the explanation is that the decision to refer to the matter in the House was arrived at by the Cabinet only a few minutes ago; but I presume ‘that it was decided upon yesterday, and if that is so, I should have been advised.

Regarding the dispute itself, I certainly share the hope of the Government that a peaceful solution of it will soon be found. It is fairly well known that a fortnight ‘before the strike actually occurred I took the secretary and the vicepresident of the Seamen’s Union to the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt), who, with Bear-Admiral Clarkson, discussed the matter with us for an hour and a quarter. I certainly did my best to bring ‘about a peaceful solution of the trouble , before it started, but I do not think ‘ that the action of the Government in bringing down thu statement to-day will assist to that end. My desire has been from the outset to deal withthe question in a way that will not widen the dispute in any shape or form. Before the strike actually took place I did my utmost to avert it, and nowthat it has occurred I am anxious to do everythingpossible to bring about a peaceful solution. I do not know what is the motive of the Government in submitting this statement, in which there is a . reference to “ ill-informed critics.” The critics referred to are probably the newspapers that usually support the Government, but which are denouncing them at the present time for their attitude” inre- gard to the strike. I certainly hope that Ministers are in receipt of information that we do not possess as to a satisfactory settlement of the difficulty, and that we shall have an early end to the struggle.

If wehave an opportunity to discuss the merits or demerits of the dispute, I shall be prepared, as the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Wallace) has said, to put the case of the workers, and to show that they, at all events, have not been to blame in respect of the requests they have” preferred to the ship-owners.

Mr FINLAYSON:
Brisbane

– Are the Government aware that the seamen are willing to come to an immediate agreement on three points, namely - (1) a six-hour day in port; (2) insurance; and (3) increase of wages; and to submit all other points to the judgment of some tribunal? Are the Government aware that the only man in this country who objects to accepting those points is the representative of the Government? Are the Government aware that . the shipping managers are willing to settle the dispute at once on those points?

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

– Order! The honorable member appears to be endeavouring to impart information instead of seeking it.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Will the Government instruct their representative to take up a less dictatorial attitude towards the seamen, and to open up negotiations with a view to an. immediate settlement?

Mr GROOM:
Minister of Works and Railways and Acting Attorney-General · Darling Downs · NAT

– The Government are well aware of the facts in dispute between the two parties, and of the attitude they should adopt. That attitude hasbeen already indicated. Admiral Clarkson is not an obstacle to the settlement in the way suggested by the honorable member. He is a courageous officer, who is impartially doing his duty in the public interests, and the Government support him in the action he has taken.

page 10745

QUESTION

SHIPMENT OF TASMANIAN FRUIT

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

– Will the Minister for Trade and Customs take the necessary action to arrange that the shipping space for fruit to be sent from

Tasmania to Europe in the coming season shall be controlled by the co-operative growers ?

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– The Government will take steps at an early date, through the Bureau of Commerce and Industry, to do what is possible in the organization of the fruit-growers, and we shall consider whether, as a result of that organization, something can be done in the direction indicated by the honorable member.

page 10745

QUESTION

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE

Mr HIGGS:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

– Is the Acting Minister for the Navy still a member of the Public Accounts Committee? If not, when did he resign?

Mr POYNTON:
Honorary Minister · GREY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– Immediately after my appointment to the position I now hold, I sent to the Prime Minister’s Department my resignation as a member of the Public Accounts Committee. A considerable time afterwards, I discovered that the resignation should have been sent to Mr. Speaker. That has been done.

page 10745

QUESTION

WHARF LABOURERS’ DISPUTE

Report of Royal Commission

Mr MATHEWS:
MELBOURNE PORTS, VICTORIA

– Is the Minister in charge of the House prepared to make any statement as to the action the Government propose to take regarding the report . of the RoyalCommissioner who inquired into the wharf labourers’ dispute?

Mr GROOM:
NAT

– I am not in a position to make a statement at the present stage.

page 10746

QUESTION

CORNSACKS

Mr SAMPSON:
WIMMERA, VICTORIA

– What steps are be ing taken by the Government to insure a supply of cornsacks for the next season ? .

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– The Government have been in consultation with the Governments of the States in regard to this matter.

page 10746

QUESTION

COPPER MARKET

Mr BLAKELEY:
DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Can the Minister in charge of the House inform honorable members of the stage reached by the Conference now being held in Melbourne in reference to copper interests, and the probability or otherwise of a satisfactory arrangement being arrived at?

Mr GROOM:
NAT

– At the invitation of the Commonwealth Government, the Ministers for Mines in the several States are at present in conference in Melbourne; but, until the proposals which have been considered by them have been submitted to the respective State Governments, I am unable to make any definite announcement regarding them.

page 10746

QUESTION

SHIP-BUILDING

Mr RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Is the Acting Minister for the Navy aware that some slips at Cockatoo Dock, from which new vessels have been launched, are not now occupied by new construction ? Will the Minister announce to the House the Government’s policy in regard to this matter ?

Mr POYNTON:
NAT

– One slip at Cockatoo Dock is unoccupied, but within a few days I shall be able to announce what provision has been made for the continuance of ship-building operations there.

page 10746

QUESTION

SUGAR BAGS

Mr BAMFORD:
HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

– Is the Minister for

Trade and Customs taking any steps to avert the trouble that is likely to be experienced in the north of Queensland, owing to the scarcity of sugar bags ? Cannot the Minister arrange for oversea ships from India and. elsewhere to deliver bags at northern ports?

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– The matter is receiving consideration, but I cannot say at this moment what the solution of the. difficulty will be.

page 10746

QUESTION

DIRECTOR OF NAVIGATION

Mr WALLACE:
WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I have read an announcement that a Director of Navigation has been appointed. Will the Minister for Trade and Customs inform the House of the name of the appointee?

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– No appointment has yet been made.

page 10746

ORDNANCE. STORES AT LEICHHARDT

Mr. GREGORY presented the report and minutes of evidence of the Public Works Committee on the proposed Ordnance Store at Leichhardt, New South Wales, also papers with reference to estimated cost, and plans. Ordered to be printed.

page 10746

QUESTION

DELAYED TELEGRAM

Mr YATES:
ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– On Wednesday last, between 12 noon and 12.15 p.m., a telegram addressed to me, and relating to a death in my family, was lodged at the post-office at Norwood, South Australia. Will the Minister representing the PostmasterGeneral ascertain where that telegram is?

Mr GROOM:
NAT

– If the honorable member will furnish me with particulars I shall make inquiries regarding the missing message.

page 10746

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Mr GROOM:
Minister for Works and Railways and Acting ‘ Attorney-General · Darling Downs · NAT

– I move -

That the House, at its rising, adjourn until 11 a.m. to-morrow (Thursday).

Honorable members know that this motion is necessary, in view of the lighting restrictions and the curtailment of the train and tramway services. Further, honorable members have expressed a desire that there should be an early adjournment to-morrow to permit of them leaving in order to take part in the Peace celebrations in their own States. Under this motion, the House will be enabled to assemble at 11 o’clock to-morrow; and, in the meantime, the question of adjourning over Friday may be considered.

Mr TUDOR:
Yarra

– I am most anxious to know what the Government propose to do about meeting on Friday. I do not object to meeting at 11 o’clock to-morrow if we are told at what hour we are to adjourn to-morrow. If we meet at 11 o’clock, and sit until the usual hour of rising, it will mean only two hours’ extra sitting, and my parliamentary experience does not lead me to the belief that extra sitting time means more business done. We might sit the whole clock round and not do as much as we would do at another time in a couple of hours. The Minister said something about the motionbeing necessary in view of the lighting restrictions.

Mr Groom:

– There is also the curtailment of the train and tram services.

Mr TUDOR:

– Does the motion mean that we shall not continue sitting after the trams stop running?

Mr Groom:

– The intention is to avoid, if we can, night sittings.

Mr TUDOR:

– That is a really good idea - a real daylight saving.

Mr Archibald:

– Why are honorable members’ opposite worrying about this?

Mr TUDOR:

– As a matter of fact, the question was raised by honorable members from other States, who mentioned the matter to me, with a desire to know what the intentions of the Government were. In a number of the. States, the Peace celebrations begin on the Friday afternoon, particularly in the case of the school children. Is it the idea of the Government that the House shall rise in time for honorable members to catch their last trams home?

Dr MALONEY:
Melbourne

.- I welcome the suggestion that we are to have day sittings. Politics is a serious business, which, like any other business, should be conducted in the day-time; and then we would not have the fool game of Parliament being carried on as it has been since the war commenced.I hope it is the intention of the Government that every child who may be hungry on Saturday shall have at least a warm meal, as suggested in to-day’s Argus by a lady, Mrs. Woolcott, O.B.E., whoseletter I commend to the consideration of the Leader of the House. I do not blame the honorable gentleman at all, but this is a matter deserving his attention, and the exercise of his well-known humanitarianfeelings.

Mr SPEAKER (Hon W Elliot Johnson:

– I think the honorable member is going beyond the motion.

Dr MALONEY:

– I mention the matter because I think an assurance of the kind I have indicated would prevent debate; and I am sure that nothing would give the readers of the Argus and the Age more pleasure than the knowledge that not a single child will go hungry at this time of joy.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 10747

QUESTION

PAPUAN OIL-FIELDS

Mr LIVINGSTON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Can the Minister for Home and Territories inform us as to the progress of the arrangements for boring in the oil-fields of Papua ?

Mr GLYNN:
Minister for Home and Territories · ANGAS, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– Arrangements were made with the Imperial Government about the end of January to join in the further testing of certain fields in Papua. One of the geologically examined fields is at present being tested, and three others are practically ready for testing; and we have arranged with the Imperial Government to spend about £100,000 in this work. The chief difficulty has been to get experts, but in answer to a telegram from the Commonwealth Government, we have received a reply from the Imperial Government, saying that practically all the experts desired had been obtained, and would soon be sent out. The original request was for an additional geologist, an expert manager, to be appointed by the Commonwealth Government at the instance of the Imperial Government, and nine expert drillers, and it is hoped these will soon be at work.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– Will the Minister for Home and Territories inform the House as to the details of the agreement entered into with the Imperial Government in regard to prospecting for oil in Papua, and state what return will be given to the Imperial Government for their advance of £100,000 which they are devoting to the assistance of the Commonwealth in this matter?

Mr GLYNN:

– So far the arrangement with the Imperial Government is merely for the purpose of testing the Papuan oil-fields. These fields cover an extensive area, and although there may be geological indications of probable success, there is a good deal of gambling in the matter of actually putting down bores in a particular place. Our arrangement with the Imperial Government is that they will help us with their experts, and they have agreed to bear half of the projected expenditure of £100,000, which will be devoted to thoroughly testing the area. The amount may not be adequate, but if the results justfy it, we may make a further arrangement with them to continue the work of development. It may mean that the profits will be equally shared, and that portion of the profits will be devoted to the administration of Papua.

Mr Blakeley:

– Selling Australia’s heritage for £50,000 !

Mr GLYNN:

– There is no sale. It is simply a question of compensating the Imperial Government for joining with us in testing what is a promising, though in some respects an exceedingly difficult, area to develop.

page 10748

PEACE CELEBRATIONS

CadetDrills.

Mr YATES:

– It has been brought under my notice by the father of two cadets in Adelaide that his sons are to be called upon on Peace Day to undergo two drills, one in the morning, and one in the afternoon, although the Citizen Force is called upon for only a volunteer parade. This gentleman desires that the Government shall see that some alteration is made in this order, so that the cadets may have an opportunity to take part in the Peace celebrations.

Mr WISE:
Honorary Minister · GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA · NAT

– I will submit the matter to. the Acting Minister for Defence.

page 10748

QUESTION

TRAVELLING OF MEMBERS

Arrangement with New South Wales.

Mr HECTOR LAMOND:
ILLAWARRA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Will the Minister for Home and Territories be good enough to lay on the table of the Library the agreement between the Commonwealth Government and the Railways

Commissioners of New South Wales in regard to the carriage of Federal members?

Mr GLYNN:
NAT

– I shall be glad to lay whatever papers there are on the table of the Library. I do not know that there is a written agreement, but, of course, there will be a record of the arrangement.

page 10748

QUESTION

NORTHERN TERRITORY RAILWAY

Mr LIVINGSTON:

– Has the Minister for Home and Territories any information to give the House relating to the railway surveys made with a view to connecting South Australia with the Northern Territory?

Mr GLYNN:
NAT

– The last real survey was made’ by Lawrence and Chalmers about four years ago, and that was a survey of the direct line from Oodnadatta to Macdonhell Ranges and Alice Springs - that is about 307 miles -thence from Alice Springs to Pine Creek. Of course, the railway has since been extended from Pine Creek to Katherine River. Although no fresh survey has been carried out, the Commissioner of Railways has had a number of examinations of certain routes made.

Mr Richard Foster:

– With the authority of the Government?

Mr GLYNN:

– The matter has never been before the Cabinet. The Commissioner of Railways has simply made an examination of a certain number of possible routes. The position to-day is as it was in 1914, when I secured the consent of the Cook Government to the survey of a line through the Macdonnell Ranges to connect Oodnadatta with Port Darwin. Two surveys were carried out upon that authority, and there has been no alteration of policy since. However, as Mr. Bell, the Commissioner, had made an examination of a number of possible routes, I thought that with the consent of the Minister for Works and Railways (Mr. Groom), it would be well to allow those interested and who wished to do so the opportunity of seeing them. Members of a South Australian association connected with the Northern Territory asked permission to view whatever plans the Department had, and, ac- cordingly, on Saturday last, Mr. Bell, who was in Adelaide at the time, but not specifically for that purpose, met them. There is no intention to depart from the agreement entered into with South Australia, which, according to legitimate’ interpretation, means the building of’ a railway passing through the Macdonnell Ranges.

page 10749

QUESTION

INDUSTRIAL UNREST

Dr MALONEY:

– Has the attention of the Acting Leader of the House been called to a statement that an Employers’ Association organizer had threatened a citizen that he would stop his supply of raw material if he did not close down his factory and discharge his hands? If he has not seen the statement, will he make an inquiry into the complaint ?

Mr GROOM:
NAT

– I have not seen the statement. If the honorable member will give me particulars, I shall make inquiries.

page 10749

QUESTION

STATE GOVERNORS

Dr MALONEY:

– Will the Acting Leader of the House ask the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) to submit to Cabinet a proposal for giving the House an opportunity of voting upon and submitting to a referendum at the next general election the following question -

Shall Eis Majesty be requested to recall the six State Governors, in order that by such economy the huge Australian war debt may he lessened by the removal of their Departments?

Mr GROOM:
NAT

– The question of whether there shall be State Governors or not is primarily one affecting the States; but as the honorable member, has asked me to bring the matter under the notice of the Acting Prime Minister I shall do so.

page 10749

QUESTION

SOLDIERS’ FINES

Mr McDONALD:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND

– Will the Assistant Minister for Defence endeavour to ascertain the amount of money taken from our soldiers by the imposition of fines, and will he cause refunds to be made ?

Mr WISE:
NAT

– I shall make inquiries into the matter.

page 10749

QUESTION

FRUIT INDUSTRY

Mr GREGORY:
DAMPIER, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– In connexion with the export of fruit next season, will the Minister for Trade and Customs submit to the House as speedily as possible particulars of the Government’s proposals, so that they may be considered when honorable members are dealing with the Commercial Activities Bill?

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– There is no concrete proposal to put before the House at the present time. It depends on whether the fruit-growers themselves decide on organization.

page 10749

QUESTION

CENSORSHIP OF CABLE NEWS

Mr KELLY:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I wish to ask the Acting Leader of ‘the House a question with reference to a cable which appeared in the Melbourne Herald a couple of evenings ago, being an alleged report of an utterance of the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) in reference to the Eastern question. As the language reported in that cable was so provocative, I looked up the following morning’s papers in order to see the exact words which had been used, but I found that the speech was not reported in those papers.. In fact, it is quite possible that the Prime Minister said nothing of the kind. Will the Government take into consideration as early as -possible the desirableness of preventing reports being published without qualification of speeches, which may have a serious influence on the position of the Commonwealth in relation to our Eastern friends?

Mr GROOM:
NAT

– I do not know whether or not the honorable member suggests a revival of the censorship; but the utmost I can say is that I shall submit the matter to the Acting Prime Minister.

page 10749

QUESTION

PEACE CELEBRATIONS

Closing or Hotels

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Last week I inquired of the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt), who, I am sure, we are all sorry to know is ill, whether the Government had determined to close all places for the sale of alcoholic liquor on Peace Day? He said that the Government had not made up their minds.

I would like to know whether Ministers have come to a decision upon the point?

Mr GROOM:
NAT

– I shall inquire into the matter, and make an announcement with regard to it later in the day.

page 10750

QUESTION

REPATRIATION

Nurses and Land Settlement

Mr PIGOTT:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES

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

Whether the privileges under the soldiers’ settlement scheme will be extended to returned nurses?

Mr POYNTON:
NAT

– As stated in answer to a previous question by the honorable member, nurses are included in the soldier settlement schemes of New South Wales and Victoria, but not in those of the other States. The inclusion or otherwise of nurses rests with the States themselves. The Government is prepared to render, on behalf of nurses becoming settlers1, the same financial aid as it now does in respect of soldier settlers. The States are being so informed.

page 10750

QUESTION

COMMISSIONS IN PERMANENT FORCES

Mr TUDOR:
for Mr. Corboy

asked the Assistant Minister for Defence, upon notice -

  1. Whether the Government will reconsider its decision that non-commissioned officers of the Permanent Forces who won commissioned’ rank on service must revert to” noncommissioned rank on return to Australia?
  2. If not, will the Minister consider the advisability of placing non-commissioned officers of the Permanent Forces on the seniority list with due regard to their war service, so’ that those who have distinguished themselves on active service may secure the earliest promotion?
Mr WISE:
NAT

– The answers are -

  1. Warrant officers of the Permanent Military Forces who gained commissions in the Australian Imperial Force have in cases where they so desired been granted the honorary rank of lieutenant in the Australian Military Forces for the duration of the war as an act of grace.

The Defence Act does not permit the retention of these honorary officers permanently on the establishment of the Permanent Forces. The Australian Military Force is essentially a. Citizen Force, and positions for permanent officers are, consequently, few and strictly limited by the Appropriation passed each year by Parliament. If, therefore, these officers were appointed as suggested, the supply would be greatly in excess of the demand.

  1. The course suggested would cause many injustices and complications, and it is not considered advisable in the best interests of the Service to adopt it.
Mr FINLAYSON:

asked the Assistant Minister for Defence, upon notice -

  1. Whether it is correct that members of the Permanent Military Forces who lately served in the Australian Imperial Force are permitted to hold as honorary rank the commissions gained on service only for the duration of the war?
  2. If so, for what reason is this limitation of time imposed?
  3. Will the Minister favorably consider the advisability of extending the privilegeso that the rank gained may be held so long as the officers are retained on the strength of Active and Home Forces, or on the Reserves?
Mr WISE:

– The answers to questions Nos. 1 and 2 are exactly the same as given to question No.l, put by the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Corboy). The answer to question No. 3 is -

  1. See No. 2 ; and. it may be further stated that on ceasing to be members of the Permanent Forces, these warrant officers and noncommissioned officers are noted for commissioned rank on the reserve or retired lists.

page 10750

QUESTION

CASE OF PAUL HERMANN

Mr YATES:

asked the Assistant Minister for Defence, upon notice -

Whether he will state what is the result of the inquiry into the case of internee Paul Hermann, a member of the “ Sons of Australia,” and, in the event of no inquiry having yet taken place, will he speed up the matter?

Mr WISE:
NAT

– The case of Paul Hermann was referred to the Release Commission, who did not approve of his release. Paul Hermann also applied for permission to remain in Australia, and he has appeared before the Aliens Board. The recommendations of the Aliens Board in this and other cases are now under consideration by the Minister.

page 10750

QUESTION

WHEAT: PAYMENTS TO GROWERS

Mr RICHARD FOSTER:

asked the Minister representing the Acting Prime Minister, upon notice -

Whereas the. second payments on wheat certificates for seasons 1916-17 and 1917-18 were limited to 3d. in each case because of the financial stringency then existing, and as the payments to date for the aforenamed seasons in the aggregate only reach 3s. 3d. per bushel, will the Acting Prime Minister confer with the Australian Wheat Board with a view to a further advance at the earliest possible moment on both certificates in question, and’ thus save needy farmers from the necessity of recourse to speculators for assistance?

Mr GROOM:
NAT

– Full details of the terms of payment for the wheat recently sold to the Imperial Government are not yet available. As soon as they are to hand the matter will receive full consideration.

page 10751

QUESTION

ELECTORAL ACT

Candidates for Parliament

Mr ARCHIBALD:

asked the Minister for Home and Territories, upon notice -

Will the Government make a regulation under the Electoral Act, under which candidates must produce their certificates of birth or naturalization as British subjects before having their nomination accepted, in the same way as is required of applicants for junior positions in the Public Service?

Mr GLYNN:
NAT

– It is not considered necessary to alter the Electoral law in the direction suggested by the honorable member, inasmuch as the qualifications and disqualifications of senators and members of the House of Representatives are fully set out in sections 16, 34, 43, and 44 of the Constitution, and reprinted in the Electoral Act of 1918 as a footnote to section 73, which provides that no nomination shall be valid unless the person nominated consents to act if elected, and declares that he is qualified under the Constitution to be elected as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives, as the case may be.

page 10751

QUESTION

DEFENCE DEPARTMENT

Boards - Disclosures to Press

Mr YATES:

asked the Assistant Minister for Defence, upon notice -

  1. What are the names of the persons comprising the Boards dealing with -(a) internees during the war period; (b) review of offences by members of the Australian Imperial Force ?
  2. What are the numbers of the regulations governing the disclosures of military matters to the press, either in King’s Regulations or the Army Act or other regulations governing the members of the Australian Imperial Force on active service?
Mr WISE:
NAT

– The answers are: - 1. (a) It is desired that more definite particulars be given as to the nature of the Boards concerning which information is asked. (b ) The names of the Committees appointed to review sentences of court martial awarded abroad are: - Philip Cohen, Esq., P.M.; Lieut.-Colonel T. M. Mclnerney, C.M.G. ; Captain C. Finlayson.

  1. Australian Military Regulation 471, which reads as follows: - “ A.M.R. 471. - Officers and soldiers are forbidden to publish or communicate to the press any information, without special authority, either directly or indirectly. They will be held responsible for all statements contained in communications to their friends which may subsequently be published in the press.”

page 10751

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN IMPERIAL FORCE

Soldier’s Overcoats : Embarkations at Sydney and Melbourne.

Mr LISTER:
CORIO, VICTORIA

asked the Assistant Minister for Defence, upon notice -

Whether the Government will authorize the refund of the 30s. paid by a number of returned soldiers for their overcoats, seeing that it is proposed to allow men now returning to retain their overcoats, and to re-issue coats to those who areat the present time without such?

Mr WISE:
NAT

– It is the intention thatdischarged soldiers who failed to return their greatcoats on discharge, and who were charged the value thereof, shall be refunded the amount so charged, or permitted to draw a greatcoat free, as the discharged soldier may elect.

Mr WALLACE:

asked the Assistant Minister for Defence, upon notice -

  1. What was the number of troops that em barked from Sydney in the months of September, October, November, and December, 1917, and January, 1918?
  2. What was the number of troops that embarked from Melbourne in the same months?
Mr WISE:

– The answers are -

Embarkation of Troops at Sydney during months of -

  1. Embarkation of Troops at Melbourne during months of -

page 10752

QUESTION

TRANSPORT OFFICERS

Mr YATES:

asked the Assistant Minister for Defence, upon notice -

  1. How many officers who have not seen active service have been appointed O.C. Troops on transport ships?
  2. What is their rank?
  3. What is the salary of each rank, and what are the allowances, if any?
  4. How many officers have been sent as transport officers from Australia to England or Egypt to bring home returning officers and soldiers ?
  5. How many have been sent since the signing of the armistice?
Mr WISE:
NAT

– The answers are: -

  1. and 2. Brigadier-General, 1; colonels, 8; lieutenant-colonels, 21 ; majors, 19 ; captains, 3: total, 52. Almost without exception these officers were employed during the early part of the war, when no others were available.
  2. All the O.C. Troops above-mentioned with the rank of major and higher rank have been paid at a fixed rate. From 1915 to L916 all officers so appointed received £550 per annum, inclusive of all allowances. After that date an increase of £25 was granted, bringing the salary up to £575 per annum. Officers with the rank of captain appointed O.C. Troops on vessels carrying only a small number of Australian Imperial Force personnel received £400 per annum, inclusive of all allowances.
  3. and 5. None; but since the signing of the armistice six officers of the Australian Imperial Force have, at the request of Lieut.-General Sir John Monash, Director-General of Demobilization, been returned to England for transport duty.

page 10752

QUESTION

DIRECTOR, NORTHERN TERRITORY

Mr LISTER:

asked the Minister for Home and Territories, upon notice -

Whether the Government, before finally gazetting the appointment of an officer whose name has been mentioned in connexion with the vacant position of Director of the Northern Territory, will invite applications from persons possessing the necessary qualifications, and thus carry out the expressed intention of the Government to give preference to a returned soldier, all other things being equal?

Mr GLYNN:
NAT

– I have full sympathy with the honorable member’s desire that all positions, so far as possible, should be made available for returned soldiers, a point to which careful consideration was given before deciding on the new Northern Territory appointment. Conditions of the Territory, however, at the present time are such that it is regarded as essential that the man selected to take local charge of affairs should have from the outset an intimate knowledge of all the conditions of the’ Territory, and particularly of the circumstances of its history during the past few years, so as to insure from the beginning the smooth working of the new machinery which is being established.

page 10752

QUESTION

TERMINATION OF WAR

Mr FLEMING:
for Mr. Pigott

asked the Minister representing the Acting Prime Minister, upon notice -

Whether, in his opinion, the war ended on the 2Sth June, 1919, the date the Peace Treaty was signed by the plenipotentiaries of the combatant nations, or will the war end only on the exchange of ratifications by those nations?

Mr GROOM:
NAT

– As regards the termination of war with Germany, the following advice has been received from the Secretary of State for the Colonies: - “28th June.- Peace Treaty with Germany signed by representatives of Allied and Associated Powers and by representatives of Germany to-day at 4 o’clock. Concluding Article of Treaty provides that first proces verbal of deposit of ratification will be drawn up as soon as Treaty has been ratified by Germany on one hand, and by three of principal Allied and Associated Powers on the other hand, that from date of this first proces verbal Treaty will come into force between high contracting parties who have ratified it. that for determination of all periods of time as provided for in Treaty this date -will be date of coming into force of Treaty, and that in all other respects Treaty will enter into force for each Power at date of deposit of its ratification. Date of ratification, i.e., of coming into force of Peace Treaty, cannot be stated yet.”

As regards the termination of the war with Austria and the other belligerent nations, it is not yet possible to say in what manner the termination will be fixed.

page 10753

QUESTION

NORTHERN TERRITORY CRIME STATISTICS

Mr GLYNN:
NAT

– On Friday last, the honorable member for Brisbane (Mr. Finlayson) asked two questions relating to arrests in the Northern Territory during the period from 1913 to 1917, also as to sly grog-selling cases adjudicated upon during that period. The following statement gives the information asked for: -

Return of Sly Grog Cases Reported and Adjudicated on during Years 1913 to 1918 inclusive. 1913. - Yot Sing, fined £2; J. Solomon, imprisonment seven days; All Sam, fined £5; J. Stevenson, fined £15. 1914. - J. Ah Sing, fined £10; G. Gray, fined £5; B. Dewey, imprisonment three months; M. Gray, fined £5; Sambo, imprisonment one month; B. Dewey, imprisonment three months; Chin Shuck, fined £10. 1915. - B. Hanley, fined £2.5; C. Swanson, imprisonment three months; E. Roddy, fined £15: Ah Fook, imprisonment three months. 1916. - Ah Fook, imprisonment three months; J. Ogilvy, imprisonment three months. . 1917. - N. Madsen, fined £200 and imprisonment six months; V. Koufatganos, fined £200 and imprisonment six months; J.’ Robertson, fined £100 and imprisonment three months. 1918. - Ah Sam, fined £25; V. C. M. Presley, fined £5; Ah See, fined £25; Ah Tie, imprisonment three months; Jimmy, imprisonment three months.

page 10754

QUESTION

HIGH PRICES IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr GROOM:
NAT

– On the 25th June, the honorable member for Perth (Mr. Fowler) . asked the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) a question in regard to a communication from the Premier of Western Australia respecting certain excessive prices alleged to have been charged on goods in that State. I am now in a . position to inform the honorable member that a reply was sent to the Premier’s communication by the Acting Prime Minister on the 26th June, and I have now a copy of that reply. It is as follows : -

Your telegram twelfth June: Price of meat: Commonwealth has relinquished’ control and has no Prices Commissioner in Western Australia. Suggested State should take whatever action considered necessary and desirable. Under conditions now. existing there is no opportunity send supplies from eastern States. Even if it were possible, it is clear cost of storage and freight would increase price to -such an extent that no relief in price would be afforded.

page 10754

QUESTION

WOOL APPRAISEMENT PORTS

Mr GROOM:
NAT

– On 26th June, the honorable member for Herbert (Mr.

Bamford) asked the following question : -

Will the Acting Prime Minister make available all papers, letters, telegrams, &c, in relation tothe naming of certain seaports as places for the appraisement of wool?

I am now able to inform the honorable member that the Chairman of the Central Wool Committee advises that much of the correspondence referred to by the honorable member is of a confidential nature, and that it is inadvisable to make it public at the present time. The Central Wool Committee will, however, gladly furnish any specific information desired.

page 10754

WAR PENSIONS

Mr WISE:
NAT

– On Friday last, the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) asked whether I could announce the intention of the Government regarding pensions to mothers of ex-nuptial sons who were killed in action. I am now in a position to say that, pending the introduction of amending legislation, arrangements have been made for payment by the Repatriation Department of special allowances to such mothers. Application should be made to the Deputy Comptroller of Repatriation in the State where the deceased soldier enlisted.

page 10754

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Customs Act -

Proclamation prohibiting the exportation (except under certain conditions) of all goods to (late) German New Guinea dated 2nd July. 1919).

Proclamation (dated 2nd July, 1919) revoking proclamation (dated 29th March, 1916) prohibiting the exportation (except under certain conditions) of goods to China (not including Hong Kong) and Siam

Northern Territory.- Ordinance of 1919 - No 6 - Supreme Court.

Ordinance of 1919 - No. 8 - Council of Advice.

page 10755

MORATORIUM BILL

Mr GROOM:
Minister for Works and Railways and Acting Attorney-General · Darling Downs · NAT

– In the regrettable absence of the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt), I move -

That leave be given to bring in a Bill for an Act to continue in force certain regulations intituled the War Precautions (Moratorium) Regulations and the War Precautions (Active Service Moratorium) Regulations.

In view of the importance of the subject covered by the Bill, I think that honorable members will appreciate at this stage a brief general statement of the purposes that it is designed to serve. As the House is aware, the Moratorium Regulations are divided into two classes, one dealing with the position of mortgagors and mortgagees generally, while the other provides for the special treatment of soldiers and their dependants with regard to mortgages and various other . matters to which I shall refer later on. These regulations were designed as a temporary protection for mortgagors, purchasers of land, and others against the rights of mortgagees, vendors of land, and . other individuals, and ‘ the Bill purports to authorize their continuance for a period which may exceed the period of the operation of the War Precautions Act in its present expended form.

The Bill was submitted to the Legal Committee appointed by the Government to inquire into the competence of Parliament to pass such measures, and the Melbourne section of that Committee, consisting of Sir Edward Mitchell, Professor Harrison Moore, Mr. H. E. Starke, Mr. J. M. Campbell, and myself, as chairman, have supplied a certificate that -

We have carefully considered this Bill, and are of opinion that it is within the competence of this Parliament.

Mr. Adrian Knox, K.C., Professor Peden, and Mr. Hemsley, members of the Sydney section of the Committee, have also certified that the Bill, in their opinion, is within the competence of the Parliament, subject to the proviso that the Bill becomes law before the termination of the war, so far as Part II. is concerned. -

Sir ROBERT BEST:
KOOYONG, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– What is the date of the “ termination of the war ?”

Mr GROOM:

– Mr Adrian Knox and Mr. Hemsley indicated in a previous telegram that, in their opinion, it dates from the exchange of ratifications.

The Moratorium Regulations were passed for the temporary protection of mortgagors, purchasers of land, and others against the rights of mortgagees, vendors of land, and others. That course was rendered necessary partly because, in consequence of higher rates of interest being obtainable, persons owing money were unable to secure extensions of the time for payment as readily as under normal conditions. The passing of the regulations likewise prevented the financial disorganization which would almost certainly have occurred if mortgagees and others had exercised their full rights to require the immediate payment of principal moneys then due. A space of time was thus obtained for dealing with a very large sum, estimated at as much as £100,000,000, a large portion of which could have been almost immediately called up.

Mr Brennan:

– Does that amount relate solely to pre-war mortgages ?

Mr GROOM:

– I cannot say exactly, but it represents mortgages, many of which are affected by these regulations.

Another important purpose served by the introduction of these regulations was the preservation of the financial stability of the Commonwealth at a time when we were about to enter very heavily upon a borrowing policy for the purposes of the war. The Active Service Moratorium Regulations, in addition, gave special protection to members of the Expeditionary Forces and their dependants against seizure of furniture, &c, as well as special rights to rent vacant dwelling houses, farms, and shops. Those persons were also protected against the raising of rents, and ejectment from rented premises.

The Bill which I am now asking leave to introduce is necessary to enable the regulations to be operative after the War Precautions Act expires. It is desired to remove gradually the restrictions imposed by the War Precautions (Moratorium) Regulations in regard to mortgages and other instruments under which certain moneys are payable. A regulation was recently passed with that object in view, so that the extension of time allowed for the calling up of mortgages will be gradually tapered down.

Sir Robert Best:

– The regulations covered will be put in a schedule tothe Bill?

Mr GROOM:

– Yes.

Mr Richard Foster:

– The Bill will not cover subsequent transactions ?

Mr GROOM:

– No; it will cover only the matters dealt with by the regulations included in the schedule. A provision is made for the continuation for limited periods of the protection afforded to members of the Commonwealth Naval and Military Forces or their dependants against the enforcement of rights possessed by mortgagees, vendors, and others. That protection is afforded by continuing in force some of the War Precautions (Active Service) Moratorium Regulations, until the Expeditionary Forces shall have been substantially demobilized, the remaining regulations being continued so long as there is any mortgage or agreement for the purchase of land to which the regulations apply.

Part II. of the Bill, which relates particularly to the general Moratorium Regulations, provides that those regulations shall continue in force until “ the prescribed date,” which is defined as the 30th June, 1920, and for such further time as is necessary to cover any extended period allowed by a Court. It is provided that this further time shall apply only to mortgages, &c, in respectof which orders have been made by a Court. Power is also taken to make regulations. The Court has power under the regulations to extend the time in case of hardship, and to this I will refer later on. Where an extended time has already been allowed by a Court for the repayment of a mortgage, such time is not to be reduced.

Part III. relates particularly to the Active Service Moratorium Regulations, and provides for the continuation of the protection now afforded to members of the Naval and Military Expeditionary Forces and their wives and dependants in respect of mortgages and purchases of land. This part of the Bill declares that the portion of the regulations relating to the seizing of chattels, furniture, or wearing apparel, shall continue in force until all Expeditionary Forces shall have been substantially demobilized. There is a direction that the Prime Minister shall, as soon as the Expeditionary Forces have been “ substantially demobilized,” notify that fact in the Commonwealth Gazette, whereupon those regulations which relate particularly to the’ seizing of furniture, clothing, &c, will expire.

Part IV. deals with penalties. It provides for punishment for breach of either of the regulations, and enacts that notwithstanding the expiry of the regulations, all rights, privileges, obligations, liabilities, penalties, &c, acquired or incurred under the regulations shall not be affected by such expiry.

I come now to the regulations themselves which are contained in the schedule to the Bill. The general Moratorium Regulations, which form the first schedule to the Bill, came into operation on 10th November, 1916, and applied to mortgages, bills of sale, agreements, and other instruments securing payment in respect of land or chattels. They also apply to leases containing optional or compulsory purchasing clauses. Those regulations, which, after being in operation for two and a half years, are fairly well understood by honorable members and the public, provide generally that mortgagees shall not demand the payment of the principal moneys secured by a mortgage or exercise rights of sale or foreclosure without obtaining the leave of the Court. Regulation 11a authorizes the postponement of the payment of rent in certain cases where, owing to restrictions in the marketing of produce, the producer is unable to pay his rent. Recently regulations have been passed to gradually reduce the number of mortgages, &c, affected, so that they will not all be called in on the one date. Regulation 13 (1) which was recently framed, and is being embodied in the Bill, provides - 13. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in these Regulations, the time for repayment of the principal sum secured by a mortgage to which these Regulations apply, the doe date for repayment of which would but for these Regulations have been a date within one of the periods specified in the first column of the following table, shall be, by force of this regulation, extended to a date within the month which is specified in the second column of the said table opposite to such period.

(2) The prescribed date for repayment shall be that May in the prescribed month for repayment which corresponds to the day of the month which would but for these Regulations be or have been the due date for repayment. So that the final date to which mortgages will be extended by the Bill, other than in cases of hardship, will be June, 1920. Honorable members will see that a fairly long period has been allowed to mortgagors by the operation of these regulations. {: .speaker-JPC} ##### Sir Robert Best: -- The Court has not to be consulted at all in this matter. The existing mortgages falling due are *ipso facto* extended. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- These dates are fixed. Under the regulations, if a mortgagee desired to call up a mortgage, he could apply to the Court, but these extensions are independent of any application by a mortgagor. The idea is to give every mortgagor a due date on which his *mortgage* will fall due. The recent regulations have been in operation for several weeks, but we are now embodying them in this Bill, because they extend to a period beyond the life of the War Precautions Act. {: .speaker-JPC} ##### Sir Robert Best: -- These dates are fixed as if they were in the mortgage. The mortgager Kas not to go to the Court at all? {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- That is so. These dates are fixed as an extension to the mortgagor in the same way as if they were included in the mortgage deed, subject, of course, to the regulations. It may be that in some individual cases the length of the extension is not just, and that a hardship may result. To meet such cases provision is made - >Notwithstanding anything contained in the last preceding regulation, the Court may, upon the application of the mortgagor made not less than one month before the prescribed date for repayment, make an order, on such terms and' conditions (if any) as the Court thinks fit, extending the date for repayment for a period not more than twelve months after the prescribed date for repayment, and may fix the intervals of time and rate at which interest is payable during such extended period. Regulation 16, relating to leases of lands containing an optional purchasing clause, provides for the term of the lease being extended in certain cases to allow a lessee to exercise his option up to the 31st December,. 1919. This provision was made as it was desirable to give further time for the exercise of the option secured by a lease, the term of which has been extended by the operation of the regulations. The second schedule deals -with the Active Service Moratorium Regulations, which came into operation in the first place on the 28th July, 1916. In respect of the principal money under a mortgage, payable by a member of the Forces or a female dependant of a member, the regulations provide for the postponement of the due date to a date six months after the termination of the war, or six months after the discharge or death of the member, whichever last happens. I refer honorable members to Active Service Moratorium Regulations 3 and 4. Even if the War Precautions Act disappears, these extensions will continue under this Bill. Payments of money due in respect of the purchase of land are similarly postponed. Regulation 7 provides for an extension of the date in cases where payment is to be made by instalments. These regulations also protect soldiers and their female dependants from seizure of . chattels, furniture, and clothing, &c., to the value of £100, under bill of sale, distress, hire agreement, or by other process. Protection is also afforded, except in certain cases, to members of the Forces, parents, or female dependants of members against increase in the rent of dwelling-houses, and against ejectment therefrom, and landlords, in certain cases, are' required to allow members of the Forces, their parents, or female dependants, to rent a dwelling-house on its becoming vacant. Similar provisions are also made in regard to the rental of shops, farms, &c., by soldiers, their parents, or female dependants. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- For how long is that extension ? {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- That period is determined by demobilization. Sub-clause 2 of clause 5 provides - >Subject to this section, regulations. 12 to 18 inclusive of the War Precautions (Active Service Moratorium) Regulations shall continue in force until all Expeditionary Forces serving outside Australia at the commencement of this Act have been substantially demobilized, and shall during such continuance have the force of law. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- Why not make the extension apply to each soldier until he is discharged ? {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- It is thought better to make the provision contained in the Bill. I have outlined generally the scope of the Bill, and I ask honorable members to accept the motion for leave, so that the measure may be advanced to the secondreading stage at once. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill presented, and read a first time. {: .page-start } page 10758 {:#debate-38} ### COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES BILL {:#subdebate-38-0} #### Second Reading Debate resumed from 11th July *(vide* page 10694), on motion by **Mr. Groom** - >That this Bill be now -read a second time. **Mr. BOYD** '(Henty) ]4.15].- The only portion of the Bill with which I propose to deal is that relating to wheat. The manner in which control has been, exercised over the Wheat Pool requires a good deal of investigation. Attempts have been made in the State of New South Wales to get a Royal Commission appointed, and if the information I obtained in that State, and the rumours which are current in Victoria, are approximately true, an investigation should certainly take place into the operation and control of the Wheat Pool in both States. I understand that it is an admitted fact that over 1,000,000 bushels of wheat has been stolen out of the Wheat Pool in New South Wales. {: #subdebate-38-0-s0 .speaker-JRP} ##### Mr BOYD:
HENTY, VICTORIA -- The information I ob,tained in Sydney was that 1,000,000 bags had disappeared, but on returning to Melbourne I was not sure whether my informant said hags or bushels, so I referred to bushels in order to be on the safe side. Men have been already convicted for stealing some of the wheat, and. what we have to discover is, how much they stole and how much has been stolen by those who have not been convicted. Of course, the gigantic nature of the operations of the Wheat Pool prevents a close supervision of details, but one cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, regard the loss of 6,000,000 bushels as a detail. ' {: .speaker-JLM} ##### Lt.-Colonel Abbott: -- We do things on a big scale in our State. {: .speaker-JRP} ##### Mr BOYD: -- This is a scale so large as to astonish the people of this country. In addition to the laxity of control and supervision, certain concessions were given to Government agents in connexion with the sale and shipment of these, and it was understood that only those concessionaires would he allowed to ship wheat. Then the question arose of .gristing, and the shipment of flour oversea. Certain firms in Melbourne and Sydney desired to ship flour to Egypt, where there was a big demand. {: #subdebate-38-0-s1 .speaker-JWG} ##### Mr FOWLER:
PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA -- And also one firm in Western Australia. {: .speaker-JRP} ##### Mr BOYD: -- I was not aware of that. On behalf of the Sydney firms, I interviewed the 'Wheat Board in Melbourne, and I was told that information had come from the Old Country to the effect that certain Australian flour was being hawked around the Balkan States for sale. Whether that was correct or not I am not in a position to say, but on probing the matter I found that this flour was supposed to be from two Japanese shipments. It had been sold by certain agents to Japanese, and the two cargoes were under the charge of the firm of Messrs. Mitsui, Busan. and Kaisha Limited. This firm got certain 'agents here to purchase for them in the ordinary way of business - and I believe there was nothing wrong with the transaction - and when I asked that the principle to be adopted should be either "all in or all out" - that British firms or Australian firms should have the same right to buy wheat, grist it into flour, and dispose of it in a British Protectorate like Egypt - I was told that no further concession would be given to any person, and that' only the Wheat Pool would be allowed to export wheat. With that I was quite satisfied, and said that if that were the principle laid down, the firms on whose behalf I was speaking would be satisfied also. A few weeks later, when I was in New South Wales, I heard , rumours in connexion with the gristing of wheat that somewhat surprised me, because, if true, they amounted to chicanery of the worst kind. I made certain investigations, which I do not propose to relate here; but I certainly urge that it is the duty of the Government to make inquiries into what has been going .on, so that the truth may be known. Another wire came to me from Sydney to say that, notwithstanding the report I had made with regard to the attitude of the Wheat Pool, the New South Wales Government, through the Minister for Agriculture, had granted permission to certain individuals to grist wheat independently of the Wheat Pool. I naturally went back to the Pool and made further inquiries. I was told that the members of the Pool were quite sure my information was wrong ; and I said that if they would give me a guarantee that no wheat would be exported except .under the Pool my mind would be at rest. I left the matter as if it were settled; and, later on, **Mr. Pitt,** the secretary of the Wheat Pool, rang me up to say that he found the information I had given was true, and that the Pool was taking steps to prevent the flour going out of Australia.. In this, I believe, the Pool has succeeded. What I wish to bring particularly before the Government is that if there is to be any concession to anybody it ought to be granted openly in free and fair competition. When Australian firms are prepared to do business they ought to get that business. No matter whether Japan or any other country is an Ally of ours, it should not have concessions over Australian citizens who are prepared to do Australian business with Australian flour on terms equitable to the farmers and the whole people; that is a view I desire to emphasize most forcibly. Although I cannot claim firsthand knowledge, I understand that a certain concession is granted to millers, in the matter of price, with regard to the gristing of wheat into flour. But a concession was given to an exporter of wheat named Georgeson, who at that time was not a miller, but who proceeded to purchase a mill. This man, or firm, was then able to get a gristing agreement with other millers to grind wheat, which would not have been possible if he had desired to grind it for his own particular purpose, that is, for home consumption: It is said that inquiries are being demanded in New South Wales in connexion with this business, and that one State Minister has resigned; but it is purely a Federal matter in the control of a Federal Wheat Pool which is governed by the Federal Government, and it ought to be sifted to the bottom. If a million bags of" wheat or more can disappear without the public or anybody else knowing about it, the fact shows clearly that the job of controlling the wheat of a continent is too big for the Wheat Pool. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Richard Foster: -- The New South Wales Government will be at the loss. {: .speaker-JRP} ##### Mr BOYD: -- Of course, but it does not really matter who is at the loss. I venture to say that, under the system by which the wheat of Australia was disposed of before the war, it would have been impossible for such a condition of things to arise. Now that the war is over, the sooner we get back to normal conditions and people who understand the business, who make their livingby it, whose interest it is to see that the best price possible is obtained for the farmer, and that nobody is robbed, are given control, the better it will be for Australia and for Australian producers. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -Doyou say that the wheat disappeared after it came into the hands of the Wheat Pool? {: .speaker-JRP} ##### Mr BOYD: -- Yes, it was taken from Darling Island. For, I suppose, thirty years I have been in control of the produce of farmers, and for every bag or truck short I have to pay, though it is my particular job to see that I am not compelled to pay much. But whose job is it to see that the Government wheat on Darling Island is not disposed of? If any disappears, those in charge have not to pay - it is the farmers who suffer. As soon as the war ceased - almost as soon as the armistice was signed - the British Government adopted the policy of getting fid of the obligations they were controlling as quickly as possible; and theCommonwealth Government ought to get rid of the War Precautions Act, with all the powers under it, at the earliest moment. The sooner that is done the better it will be for the community as a whole. I am not urging this for the first time, for I urged it when we were talking about the red flag and other trivial matters last session. {: .speaker-KXO} ##### Mr Page: -- It is not a trivial matter for the poor fellows in gaol ! {: .speaker-JRP} ##### Mr BOYD: -- No, but control by the Government under a War Precautions Act and Regulations puts gigantic powers into the hands of a few men, and that is not in accordance with the principles of democratic government. Power should be dispersed through the people. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- Do you say that this Bill depends on the War Precautions Act ? {: .speaker-JRP} ##### Mr BOYD: -- It is based on the War Precautions Act, for we had no such powers before the war. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- The Bill itself is independent of the War Precautions Act. {: .speaker-JRP} ##### Mr BOYD: -- This Bill is introduced under the powers of the War Precautions Act. If honorable members look at the report from New South Wales with regard to the sugar clauses, they will see that if this Bill is not passed before their ratification, it will fail. If we could not pass such a measure before 1914, I am very doubtful whether it will have any effect if it is passed now. {: .speaker-KXO} ##### Mr Page: -- What is the good of it now the war is over? {: .speaker-JRP} ##### Mr BOYD: -- Some contracts have to be continued. If the matter of the supply of bags were left to those whose business it is to supply them, we could depend on the farmers getting plenty. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- At a price. {: .speaker-JRP} ##### Mr BOYD: -- They were always cheaper under private enterprise. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- In different circumstances. {: .speaker-JRP} ##### Mr BOYD: -- Excuses of that kind can always be made. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- It is a statement of fact. {: .speaker-JRP} ##### Mr BOYD: -- I have nothing more to say in regard to the Bill; but the Government should consider seriously whether such a huge shortage of wheat in New South Wales does not demand an inquiry. I do not ask for a Royal Commission; but, in the interests of the farmers and of the country generally, I ask for a serious inquiry. {: #subdebate-38-0-s2 .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY:
Darling .- I am disappointed, indeed, at the constitu- tion of our various Boards and Pools, and the lack of representation of consumers and the general public, and of the employees in the various industries concerned. Personally, I believe that the pooling system is good. I regard the bulk handling by organization of any commodity or raw material, or the public management of any utility, as better than handling by private enterprise, provided the organization is equal to that of private enterprise. As I say, there is no provision for the representation on these Boards and Pools of consumers, who are just as much interested as producers, and there is absolutely no reference whatever to the representation of those who do the work. The grower, so far as wool is concerned, does very little work in its production, with the exception, of course, of the small men. With the big man, his capital is employed, but he goes no further. On the other hand, the employee, the man who is actually engaged in producing wealth, using the owner's buildings, machinery, and capital, is just as vitally concerned as is the wool producer. Yet there is no reference in this Bill to the giving of representation on' any Board or Pool either to the consumers or to employees. This defect we shall endeavour to remedy in the Committee stage. Most of us favour the pooling system, because, after all, it is a modification of Socialism ; but this Bill makes one think that the Government are selling a gold brick. Can the Commonwealth Parliament pass this measure *1* Certain legal opinion has been quoted, with which the Acting Attorney-General **(Mr. Groom)** agrees, to the effect that, when the War Precautions Act has gone out of operation, the Commonwealth will have the power to control wool, wheat, cheese, butter, and sugar; but if it can control these commodities, surely it will have power over any other commodity produced in this country, or any utility used by the . people of this country. As, a matter of fact, the position is that if the Government are asked to handle some other commodity or utility on behalf of the people of Australia, they say, "We have not the power." In the past two referendums on proposed alterations of the Constitution have been held because eminent barristers have been of the opinion that the Commonwealth does not possess the requisite power to control commodities produced by the people of Australia or utilities used by them. That is why this measure is a " gold brick." The Government are seeking to place it on the statute-book merely for the edification of lawyers. It is common talk that when the War Precautions Act ceases to operate three months after the ratification of peace, the constitutionality of the measure will be tested by the jam manufacturers, and possibly by others. The Government know that it will be tested, and that, if the legal opinions which have been obtained for a considerable number of years past stand for anything, it must be declared *ulira vires.* There is an alternative if the Government would only be courageous enough to accept it, and that is not to sell a " gold brick " to Parliament, but to have a referendum taken immediately, and set the people's decision upon the matter. The' people's verdict could be obtained before the War Precautions Act goes out of existence. Will Ministers adopt that course, which is sure, or will they continue to pursue that which is far from being sure? If they proceed as they are doing - enacting a measure which, in all probability, will be found to be unconstitutional - they are not fulfilling their duty either to the producers or to the consumers. I wish to say a word now in regard to the position of the Wheat Board in" New South Wales. Last week I asked*, eleven questions about certain operations; of that Board. My curiosity has evidently caused a disruption in New South Wales, and a considerable amount of uncertainty as to where some people stand. Immediately . the Acting Prime Minister **(Mr. Watt)** replied to my questions, **Mr. Holman,** the Premier of New South Wales, issued a reply, and **Mr. Beeby** resigned from the New South Wales Government. The information given in reply to my questions would have caused a Ministry to resign in the past. However, Governments do not go out of office over such matters nowadays. I elicited from the Acting Prime Minister that 72,000 tons of wheat had been sold to Japan by the, New South Wales Wheat Board for export at the rate of 4s. 4£d. per bushel. The purchaser was really a person named Georgeson, and he in turn sold it to Japan. I was also informed by the Acting Prime Minister that the Victorian Wheat Board has disposed of inferior wheat to Japanese buyers at 5s. 7£d. per bushel. The most extraordinary feature of the two sales is that the Victorian, wheat went as high as 58 lbs. per bushel, whilst the New South Wales wheat was 54 lbs. per bushel, and Victoria could get 5s. 7£d. per bushel for her inferior wheat, whereas New South Wales could get no more that 4s. 4$d. for wheat which, was not more than 4 lbs. or 5 lbs. per bushel inferior to the Victorian. This cannot be beneficial to the primary producers or the people of Australia. For months past commercial vultures have been hovering over the wheat of New South Wales, and great have been the gorgings. An extraordinary feature of the Georgeson contract is the secrecy about the whole matter. Despite an agitation in New South Wales, the State Wheat Board were as oysters. In fact, the Australian Wheat Board were also like oysters in regard to the transaction. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- Did the Australian Wheat Board know anything about it? {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- They were in formed about it. It was such an extraordinary piece of business that I am told that **Senator Russell** went post haste to New South Wales, and threatened to cancel the contract. However, he did not do so, but the Australian Wheat Board could have done it. If they had cared to exercise their functions, the contract could have been cancelled either by them or by the State Board. In my questions to the Acting Prime Minister, I asked if he would cause an investigation to be made, and appoint a Royal Commission to deal, not only with the Georgeson wheat sale, but also with the whole of the operations of the New South Wales Board ? I was told, in reply, that it was entirely a question for New South Wales, and not for the Australian Wheat Board. What are the powers of that Board if it is not to exercise supervision over State Boards ? Here *is* another extraordinary occurrence. A contract was entered into by the State Wheat Board, to supply 72,000 tons of inferior wheat, although at the time the Board knew that it did not have that quantity of inferior wheat on hand, and, not being in a position to supply the. quantity of inferior wheat, f.a.q. wheat had to be substituted. In other words, wheat worth 5s. 9d. per bushel is being sold for 4s. 4 1/2 d. per bushel. The State Wheat Board knew that it did not have the quantity of inferior wheat that it contracted to supply. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- Georgeson is on a pretty" good wicket. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- He is. If he had been supplied with 72,000 tons - that is to say, 3,000,000 bushels of wheat- at 4s. 4 1/2 d. per bushel, he would have made . a profit of at least £100,000, but, seeing that a considerable proportion of the 72,000 tons has to be made up with wheat worth 5s. 9d. per bushel, he will make an additional profit of £100,000 or more if the contract is not cancelled. Immediately the Acting Prime Ministerreplied to my questions, **Mr. Beeby** resigned from the New South Wales Government. {: .speaker-JLM} ##### Lt.-Colonel Abbott: -- As the result of the action taken by the honorable member ? {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- I do not claim it, though other people may do so. The replies given in this House may have precipitated matters. **Mr. Holman's** explanation was .an extraordinary one. **Mr. Campbell,** the secretary of the Farmers and Settlers Association in New South Wales, was asked his opinion of the Georgeson sale, and he said that he agreed with it. **Mr. Trethowan,** the president of the Farmers and Settlers Association, was . not approached before the sale, but he approved of it after the contract had been consummated. The president of the Farmers and Settlers Association is also a member of the State. Wheat Board, and one is justified in asking, if the primary producers cannot depend upon the officials of that association for protection from robbery, upon whom are they to depend ? There is the Georgeson sale, in all its naked ugliness arid with all its . smell fulness, The New South Wales Government say that they will grant a Royal Commission to deal with the Georgeson sale only; but I am not satisfied with the way iri which Royal Commissions are carried out in New South Wales. The Federal Government should not take cognisance of any Commission or inquiry instituted by New South Wales. Their duty is right here, to inquire, not only into the Georgeson sale, but into other matters which I shall mention. For instance, about 70,000 bushels of wheat were purchased at 2s. 9d. per bushel. It was supposed to be of very inferior quality - what some call chick food - but the trouble in this transaction was that 50 per cent or more was f.a.q. wheat. One man has been sacked over the business, but more than one were concerned in that particular robbery. Half of the wheat alleged to be chick food, and sold at 2s. < 9d. a bushel, was worth 5s. 9d. a bushel ! {: .speaker-KFC} ##### Mr Fleming: -- Can you prove that more than one man was responsible ? {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- It is the duty of the honorable member, as a supporter of the Government, to back up my demand that a Royal Commission be appointed to investigate the truth or otherwise of the statements I am making. The honorable member for Henty **(Mr. Boyd)** mentioned to-day that a good deal of wheat had mysteriously disappeared. We find now that when they came to supply the' Georgeson contract of 72,000 tons of inferior wheat, they had not got it. They are in such a bungle in New South Wales that for the last two and a half years a highly paid staff of accountants has been trying to find out where the 1915-1916 wheat has gone. The 1915-16 Pool has not yet been completed, and never will be completed, if that is any news to honorable members, because they do not know what has become of the wheat. It has gone, to the great joy of some of the vultures in New South Wales. The loss of wheat in New South Wales alone was mentioned as 1,000,000 bags, or 3,000,000 bushels, by the honorable member for Henty. As a matter of fact, it is 6,000,000 bushels. That quantity has been lost, and most of it has been stolen. What are the Australian Government going to do about it? Do they propose to stand idly by, and see the New South Wales Government appoint a Royal Commission, to investigate one of the small affairs, or will they appoint a Royal Commission themselves - to investigate the whole business? {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- Right through the Commonwealth, because there are other States where wheat is missing. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- If any of the other States can come anywhere near the operation of the State Wheat Board of New South Wales, I. pity them. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- I think you are the premier State so far as that is concerned. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- So far as robbery is concerned, apparently. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- In New South Wales a Minister did resign; in South Australia he was kicked out. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- I am afraid a good many more will resign if a Royal Commission is appointed. The following appeared in a recent issue of the Sydney *Daily Telegraph: -* >Recent developments in connexion with the 1916-17 stocks of wheat, as affecting the sale to **Mr. Georgeson,** have disclosed a remarkable position. There was at- the time apparently an extraordinary miscalculation of the amount of wheat remaining to the credit of that particular Pool. > >When this deal was first proposed the management of the State Wheat Office submitted' a statement showing that 21,000,000 bushels had been disposed of, and it was estimated that there were 11,000,000 bushels still available for sale. It was shown that the sales to that date, which represented the pick of the stacks, had given an average return of 4s. 5d. per bushel. **Mr. Drummond** advised the Board that he could make this sale of 3,000,000 bushels for Japan at that figure, the wheat to be the second pick of that which remained and of a standard of 54 lbs. and under per bushel. The local millers were to have first pick to make up the 25 per cent, of this wheat which they were called upon to grist. The millers refused to take this wheat for the manufacture of flour for local consumption. > >The extraordinary fact is, however, that, instead of there having been 11,000,000 bushels of 1916-17 wheat on hand when the sale was made, it is now authoritatively stated that only 5,000,000 bushels remained. The pick of the wheat, which would have gone to the local millers had they accepted it, will, after gristing contracts are filled, now go. to **Mr. Georgeson.** It appears that some scraping up will be necessary to give him the amount of grain he purchased, and incidentally, it is said, he will receive a better average sample than he bargained for. Unless the Government exercise the functions of the Australian Wheat Board, and cause an investigation to be made, the thing will grow worse, and the Government must accept the responsibility for allowing it to grow worse. They say they have no power, and that it is a question for the States concerned; but we know that where the whole of Australia is affected they have the necessary power to cause an investigation to be made. I have something to say now as to the operations in wool, which bear some similarity to the operations in wheat, but were on a smaller scale. The State Wool Committee handles the whole of the wool of New South Wales. It comprises two wool-growers, three wool-sellers, one woolbuyer, one manufacturer, and one scourer or fellmonger. {: .speaker-KYV} ##### Mr Riley: -- It is not complete, because the fellmongers have no representative. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- As the honorable member reminds me, the fellmongers - the men who do the work - are not represented on the Committee, nor are the men who shear the sheep, and press the wool, and handle it generally.I have been informed recently in Sydney that a leading firm of woolbrokers, one of the Ring which has had a practical monopoly of the handling of the wool in New South Wales, and one of whose members is a member of the State Wool Committee, grossly abused the War Precautions Regulation which provides that wool must be weighed within forty-eight hours of its landing in Sydney, because, near the sea, wool will rapidly absorb moisture and grow heavier. According to the position of the bales in the stacks, it will absorb anything from 2 lbs. to 14 lbs., or more, of moisture per bale. Bales inside the stack will absorb less than those outside. The firm I mention were, I am informed, fined £50 for the first offence. It is said that they were fined £2,000 for the second offence. Honorable members will understand that, if wool were allowed to remain on the wharfs not weighed, within fortyeight hours it would increase in weight, and the firms handling it would benefit. Some of that wool was allowed to remain on the wharfs at Sydney for two months before being weighed. I am also informed that this firm was convicted of a third offence. If I am wrong, I should like the Central Wool Committee to explain to me where I am wrong, and what actually did occur. I am told that these things have occurred; but why were not the people of Australia allowed to know of them? No publicity has been given *to* them. Is it because one of the men alleged to have committed this offence is a member of the State Wool Committee? Was he shielded from publicity for that reason? If the honorable member for Grampians **(Mr. Jowett)** were here he might enlighten the House on this matter. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- Did not the prosecution of that firm under the War Precautions Regulations receive the same publicity as the trial of a person for waving the red flag? {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- Perish the thought! One of the members of the firm was a member of the State Wool Committee; hence the secrecy. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Richard Foster: -- Were they fined in open Court, or by the Wool Committee? {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- I do not know who fined them, or who got the. money. The information I have received is necessarily vague. It is not what I would desire. I know, as a fact, that a firm have been fined for a breach of the War Precautions Regulations dealing with wool, and that a member of that firm is a member of the State Wool Committee. {: .speaker-KFC} ##### Mr Fleming: -- Can you name the firm ? {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- I want the Central Wool Committee to give the House some information about the matter. {: .speaker-KZC} ##### Mr Hector Lamond: -- The honorable member wants a fishing expedition ? {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- I want an official explanation. If the honorable member likes to make inquiries of any of his commercial friends in Sydney who deal with wool, he will soon findout, with probably greater facility than I could, the full facts about this transaction. {: .speaker-KZC} ##### Mr Hector Lamond: -- I should not produce them on the floor of the House unless I had fuller information than you have. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- Would you not* At any rate, not only were the firm bound over for this or some similar offence, in the first place, in a sum of £2,500, but a second offence occurred, and now. I believe the Central Wool Committee is holding £5,000 as a bond from that firm, binding them to be of good behaviour, and to keep strictly to the moral path in future. The question occurs: Should that firm be allowed to continue to handle wool? Surely a representative of that firm ought not to remain on the Committee. Not only should the firm be disallowed representation on the Committee, 'but it should not be permitted to participate in the handling of the business. I wish now to deal with another phase of the activities of the New South Wales State Wool Committee. Honorable members generally have received copies of a pamphlet issued by Messrs. John Bridge and Com'pany Limited of Sydney, which is a most interesting publication. If onehalf of the statements contained in it are true, it constitutes a grave indictment against the State Wool Committee and those who are handling wool in New South Wales. If, on the other hand, these statements are untrue, Messrs. John Bridge and Company are liable to be prosecuted for criminal libel; but evidently they are convinced as to their accuracy. This pamphlet has been circulated amongst both State and Federal members, and it deals at length with the question of dumping. It sets out that **Sir E.** Owen Cox, K.B.E., is chairman of the Overseas Shipping Representatives Association in New South Wales, chairman of the Overseas Central Committee of the Shipping Administration, and chairman of the Wool Administration, consisting of Messrs. Gilchrist, Watt, and Sanderson; Flood and Company Limited; Brown's Wharf Limited; Sydney Stevedoring and Wool Dumping Company Limited; Dalgety and Company Limited; Darling Is- [ land Stevedoring and Lighterage Company Limited, and the Fitzroy Stevedor ing Company; **Mr. Alcorn** McKell being the secretary. In a footnote it is stated that- >In the companies' returns at the RegistrarGeneral's Department the name of Edward Owen Cox appears as holding 1,600 shares in the Darling Island Stevedoring and Lighterage Company Limited. According to this pamphlet the Central Wool Committee had asked John Bridge and Company Limited to install a dumping plant for double-dumping bales. This request was no sooner carried out than John Bridge and Company found that they were up against the State Wool Committee. That Committee consists principally of people who belong to the Wool Ring. Messrs. John Bridge and Company, I presume, do not belong to the Wool Brokers Association, and were, therefore, considered to be outside the pale, and not eligible for any benefits that might be accruing. The State Wool Committee decided that John Bridge and Company should not be allowed to dump wool, and it was only after the Central Wool Committee had given fairly curt instructions on the point that the firm was given any dumping to carry out. When wool so treated by the firm was sent on for shipment - >To the great surprise of the Central Woo! Committee, the agent of the Ellerman Line, the owners of the ship, refused to take such wool on board or to pay for the dumping of the wool, or any wool dumped by John Bridge and Company Limited. Bridge and Company were not in the Combine, and, therefore, the owners of this vessel refused to carry wool dumped by them. It is further stated in this pamphlet that subsequently seven vessels were held up because of the fact that this firm had been dumping wool against the wishes of the Wool Ring. It would seem that the Darling Island Stevedoring and Lighterage Company, and certain other firms, had had in the past a monopoly of dumping operations, and that when John Bridge and Company came in the shipping companies were induced to refuse to accept wool dumped by them. In this way produce was held up. The charge for taking the wool from Messrs. John Bridge and Company's stores to the premises of the Darling Island Stevedoring Company, in which **Sir E.** Owen Cox holds 1,600 shares, is 6-Jd. each way. Under the old system, wool to he dumped had to be taken from John Bridge and Company's stores to one of the waterside dumping plants, and then carted back to the Government Wool Store at Wentworth Park to await shipment. .Since the Central Wool Committee have made an alteration in 'the system adopted, the wool, after being pressed, is dumped and stored in the firm's warehouse, which is close to Wentworth Park. It would seem from the statements in this booklet that there are certain factors operating to the disadvantage of the owners of the wool. The carriage to and from the Darling Island Stevedoring Company's premises costs ls. Id. per bale, and that cost has to be borne by the producers. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- Head paragraph 9. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- In paragraph 9 of the pamphlet it is stated that - >Were it not for the fact that **Sir John** Higgins, K.C.M.G., is a man of determination, the position then existing - at the time when' the seven ships were held up - would be the present position of Sydney, but with the support of the Central Wool Committee in Melbourne he determined that their instructions should be carried out, especially as a plant had been purchased by John Bridge and Company Limited for £3,500, and it would be a gross breach of faith for the Central Wool Committee's contract not to be carried out. The charge made in this pamphlet is that **Sir E.** Owen Cox's private interests greatly conflict with his duty as a public official engaged in the handling of wool in New South Wales. In view of the allegations made, a Royal Commission, or some other form of inquiry, would be welcomed by the .public. We should get to the bottom of all that has been taking place in connexion with the handling of wool in New South Wales. I have only to say, in conclusion, that provision should be made in this Bill for the representation of employees and consumers on these several Boards. The employees do the work and produce the wealth, while the consumers are vitally affected, and 'both sections should, therefore, have from the Government some consideration in the form of representation on these Boards. {: #subdebate-38-0-s3 .speaker-KYA} ##### Mr PIGOTT:
Calare .- The honorable member for Darling **(Mr. Blakeley)** suggests that an inquiry by a Royal Commission into the workings of the Wool Pool would be welcomed by the people. I would' remind him that. **Mr. Holman,** Premier of New South Wales, in receiving **Mr. Beeby's** resignation, at once agreed that a Supreme Court Judge should be appointed as a Royal Commission to investigate all the matters which have been dealt with by the honorable member. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- That Commission is to> deal only with Georgeson's contract. {: .speaker-KFC} ##### Mr Fleming: -- The whole matter will be inquired into. {: .speaker-KYA} ##### Mr PIGOTT: -- That is so. It will thus be seen that the whole question is *sub judice,* so that we might well leave it in the hands of others who are more competent than we are to deal with it. {: .speaker-KFC} ##### Mr Fleming: -- All that we can ask isthat the Commission shall do its work thoroughly. {: .speaker-KYA} ##### Mr PIGOTT: -- We hope that it will. There would have been no ground for the complaints which have been voiced by the honorable member for Darling **(Mr. Blakeley)** if the Labour Administration which initiated the Wheat Pool had granted the request of the primary producers for representation on the Central and State Boards. Government officials and others who knew nothing whatever of wheat-growing were appointed to control its operations, and many of us forecast what has actually happened. If the Government had appointed representatives of the primary producers on the Wheat Board, just as they have appointed representatives of the various interests concerned on the Butter Pool and the Wheat Pool, the position would have been different. In season and out of season members of this party while rn opposition urged, without success, that representation should be given to the wheat-growers. When the National Government came into power we received a little encouragement by the appointment" of **Mr. Giles,** of South- Australia, to the Central Committee. He was chosen to represent the whole of the wheat-growing States, and, subsequently, as the result of further pressure, one representative from each of the wheatgrowing States was added. Even now the wheat-growers are not sufficiently represented. There should be two, or even three, representatives of the wheatgrowers of each State on the Central Board. On the Butter Board we have a chairman, deputy chairman, and three Government nominees, and a dairy expert; whereas, on the Central Butter Board there were two representatives of New South Wales, two of Victoria, and one each of Queensland, South Australia, and Tasmania. The cheese industry had one representative of New South Wales, one of Queensland, and one of Victoria. Thus the producers had eleven representatives on the Board as against four Government nominees. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- The consumers had no representative. {: .speaker-KYA} ##### Mr PIGOTT: -- Does the honorable member think that if the consumers had been represented, butter would have been cheaper than it is to-day? {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr Wallace: -- Yes. {: .speaker-KYA} ##### Mr PIGOTT: -- Can the honorable member mention any other place in the world where butter is cheaper than it is in Australia? If the representatives on the Board had considered only their own interests, a great deal more of the butter would have been sent out of Australia, and local consumers would have been paying 2s. 6d. and 3s. per lb. ; instead, the Board gauged the requirements of the home market, and the people are getting butter at a reasonable price. The honorable member for Maranoa **(Mr. Page)** spoke eloquently of the trials of dairy farmers in Queensland, and described a man and his wife and five children working from early morning till late at night for a net result of £2 per week; yet some honorable members opposite would sweat those people further. They are already the worst white slaves in Australia, working fourteen and fifteen hours a day in order to provide cheap butter for honorable members and their supporters. If the men whose cause members of the Opposition espouse were only to work half as long and. hard as do the dairy farmers, we should have greater production and a reduced cost of living. The Central Wool Board comprises two growers, in the persons of the honorable member for Hume **(Mr. Falkiner)** and the honorable member for Grampians **(Mr. Jowett),** both of whom were appointed before they were elected to this Parliament; three buyers, one manufacturer, and one fellmonger. They are all producers or experts in the business - there is no Government nominee. As a result, there has been no complaint by the wool-growers regarding the operations of that Pool ; they are all abundantly satisfied with the manner in which the wool has been handled. The Board classified the wool into 800 grades. All wool found its way into one of those grades, and the result was that every 'grower received the value of his product. Honorable members on the opposite side have said that one reason why the public have to pay so much for woollen goods is that the graziers and wool-growers have combined, more or less, for the purpose of exploiting the public. One honorable member said that so high was the price of wool in Australia that it would pay local manufacturers to buy it in London. So far from that being the case, manufacturers . obtained wool during 1916-17 at the appraised price, which was very conservative and below the flat rate. They were allowed to go to the Wool Pool, and choose the wools they required for their own purposes at 12.59d., or nearly 3d. per lb. less than the flat rate. The graziers had to bear that loss. The actual . consumption by Australian manufacturers in 1917-18 was 14,318,332 lbs., which sold at an average price of 12.59d. per lb., instead of the flat rate of 15½d. per lb. represented a present of £45,336 by the growers to the consumers. In addition, if that wool had been exported to England the growers would have had an . opportunity of getting 50 per cent. of any profits made by the Imperial Government on its re-sale. In the early stages of the Pool a great deal of wool was absorbed for military purposes. I am glad to. say that the wool-growers readily assented to every proposal made by the British Government. They said nothing about the big price at which the wool might have been sold in England, because they realized that if they had attempted to get the best market price they would have been exploiting the soldiers. The Imperial Government offered the growers a price, and they accepted it. In the year before the war the price of wool averaged 1Od. per lb. all through; since that year the manufacturers have been getting their wool for 12.59d. Therefore, the only increase in price which the grower received was 3d. Taking the average wool consumption for the whole of Australia at 14,318,332 lbs., the manufacturers have used 3 lbs. of wool per head of the population per annum. If the graziers have exploited anybody they have exploited the public, and the amount of that exploitation has been only 9d. per head per annum, or less than Jd. per week. Surely the grazier is entitled to some share in the increased value of his commodity. As soon as the price of wool, was fixed at 15 1/2 d. the shearers approached the Arbitration Court, and were awarded an increase in wages from 24s. to 30s. per 100, because **Mr. Justice** Higgins said that the price of wool had been raised 55 per cent. "We made no demur, and I mention the matter merely to show the honorable member for Darling **(Mr. Blakeley)** where the shearers " come in." I am sure we are all pleased to see the men get the increased wages. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- Why, you asked that **Mr. Justice** Higgins should be shifted off the Bench for awarding the increase ! {: .speaker-KYA} ##### Mr PIGOTT: -- That was because **Mr. Justice** Higgins made all kinds of impossible conditions when he practically raised the rate of wages on the various stations by something like 100 per cent. These increased wages are only made possible by the increased price of wool, and, while we like to see people well .paid, the employer must also be well paid, in order to meet the new conditions." The general expenses of graziers have been' considerably increased during the period of the war. Wire netting has gone up 400 per .'cent., while ordinary fencing wire has risen from £8 to £50. Salt has gone up about 300 per cent, in price, and similar in creases are recorded in the case of sulphur, phosphorus, bags, and all kindsof shearing plant. All this is in" face of the fact that the increased cost of wool amounts to only -Jd. per week per head to the consumers of Australia, so that it cannot be. said the grazier in any way exploits the public. {: #subdebate-38-0-s4 .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE:
West Sydney -- I am completely in favour of the Government taking over the functions contemplated by this Bill, and controlling commodities, primary and secondary, by means of Boards. My only objection is to the constitution of the Boards and the fact that their operations do not go far enough. I do not say for a moment that the average farmer is not entitled to a good price for the commodities he produces. I know that some dairymen work very hard, and I agree that the pioneers of the country, who have cleared the bush and made the land habitable, are entitled to all they can make by their labours. But, as has already been remarked, the pioneers, or the majority of them, are dead, and those who have been lucky enough to survive have large areas of country, from 600 to 1,800 acres, which they do not work themselves, but leave to others, while they live at Menzies' or the Hotel Australia. {: .speaker-KYD} ##### Mr Poynton: -- Not many dairymen ! {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE: -- The dairymen, or the poor, struggling farmer, cannot buy land worth £100 or £120 an acre, and has to be satisfied with the share system, by means of which he gets 8s. out of every pound's worth he produces. That is the tragedy of the dairyman, and it ought to be prevented by the Government making land available to those willing to work it, and confiscating the land of those who will not work it. {: .speaker-KFC} ##### Mr Fleming: -- There is not much dairy land in New South Wales worth that price. {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE: -- At any rate, I know of some supposed dairymen who could " buy " up the members of the Federal Parliament. {: .speaker-JUV} ##### Mr Mcwilliams: -- A man is a- fool to be dairying on the share system on such a small return as that mentioned. {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE: -- There is no other avenue of employment for some of them: and these men are worthy of all the consideration we can give them. We were told by the Acting Attorney-General **(Mr. Groom)** that the Prime Minister **(Mr. Hughes)** had entered into contracts for the supply of butter to the Imperial Government at 175s. per cwt., landed in Great Britain. This works out at something like1s. 6¼d. per lb., it may be, wholesale. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- That is free on board in Australia. {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE: -- That alters the case considerably. But the Minister also told us, in the course of his speech, that 1,211,368 boxes of butter, valued at £4,584,072 14s. 6d., had been sold to the Imperial Government, realizing1s. 4d. per lb. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Richard Foster: -- That would be the price free on board in Australia. {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE: -- That, as I say, makes a difference; but if butter can be sold at1s. 6d. and1s. 4d. to the Imperial Government, I see no reason why the public here should be paying1s. 8d. and1s.11d. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Richard Foster: -- A lot of that butter was shipped at the flush of the season. {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE: -- But how is it that cheese is sold to the Imperial Government at 9½d. per lb. while we here cannot purchase it at less than1s. 2d. and1s. 3d. ? {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Richard Foster: -- It depends on the time of the year. {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE: -- Butter, cheese, and other commodities are stored up and released just as the members of the Fool think fit, and the price is practically regulated the whole year round. What I mean is that there is very little difference in the price from one year end to the other. Indeed. I do not think there has been a difference of1d. per lb. for the last twelve months, or that butter has ever been under1s. 5d. per lb. in the last five years. {: .speaker-KYD} ##### Mr Poynton: -- It is cheaper now than it was in 1914, when the Labour Government was in power. {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE: -- However that may be, it should be the function of these Boards to regulate such matters. If people in England choose to pay1s. 6d. to 2s. 6d. per lb. for butter in the Old Country I have no objection, but we in Australia should get such commodities at a reasonable price. {: .speaker-KYD} ##### Mr Poynton: -- There is no more badly paid worker in the world than the Australian dairyman. {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE: -- I would not say that is so; but. I admit there are some dairymen who have to struggle to make ends meet. In any case, these men get no advantage from a Pool of the kind we are discussing. The majority of the dairymen who supply the butter factories are share, or leasing, farmers, not owning any land at all. {: .speaker-KYD} ##### Mr Poynton: -- You are entirely wrong. {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE: -- Conditions may be different in Victoria, but I know that I am right so far as concerns the South Coast and the northern rivers of New South Wales. {: .speaker-KW8} ##### Mr John Thomson: -- On the northern rivers nearly all the dairymen own their own land. {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE: -- I know that, in the majority of cases, the owners of the land have the members of their families and others working on it. These workers are simply hired at wages, or on the share system, and the majority of the landholders, as I say, live in town. {: .speaker-KW8} ##### Mr John Thomson: -- You had better have a trip up there and see for yourself. {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE: -- I have lived and worked there, and had some dearlybought experience. I was paid 10s. a week for at least twelve or fourteen hours a day, and some of the men who employed me then are now worth £60,000 or £70,000. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Richard Foster: -- I swear they did not make it at dairying ! {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE: -- No; other people made it for them. The other night the honorable member for Grampians **(Mr. Jowett)** contradicted me when I said here, on the authority of a manufacturer in New South Wales, that it was very nearly as cheap for a manufacturer to go to the Old Country and buy his wool as to buy it in Australia. Subsequently, in New South Wales, I saw that manufacturer again, and told him what had taken place here, and the manufacturer admitted that the honorable member for Grampians was quite correct in his contradiction, and said that the original statement had been made merely in a conversational way. Of course, I felt somewhat annoyed under the "circumstances, and asked the" manufacturer why, if wool was cheaper here, he was charging as much for his cloth as for imported cloth. We had a little argument on the matter, and, of course, he talked about increased wages, and so forth, though the increased wages represent only about 15 per cent. However, the Wool Board ought to so regulate matters that when a manufacturer purchases wool at a certain price there should be a stipulation that he shall manufacture cloth at a certain price. The Pools or Boards would then serve some useful purpose. It appears there is" no check upon what these men may charge for the articles they produce. The con- sumer in Australia pays just as much, for some commodities as is paid for them by the consumer on the other side of the world,, and provision should be made by which' he. will .be protected in regard to the distribution of these goods. . - , In regard to the constitution of some of the .Boards controlling various commodities, I notice that **Sir Owen** Cox is interested in --many, activities. For, instance, he is Chairman of the Shipping Board, and he is a member of the Central Wool Committee. He is also an employer of workers on the waterside front in New South Wales, where what we call a bogus union has been formed. He and his- secretary are considerably interested in that union, and they stipulate the wages which the men are to receive. Honestly speaking. **Sir Owen** Cox has too many activities on bis hands, and I consider he should be displaced by some one who can devote more time to the Government's business. {: .speaker-KDZ} ##### Mr Jowett: -- **Sir Owen** Cox was never on the Central Wool Committee. {: .speaker-KWX} ##### Mr WALLACE: -- At any rate, those are my views. The Bill, as far as it goes, meets with my approval. I leave legal gentlemen to fight out among themselves the question as to whether the- Commonwealth has the power to continue the functions referred to, but if its activities can be extended in some directions, I see no reason why they should not beextended in others. It is absolutely necessary that the Commonwealth Government should take full control over the primary and secondary industries of Australia at the present time, for monopolies are- now at work, and men interested in them are on the Boards controlling them. I favour the appointment of a Royal Commission to find out how the Boards have been operating, to sift the dust from the grain, and to constitute them on a proper basis, not only to control the selling of commodities, but also to fix the prices of them within the Commonwealth. {: #subdebate-38-0-s5 .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS:
Capricornia .- I want to know what has become of theprogramme of the Government. We understood that they were individualists,, and believed in private enterprise., but apparently they have become Socialists. I do not complain if they are sincere, if they mean business, if they" propose to do the thing properly, and if this measure is not the gigantic bluff which the honorable member for Batman **(Mr. Brennan)** believes it to be. I do not think that the Bill is constitutional, but if it is perfectly, in order from that point of view, and if the Government have abandoned their individualism and private enterprise, 1 presume they will make it more, comprehensive, and, at the same time, abandon their abuse, their misrepresentations, and their defamation of this party, which they have held up to ridicule and contempt as being the " Socialistic tiger." In my opinion as a layman, the Bill is unconstitutional. Having seen in the Senate half-a-dozen lawyers on one side and half-a-dozen on the other take opposite views about the Constitution, and having seen lawyers in this House at loggerheads, I consider myself just as capable of forming an opinion on the constitutional merits of this Bill as any other honorable member, and my - long experience in politics has given me the audacity to give expression to that opinion. Section 51 of the Constitution Act provides - >The Parliament shall, subject to the Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to- >The naval and military defence of the Commonwealth and of the several States. When war was declared against Germany, it was very speedily discovered that it was necessary for this Parliament -to . pass a War Precautions Act, giving the Government absolute power to properly defend Australia. By means of -that measure the Commonwealth Government was able to take away from the State Governments every power they possessed prior to the war. It was not a difficult matter for the Government to justify some steps it took under the power conferred by that Act, but it will be a very difficult matter for it to justify certain other steps. The State Governments had been fixing prices, but the Commonwealth Government took away their control in this respect, and fixed the price of meat, sugar, bread, and a host of other commodities. Some people object to the War Precautions Act because of the unfair use of it made by the Government. .It abolished free speech, trial by jury, indeed, any sort of trial ; and it imprisoned men, it deported them " even, without informing their relatives. A wise Ministry would have used its authority with discretion as well as with firmness, but I venture to say that the present Government have not done so, and now, after the war, it is attempting to take to itself powers which belonged to it during the war only. I think the attempt must fail the moment this measure is challenged in the Courts. Germany has ratified the Peace Treaty. It will not be very long before there is an " exchange of ratifications." During the war, it was a very easy matter to prove that it was necessary for the Government to have complete control of wool, in order that our soldiers might be properly clad, and so that the enemy's soldiers might be prevented from being properly clad. It was also a very easy matter to prove that it was necessary for the Government to take control of foodstuffs, in order that our soldiers might be fed, and so that, if possible, the soldiers of the enemy might be starved into submission. But now that Peace has been declared, who will affirm that, in the interests of Australia, it is necessary for the G Government to control the production of wool? {: .speaker-KFC} ##### Mr Fleming: -- They do not propose to control the production of wool. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- By controlling the distribution of wool, the Government to some extent control its production. The Ministry have sought the assistance of a number of legal gentlemen. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- Eminent legal gentlemen. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- Yes; **Sir Edward** Mitchell, among others. Their opinion was sought as to the competence of the Bill. I .apprehend that " competence " means the constitutional power of the Commonwealth. I have no wish to say anything against the "Devil's brigade." I have a great admiration for them. I am sorry that I am not one of them, because it must be a very fine profession, a very interesting one, and, indeed, a noble one. But I can imagine these gentlemen givingan opinion in such an off-hand way- {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: -- It was a very carefully considered opinion. They devoted a great deal of time to giving it. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- But they were very sparing of words when they gave it. It may be the practice of lawyers to be sparing in the use of language when they are not paid for giving an opinion. I do not suggest it in this connexion; but I came to the conclusion that these legal gentlemen felt themselves to be in a very great difficulty, especially **Sir Edward** MitchelL It is not long since this party sought to effect an alteration of the Constitution to enable the Commonwealth to deal effectively with trade and commerce, corporations, companies, industrial matters, combines, and monopolies, and **Sir Edward** Mitchell deemed it his duty as a prominent lawyer and a leading citizen - for so he has been described in this Parliament - to make a few observations about our proposals. He was not sparing of words on that occasion, this gentleman who says that this Bill, which will enable the Government to interfere in trade and commerce, regarding wool, sheepskins, dairy produce flax, and sugar, is within the competence of the Commonwealth Parliament. {: .speaker-JPC} ##### Sir Robert Best: -- Only on the ground that it is incidental to the plenary powers of defence which are given in the Constitution. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- I apprehend that he felt himself in a difficulty. If he had spread himself and given a full opinion as he did in the days I have referred to when we were trying to amend the Constitution, he would have given reasons. He would have pointed out the effect of the Government's proposal, but now he simply contents himself by saying, " It is within the competence of Parliament." Referring to the proposal to amend the Constitution some years ago, he said - >As regard the division of powers between the Commonwealth and the States, it is possible that more questions would arise under the amended sections than remain for decision on those for which they are to be substituted. > >But, however this may be, the number of such cases would be completely overshadowed by those that would arise for decision under section 109 viz., as to whether or not the laws or each of the States with respect to the vast number of matters that come within domestic " trade and commerce " were inconsistent with the laws which will be eventually passed on similar subjects under the amended " trade and commerce " sections by the Federal Parliament. > >Whenever the Federal Parliament legislated about any one of these matters, there would probably arise problems (which are, I may state, some of the most difficult of all to advise upon) as to whether the provisions of the Federal law were not inconsistent with some law in one or more of the six Australian States. In fact, my strongest objection to the first proposal of the referendum is based upon this extended power of legislation as to domestic trade and commerce, and is fundamental. He took exception, not only to the wide proposal that we should have power to deal with trade and commerce as a whole, but also to our dealing with any one item, and pointed out the problems that would arise if we dealt with any branch of trade and commerce. Now, apparently, he sees no objection to our dealing with wool, sheep skins, sugar, dairy produce, and flax. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- Not in a time of war, but in a time of peace. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- And that, too, as the honorable member says, in a time of peace. **Sir Edward** Mitchell's opinion goes on - >If carried by the people, it would transpose a Constitution framed by the delegates of the people - the leading statesmen and lawyers of Australia at that time - after years of skilful care and thought, a Constitution which evoked the highest praise of British statesmen when brought before the Imperial Parliament, into an unscientific kind of mongrel between two entirely differing kinds of Federal Constitution, and would soon make the position of the States and of the people of Australia so intolerable under it that Unification would become a necessity. If the proposals that we put before the people in 1911 were going to make a " mongrel " of the Constitution, what will be thought of the proposals in this Bill, which deal with only a section of the trade and commerce activities that would have been covered by our proposals? He said also - >My deliberate opinion is that the amendments now proposed would give to the Federal Parliament powers of so wide and sweeping a character that, in the absence of any protections similar to those afforded by the Canadian Constitution, the result would be a kind of mongrel Constitution between the two systems, which would be found impracticable in working, and would naturally result in Unification as the lesser of two evils. > >Under the Federal Constitution - if amended as proposed - no such restrictions would exist, so that, upon every one of the vast number of subjects coming under the term " trade and commerce" (for example, I might mention the control of the whole of the liquor traffic), the powers of the Federal Parliament would be supreme, and every law of every State passed on the same subject-matter would have to give way to it. This Bill gives, regarding the five subjects I have mentioned, the absolute power referred to by **Sir Edward** Mitchell. Under it, all the butter and cheese produced in the States of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, and Tasmania will be dealt with by a committee, which " shall fix the price of the said butter and cheese." The committee can grant or withhold licences to trade in butter and cheese, and the Minister for Trade and Customs may override any of the actions of the committee. Can anybody imagine anything more extensive than the powers proposed to be given to a small group of men in this big Australia of ours? A few men, who can be numbered on the fingers of both hands, have absolute power to deal with these items of production in Australia. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- The Bill gives to a committee powers which would not be given to a responsible Minister. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- More than that, they make a positive autocrat of the Minister. It is also provided that, " The committee may require any dairy farmer to furnish a return of the butter and cheese manufactured by him, and the stocks held." The powers of the Wool Committee are even more absolute and more objectionable, because the Government have appointed as chairman of it a gentleman who is responsible, apparently, to no one but himself. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- He can spend what money he likes. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- Yes, and if he gives a certificate that certificate is a certificate that the Commonwealth Government has taken a certain action. The other night the Acting Prime Minister **(Mr. Watt)** drew an unfavorable comparison between members of the House and **Sir John** M. Higgins. He said - and to me it was most objectionable - " The honorable member, like myself, is working for a 'screw' in this House." I resent that suggestion. It was a most impertinent one to make. He added that **Sir John** Higgins was doing his work for nothing. I have given about thirtyyears of my life to the public. If I had devoted whatever talents I possess to making money, I might have been able, in the declining years of my life, to give a great deal of time to the public for nothing, especially if I were inclined to seek or accept a title. I object to the Acting Prime Minister lowering the prestige of members of the House, and to him or any other man casting aspersions such as that a member is here for the " screw " that he gets out of his public work. **Sir John** Higgins has been, and is being clothed with enormous powers. I hope we shall alter the Bill in that respect. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- He has used them very badly in many cases. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- It may be that he has used them badly, because he 'has had so much to do, or that he has undertaken to do so much. I think that **Sir John** Higgins used his powers badly in connexion with the contract he ' made on behalf of the Government with the Colonial Combing, Spinning, and Weaving Company. I asked in this House for information about the agreement which the Central Wool Committee had entered into with that and another firm, but I could not get it. 1 asked question after question, and was put off and side-stepped by the Prime Minister **(Mr. Hughes),** or the Acting Prime Minister **(Mr. Watt). Sir John** Higgins was very much annoyed about the suggestion in my question that there was anything wrong in the contract, and he wrote to me a letter in which he said that the Central Wool Committee were very careful in the preparation of the agreements with the Colonial Combing, Spinning, and Weaving Company and Messrs. Whiddon and Company. He added that the members of the Central Wool Committee courted the fullest investigation and publicity as to the terms and conditions contained in the documents; that the agreements were practically the property of the Commonwealth Government, and could be disclosed whenever the Prime Minister thought fitBut could I get those agreements, or theagreements in substitution? ' No. I got another side-stepping reply to my question the other day, in which they offer - the paltry excuse that, because some of the phrases used in the new agreement' find a place in the writ which has been issued against the Colonial Combing,-. Spinning and Weaving Company,, tile matter is *sub judice,* and they_ therefore do not think it would be wise to make it public. I ask any legal member of the House whether it is not a fact that the moment a writ is issued or filed the contents are open to the general public? It is a mere subterfuge for the Central Committee or **Sir John** Higgins to say that, because a couple of the clauses of the new agreement that has been substituted for the old one find a place in the writ, myself and the public must not be given the information. The whole thing is characteristic of the policy of the Government to keep things dark, smother it up, " mum's the word." I am surprised that the Acting Attorney-General **(Mr. Groom)** should associate himself with a Government that has a policy of that kind. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- You have had a copy of the agreement? {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- Not of the new one. The Central Wool Committee - and. I am sure the honorable member for Grampians **(Mr. Jowett)** will bear me out in this - found that they had been caught napping by . this very clever member of the Wool Board, who has since resigned, to the very great delight of the honorable member for Hume **(Mr. Falkiner)** and the Committee generally. {: .speaker-KZC} ##### Mr Hector Lamond: -- And the Meat Ring. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- Does the honorable member stick up for the Colonial Combing Company's agreement? {: .speaker-KZC} ##### Mr Hector Lamond: -- I will tell the honorable member what I stick up for. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- I hope the honorable member will explain how it is that the Government, cannot get this £280,000 out of the company. {: .speaker-KZC} ##### Mr Hector Lamond: -- I do not stick up for dear meat. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- We shall see whether the honorable member will vote for a motion that. I shall move shortly to give the people a chance of getting cheap meat. The Central " Wool Committee found, after we had discussed the matter in this House at great length, that they had made a very big mistake. They had allowed this gentleman to get an agreement which enabled him to do certain things, and they proposed another. {: .speaker-KZC} ##### Mr Hector Lamond: -- You are merely discussing the issue of the case before the Supreme Court. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- The honorable member may stick up for his friend, **Mr. J.** C. Watson, in this matter, but I am not to be "bluffed" by him. {: .speaker-KDZ} ##### Mr Jowett: -- Is not the ease *sub judice?* {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- That is so. I am not going into the merits of the case at all. I only want to know from the Central Wool Committee what is the new agreement that it was proposed' to substitute. I cannot get that information. I . am trying to show what has been the conduct of the Central Wool Committee and its chairman, who apparently has not the ' moral courage to admit that he was wrong; and the powers conferred by this Bill on that Committee are so great that, if we are to pass the Bill, we ought to modify those powers, and place more responsibility on a Minister of the Crown - a man who i3 responsible to somebody. It has been said that **Sir John** Higgins is doing this work for nothing, but if he is doing it so badly as to make mistakes in a big deal of this kind, we are paying dearly for his cheap services. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- Gratuitous service is no excuse for bad work. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: -- His work is done remarkably well. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- We all admit that a lot of it has been done well, but he may be undertaking too much. The fact remains that the Government have given this gentleman too much power. What means is there of signifying public objection to tha manner in which the duties of the Central Wool Committee have been carried out? {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: -- Was not the honorable member a member of the Government which created these powers ? {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- I do not remember. I only know what I was responsible for in the Treasury. I made an honest, and, I hope, successful, attempt to acquaint myself with what was taking place there, and to keep control. No matter who was responsible for creating the Committee, the moment it was discovered that too much power had been given to that body we should have altered our point of view, and made fresh arrangements. We in this House are responsible to somebody, but if **Sir John** Higgins does wrong, and refuses to give this House any information regarding his doings, we have no means of punishing him, such as we have in the case of a refractory member of the House. The Government are doing wrong in asking the House to pass a Bill in- eluding regulations which were passed in war time. While the war was in progress, it was necessary to give some people very large powers, and to preserve a great deal of secrecy, but the Armistice having .been signed on the 11th November, and the Peace Treaty having been ratified by the German Parliament, what necessity is there for continuing the large powers which have been centred in **Sir John** Higgins? {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: -- We must carry out our contract with the Imperial Government. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- That is quite true; but there is no contract with the Imperial Government regarding wool tops manufactured in Australia. We ought to know whether, in peace, time, the growers of Australia are to be disadvantaged because of some foolish war-time agreement, in connexion with which the wool manufacturers in Great Britain had a great deal of influence. {: .speaker-KDZ} ##### Mr Jowett: -- Has the contract placed us at a disadvantage? {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- Yes. The manufacturers in Britain get their wool at 15-Jd. per lb. {: .speaker-KDZ} ##### Mr Jowett: -- No. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -At any rate, they get their wool at a very much cheaper rate owing to the existence of the contract with the British Government. {: .speaker-KFC} ##### Mr Fleming: -- The English manufacturers pay the market rate. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- Yes; but certain buyers are excluded from the market. French buyers have been excluded. {: .speaker-KDZ} ##### Mr Jowett: -- No. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- The honorable member will find that this is so if he will read the last wool article in the *Sydney Morning Herald.-* What benefit do the public of Australia get from the agreement ? They supply the manufacturers abroad with cheap wool paid for with depreciated currency; the manufactured article is sent out here, and we have to pay as much as £1 per yard for it. {: .speaker-KZC} ##### Mr Hector Lamond: -- How does the honorable member argue that we should get a bigger return for our wool if there were no agreement with the British Government ? {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: *- '-Hi* there were a free market for wool and other products the Australian producer would get a bigger return. Will the pastoralists, who are overjoyed at getting a flat rate cif 15&1. per lb., inform us of the reason for allowing the British Government 50 per cent, of all profits made on the re-sale of the wool at prices above the flat rate? *Sitting suspended from* 6.30 *to* 7.45 *p.m.* {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- I was endeavouring to show to honorable members that the powers given to the Central Wool Committee and its chairman are far too extensive, and ought to be modified; and I have heard nothing since the dinner adjournment to alter my views. I am of opinion that the Central Wool Committee ought to permit the AuditorGeneral of the Commonwealth to audit the books of account, vouchers, and documents used by any of the companies that are working with the Committee, and carrying out an agreement with the Government. I have the complaint to make that the Central Wool Committee have appointed a gentleman to audit the accounts of the companies, and that he declines to furnish the Auditor-General with the information at his disposal. When the Bill gets into Committee, I propose to submit an amendment to the schedule, or clauses in the schedule, to provide that the Auditor-General shall examine ' and inspect the accounts of the companies. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- Is there any provision that the Auditor-General shall audit the accounts of the. various Pools? {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- No; so far as I can -see there is no provision for the Auditor.General coming into the business ait all. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- Are the wool agreements not incorporated in the Bill? {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- I think that in the schedule only a portion of the regulations appear, and those which do not are covered by some of the clauses in the Bill. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: -- All the regulations axe consolidated and incorporated in the schedule. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- If that is so, there is an omission. In the agreement between the Government and the companies manufacturing wool tops there is a clause that allthe books, vouchers, and documents in the possession, or under the control of a company, shall be produced to an auditor nominated by the Commonwealth Government: but under the wool regulations the chairman of the Central Committee takes the position of the Government and the Committee have nominated an auditor who is not on the staff of the Auditor-General. That gentleman has audited the accounts of the companies, but, as I say, he declines to give any information to the Auditor-General. That is a position which ought to be put an end to, and can be put an end to by this Bill. I presume that the Government are prepared to take responsibility for this measure, since they show a readiness to assume responsibilities, and fail to act up to them subsequently in a manner amazing to any Opposition. If they are prepared to take responsibility for this measure, and declare it to be constitutional, then let us go further, and endeavour to protect the general public against the profiteers, who are depriving the people of their hard earnings by charging extortionate prices for meat and other commodities. If the second reading is carried, I propose to move that it be an instruction to the Committee to provide for making arrangements for dealing with meat, hides, and other commodities during the period covered by the Bill. I am aware that the leave given was to introduce a Bill for an Act relating to certain commercial activities carried on by the Commonwealth in time of war. My proposal, therefore, will not come within the order of leave, and I am compelled by the Standing Orders to move that it be an instruction to the Committee to provide as I have indicated. {: .speaker-KXP} ##### Mr Palmer: -- Do you favour an export duty on primary products? {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- When the electioncomes on, and I am a candidate for the representation of Capricornia, I shall be glad if the honorable member will come to Rockhampton and ask that question. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- He will be too busy with the farmers' candidate in Echuca! Mr.HIGGS. - I have no doubt that between his endeavours to carry on his campaign and his watching **Dr. Mannix,** his time will be fully occupied. There is no commodity produced or sold in Australia at present in regard to which there is greater profiteering than in the case of meat. If honorable members are so anxious to protect the public in regard to wool and sheep skins, sugar, flax, and wool tops they will have no objection to protecting the unfortunate people from the extortionate prices charged for meat and hides. {: #subdebate-38-0-s6 .speaker-K99} ##### Mr SPEAKER (Hon W Elliot Johnson: -- The honorable member will have to give notice of the amendment he proposes to move. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- That is what I intend to do. Not only the Prime Minister **(Mr. Hughes),** but members of the Winthewar party, on a hundred platforms, said they would protect the public against the profiteer. The Prime Minister only recently pointed out that if the profiteers were not checked, they would bring about Bolshevism. At the election time honorable members opposite will no doubt declare we on this side to be Bolsheviks, who are people supposed to be killing off the rich and appropriating their property. {: .speaker-JM8} ##### Mr Archibald: -- That is according to the Russian policy - what more do you want? {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- What is the Russian policy ? {: .speaker-JM8} ##### Mr Archibald: -- Doing as you now describe. {: #subdebate-38-0-s7 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- I am afraid that the Russian policy has nothing to do with the question before us. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- Could anybody imagine Australian people killing off -the rich and appropriating their property? Only a man like the honorable member for Hindmarsh **(Mr. Archibald)** could do so. He breaks out sometimes, and gets so ferocious as to describe honorable members on this side as " cut-throat redraggers." {: .speaker-JM8} ##### Mr Archibald: -- Quite right; you crawl and play up for their votes. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- I am afraid this discussion has nothing to do with the Bill. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- I do not think there is very much difference between the speeches that we on this side made to-day and the speeches that we made a few years ago when the honorable member was on the same platform. {: .speaker-JM8} ##### Mr Archibald: -- That is absolutely wrong. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- What am I saying? I am asking the Government to protect the public of this country against profiteering. Does the honorable member agree in. that? {: .speaker-JM8} ##### Mr Archibald: -- Of course, but that has nothing to do with what you are talking about - " cut-throat redraggers." Every sane man is against profiteering. , {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- What is there about the respectable members of the party on this side to prompt the honorable member to describe them as cut-throats ? It will not do; and the Government and their supporters will have to find some more appropriate expressions to keep us off the Treasury bench. The conduct of the Government every day is making it more impossible for them to remain in their present position, and I am offering a suggestion whereby they may retrieve themselves, and carry out their promises. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- Their masters outside will not let them. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- I can well believe that this Bill will not be altered, and for that very reason. Many honorable members opposite are idealists, and I may mention the Minister for Home and Territories **(Mr. Glynn),** who would, if he had his way, bring about the millennium. Can we hope for any efforts to establish the millennium from the honorable member for Wide Bay **(Mr. Corser)** ? His appearance indicates that that honorable member is very amiable, but his experience of life has been such- {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- I am afraid that in paying these compliments the honorable member for Capricornia is wandering from the subject. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- May I not grieve that this Bill will not pass in an amended form, and state my reasons ? I did not intend what I said as a compliment, though it may appear to be one; and had I been allowed to finish my sentence I should have been able to show that the honorable member for Wide Bay will not permit such amendments of the Bill as would make it possible to establish anything like the millennium in this country. We have a definite programme on our side. {: .speaker-KDZ} ##### Mr Jowett: -- Is it the millennium? {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr HIGGS: -- It is a series of rungs in the ladder which will lead to the millennium. We may not get to it because of the political views of men like the honorable member, whose place ought to be with us. We are not likely to get through this Bill the reforms we would get if our party were in office; but that fact must not prevent us from offering suggestions to honorable members opposite. If the second reading is agreed to, I shall move to make the Bill more comprehensive, and to improve it if it comes within the Constitution to do so. Then we shall be able to ascertain where honorable members stand, and those who profess to have the interests of the people at heart will have an opportunity of saying so. {: #subdebate-38-0-s8 .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY:
Dampier .- If it had not been for the contracts entered into by the Government during the period of the war, I would strongly oppose this Bill, because the sooner we get back to normal conditions the better it will be for Australia . and its producers. The bunglings that have taken place, and the consequences which have accrued to the producers through the handling of huge concerns by persons with no business knowledge, particularly in regard to the industries controlled, must have brought about great losses to the people of the Commonwealth. {: .speaker-KTU} ##### Mr LAIRD SMITH:
DENISON, TASMANIA · ALP; NAT from 1917 -- That remark is pretty rough on the Central Wool Committee. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- The wool producers seem to be satisfied, and it is not my place to raise any complaint against the Central Wool Committee; but as a member of the community, and as one who has watched over the interests of a great number of producers, I have my own opinion as to how these concerns ought to be managed. I have been in a position to get into touch with people who have been gainers and losers by this interference on the part of the Government, and I have no doubt as to the great incapacity displayed by many who have been intrusted with the handling of 'the various concerns controlled by the Government. The Minister in charge of the Bill **(Mr. Groom)** should have given us a little more information. It is time we had some definite statement in regard to the shipping business. The Prime Minister **(Mr. Hughes)** has spent large sums of money in the purchase of vessels, and the policy is being continued. Yet Parliament is ignored year after year, and has not yet even been asked to approve of the original purchases. We learn from the cables that further large steamers are being bought, and that a big sale of wheat has been effected, representing about £10,00.0,000. Are we to understand that the money which ought to go to the farmers, who had a distinct guarantee from the Government that they would receive payment for their wheat in the same year in which it was produced, is to be devoted to the purchase of these vessels, or is it to come out here for the wheat producers? {: .speaker-KDZ} ##### Mr Jowett: -- Surely the honorable member does not suggest that the Prime Minister will not pay the farmers? {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- -I suggest that the farmers should be paid the money guaranteed to them before the end of each financial year. Is it to be wondered at that the farmers complain, more particularly when one sees in the newspapers the periodical activity in re,gard to wheat scrip ? {: .speaker-KDZ} ##### Mr Jowett: -- That is shocking! {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- The poor devil who goes* out into the bush .and produces does not get the profit. It goes to the man who has the first information. And this will always happen while honorable members opposite seek to have Government interference in these matters. {: .speaker-KYV} ##### Mr Riley: -- We want to defeat the Bill. Will the honorable member help us to do so? {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- Not this Bill. The wool has been sold, and we have to keep the contract made by the Prime Minister, whether it be good or bad. Therefore this. Bill is necessary; but we should seek toimprove it, and make it as perfect as possible. We have to keep faith with tha Government in regard to other deals; but I want to get out of these things as soon as I can, and I think I can show honorable members that the sooner we are relieved from them the better it will be for the community. Western Australia will be a marvellousfruitproducer. On my last visit to that State, I motored for three-quarters of a. mile through an avenue of magnificent export grapes. There were thousands of casesof grapes awaiting shipment overseas, but we could not secure shipping space for a. single-case. When I spoke the other night,. I alluded to the fact that a return of £2,196 had been secured from 15-J acresof vines. I mention this again, merely to show the value of the industry toWestern Australia. But in connexion with the export of fruit, I had occasion to send -a telegram to the Prime Minister's Department', and I received a most impertinent letter in reply. I do not blame any Minister. I blame the staff. The letter was signed "Webster," on behalf of the Acting Prime Minister **(Mr. Watt).** My complaint was that Jones and Company "were able to get information and facilities in . connexion with Western Australian trade that the people of that State were not supplied with. We were told that we could only get space for 8,0Q0 cases on the steamer *Somerset.* But at. that time the following advertisement appeared in the *West Australian: -* >Export AppLES > >Jones and Co., Hobart, offers 7 s. per dump cases for 10,000 or more bard suitableapples wrapped and packed for export aboard steamer *Somerset,* duo Fremantle about 14th March. Less broker's commission *2i* per cent. Apply (EC. J. Simper, Broker, Perth. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- May not the explanation ' be that they could not get the apples in Tasmania, and that they had space available for which they had paid? {: #subdebate-38-0-s9 .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- But they should' not have had the space which was- being made available to the producers in "Western Australia. It was not because they did not have the apples in Tasmania. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- I hold no brief for Jones and Company. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- I stopped this matter at once by sending my telegram to the Prime Minister's Department, and the Western Australian producers were provided with space for 15,000 cases, Jones and Company's agent being given the share fixed by the producers' Committee in Western Australia. According to this advertisement, Jones and Company's agent was offering 7s. per case for fruit which realized 19s. 3d. per case, and he was giving the public to understand that his firm had been given space for 10,000 cases, when the producers of Western Australia were told that there was only space for 8,000 cases available for them. I was anxious to get space for the export of grapes, but I was told that the British Government would not give a permit forthe importation of anything but apples from Australia. Recently I received the following letter from one of the biggest firms in Perth - >The point we wish to bring under your notice is, that whilst the apple crop was extremely light, the crop of pears was exceptionally heavy, and these, without export, were sold at very low rates indeed. We, as the largest exporters, on behalf of growers, did our very utmost with the authorities to try and obtain space to ship 10,000 to 20,000 cases of pears, but were regularly advised that no space was available for either pears or grapes, and we wore unaware that space had been allotted for pears to any State in Australia until we read the cable referred to above. The prices mentioned are per tray, and there are three trays to a case. Therefore, growers in the eastern States obtain from £2 3s. 6d. to £4 13s. per case. The cable referred to stated that the steamer *Bakara* was discharging apples and pears, and that the latter had been auctioned at Covent Garden at phenomenal prices - from 14s. 6d. to 25s. per tray, and some Winter Nelia pears from 28s. to 31s. My protest is this, that if pears were to be exported, every State in the Commonwealth should have been advised of the fact. One section of the community should not get favoured because the Government and Government officials are right alongside them, while the industry of another section of the community is destroyed. I do not say that there has been any dishonesty in regard to the matter, but there has certainly been incompetency. Men are attempting to run businesses who have never done a day's commercial work, and do not understand the ramifications of huge industries. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- I understand that the Victorian pears came from Harcourt. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- I do not care where they came from. If Australia was to be permitted to export pears, the people of Western Australia should have been advised of the fact. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- Harcourt is in the Bendigo electorate. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- The gentleman who has written to me advises me that Western Australia will be able to ship from 200,000 to 250,000 cases of fruit next year. If Government control is to continue, we must see that solid business people are placed in control of these activities, and ample provision made for export. I have spoken in the House time after time in regard to the Government's interference in the metal industry. Why has no .explanation been made in regard to the position of that industry? Why are we told that the Government must take control,, when, without any regulation, or without accepting any legal responsibility, they have placed difficulties in the way of producers who do not join a certain organization. I was speaking to the Acting Prime Minister **(Mr. Watt)** the other day about a big copper-producing mine at Cobar, New South Wales, employing over 300 men, and, I suppose, providing employment for another 1,000 persons. They have their own smelter, and their own electrolytic plant. They are able to sell in the markets of the world; but for the last twelve months they have been unable to secure an answer from the Government to. their request to dispose of their product. They have been humbugged. I use that word because they did not get a definite refusal from the Government. They were told, in the first instance, that under _ their contract with the Copper Producers Association they must dispose of their product through that association. They advised the Government that they had made no contract with the association, and would have nothing whatever to do with it in any shape or form. Those people in New South Wales have been humbugged month after month, and this has been going on since about" May of last year. They are prepared to start work tomorrow if the Government will tell them that- they can sell their product free of Combine control. They "want to sell it only in approved markets, but the Government will not give them a permit to carry on unless their business is done through the Copper Producers Association, which means that they must hand over to that association the absolute control of their property for the next fifty years. It is scandalous!' We, in Western Australia, are differently situated from the producers on this side. We are producing base metals only on a very small scale, but many of our mining ventures may grow into very big concerns if there is some freedom in connexion with the disposal of their products. We are producing now tin, copper, and lead. I told honorable members the last time I spoke, of three men who made a marvellously rich discovery of lead at Ajana, 100 miles north of Geraldton. They produced over £70,000 worth of lead out of a little pocket in two years, and the only profit they got out of it was less than £4,000. Under the wretched regulations it 'all went into the hands of the people who have got control. I have a letter here from a tin producer- in Western ' Australia. These people were compelled to send their tin oxides over here for treatment. They applied for a permit to sell, and there was such a delay in the Prime Minister's Department in giving that permit that the market dropped over £60 per ton, and they incurred a loss of that amount. Here is a further instance of Government interference. The letter begins - >Some weeks ago we had some tin concentrates ready to ship, and had received the -permission of **Mr. Poynton** to ship. It was sold in Liverpool subject to shipping being available. I am not complaining of the Acting Minister for the Navy **(Mr. Poynton).** I have been too pleased with his work - >A few days afterwards, **Mr. Watt,** the Acting Prime Minister, refused to allow it to be shipped on the ground that it was against the policy of the Federal Government to ship ores out of Australia, and that they must be smelted in the Commonwealth. That means that we have to send that tin ore from Western Australia to Sydney to have it smelted, and then dispose of it, I suppose, in the best way possible. The Government have been pursuing " that policy in regard to lead and copper right away up in the north-west of Western Australia. The Whim Creek Company have been compelled to ship, their ore round to Port Kembla. They sent 11 per cent, ore, with copper worth over £100 per ton, and the cost of shipping, handling, and realization charges at Port Kembla brought, in the treatment of that ore, a dead loss. Even though it produced ore worth over £11 a ton, that mine has been closed down, and several hundred men have been thrown out of employment, owing to the conditions imposed by the Government, and their insistence upon these metals being treated within Australia. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- Is that Whimwell? {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- Yes. {: .speaker-KXO} ##### Mr Page: -- That is the Protectionist policy. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- I do not think it is. I do not believe even the greatest fool of a Protectionist would urge that actions of that sort were beneficial to Australia. {: .speaker-KTU} ##### Mr LAIRD SMITH:
DENISON, TASMANIA · ALP; NAT from 1917 -- Would the honorable member rather have the ore smelted in Japan ? {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- Ten thousand times, yes, if by that means we were able to have a big mine, in full working order, employing thousands of men. If we cannot get white men up there, we shall soon be driven out of that part of the country. I suppose the honorable member would prefer that the mine should be closed down ? The letter relating to tin export continues - >This blocked the sale. We then wrote to **Mr. Watt,** pointing out that the difference in price paid by smelters in the East on that day and what we had sold it for in London was £21 13s. per ton of metal, which we had to sacrifice in order to keep the smelters going in Sydney. In fact, the differences arc eating up all the profits, and the whole business is nothing short of pure robbery in the interests of other people. If the Government are maintaining control over this industry, why do they not include it in this Bill ? Why do they not make it clear that they are controlling mining, and let the public know what manner of control it is ? If we want this country to produce, surely the Government, if they intend to carry on a policy of that sort, can tell the House straight out what they propose doing, and let us come to some decision on the matter. Some honorable members seem to be very satisfied with the action of the Government in- regard to the wheat business. I am not. While we realized that Government assistance was necessary, I certainly had no sympathy with any scheme which meant compulsion. The Government made a distinct promise, which was included in the preamble of the Bill introduced into the Victorian Parliament when the war was in its early stages. It was laid down there, under an agreement made by the Prime Minister and the Ministers for Agriculture of the several producing States, that the price to be paid for wheat in Australia was to be on the basis of the London parity. That sacred promise was broken almost immediately after the Wheat Pool started. The London parity for wheat was 5s. Id. per bushel, and because the wharf lumpers in Melbourne declined to let wheat be loaded for the use of our troops and our Allies, the Government immediately broke their promise, and reduced the price of wheat in Australia to 4s. 9d. a bushel. The promise made at that time was clear and definite, as the following extract, taken from a statement made by the Prime Minister in 1915, will show : - >As soon as possible after the sale of the last cargoes the Minister is to ascertain the net average price realized for the whole of the wheat shipped by his State, and each farmer is to be credited with this rate on the whole of the amount delivered to the Government agent. They were led to expect full payment about September in the year following the delivery of the wheat. To-day the Government have not been able to clear up any of the Pools. I realize the difficulties they have had to meet, but I urge that after the last big sale in London there should be no reason why the Government should not immediately pay to the farmers at least the guaranteed price for their wheat. 1 received some -time ago a circular about the Wheat Pool, giving the comparative prices in Australia, the Argentine, America, and the United Kingdom. It was prepared by a large number of producers in South Australia, and addressed to the wheat-growers of Australia. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Richard Foster: -- It was signed by a very small number, and is not representative of the opinions of the South Australian farmers. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- It is signed by about twenty-six gentlemen, representing farming interests in South Australia. {: .speaker-KDZ} ##### Mr Jowett: -- It is repudiated by the Farmers Union. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- I am not concerned with the arguments. I do not fully approve of them. It is the figures I want to give, as follow: - {: .speaker-K6S} ##### Mr Corser: -- The Argentine had the shipping; we had not. That is the only difference. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- On the question of shipping mentioned by the honorable member for Wide Bay **(Mr. Corner),** the circular says - >For example, prior to the Pool we received 6d. less than American farmers on English parity. Under the Pool wc received 4s.° Sd. per bushel less! Prior to the war our f.o.b. price was about lOd. below English values. Under the Pool it has been about 8s. per bushel below English prices! Under the Pool we have lost our war profits. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: --- They are opposing any system of pooling. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- They want to obtain freedom as speedily as possible. They point out, whether their figures are correct or not, that - >Argentine had no Pools nor restrictions, and, being a neutral country, had to battle for ships, with two-thirds of the world's tonnage either sunk, interned, or requisitioned for urgent military purposes. Notwithstanding these drawbacks, Argentine shipped about 4,000,000 tons of cereals during the 1915-16 season - four times that shipped by us - and paid their farmers cash on delivery J {: .speaker-KDZ} ##### Mr Jowett: -- They got the ships. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- And we, in the early stages, appointed as shipping agents for the Pool two firms which did not make it a part of their general operations to deal in wheat,- and did not understand the ramifications of the business. The Prime Minister's announcement, on 11th November of the first year of the Pool, and the promises he made in regard to shipping, were never realized in any shape or form. The Wheat Pool was compulsory. Our people were forced to put their money into it, the Government have sold their wheat, and it is the duty of the Government now to provide sufficient money to pay the fanners at least the amount they guaranteed them. I know nothing about the facts concerning, the huge shortage of wheat in New South Wales referred to by the honorable member for Darling **(Mr. Blakeley),** but in the Wheat Pool we have the Central Board controlled in Melbourne, and we have various State Boards, which have absolute control of all matters in their own States. I believe all sales for export have to go through the Central- Board, but I understand that there has been some breaking of that agreement in connexion with the administration in New South Wales. But all matters of handling and general, administration are purely the concern of the State, and it is the farmers of New South Wales only who will suffer by any bad administration in this regard. The New South Wales authority may have made a mistake in selling wheat for export without the permission of the Central Board. I do not- like the look of things in connexion with the Pool in that State, but the Commonwealth Government would not be justified by anything said in this House to-night in interfering in the. administration of what is purely a State matter. It is the farmers of New South Wales who will gain or lose by the administration of the State Board, and it is their duty, if they think fit, to demand a Commission of inquiry. The Government have given to the Butter Pool absolute power to make contracts and to supply the people. I sympathize with that to some extent, but there is one point in regard to which an explanation should be made to the House. The Butter Pool is not given' absolute control within a State, but it does control all butter leaving the State in which it was manufactured. Western Australia ur: gently required butter recently, and, although it was selling in Victoria-for 177s. per cwt. , the people of the. western State were required to pav 198s., plus all freight and cartage charges. We were charged 2d. per lb. more than the wholesale price in Victoria, and also had to pay 3s. for casing, cartage to the station, and railage to Perth or Kalgoorlie. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- Does the honorable member say that Western Australia had to pay 21s. per cwt. in Melbourne more than the people of Victoria were paid ? {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925 -- No. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- I say yes. We had to pay 198s., plus the other charges I have mentioned. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- That was a monstrous proceeding. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- It was not fair. If the Butter Pool is to have control, that control should be absolute. We in Western Australia were quite prepared to pay all extra charges, such as cartage and railage, but we do not think we should have been made to pay a special price apart from those charges. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: -- To how many cases did that charge apply ? {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- To a great many. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Richard Foster: -- The 198s. was inclusive of railage. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- It was not. {: .speaker-KRN} ##### Mr Sinclair: -- I think it would be better if the honorable member left the question alone. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- If any honorable member desires to get the actual facts, I refer him to the answer given to a question which I put to the Minister for Trade and Customs **(Mr. Greene).** I know that the honorable member for Moreton **(Mr. Sinclair)** is sympathetic with the people of Western Australia, and will do his best to protect their interests. He pointed out to me that in Victoria certain small producers were not sending their butter into the Pool, and were supplying the people at 177s., but butterwhich went into the Pool, and remained in cool storage for some months, had to bear certain extra charges, including interest on capital. I consider that policy is not fair. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- And that is not the correct explanation. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- If butter supplies are to be controlled by the Pool, the price paid should be the same throughout Australia, irrespective of whether or not the butter comes out of the Pool. Of course, distant States must pay railage or freight and other incidental charges. The Minister, in his answer to my question, said that the price in Victoria was 177s., and that the price paid in Melbourne by the Western Australian people was 2d. per lb. more for the same butter. {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- It was not the same butter. That was the trouble. Somebody had to pay the cost of storage. Only one shipment was involved, and, because of the difficulties created by the strike, we could make no other arrangement. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- The fact remains that we were paying 2d. per lb. more for butter than were the people in Victoria. {: .speaker-KNF} ##### Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917 -- Because you were getting it out of stores. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- It is absolutely unjust that one section of the community living in a distant State should be compelled to pay more for the same article than is paid by the consumers in this State while there is a controlling Pool. The House should not give to the Government control of any product unless the wholesale price is to be the same in every part of Australia. In regard to the Bill generally, we should insist upon retaining full control over the bodies in whom the powers are being invested. I complain bitterly of the powers given to **Sir John** M. Higgins. In the metal trade he has been the person who has helped to build up the monopolies that have been created, and I feel satisfied that centralization and a desire to give tocertain peoplea controlling influence has been part of his policy. It may have been that he was carrying out thepolicy of the Prime Minister and the Government. {: .speaker-KFC} ##### Mr Fleming: -- The effect has been to crush out the small concerns. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- Some of them have been destroyed, and I feel sure that in connexion with wool also it will not be long before a few firms will have complete control of the business. I see nothing in the Bill which will enable the Government to have an audit of these various Pools. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: -- The honorable member is quite wrong; there is provision for an audit in connexion with the Butter Pool. The Wool Pool is subject to a continuous Government audit. Such auditing has been done, and is being done. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- I do not care what has been done. The Bill should contain a definite provision requiring a Government audit. I notice that clause 25c reads - " All expenditure approved by the Chairman of the Central Committee, acting for and in behalf of the Committee, shall be deemed to have been duly authorized by the Committee." The chairman of that Committee can spend £50,000 in the erection ofstores in Sydney or elsewhere - {: .speaker-KDZ} ##### Mr Jowett: -- And save £100,000 in storage. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- He might, but he will be spending other people's money. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: -- He has been spending it very wisely. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- I can only judge from my experience of him in connexion with certain matters. I have read the agreement he made with F. W. Hughes and Company, and I do not think too much of the business capacity of the gentleman who made that arrangement and allowed Hughes to get his profits, irrespective of what this Parliament might do by way of taxation. This Bill should provide that the accounts of each Pool shall be audited by the Auditor-General. We are giving to these authorities statutory power to sell the whole of their products, to expend enormous sums of money, and probably pay large commissions, and surely there should be an absolute control by Parliament through the AuditorGeneral. I remember reading the articles of association of the Zinc Producers Association, one of which enabled the directors to pay gifts or commissions to any person who may not directly or indirectly do anything of advantage to the company, if, in the opinion of the directors, it was in the interests of the company to do so. That was the most extraordinary power I ever saw in articles of association. At that time **Sir John** Higgins was looking after the registration business, and he was the principal influence in enforcing men to join the Combine. I must admit the necessity for the Bill. I wish the Government had gone further and shown, if they are compelled to interfere, how far their interference is to go. I regret that it is necessary to have Bills of this kind, but contracts have been made, and the Government must be given the necessary powers. I am not a constitutional lawyer, but it seems extraordinary to me if this legislation is valid.Is there any limit at all to the powers of the Government, if, after the war is over, we can give effect to legislation of the kind. We are assured, however,on the highest authorities, that this legislation is within our powers, and we must accept the opinion. {: .speaker-KYA} ##### Mr Pigott: -- Provided we get the approval of the States. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- There is nothing said as to the approval of the States. The Government should see that every protection is given to the producer by Bills of this kind. In every one of the Pools more control ought to be given to the producers themselves. I realize that when the Government make advances, as in the case of wheat, they must be strongly represented; but in the case of wool, what need is there for more representation than is necessary to see that the obligation on the part of the Government to give the people a square deal is carried out? Beyond that, in all these Pools, wheat, wool, butter, and so forth, the whole of the representation should be in the hands of the producers. I quite approveof the methods used in the formation of the Butter Pool. The Government representation is right and just, while the rest of the control is in the hands of the producers. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Richard Foster: -- You cannot conceive of more satisfaction amongst producers than in the case of the Wool Pool. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- There is that idea abroad, because it is thought that the producers have been getting a good price for their wool. But right throughout the back country there is a great feeling of. loyalty to the Old Country, and a desire to help, although in doing so the producers know that they are getting a lesser price than they otherwise would. I am quite sure that if the producers had had. more representation the monopolies we have seen would not have been given to certain firms. There is a large cooperative company in Western Australia - the Western Australian Producers Company - with some 5,000 shareholders, nearly every one of whom carry sheep, and desire to do their business with their own concern. But they were refused the right to act as agents, and the business was most unfairly given to other people. There has been a similar tendency to monopoly in connexion with most of the Pools, and I resent it. The sooner we get back to normal conditions the better it will be for Australia. The other night the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Tudor)** spoke about the increased cost of living, and that increased cost, I take it, is due to the action of the Government in interfering with industries. We had an instance last year in connexion with the purchase of woolsacks, when the ' Government compelled the ordinary business people to stand on one side, with the result that the sacks were not so cheap to the producer as they otherwise would have been. For the last ten years there have been all sorts of interferences and restrictions on trade and commerce by regulations and enactments, and I am convinced that the more we have of it the more the prices are inflated, and the more hard- ships are inflicted on the workers of the country. So far as the Wool Pool is concerned, there has been a very fail deal given to local industries, and wool is obtained at a lesser price than that at which it is sent to the Old Country. My own opinion is that it is because of the Protective policy that prices have gone so high as they are. the Leader of the Opposition knows a great deal about the hat-making industry, and he must remember that in one ship the whole of the space was taken up with a consignment of hats sent from America by parcels post. We had exported the raw material, in the shape of rabbit skins, to America, where the manufacturers were able to make up hats and send them here at the extraordinary rates chargeable during war time, and compete with Australian manufacturers. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- I asked the Postal people as to this, and they told me it was a pure fabrication. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- J know better than that As to boots, we ought to be exporting them all over the world; but the people in Australia have had1 the restrictions so long that, not only have they got used to them, and are willing ito pay the extraordinary prices demanded, but are actually asking1 for still 'higher duties. I shall support the second reading, but hope that in Committee there will be some alteration (made in the methods of forming the Boards of some of the Pools. {: #subdebate-38-0-s10 .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr BRENNAN:
Batman .- The honorable member for Dampier **(Mr. Gregory)** , has expressed some apprehension about our constitutional powers in regard to this Bill, and, as to that, I shall have something to -say in a moment. I cannot help congratulating my own party and honorable members opposite on the great measure of support that some of die latter have given to 'the policy of the Labour party in reference to the Bill. The honorable member for Dampier, like others, is most emphatic that, whatever may be the cause of the inflated, prices and the high cost of living, which are the tragedies of our social life of to-day, they cannot be laid at the door of the primary .producer. I remember listening with great interest not so long ago to my amiable and' exuberant friend-, the honorable mem'ber for' Grampians **(Mr. Jowett),** who was at pains .to defend the primary producer from any charge of the kind. I join with those honorable and distinguished members apposite in saying that for a number of years the Labour party's apostles have been touring the Commonwealth declaring that the primary producer is exploited by the middleman, or some unascertained combination of middlemen. The newspapers, the supporters, and claquers of honorable members opposite, said that the Labour party was trying to win the suffrages of* the farmers, but that the farmer was not to be deceived- as to who his real friends were, and, therefore, could not be expected to vote for Labour. When the honorable member for Corangamite **(Mr. Gibson)** came here his first declaration was that the small land-owner, dairyman, andi primary producer was a working man like those on this side, and was not exploiting the people, but merely getting a fair wage. While it was admitted that the cost of living was far too high, it was held that that could not be laid at the door of 'the primary producer. The honorable member for Grampians **(Mr. Jowett)** carried the argument a little further, and .proved that the high prices were -.really attributable to the operations of Trusts and Combines. Has the Labour party never so declared? Has it never attacked Trusts and Combines? Did the Labour party not ask for extended constitutional powers to deal with them ? Did honorable members opposite support us ? Honorable members opposite know that the Labour party asked for those powers on two occasions, and might have asked for them on a third occasion, if it had not been for the action of a certain distinguished absent member of this House. {: .speaker-KIL} ##### Mr Lynch: -- And the . majority concurred. {: .speaker-KZT} ##### Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917 -- Let the honorable member for Batman **(Mr. Brennan)** make his point, whatever it is. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr BRENNAN: -- I thought I had made the point sufficiently obvious by what I have said. My point is that members on the Ministerial side now declare, with the Labour patty, that the people of this country are 'being exploited, and the honorable member for Grampians **(Mr. Jowett)** has proved that they are. And it is further declared that the exploitation is- not by the farmers an'd producers, whose votes in the past we on chris side have -successfully solicited, and hope to successfully solicit again1, when it is found where exactly the exploitation arises. I now come more closely to the Bill before the House. The measure is remarkable in the manner of its presentation, its form, and its subject-matter.. The manner of its presentation to the House is not a mere formal matter that may be brushed aside as not requiring further discussion, for I conceive that it involves a very grave departure from well established precedent, founded on law and common sense, and involves- -also something which, I am sorry to say, is, though I am sure it was never intended to be, very little less than an affront to honorable members on both sides. Why do I say so ? May I remind the honorable gentleman who moved the motion for the second reading of the responsibility which he has as Acting Attorney-General and Chief Law Officer of the Crown. He presents a Bill involving intricate technical constitutional considerations and law points, and reads to the House a short certificate of three lines signed for the guidance of a responsible Minister, by an utterly irresponsible Committee of persons outside, and says, " Here is the Bill ; they, say it is constitutional ; and I ask you ' to accept it. as being so." Although this was not intended as a deliberate affront to honorable members, it bears that appearance, and seems- to suggest that the honorable member considers the Bill too difficult, too complicated, and too complex to submit reasons or arguments in support of it to honorable members whose duty it is to criticise it, and perhaps oppose it. What is involved in this certificate, which the Acting Attorney-General has presented? The honorable gentleman says that' the Committee have given us the best that is in them. All I have to say is, that if they have given to us as a Parliament the best that is in. them they have not rendered themselves very much poorer by what they have given, and have not made honorable members of this House very much richer. They give us a certificate unsupported by argument, or analogy, or by authority of any kind whatsoever; a certificate which appears to me to be very doubtfully in harmony with the decided law of this country. Their certificate is that they have carefully considered the Bill, and come to the conclusion that it is within the competence of the Commonwealth Parliament. Those members of the Committee who reside in Sydney, calling in aid that great Department controlled by the PostmasterGeneral, have written over to say that they too have carefully considered the Bill, and think it is within the competence, of the Commonwealth Parliament, but subject to the important qualification that in regard to sugar the Bill should come into operation before the end of the war. I doubt if there is any sufficient reason for distinguishing sugar; but would.it have been too much for the Acting Attorney-General to have told us that the Melbourne members of this honorary and irresponsible Committee concurred in that qualification? We have not been told that much. Perhaps .there might have been in the minds of the Melbourne members of the Committee a little mental reservation in regard to that point.' I may be permitted, without presumption, t'o offer my humble opinion in this Parliament to which I have been elected. Although we have not had the benefit of any legal expert opinion in regard to this question, and, apparently, we are not to have it, I venture to state that it is quite possible the Bill is within the competence of the Commonwealth. Parliament, although it is highly probable that it would not have been impossible to get half-a-dozen highly-qualified legal experts to furnish the Acting AttorneyGeneral with a certificate that it was very doubtful whether the Bill came within the: competence of the Commonwealth. Parliament or not. I do not think that he has exhausted the legal talent of Australia in receiving this short certificate of competency on the part of this Parliament. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- Does the honorable member suggest that the Acting AttorneyGeneral has discriminated in his selection ? {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr BRENNAN: -- Oh, no, not improperly ; I do not say that. Those members of the Bar, of whom he is content to allow himself to be regarded as the least and last, although in his official capacity he should not have forgotten that, in addition to being responsible to this Parliament, he is the head of the Bar in Australia - those legal gentlemen whose opinion he sought are distinguished in the law, for the most part at all events, not all of them - and are as fairly representative of legal thought outside this House as any committee could be. But my point is, not as to whether this Bill is within the competence of Parliament, as they baldly state it to be. The main question is, when and where and in what circumstances this Bill, when it becomes an Act, as to any of its severable parts, . will be challenged. The effect of the leading decisions on measures of this kind is to make it perfectly clear that the validity of anything done under them cannot be determined in advance. The Bill clearly involves an interference with local trade and commerce. I do not think the Acting Attorney-General would deny that. It clearly involves the fixing of prices, not only in regard to sugar, as those distinguished members of the New South Wales Bar seem to have felt, but also of any or all of the commodities dealt with in the various regulations. It certainly involves a power over trade, not only between States, as we may trade under the Constitution, but also within the bounds of any one State, as we may not trade under the Constitution. Surely the Acting AttorneyGeneral, apart from his own personal knowledge of the law on this subject, has not forgotten the various manifestoes and pamphlets issued by the gentleman who is now his honorable Leader, in which that distinguished King's Counsel of another country **(Mr. Hughes)** has quoted cases which lay down the principle that the Commonwealth Parliament has no power to interfere with or restrain the local commerce of any State within its own boundaries. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- Has not **Sir Edward** Mitchell said that? {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr BRENNAN: -- The Deputy Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Higgs)** quoted probably one of the most eminent - at all events I am sure he considers, himself one of the most eminent - members of this committee, which has given us the certificate referred to by the Acting AttorneyGeneral, as having said that this Parliament has no power to invade the intrastate regulation of trade and commerce, yet this Bill involves it in the regulations, which become part of' the Act as a schedule to it, and which were formerly based on the power given by the War Precautions Act. {: .speaker-JPC} ##### Sir Robert Best: -- But is not the Bill founded on the plenary power of defence? {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr BRENNAN: -- -Yes; and that power has been carried in the leading case on this subject, *Burvett* v. *Farey,* so far as to say that in extreme circumstances, that is in time of war, the Commonwealth Parliament has the power to fix prices, but not at any other time. It is now proposed by means of this Bill to invest the Commonwealth Parliament with power to do all these things, not in time of war, because the war is over, but in time of peace, when the ratification has taken place, and things have resumed their normal way. I may be . accused of presumption again, but I think that the decision of the High Court in the case of *Burvett* v. *Farey* is bad law, and before any one interjects to tell me that I should not presume to say so in the face of the eminent men who decided the case, let me say that I have the honour to hold that view in company with some of the most distinguished lawyers in Australia, and that I share )t with the minority of the. High Court, **Mr. Justice** Rich and **Mr. Justice** Duffy, supported by the most luminous arguments of the present Chief Justice of Victoria, **Sir William** Irvine, and **Mr. Starke,** who is probably *par excellence* the most able lawyer in Australia to-day. The effect of the decision that we might fix the price of bread in Australia - it is the law, and I am merely referring incidentally to the effect of it, and to the point it brings us to - is that the Constitution has become the plaything of party politicians. The Constitution is no longer to be interpreted by the plain meaning of its words, but is to be interpreted by an effort on the part of the High Court Justices to determine what is in the mind of the governing Minister at the time as to the national necessities. It means that an honorable and conscientious Minister of the Crown may convey to the High Court that the necessities of the international situation are such that we require to do certain things, and, therefore, the Court must say that they are necessary to be done for the purposes of defence. But it also means that an unscrupulous Prime Minister, seeking to pursue his own political cause, regardless of consequences, seeking, it may be, to enslave this country, and prepared to resort to any measure to do so, may by lying, trickery, and fraud - I will not mention any names or suggest that such things may have been done in this country by any Prime Minister we may know - but an unscrupulous Prime Minister may convey to the High Court in Australia that the international necessities are so great that he invites the Court to take a certain view, and Chief Justice Griffith is there to say, " We are not here to determine what the necessities of the international situation are; those are for the Government to declare, and we declare that the law is in consonance with the declaration of the Prime Minister for the time being." It follows from that decision that what is the meaning of the Constitution on one day ceases to be the meaning of the Constitution on another day ; that what is the meaning of the Constitution when our warlike operations are proceeding satisfactorily ceases to be the meaning of the Constitution when adversity comes upon us. It follows that before a battle is fought the words of the Constitution may mean one thing, and after a battle is fought they may mean quite another. Those are the results of this decision of the majority of the High Court Bench. If the distinguished gentlemen who gave that decision had not been unconsciously influenced by that patriotic fervor which has so distorted the minds of many other able men, we should have had a better and saner interpretation of what our constitutional position was and is. Such as it is, that is the law. It lays down the law, and it lays down our constitutional powers in regard to this matter. But we propose to use the powers conferred by this Bill and the regulations embodied in it, not in time of war, but in time of peace. I do not attach much importance to the question of whether or not there has been an exchange of ratifications, or any technical act done. The important point is not whether those technicalities have been attended to, but whether in fact we are in a state of international crisis. We are not in such a state at the present time, and nobody expects that we shall be, so that the war, for all practical purposes, is over and finished with. Whether the ratifications are exchanged to-day, or to-morrow, or a year hence seems to me a matter of very small importance. {: .speaker-JPC} ##### Sir Robert Best: -- Except so far as it affects the termination of the War Precautions Act. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr BRENNAN: -- Will the honorable member tell the House what the War Precautions Act has to do with it? {: .speaker-JPC} ##### Sir Robert Best: -- It terminates three months after the termination of the war. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr BRENNAN: -- But this Bill does not so terminate. When it becomes an Act it is independent of the War Precautions Act. It stands on its own foundations. The honorable member for Fawkner **(Mr. Maxwell),** who apparently has not given the Bill that consideration which his standing at the Bar would warrant, replied to-day somewhat contemptuously that the whole thing rests upon the War Precautions Act. It does not rest upon the War Precautions Act. It may depend on the condition of war or peace, but not on that Act, with which it has nothing to do. To show that our constitutional powers inregard to the matters involved in these regulations and in this Bill are extended by this High Court decision to the very furthest point that they will go to, and that they are so extended only because at the time the decision was given we were at war, I shall quote a few words from the leading judgments. The Chief Justice, at page 440 of the report, as contained in the bound volumes for 1915-16, said - >No one disputes that an attempt by the Commonwealth Parliament to fix the price of food in time of peace would be a trespass on the reserved powers of the States. Barton, J., said at page 448 - lt is not to the purpose to say that they involve the exercise of powers which are the proper province of Governments - He was referring to the fixation of prices. In this case the price of bread had been fixed in Victoria, and the power to fix that price was challenged in the High Court. These observations were made in the judgments in which it was decided that we had that power. Barton, J., continued - which have no direct concern with that duty. If they are admittedly so in time of peace, it does not follow that they are so, or exclusively so, in time of war. And, again, at page 449 - >Subjects which before that battle seemed only indirectly or remotely connected with defence as the means of winning the war may, after the battle, be seen quite clearly to be within it. That gives the same illustration that I gave a moment ago regarding the effect that one battle might have upon the nation's fortunes and, consequently, upon the meaning of our Constitution. At page 450 he sums up the matter in these words - >I cannot but think that, as a mere war precaution, though in no other way or guise, and not in time of peace, this legislation, and the derivative regulations and orders are, as far as they are impeached, authorized by the Constitution. Those are the Judges who gave the majority decision upholding the extreme step we took at that time in fixing prices. I come now to the judgment of **Mr. Justice** Isaacs. Unlike his distinguished chief, **Mr. Justice** Isaacs has always stood for an extended and liberal interpretation of the Constitution. He has gone much further than ever the Chief Justice did in time of peace, and, therefore, although I rather prefer to side in the interpreta tion of our Constitution on this occasion with those who disagreed with him, I have always commended him for his consistent interpretation of the Constitution on the well-known American line of extending its power by judicial decision as far as possibly could be done consistently with his judgment as a constitutionalist and a lawyer. He said, at page 453 - >The defence power may be exerted in times of peace, but, so far only by way of preparation. Actual defence, and all that it connotes, comes only when we are at war. War creates its own necessities, proportioned to the circumstances, and not measurable in advance of the occasion, and defence is only complete when it meets those necessities, whatever they may prove to be. While peace prevails, the normal facts of national life take their respective places in the general alignment, and are subject to the normal action of constitutional powers. I shall not quote the judgments, able and scholarly, of the two learned Judges who dissented from those views, except to say that I have the honour of entirely agreeing with the .reasons and arguments they put forth, especially where **Mr. Justice** Duffy made the scathing reply to the argument addressed to him, which was not an argument, but political propaganda, inviting him not to withhold these powers from the Government in time of national stress. The learned Judge replied that it was a strange argument to address to men who were bound by their oath to administer the law without fear or favour. The incident shows in brilliant light just where we have come to in our constitutional relationships as the result of the demoralizing hysteria incidental to the war which has now happily passed away. I hope the Acting Attorney-General will not treat the House with contempt in this matter. I hope, also, that what I am saying will not end the pleasant interchanges between those irresponsible persons and' himself, but I trust that he will not continue his attitude of studied disregard of the intelligence of honorable members 'on both sides of the House, particularly those who are opposed to him, and who expect to be taken a little into his confidence respecting these matters. I ask him to state, for it is not too late, if he has considered the constitutional position himself independently and fairly, how he squares his signing thatblunt certificate as to our constitutionalpowers with the arguments which he so ably addressed to honorable members of this Chamber when contending for the limited powers of the Australian Constitution, and arguing that the powers which we were asking for should be reserved for the States. Let it not be thought that I am desirous of restricting or helping to restrict the powers we enjoy under the Constitution. I have had the honour to stand with those who have asked for much fuller, if not plenary, powers for the Australian Parliament as representing the whole of the Australian people. But if we are to have those powers, and the day cannot be much longer postponed when we shall enjoy them, let us have them in an orderly way at the direction of the people who created the Constitution, and whose instrument it is, and by whose means alone it can be adequately fashioned to their needs. Let not this patchwork continue, under which a Bill is brought down from time to time, and the responsible Minister has to satisfy his own conscience, and the conscience of the House, by getting irresponsible persons outside to say, "You may tread a foot or a yard to-day, and another yard to-morrow "; while for every move we make we must have a certificate from some eminent legal gentlemen outside that we are treading in the right direction, and have not overstepped the bounds of our powers. As we do not know either the time when, or the circumstances in which, this Bill may be challenged, so we do not know what is involved in the Bill itself. I am not permitted to quote literally the debate so far as it has proceeded, but I presume I am at liberty to remind honorable members of one incident. When the Acting Attorney-General made his speech explaining the Bill on the motion for leave to introduce it, when we had not the Bill before us - for he did not make a speech when moving the second reading - and when he came to the question of wheat, the honorable member for Wimmera **(Mr. Sampson)** interjected. "And the price?" " Oh, the price," said the Acting Attorney-General, " there is an arrangement made between the Governments, but I am not at liberty yet to tell you what it is or what the price is." {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: -- The honorable member is quite wrong. I said I had only just received the information a moment before I came into the House that an agreement had been completed, and that I had not the particulars with me. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr BRENNAN: -- I am quite clear that the honorable member said he was not in a position to go into the details. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: -- Because the telegram had only just been communicated to me before I came into the House. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr BRENNAN: -- Later on, when other honorable members interjected, the honorable member said that no doubt the Acting Prime Minister would come down later and tell the House what was involved in that arrangement. The Acting Prime Minister has not done so yet, and it was not intended that he should before the Bill becomes law. The point is that we are expected to pass this Bill with only the haziest notion as to what the arrangements are in regard to prices and other commercial activities. All these things are in a maze of uncertainty. We do not know now what is really involved . in the measure, because there are a number of subsidiary arrangements connected with the Bill which are not tobe disclosed until in good time the Acting Prime Minister **(Mr. Watt)** is disposed to tell us what they may be. The Bill contains in its schedule a number of regulations which are printed *in extenso.* True they only come to us as a schedule, and the Chairman of Committees will dispose of them in due time by saying, " That this be the schedule to the Bill. Those of that opinion say Aye '; to the contrary, ' No ' ; the Ayes ' have it," and that will be the end of it. But I thank the Government that for the first time these legislative enactments, which take the form of regulations, have been placed on the table. One of the greatest abuses from which we have suffered is that the legislation under which this country has been governed for the last four and a halfyears has been legislation, not discussed or approved by this Parliament, but passed in secret by the Government under the name of regulations. And under those regulations, never discussed in whole or in part, men have been prosecuted and imprisoned who could not have been so treated if those regulations had been brought up for discussion in this Chamber, So I congratulate the Government on the fact that this Bill has been the instrument of, for once at least, tabling for our consideration, incidentally and indirectly; some of these regulations. Finally, I ask the Acting AttorneyGeneral not to tinker with the Constitution in the way that is involved in this Bill. Now that they have confessed bv this measure the necessity for getting greater powers for this Parliament, let the Government ask us on this side to cooperate with them in securing a liberal amendment of the Constitution designed to achieve the very things which Ministers are now seeking to achieve, and they will have our support. Are they so jealous of their powers that they will not join with us in doing the very thing which, by this Bill, they declare to be necessary, and which they are seeking to do in a haphazard, halting, and inefficient way, when it may be done in a direct, democratic, and sufficient way - the only sufficient way - by an appeal to the people ? {: #subdebate-38-0-s11 .speaker-KIL} ##### Mr LYNCH:
Werriwa .- I feel that there is an absolute necessity for whatever common sense this Parliament contains to assert itself and vote for this Bill, It may be imperfect from a strictly legal point of view, but as one who has always voted for the liberalization of the Constitution in the direction of giving increased power to the Federal Parliament, and would even have voted for" the abolition of the States in order to secure that supreme authority which it is essential the Commonwealth should possess, I could not forget while listening to the beautiful and eloquent address of the honorable member for Batman **(Mr. Brennan)** - I believe he ranks amongst the most accomplished legal strawsplitters in Australia - that the great mass of the people are asking, " Of what good are our -representative institutions? What benefits are- they con ferring upon us ?" After all, this Bill is only for the purpose of continuing the activities commenced in 1915, and I am asking myself about the consistency of those gentlemen opposite who stood solidly behind the Government when the' pooling system was instituted. Surely, we had no learned opinion at that time that the activities of the Wheat Pool could be ended at any given date. Yet every one of those honorable members, like unnatural parents, would leave their offspring to perish on the doorstep now that the war is over. As a man interested- in the farming industry, I ask what alternative is suggested by honorable members opposite, unless it be found in' the concluding proposal of the honorable member for Batman that we should commence an agitation for increased constitutional powers for the Commonwealth Parliament. Are we, whose wheat aud wool and every security is wrapped up in 'those Pools, to await the issue, of a contentious warfare waged from one end of Australia to the other? K those honorable gentlemen who supported the wheat-pooling system at its institution realized just exactly what they were doing, they must have 'had a reasonable recognition of the fact that some day this Parliament would be faced with the problem that is now before us. Scores of millions of pounds a-re wrapped up in these Pools, and, while the legal argument is proceeding as to what the Constitution admits or does not admit, the producers, whose interests are at stake,, are asking, " Who is going to carry on this work, and when *is* it to be done?" These Bills are essential, and I intend to vote for them. The Government are proposing a short out to do 'the only effective thing 'that can be done. They are endeavouring to protect the property of the producers of the country and secure the interests of all. Iu regard to the Wool Pool, we should attempt at this stage to alter many imperfect things that have been done in connexion with its administration by the Central Wool Committee. After 'all, tho Central Wool Committee was nothing more or less Oban a body deputed to take over the Australian wool clip, which had been purchasedby the Imperial Government, and see that the wool, when properly classified and paid for at the arrangedrate, did not reach the hands of the enemy. When that function was performed, the Central Wool Committee had done all that was expected of it. But we found that in its administration' it practically destroyed the small wool buyer in the country. We saw men who had spent a life-time in building up the wool industry in country towns, and whose sons had gone to the Front, having their businesses wiped out of existence, as though they were enemies of the Empire. The principle of centralization was expressed *in excelso* by the administration of that Committee. I failedto seethe necessity for Chat policy. We were told that it was in the interests of the small grower that he should be. deprived of the right to sell his wool to country merchants who had expert staffs well qualified to classify the wool, and who could have actually assisted the appraisers; but, in the interest of the small grower, it was alleged, they were refused the right to dothat. I again enter my most emphatic protest against that policy, and I hope ihe Government will take- the Opportunity of altering it by a provision in thisBill. In regard to the Wheat Pool, I claim to know something about wheat-growing. We have heard a great deal lately about maladministration of the Wheat Pool, especially in NewSouth Wales. Those people who were such severe critics of the Wheat Pool, and who a short time ago were howling in violent indignation against the Government of New South Wales, alleging that they were allowing the people to be poisoned through inferior 1916-17 wheat being foisted on the millers, are now protesting because the worst elements of that crop were sold to a certain speculator, and the. Wheat Pool is now delivering to him first class f.a.q. wheat. They cannot have it both ways. I wish to explain this matter to the House, because I think I have the right to claim that I attempted to do something that would have prevented the trouble over the inferior wheat. In De cember, 1916, before the inferior wheat, which was grown as a result of the rust, left the farmhouses throughout Australia, I approached the Prime Minister **(Mr. Hughes)** with a scheme to prevent it going into the wheat reserves for human consumption. I urged that it should be set apart to be used in the pig, poultry, and dairy industries, and turned into profit whilst the products of those industries were returning very high prices. The Prime Minister decided that he could not interpose at that stage ; but later on, when the mice plague of 1917 occurred, I again saw him. That plague was a terrible visitation, scarcely conceivable by those who did not visit some of the farmhouses. From ordinary barns cartloads of mice could be taken away, and even people were nibbled in their beds. It may sound like a Baron Munchausen story, but I, at that time, saw pigs with their backs all nibbled by mice while they slept. My appeal to the Prime Minister and the Wheat Board was by means of a memorandum, as follows : - >Problem of Inferior Wheat, 1916-17 Grown. > >Owing chiefly to rust visitations, 1916-17 grown wheat includes a large proportion that is of little or no milling value. This is especially true of the New South Wales crop, as the grade deductions on certificates will show. > >In December, 1916, when this damaged crop was being harvested, I made suggestions that all wheat unfit for human consumption should be carefully kept apart, and should be made available for pig and poultry raising at its real feeding values. I submit that, in view of the present positions, which I shall shortly review, that it is incumbent upon the authorities, even at this late hour, to deal with the question and avert future losses to farmers through holding on indefinitely to an asset of very questionable value. > >Speaking as a wheat-grower for the past twenty-seven years in New South Wales, I can say that we produced more bad wheat last year than in any ten aggregate years within my experience. If the Pool . had not been in existence to advance 2s. 6d. per bushel for all this inferior stuff, practical farmers knew there would be no real market for it at all. > >The present position is: We have pooled the good and bad wheats; how far they have been kept separate in stores and stacks is not clear. We have advanced to ourselves . 2s. 6d. per bushel, upon which " the Pool,"i.e., the farmers, must pay interest. The mice plague, by cutting the bags, has assisted in mixing the grades, and thus intensifying the problem. Big expense has been, and is being, incurred in reconditioning, bagging, restacking, &c, the bad wheat as well as the good. None of the very inferior stuff has been sold, or can be sold, at home or abroad at the nominal face values, interred from the certificate deductions, and that range from *id.* to1s. 3d. per bushel. The official opinion expressed during the passage of Wheat Storage Bill went to show that, even if the war ended quickly, many years must elapse before the last of the surplus wheat grown, or that will be grown during the years we must await shipping, can leave these shores. Such being the case, the question arises, and must be faced - whether it is wise to go on incurring and paying interest, storage, and other heavy charges on the inferior wheat - on the doubtful chance of an ultimate payable return for it overseas, or will we take the practical view, and admit that, sooner or later, the stuff must be fed to animals, and that we should make every possible effort to turn it into highly valuable foodstuffs in Australia while high prices for such foodstuffs obtain both at Home and abroad ? I suggest that the following course of action be taken to assist in averting the tremendous losses that confront us if the policy of drift on this matter be continued, and that has already involved the farmers and community generally in much loss since harvest time: - The Australian Wheat Board, in cooperation with State Pools, should get definite information under the following heads: - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. Expert millers' advice as to the poorest grade of 1916-17 wheat that experience has shown it profitable to mill. 1. Obtain from each State Pool the quantities stored of each grade, and definite information as to the extent to which poor-grade wheats have been kept separate, or may now be separated, from payable milling grades. 2. Get full case printed when all facts and figures are collected, and hold conference (which farmers' representatives should be asked to attend), to devise scheme for dealing with the problem. 3. When conference decides upon practical scheme for loosing such inferior wheats at real feeding values, and according to grades, to the pig, poultry, and dairying industries, then a ballot of the wheat-owners be taken. 4. That with each ballot-paper be sent to certificate holders' in 1916-17 wheat a printed statement of the whole case. 1 believe that, as a result of such ballot, practical farmers all over the Commonwealth will at once indorse action that will not only relieve them, as a class, from a serious burden, but will also give an impetus to industries that can turn what is really waste product into highly valuable and condensed foodstuffs; an action that, if effectively carried out, will also prevent our reputation (in outside markets) as high-class wheat-growers from being seriously injured. The Prime Minister put that memorandum before the Board, and here is the official reply, dated 1st October, 1917 - Prime Minister's Department, Melbourne, 1st October, 1917. Dear **Sir, -** With reference to the memoran dum presented by you, dealing with the problem of inferior wheat, I desire to inform. you that this matter was brought under the notice of the Wheat Board at itsconference last week. The conditions referred to by you do not apply generally throughout the pooling States, but are confined practically to New South Wales, and' efforts arc being made to realize, as profitably as possible, the wheat on hand in that State. The conference considered that the scheme suggested by you would be of no practical benefit to growers. Yours faithfully, {: type="A" start="M"} 0. L. Shepherd, Secretary. It is clear that when the opportunity presented itself to members of the House, to the press, and others outside, to support a proposal that would *have* been of inestimable value to Australian farmers, no attention whatever was paid to the matter. It shows what a lamentable rut we have fallen into when, for party advantage and the wheedling of votes, matters of this kind are neglected. The statement by the Wheat Board that the "problem of inferior wheat was largely confined to New South Wales is absolutely correct. As a wheat-grower of over thirty years' experience, I can say that the average man can have but a poor conception of the wretched stuff that was produced in large quantities owing to the rust visitation of 1916-17. No doubt the system of handling that crop was well meant, but it was a wrong one. We fixed the f.a.q. at 57 lbs. to the bushel, with a scale of deduction ranging from id. to1s. 3d., but it was largely a matter of guesswork, as the result showed. For wheat that was 58 lbs. there was no penalty, but after that the penalty began at½d. and went on until the1s. 3d. maximum was readied, when the wheat grade mounted to only 45 lbs. to the bushel or under. I saw wheat going into bags that would not weigh 40 lbs. to tb.e bushel, and practical millers tell us that anything below. 50 or 51 lbs. is not worth milling for human consumption. Our object was to give the farmer who was unfortunate enough to be hit heavily by the rust trouble a fair and square chance, and we paid 2s. 6d. a bushel, irrespective of what the grade might be. We have only to look at the value of the f.a.q. wheat in the 1915-16 Pool and the value of the wheat in the 1918-19 Pool. The value can be ascertained by adding the sums we have already obtained to the selling value of the certificates to-day, and then comparing either with the f.a.q. wheat in the 1916-17 Pool. We find that the f.a.q. wheat in the Central Pool is worth from 5d. to 7d. a bushel according as the certificates fluctuated. That is because there were men who delivered nothing but f.a.q. wheat, and there was a fair proportion of such who adopted better farming methods, or were more fortunate in their conditions, whose wheat ran from 60 lbs. to 64 lbs. to the bushel - and they are the real losers. Other men, like myself, put in a quantity of good and bad wheat - in a" few thousand bushels of many .grades we put in some of the best and some of the poorest. But as the certificates were claimed by the grower, the f.a.q. man, no matter how good the quality of his wheat, was paid 2s. 6d., and was given the next payments of 6d. and 3d. as they came along. Another man might have had 4,000 bushels- 2,000 of it f.a.q., and 2,000 subject to' ls. reduction. If he delivered the wheat at the railway siding, and received one certificate, when the second payment of 6d. came round he was told that he was entitled to that amount on 2,000 bushels of f.a.q., but that, as there was a deduction of ls. on the other 2,000 bushels, he would be credited with 6d., and he would get no cash. Some of the farmers, however, did hot " come into the country tomorrow," and they put in the wheat in *wo lots. When the f.a.q. wheat ' was delivered, they claimed a certificate for 2,000 bushels, and when the inferior wheat was put in, they claimed another. There was no objection to that, because we had, unfortunately, much against my desire, legalized the right to deal in scrip. Consequently the man with 4,000 bushels, which was delivered under two certificates, drew his dividends of 6d. and 3d. on the f.a.q. portion, and did not mind what happened to the inferior wheat, because he knew that if there had been no Bool it would hardly have been worth carting from the farm. I am as confident as I stand here that what **Mr. Grahame,** the' Minister for- Agriculture in New South Wales, stated is absolutely correct. The wheat stacks of 1916-1917 were raked over and over again for the purpose of getting wheat the millers would accept, and there was a great outcry, which practically debarred the Government from doing anything ,' further. When the splendid deal was made from the producer's point of view, and a sale was effected at something like 4s. 4d., the cry was that the speculator had been able to make a profit .out of it. I hope the speculator will make a profit. Where there is dealing in an individual or corporate capacity, there will be fluctuations in prices, that speculative kind of profit from which the poor suffer so much, until- we devise some better system' of co-operative effort. Perhaps some of my wheat was in that particular lot which this gentleman secured, and I wish him good. luck. It was no good to me. The- evidence goes' to show that the deal was a splendid one for the farmers. Last December we heard the Acting Prime - Minister reading' voluminous correspondence showing the great efforts the Prime Minister **(Mr. Hughes)** had made to sell our wheat. The best price offered was 4s. 6d. per bushel for f.a.q. prime milling wheat, and it was hedged round by such conditions that Australia could not afford to accept it; but, fortunately, for us, a change has come over the scene, and the wheat market has improved. The Prime Minister is now able to sell 1,000,000 tons and a possible additional 500,000 tons of- wheat- at 5s. 6d. per bushel, and there will be a corresponding increase in the price of inferior wheat which will enable the speculator to make good on his purchase. He may do so; but we do not know the price at which he is going to deliver the wheat. I do not care about giving the ' show away, but unless the people of New South Wales used up that worthless rubbish, as I suggested, it was the only way in which this inferior wheat could be got rid of to bring in any return to the farmers. I cannot conceive of any Government allowing such stuff to be used for human consumption, and that was the only province in which they could interpose in the interests of public health. If we look at this question from a fair point of view, away from this atmosphere of party wrangling on the eve of an election, and if we regard it. from the point of view of the producers' interests, we must see that the State Government acted, not only in the interests of the farmers, but in the interests of the general community, and we ought all to rejoice. If success attends the efforts' of those who, from motives best known to themselves, are for ever directing their- darts against the Boards and Governments who are compelled to control these industries during the time of war, does it benefit the producer or the consumer? Wot at all. We had a striking instance of it in connexion with the jute question. I was among those who opposed the action of the Government in giving up the control of the importation of cornsacks. I would like to have seen it perpetuated if possible, and I believe now that something will have, to be done in that direction, but a large section of farmers - not a majority of them, I am glad to say - condemned the Government for having interposed at all. They said that if the Government had kept their deadly grip off they would have got cheaper bags for their wheat. The British Government used their influence with the Indian Government, and the Commonwealth had to spend £4,000,000 in order to purchase bags for the Australian farmers. But because 'of bitter criticism and constitutional difficulties against carrying on this particular activity any longer, the Government had to give over their control and sell the remnant of their bag purchase. I believe they sold bags at 9s. 5d. or 9s. 8d. per dozen, with the result that they are now quoted at 14s., and we are told that they will be about 15s. for the coming harvest. There is no limit to the cupidity of people, and there is no distinction between classes in this respect. We take whereever we can lay our hands on anything, and it is due to that selfishness that is everywhere predominant in the majority of us; in fact, it is said that unless his Satanic Majesty gets hold of a good many of us there will be a miscarriage of justice. People howl for juster and truer systems, yet every one is seeking an outlet by whicH he can get round his fellow, whether it be in the matter of war-time profits taxation or income taxation, or. whether it be in regard to the obligation to yield an honest day's work for an honest day's pay. I can see no better method of reform than by starting with ourselves. Before this inferior wheat left our farms I endeavoured to get something done that would at least safeguard the people's health and the character of the Australian wheat-grower, so that the farmer would only deliver the rubbish at its real food value for animal use. I hope I shall always endeavour to adopt the same attitude. While my sympathies are with the under dog, I have no sympathy with an opposition to the Government that would render it impossible for them to make progress even on the crutches on which they are now hobbling along, and only seeks to bring about turmoil and chaos. I hope means will be provided by which the Commonwealth Government, can conduct the sale of our wool for quite a number of years. In fact, I would not mind if it went on for ever doing so. But I have no hope of being able to maintain the price of ls. 34d. ner lb. I have no desire to see that price maintained, because the teeming millions of people who must provide the market for the wool would need a tremendous increase in their remuneration if, in addition to providing food, they are to have sufficient means to provide garments for themselves. In our efforts to get away from the industrial unrest from which every country is suffering, we must devise some method by which a more scientific system of production and distribution can be achieved. We want new doctrines that will bring the obligation home to every person to play his part. If we are criminally inclined always to lose no opportunity to take the other fellow down, nothing but imperfect, immoral, and tyrannous systems are those which are logically *At* for us to live under. It is idle to fix a daily rate of pay unless we can devise systems which will fix on an average what is a fair value for foodstuffs and raw material for the industries to work up into the thousand and one commodities required by man. By the abolition of wrangling and fighting, and by a better system of distribution, we can solve these problems. The only road I know of is to take' our coats off, and get to work. It is the only road worth pursuing. We have had it said on very good authority that if all incomes over £500 a year were absolutely wiped out and distributed amongst those whose incomes are under that amount, it would mean a share of 3s. 9d. per week only to each man, woman, and child. The volume of wealth that it would Le possible to distribute amongst the human family would be immeasurably greater under a proper system than could be attained under any imperfect system. But while we are looking out for ideal methods we must begin with the lowest rung of the ladder, that is, with ourselves, and determine, as we must do, that the part of self-sacrifice and selfabnegation leads to the highest liberty and the highest progress. Our track must be blazed clearly before our vision, instead of taking the short cuts that satisfy the ears and leave us not even in our present imperfect standard, but_turn us on the wrong path, and destroy those processes of evolutionary effort it is still possible to maintain, and which, I am pleased to say, are still visible in the British Empire. We have much to be thankful for. We have a fearful price to pay for our participation in the war, but if we derive nothing more than the opportunity to go on and do things as Australians can do them, then events are moving in the right direction. If people will only refuse to listen to the talk of class war there is in the community, to the talk that there must be a conflict for ever waged 'between labour and capital, and if they will only realize that land, labour, and capital are the great factors, labour being the predominant partner - that is to say, the creator of the one and the inheritor of the other - labour will come into it3 own, but that will only be when it is capable of giving expression to the highest virtues of co-operative citizenship. Then we shall have the nearest approach to the millennium that fallen man is capable of attaining. The debate on this Bill has clearly evidenced that there is too much of a desire to pull down, and no tendency to build up. That is not the way out. I believe that the majority of all sections of the community in Australia are anxious to do the right thing. I am careless as to whether I shall retain my position in this Parliament, but I am very solicitous that the character for honesty and uprightness, which I. claim to possess, shall not be indicted. Lt. -Colonel Abbott. - What about the wheat deal *1* {: #subdebate-38-0-s12 .speaker-KIL} ##### Mr LYNCH: -- The honorable' member forgets that we had no option but to put wheat of all grades into the Pool, and could not dispose of it in any other way. Although there is perhaps a tendency to unbecoming levity while great issues are being debated, I believe that the only road to follow is for every one to recognise his responsibility, and not seek to correct the other fellow before doing some thing in the direction of amending his own ways. Debate (on motion by **Mr. Riley)** adjourned. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr Higgs: -- I ask you, sir, to be good enough to obtain leave for me to give notice of my intention to move for an instruction to the Committee on the Commercial Activities Bill. {: #subdebate-38-0-s13 .speaker-K99} ##### Mr SPEAKER (Hon W Elliot Johnson: -- I remind honorable members that the honorable member for Capricornia **(Mr. Higgs)** intimated in his speech on the second reading of. the Bill that he desired to move for an instruction to the Committee on the Bill. Notice of such a motion is required, and the honorable member desires the leave of the House to give that notice now. Has the honorable member leave to give the notice ? Leave granted. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr Higgs: -- I give notice that I intend to move - >That it be an instruction to the Committee that the Committee have power to provide for the making of arrangements dealing wi,th meat, hides, and other commodities during the period covered by the Bill. {: .page-start } page 10797 {:#debate-39} ### ADJOURNMENT Closing of Hotels on Peace Day. {: #debate-39-s0 .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM:
Minister for Works and' Railways, and Acting Attorney-General · Darling Downs · NAT -- I move - >That the House do now adjourn. Early this afternoon I promised to make an announcement on the question of the closing of hotels on Saturday next, Peace Day. The Government have taken steps to bring that about. Question resolved in the affirmative. House adjourned at 10.18 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 16 July 1919, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1919/19190716_reps_7_88/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant