View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives
30 November 1921

8^th Parliament · 1^st Session

QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH JURISDICTION OVER STATE INSTRUMENTALITIES
QUESTION
- DISMISSAL OF TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES
QUESTION
- NORSEMAN-ESPERANCE POSTAL NEEDS
QUESTION
- MINISTERIAL VACANCY
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH SHIPBUILDING
QUESTION
- MURRAY RIVER WORKS
HISTORICAL MEMORIALS
QUESTION
- WAR SERVICE HOMES COMMISSION
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH FUNDS IN BANKS
QUESTION
- BRITISH EMPIRE EXHIBITION
QUESTION
- S.S. MORUYA
QUESTION
- STANDING ORDERS
QUESTION
- CAPITAL SHIPS
SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT
QUESTION
- AUSTRALIAN MANUFACTURE OF TRACTORS
PAPERS
QUESTION
- ESTIMATES 1921-1922
LOAN APPROPRIATION BILL

Mr. Speaker (Hon. Sir Elliot Johnson) took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 13393

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH JURISDICTION OVER STATE INSTRUMENTALITIES

Appeal to Privy Council

Mr FENTON:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

– Has the Prime Minister noted the deliverance of Mr. Robinson, the Attorney-General of Victoria, regarding the comparatively recent decision of the High Court in respect of State instrumentalities? If so, does the right honorable gentleman think it competent forthe Government of a State to appeal to the Privy Council, despite the refusal of the High. Court to allow such an appeal ? If the Privy Council is appealed to, will the Commonwealth contest the application ?

Mr HUGHES:
Prime Minister · BENDIGO, VICTORIA · NAT

– The honorable member can hardly expect me to give a considered opinion on this constitutional question until I have had an opportunity to weigh carefully what Mr. Robinson has said. I must ascertain whether an appeal may lie to the Privy Council other than by leave of the High Court. If an appeal is possible, and is made by a State Government, the rights of the Commonwealth will be maintained by this Government. It is the duty of the Commonwealth Government to defend Commonwealth prerogatives and rights, and that will always be done. It is for the High Court to state what are the powers of the Commonwealth, where these are not clearly set out in the Constitution, as in this case, and should the Commonwealth rights be challenged in any way, the Government of the Commonwealth must defend them.

page 13393

QUESTION

DISMISSAL OF TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES

Mr MARKS:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– As I hear all sorts of rumours about the likely fate of the diggers - temporary hands - who have been discharged from the Defence Department, I should like to know whether the Prime Minister can throw any light on the subject?

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

– The Assistant Minister for Defence set out the position in replying to a question yesterday. This morning he and I have discussed the whole matter. He has stated that the sum of £40,000, which was available for temporary assistance would be exhausted when the payment for the three weeks’ leave to which these men are entitled had been made, and that, therefore, in view of the action of the Committee of Supply in cutting down the amount available for works, from which it has been customary in former years to supplement the sums needed for temporary assistance, there was no alternative but to give the men immediate notice, and they were, accordingly, to have been dismissed this afternoon. It appeared to me, however, that this was not in the best interests of the Commonwealth, and that honorable members might avail themselves of an opportunity to reconsider their decision. Therefore, on behalf of the Treasury I authorized the advance of £6,000, which is the amount necessary to keep the men in their employment until the end of the year, and asked the Assistant Minister for Defence to suspend the notices of dismissal. The men will remain in the Department until 31st December, and on that date they will, if dismissed, be entitled to three weeks leave. But I hope that honorable members, when they have had an . opportunity to reconsider the whole matter, will vote such a sum as may be necessary to keep these men in employment after that date. We are under an obligation to them of which we cannot disburden ourselves.

The action taken is a reversal of the original decision, and’ the men will remain at work until the end of the year.

Later.

Mr MAKIN:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Will the statement just made by the Prime Minister also cover employees of the Federal Taxation Department, Adelaide, who have received notice of dismissal?

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

– No. My remarks were directed to the soldiers who are temporary employees, and have received notice of dismissal, as the result of the reduction of the Defence Estimates.

Mr GREGORY:
DAMPIER, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Will the Assistant Minister for Defence indicate the items in the Defence Estimates for Additions

New Works, Buildings, &c., in which provision was made for temporary labour ?

Sir GRANVILLE RYRIE:
Assistant Minister for Defence · NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– The men affected are storemen, clerks, and temporary hands of every description, and provision for the payment of their services was made in practically every item of the Additions, New Works, and Buildings Estimates.

page 13394

QUESTION

NORSEMAN-ESPERANCE POSTAL NEEDS

Mr FOLEY:
KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Recently, when replying to a deputation, the PostmasterGeneral said that an inspection would be made, and a report furnished, upon the settlementsbetween Norseman and Esperance, with a view to determining their postal requirements. When will that report be made, and when will it be available to honorable members ?

Mr WISE:
Postmaster-General · GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA · NAT

– I shall make inquiries, and let the honorable member know.

page 13394

QUESTION

MINISTERIAL VACANCY

Mr WEST:
EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I would like the Prime

Minister to throw some light upon the following telegram which I have received : -

I am leaving Sydney for Melbourne to interview the new Treasurer.Hughes not acquainted with subject. Wife of a New South Wales member has sent dress suit and tall hat.

In view of this message, will the Prime Minister still persist in not telling the country who is to be Treasurer?

Mr SPEAKER:

– The honorable member should know that he ought not to take up the time of the House by submitting a frivolous question of that kind.

page 13394

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH SHIPBUILDING

Mr MARKS:

– As I understand that the two 12,800-ton vessels to be built at Cockatoo Island will have no provision for the accommodation of passengers, will the Prime Minister confer with the Minister in charge of shipbuilding, and also Mr. Larkin and the Board of Control, Cockatoo Island, in order to see whether such provision should not be made?

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

– I can appreciate the point of the honorable member’s question, and in view of the fact that the vessels which are being built for us in England have space for passengers, I shall adopt the suggestion that I should confer with the Minister in charge of shipbuilding and the manager of the Commonwealth Line of Steamers with a view of seeing whether similar provision should not be made on the vessels about to be constructed at Cockatoo Island. ,

page 13394

QUESTION

MURRAY RIVER WORKS

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– In view of the alow progress, caused by the present divided control of the works which are being carried out on the River Murray, notably at the Hume reservoir, and the consequent unemployment, will the Minister for Works and Railways get into touch with the Government of New South Wales and ask them to hurry on with the passage of that legislation which is necessary to bring about unified control of these works, in order that more of the men who are now idle in the district may be employed ?

Mr GROOM:
Minister for Works and Railways · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · NAT

– The Murray River Waters Commission visited the works on Saturday, 19th November, and instead of finding unsatisfactory progress, they were of the opinion that satisfactory progress had been made by both the New South. Wales and the Victorian constructing authorities. Of course, the honorable member is aware that industrial disputes have prevented full employment on the Victorian side, but that difficulty, happily, has been removed, and work is now going on. Excellent housing accommodation has been provided for all the workers employed in the area. In regard to the. main part of the honorable member’s question, an amending -agreement has been made between the Commonwealth and the three contracting States - New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia -for the transfer of the control of construction to the Murray River Waters Commission, but the agreement was not to come into operation until it was ratified by the Parliament of the Commonwealth and the Parliaments of the three contracting States. Each Parliament has ratified the agreement with the exception of New South Wales, where certain amendments made by the Legislative Council have had the effect of preventing the ratification of the agreement by the Legislature of New South Wales. Until the State of New South Wales has re- pealed its Act and ratified the new agreement in accordance with the ratifying Acts of the other parties, the necessary agreement transferring the absolute control to the Commission cannot be achieved. Quite recently the Prime Minister, at my request, has forwarded to the New South Wales Government a letter requesting them to take immediate action. to come into line with the other States. No reply has yet been received.

page 13395

HISTORICAL MEMORIALS

Mr WEST:

– I notice that in the Queen’s Hall the painting of Mr. Andrew Fisher has been removed to a position where the light will prevent it being seen to any advantage, and it requires to be re- varnished or otherwise preserved, to prevent its deterioration.

Mr SPEAKER:

– I shall bring the honorable member’s observations under the notice of the Historical Memorials Committee, under whose control the alterations in the positions occupied by the paintings in Queen’s Hall are being carried out.

page 13395

QUESTION

WAR SERVICE HOMES COMMISSION

Charges by Mr. Ashworth.

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

– In view of the fact that the Joint Committee of Public Accounts has handed in its final report upon the timber purchases effected by the War Service Homes Commissioner, and also in regard to the Caldwell case, and in view of the charges made by Mr. Ashworth to-day, will the Government consider the question of appointing a Supreme Court Judge as a Royal Commissioner to make full inquiries into the charges against the administration of War Service Homes?

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

– I have already answered the question several times, and the fact that Mr. Ashworth has again written to the press leaves me unmoved.

page 13395

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH FUNDS IN BANKS

Mr RILEY:
for Mr. McDonald

asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

What amount of loan money is lying to the credit of the. Commonwealth in the various banks, and at what rate of interest?
What amount of moneybelonging to the Trust Funds is lying to the credit of the Commonwealth in the various banks, and at what rate of interest?

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

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

The amount of loan money at credit of the Commonwealth Public Account at 31st October, 1021, was £8,496,797.
The amount of Trust moneys at credit of the Commonwealth Public Account at 31st October, 1921, was £2,179,155.

The Commonwealth has on fixed deposit in the Commonwealth iBank two amounts of £2,000,000 and £5,000,000, bearing interest at 3 per cent. and 2 per cent. respectively. The deposits are for three months. The deposit of £5,000,000 may be broken on giving a week’s notice. These deposits are not ear-marked as against either Loan or Trust moneys, but form portion of the general balances of the Commonwealth, in which are included the sums of £8,496,797 and £2,179,155 above referred to.

page 13395

QUESTION

BRITISH EMPIRE EXHIBITION

Mr FLEMING:
ROBERTSON, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

What steps are (being taken to secure suitable Australian representation, both in men and materials, at the British Empire Exhibition proposed tobe held in London in 1923 ?

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

-The matter has received full consideration. A provisional site has been reserved. A conference of the Commonwealth and States has been held, and a draft programme agreed to; subsequently the question was considered at the recent Conference with State Premiers, and the decision arrived at is now receiving Cabinet consideration. An announcement regarding the steps decided upon will be made at an early date.

page 13395

QUESTION

S.S. MORUYA

Mr FENTON:
for Mr. Mahony

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice - 1.Was the steamerMoruya purchased by the Commonwealth Government?

If so, when was the purchase effected, who were the vendors, and what was the price paid?

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

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

Yes.
The vessel was purchased from the Illawarra and South Coast Steam Navigation Company on 13th September, 1912, for £10,400.

page 13396

QUESTION

STANDING ORDERS

Time Limit to Speeches

Mr LISTER:
CORIO, VICTORIA

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

In order to facilitate the business of the House, and obviate, if possible, the need for all-night sittings, will he consider the advisability of causing the Standing Orders to be temporarily altered in the direction of reducing by one-half the time limit of all members’ speeches, apart from the speeches of the leaders of each recognised party in the House?

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

– I do not think it advisable that the Government should take action with a view to the curtailment of the time allotted for members’ speeches. I would suggest, however, for the consideration of the House, that the proposal outlined in the question is one in which honorable members might think it desirable to co-operate at the present stage.

page 13396

QUESTION

CAPITAL SHIPS

Approximate Cost

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

asked the Minister for the Navy, upon notice - 1.What are the approximate tonnage and horse-power of the capital ship mentioned by the Minister in” answer to the question by the honorable member for Melbourne on the 29th November?

What is the approximate cost, including full equipment, of a ship similar to the 40,000- ton capital ship launched, or tobe launched in a few days, by Japan?

Mr LAIRD SMITH:
Minister for the Navy · DENISON, TASMANIA · NAT

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

The latest capital ship built byGreat Britain is H.M.S. Hood, battle cruiser, 41.200 tons, 144,000 horse-power, estimated cost £5,672,039, the figure being taken from the latest Navy Estimates. This ship was completed in 1920, and no other capital ship has since been built by Great Britain. Prices are considered to have risen since then. Any figures as to cost of future ships are therefore only conjecture. As much as £8,000,000 has been mentioned in press articles.
No figures are available as to the cost of the latest Japanese capital ships.

page 13396

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Motion (by Mr. Hughes) agreed to -

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

page 13396

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN MANUFACTURE OF TRACTORS

Remission of Duty

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

– On the 10th inst., the honorable member for Dampier asked the following questions, upon notice -

How many firms in Australia are engaged in the manufacture of tractors - (a) steam; (6) oil?
How many employees are engaged indirectly in the manufacture of tractors?
What has been the production in Australia of tractors -(a) in numbers; (b) in value?
When does he propose to issue notices regarding the remission of duty on heavy and light tractors?

I then stated that the information was being obtained. I am now in a position to furnish the honorable member with the following replies: - 1. (a) None; (b) Five.

The number cannot be definitely ascertained as the employees are engaged in making other machines as well as tractors. The total number employed by the five firms is 340. Estimating on the average output per man in the engineering trade, the output of tractors would require the employment of not less than eighty-five hands. 3. (a) and (b) Ninety-two tractors, valued at £56,150, were manufactured during the past twelve months.
An item, which reads as follows, has been inserted in the Tariff: - “ 177(b). Traction engines of a class or kind not made in Australia, as prescribed by Departmental by-laws, British, free; intermediate, 5 per cent.; general, 10 per cent.”

Inquiries are being made, and so soon as the Tariff is finally disposed of, a definite decision will be given as to the types of traction engines admissible under the Tariff item mentioned. The necessary by-law cannot be framed until the Tariff is passed by both Houses.

page 13396

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Air Communication between Great Britain and Australia - Report of Expert Committee appointed by the Air Ministry of Great Britain - Imperial Government Scheme; together with Private Enterprise Scheme submitted by Mr. A. H. Ashbolt.

Wireless Service - Proposal by Radio Communication Company with reference to Wireless communication between Australia and the United Kingdom.

Public Service Act - Promotions of J. L. White, H. C. Hunt, M. H. Marshall, C. J. Sypott, C. C. Green, A. L. Connolly, F. V. Boyle, T. R. Cox, J. A. T. Anderson, W. J. Hannan, Department of the

Treasury.

page 13397

QUESTION

And the important point is that unless we do give them justice we cannot expect them to abide by the law. This Parliament has given the public servants a special tribunal for the redress of their grievances, and it has removed them from the jurisdiction of the Arbitration Court. Surely then, having proved their case, they should be able to get redress. One of the worst possibilities for this country is a discontented Public Service; but if we do not give our employees the right to have their grievances redressed, we cannot expect anything but discontent amongst them. That must mean inefficient service, and instead of a saving, probably a loss to the Commonwealth. As the Prime Minister agrees with my contention, I shall not unduly occupy the time of the Committee, but I remind honorable members that when Mr. Justice Powers dealt with the plaint pf the Civil Service Association in 1919, prior to the appointment of the Arbitrator, he granted a special efficiency allowance of £12 to officers who remained on the maximum of the Fifth Class for two years, and whom the Commissioner certified, were eligible for promotion to the Fourth Class when sufficient vacancies were offering. In 1920, Mr. Justice Starke suspended the operation of this clause of the award, but did not deprive those officers already enjoying’ the allowance of its benefit. In view of the_ expected early appointment of an Arbitrator with the special function of making determinations with regard to the Public Service claims, Mr. Justice Starke referred the matter to him for settlement. I stress the point that that ‘decision did not affect the officers who were already enjoying the efficiency allowance, but it did affect all other members of the Fifth Class.; and Mr. Justice Starke said that he suspended the operation of that clause of the award because another law had been passed to provide for the determination of public servants’ claims. Mr. Hunt was duly appointed Arbitrator, and he has left this matter in exactly the same anomalous and intolerable position as it has been in for over two years. He in tura has referred it to the new Public Service Board without adjustment in any respect. The Clerical Division of the Public Service strongly urges that this matter should have been definitely decided by Mr. Atlee Hunt. This gentleman admits that the anomalies exist and should be rectified , and that he has the power to rectify them, but he delegates that duty to the Public Service Board proposed to be appointed under legislation which has not yet received the sanction of this Parliament. So the public servants must look forward to the very distant future for any redress of their grievances. I am sure this Committee will not approve of that state of affairs. When we deprived the public servants of the right to go to the Arbitration Court, and when we set up a special tribunal to investigate their claims, we did so with the idea that they would get their grievances redressed. As that purpose is not being realized, are we justified in continuing to spend money on this Court ? The Arbitrator says that because of tha present financial position of the country he does not think he is justified in giving a certain award, although the public servants are entitled to it. That is the sorb of decision we get from this Arbitrator. I do not like having to criticise in this Parliament a man occupying the position that Mr. Hunt holds, but we must do right by the people of this country. The Arbitrator must know that the position he occupies is one of considerable importance, and that the welfare of the country depends to a large extent upon an efficient and contented Public Service; and if he is not prepared to do the right thing, Parliament is not justified in continuing his office. I trust that the Prime Minister will take action in this matter. The Arbitrator must deal with the Public Service disputes as expeditiously as possible, and he should be told that he is not justified in anticipating legislation that may be passed by this Parliament, or in refusing to rectify grievances and delegating the hearing of them to a proposed Public Service Board. As the Arbitrator’s salary is appropriated under special Act of Parliament, it is not competent for me to move any reduction of it, but as a protest against what has taken place, and in order to test the feeling of the Committee, I shall later move a reduction by £1 of the proposed vote of £899 for the Public Service Arbitrator’s Office.

Mr HUGHES:
Prime Minister and Attorney-General [3.10]. - I am. sorry that ‘ the honorable member for 1 Hunter (Mr. Charlton · Bendigo · NAT

suggests such an amendment, for it is one that I must vote against, seeing that the reduction is aimed at a person other than the person, complained of. I am not going to traverse the whole of these departmental Estimates, but I wish to say that I know nothing of this matter but what I have heard from the honorable member for Hunter (Mr. Charlton) and what was stated privately to me by the honorable member for Perth (Mr. Fowler). So far as I know, the facts are precisely as stated by the honorable member for Hunter, and assuming them to be as presented, I agree with the honorable member in his complaint, and do not agree with the attitude of the Arbitrator. The honorable member referred to my comments upon the attitude of the President of the Arbitration Court, who seemed to consider that a projected amendment of the Federal or State laws,’ arising out of a. resolution carried by the Premiers’ Conference, would make it impossible for him to carry on. I said, in reply to a question, that it is the business of the Judiciary to administer the law, and that of the Parliament to legislate: and, that being so, the Court should continue the work it was created to perform. The business of the Public Service Arbitrator, as I understand it, is this: He is to consider- plaints brought before him by various associations or divisions of the Public Service, and he is to grant awards which, in his opinion, will remedy their grievances. The Judge may say that the law does not permit him to remedy the grievances; but, while I do not see how any one can set a limit to the discretionary power of an Arbitrator or a Judge, I do not agree with him if he says that the reason, he will not give the public servants justice is that Parliament may at a later stage do what they are asking him to do now. The honorable member for Hunter is right in saying that it is not the business of the Judge to anticipate, or even to inquire, in any way as to what Parliament does. The division between the Executive and the Judiciary is complete; one of the chief advantages, and, indeed, the strength of our present form of government, is that the Judiciary and the Executive carry out their respective functions quite independently of each other. The position, as I understand it, is that certain branches of the Public Service are suffering from what they conceive to be injustice, and’ they seek redress by arbitration.

First of all, they made their plaint in the ordinary Court, but, owing to congestion of business, it was not heard. On the appointment of the Public Service Arbitrator the plaint came before him, and, according to the honorable member for Hunter, eighteen months elapsed from the time it was lodged until the hearing. The Arbitrator did not say that he was not satisfied’ that the public servants had made out their case, or that the evidence was against them. But he said, that Parliament had a measure before it which, if it was passed in its present form, would, as he conceived one of its effects, remedy their grievances. I submit that it is not for the Arbitrator to decline to exercise the duties of his office om the ground that tha Legislature intends to provide a remedy for the grievances of the applicants. If I am asked what is to be done, I cannot give the Arbitrator directions, but I may express my opinion, and I do so> quite freely when I say that if he has acted as the honorable member states - and as to this, of course, I express no opinion - but if ha has, then he does not understand his functions. Our functions are quite distinct, namely, to legislate to the best of our ability, and that we propose to do. The Arbitrator is alleged to have said to. the applicants, “ I will’ not deal with your case: There is a measure in another place which may, or may not, become law in its present form. If it does, then it will do what you want.” It may take quite another form, an occurrence that is not unknown to honorable members; we are not able to say what shape that legislation will take, or whether *it will take any shape; it is at present a mere shadow of coming events. If I am asked to say what I conceive is proper for the Arbitrator to do, I say that he ought to hear the plaint, and, after hearing the evidence, give an award on the facts, doing even-handed justice. I hope the honorable member for Hunter will not take the suggested amendment to a division; if he does, he must propose it in some other, form. I am not going to vote to cut down the salary of the senior assistant, or of the typist, ot anything of that sort, under cover of an attack on the Arbitrator. The expression of my opinion ought to carry some weight. If there is a consensus of opinion against the view which, the honorable member for Hunter and I hold, he may, of course, move any amendment, but if Parliament generally supports that view, that ought to be sufficient. If the Arbitrator will not take notice of what I have said, I have no means of making him.

Mr Anstey:

– Except by taking the amendment as an instruction to the Government to give the position to some one who does understand his functions.

Mr HUGHES:

– I shall not hold out any threats. We are here to express our opinions. The Judge is there to carry out his duties as best he can. When we differ, we have a perfect right to express that difference, but I object to threats. If I were in the Judge’s place, and Parliament threatened, I should-

Mr Anstey:

– Throw it up!

Mr HUGHES:

– I feel sure that if we express our views temperately the Judge will pay attention to them. I shall not use any threats at all. If he thinks our views are wrong, Parliament, ih the fulness of time, can do what it pleases.

Mr BRENNAN:
Batman

– I say with some confidence that if the Public Service Arbitrator is to mould his judicial operations upon what we have heard a member of the present Government say in this House i3 part of the policy of the Government, he is destined to pursue a most erratic course in the future. He is a very unwise person who would assume, from what the Government have said, what they are likely to do in any particular regard. On their late history, if one wished to make a safe wager, it would be that the Government would do something different from , their announced policy. >It is not a matter of surprise, but a natural sequence of Government action and inaction, that the Court should be giving very grave dissatisfaction. That dissatisfaction was prophesied by me.mbers of the Labour party, and well understood by them, before this, if I may so call it, pernicious Court so-called., was brought into existence. It was realized that, in divorcing the mass of Public Service workers from their brethren in other occupations, so far as their right to approach a judicial Tribunal was concerned, we were taking grave risks. At all events, we were doing this great wrong, that we were creating in tense and well-founded dissatisfaction in the ranks of the public servants themselves. All the reasons, therefore, which we urged against the formation of the Public Service Arbitration Court have been proved, during the short history of that Tribunal, to be sound reasons. Little more need be said, then, in that regard. It appears now that the Public Service Arbitrator - to put it mildly - has not been doing his work ; aud there is, in Public Service Arbitration matters, something approaching the congestion of work - at all events,, in kind, if not in degree - which exists in connexion with Arbitration generally. It is upon this question of Commonwealth Arbitration and Conciliation generally that, I wish to say a word or two before .the House goes into recess. It has been suggested by the Prime Minister that my interest in the matter is professional rather than political. I can only say that an imputation of that kind i9 characteristic of the right honorable gentleman who uttered it. But the truth is that my professional connexion with Arbitration, although I have some such, does not weigh with me in the slightest degree in forming the opinions which I hold concerning the understaffing of the Federal Court of Conciliation and Arbitration. Honorable members are not at present concerned with the question whether or not it was wise to embody in the Constitution powers in “this Parliament to legislate in respect of conciliation and arbitration at all; and we need not at present consider whether - those powers having been given to this Parliament - it was wise for Parliament to exercise them in the way it has done. There are many honorable members who take a different view from that held by myself as to the efficacy of arbitration, operating, at all events, through the Commonwealth Court of ‘.Conciliation and Arbitration. There is any amount of room for difference of opinion upon that subject. I know that many persons who supported generally the principle of the Federal Parliament having the power to legislate in respect of conciliation and arbitration did not anticipate that this power would be exercised so generally - perhaps, some would .say, generously - as has proved to be the case. That is not at present the question. The facts are that that power was embodied in the Constitution, that legislation was passed by the Commonwealth Parliament, that the Court has been constituted, and that it entails a Department and a large number of officers, and that in one measure or another it is performing or attempting to perform, its functions hi all the States. It has been a part of our judicial system since 1904. And, whatever other charge may be made ‘against the Court, it cannot be said of it that it is an unpopular Tribunal, or that it has lacked business, or that those persons qualified to have recourse to it have failed in that direction ; because the truth is, beyond all doubt, that it has been a Tribunal of which those entitled to its use have shown extraordinary readiness to avail themselves. What has been the consequence? It must be remembered that this Court has to deal with .industrial disputes and differences of an all-Australian character, industrial disputes extending beyond the limits of one State. Successive judicial decisions have extended rather than diminished or restricted the meaning of “industrial “; have extended the judicial interpretation of the term, “ extending beyond the limits of one State”; and have given a very wide meaning to the definition of “industry.” Generally, judicial interpretation, from day to day, has very largely extended the actual as well as the possible activities of the Court. It would be quite open to the Government, after the years of experience which they and the country have had, to declare against a system of Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration. If the Government had the. courage of their opinions and really believed that the system was inimical to the best interests of the country, it would be quite open to them to introduce a repealing measure and tell the people what they feel and mean in regard to arbitration. But it is a sinister circumstance that, behind the Government, and keeping them in office, are persons who have been consistently and openly, and, I am bound to say, honestly, opposed to arbitration, since it was brought into operation, while the Government themselves, through their head, have declared themselves to be believers in and supporters of the general policy of conciliation and arbitration. The position is, therefore, that the Government, not wishing to unsay the things that the)7 have said in regard to arbitration, and lacking the courage to declare to the people that they have changed their mind, or. that expediency, if not principle, requires that they should vary their policy t and having behind them: those gentlemen who are opposed altogether to arbitration, have decided, apparently, to pursue the easy line of allowing the Court to end in chaos and confusion. That, in regard to any issue, would be a policy for which the Government might well be censured, but when it is remembered that it involves in the case in point confusion and chaos in the industrial system of Australia, honorable members must seriously consider the consequences, and where we are tending in regard to conciliation and arbitration. The Prime Minister has said that I have a personal, rather than a political, interest in this matter. -I shall tell him this afternoon what my political interest in it is. I tell the House and the country that, knowing what the Government is doing, knowing that it is deliberately preventing the Court from operating, while at the some time inviting thousands of unionists to seek its aid and invoke its decisions, my advice to the unionists who have” cases for which they seek a hearing will be’ to drop them until they can get a new Government, or have new evidence of the good faith of this Government. Direct action may or may not be bad, but it is always better than underhand action, especially if the unionists who have been waiting in their thousands to appeal to a Court which is ridiculously under-staffed, have the courage to say to the Government, “ We have offered to submit our claims for constitutional settlement by means of arbitration; we have waited on your doorstep for weary months to be heard, and during that time you have stood with your back to the door, and inveighed against us for being direct actionists. We are done with waiting.” The Government does not know what direct action is, nor, apparently, what honest action is. Here is a Court with one Judge to preside over it which, to function properly and adequately, needs probably half-a-dozen officers - not necessarily High Court Judges - but wellqualified judicial officers, to deal with its business. The learned President of the Court, from his place on the Bench, has told the Government and the country that he cannot cope with the work. It should be self-evident that he cannot do so. If it .were not, there is the evidence that thousands of men are waiting to have cases heard. When the honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley) moved the adjournment pf the House the other day, the Prime Minister told him that Mr. justice Powers had said, shortly after tine retirement of Mr. Justice Higgins, that he could now deal with the business of the Courts Yet there are twice as many cases banked up in the Court today as there were when. Mr. Justice Higgins retired. It is to be noted that no other Justice of the High Court will take on this work. I do not blame them; I commend their discretion. We lost the best judicial officer that we have had, or are likely to have, presiding over the Arbitration Court when, the Government forced Mr. Justice Higgins from the position of President which he had graced so long, and where he had reduced the Court’s findings to some kind of understandable system.. When Mr. Justice Higgins retired, Mr. Justice Powers took on the work. The Prime Minister told us that Mr. Justice Powers had informed him that he was able to cope with the work because he had wiped out, he said, thirty or forty cases in a few sittings. The learned and able Judge, of course, entered upon his work with enthusiasm and optimism, and did so at a time when a large number of unionists had made agreements which were ripe for filing. These agreements were based on principles laid down over a series of years “by Mr. Justice Higgins, and in accordance with a system which he had established. As a consequence, they were rapidly filed, and, owing also to the great industry of Mr. Justice Powers, a large number of oases were thus wiped out. And, by the way, it must be remembered that the number of cases litigated in the Arbitration Court is insignificant in comparison with the number which are settled by agreement in the spirit of the Act.

– It is unfortunate that the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) should deliberately repeat the statement already replied to several times by the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes), that the Government are deliberately preventing the Arbitration Court from functioning. The statement is absolutely without the slightest foundation. The Prime Ministerhas pointed out on several occasions that the Government have from time to time taken all possible steps to assist the Court to fulfil its functions. The honorable member’s other statement that the Government forced Mr. Justice Higgins to retire from the position of President of the Arbitration Court is equally unfounded. It is, as I say, unfortunate that the honorable member should repeat such incorrect statements, and let them go out to the public.

– It has not. I have, already explained that a number of *es officers were not transferred from other Departments until a considerable portion of the financial year had passed, so that their salaries in respect of the whole year had not to be paid by the AttorneyGeneral’s Department. This year, however, their full salaries will have to be paid out of this vote. Instead of there being any increase in the cost of this service, an enormous saving has been effected’.

I have been asked to explain the functions of officers of the Commonwealth Investigation Branch. My answer is that the Commonwealth Parliament has passed a large number of laws, the proper enforcement of which involved the appointment of a certain number of investigating officers. The Department of Home and Territories, for instance, administers laws relating to aliens, naturalization, immigration restriction, and other activities; and the proper carrying out of those laws has an important bearing on the welfare of this country. Then, again, the Treasury administers a large number of laws affecting revenue, and in connexion with them important and- confidential investigations have to be made. As the result of one or two investigations alone the officers of this Department have secured for the Commonwealth revenue amounting to more than one-half of the total proposed vote for salaries. We must have Commonwealth officers for the administration of Commonwealth laws. The transfer of investigation officers from other Departments has not been yet completed. We have still to transfer to this branch investigation officers associated with the Department of Trade and Customs and the Post and Telegraph Department.

Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · FSU; CP from 1920

– Are there fewer officers employed in the Departments from which these officers have been transferred?

Mr GROOM:

– The offices held by them in the other Departments have been abolished. It has been said that we have made new appointments. That is not so. We have simply transferred officers, mostly permanent, of other Departments to this new branch, and have so consolidated the investigation staffs of the Commonwealth.

Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · FSU; CP from 1920

– Were the fifteen men whose services as investigating officers have been dispensed with only temporary hands?

Mr GROOM:

– They may have been transferred to other work in Departments where they were formerly acting as investigation officers. They are, at all events, no longer holding those offices. It would be absurd to impose on the Treasury the responsibility of administering all the laws relating to the collection of revenue without making a provision of this kind for their effective operation.

Mr Brennan:

– The Government must keep an eye on its political opponents.

Mr GROOM:

– I resent that slander on my political opponents, who, I am glad to say, do not need to be kept under surveillance. Investigations, many of them of a confidential character, have necessarily to be made in connexion with the enforcement of our Commonwealth laws. Honorable members would not deny to the State Governments the services of such officers in connexion with their various activities. It is our duty to look after the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth to the extent to which our legislation goes, and it is to that end that these officers are employed. This is an honest attempt on the part of the Government to effect a saving and, at the same time, to secure increased efficiency.

Mr RILEY:
South Sydney

.- I indorse a good dealof what the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) has said with regard to the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Court. I agree with him that the industrial community is sadly disappointed with the way in which the Act has been administered. Like him, I have no complaint to make concerning the learned Justices who have adorned the Bench of the Conciliation and Arbitration

Court. I believe that the ex-President, Mr. Justice Higgins, and the President. Mr. Justice Powers, have rendered good service to the country, and that, if their efforts had been backed up by the appointment of Deputies, we should have had a much greater measure of industrial peace. When men who are labouring under injustices seek a legal means of redress, when they incur great expense in preparing a plaint for the Arbitration Court only to find, after waiting for twelve or eighteen months, that there is no likelihood of an early hearing of their case, it is hardly surprising that they should become soured, and that strikes should occur. One of the chief causes of the delay is that the Courtis wrongly constituted. There should be associated with the President a representative of the employers and a representative of the employees. If we had sitting with the President on the Bench two practical laymen, the work of the Court would be greatly facilitated. These men would be familiar with the technicalities of the trade that was being inquired into, and would be of great assistance to the learned Judge in framing his awards. The work of the Court would thus be made more effective. There might be appointed, as President of the Court, a man of high legal training but having, perhaps, no industrial experience. What an advantage it would be to such a man to have sitting with him a representative of the employers and a representative of the employees possessing an intimate knowledge of the technicalities of the industry being inquired into, and so able to give him material assistance in dealing with the evidence. The old Arbitration Court of New South Wales was so constituted, and my experience, as the representative of the employees in that Court, was that it did splendid work. For the first three years of its existence the industrial difficulties of the State were dealt with so expeditiously by it that general satisfaction was given, but as soon as lawyers were allowed to appear before it, and to take points as to its jurisdiction and so forth, delays ensued and dissatisfaction arose.

Mr Atkinson:

– That sort of legal flummery is not required.

Mr RILEY:

– I agree with the honorable member. If this country is going to progress as rapidly as it should do, we must do everything possible to eliminate strikes and industrial disputes. We can best avert serious industrial trouble by requiring the aggrieved parties to a dispute to appear before a Judge who has the confidence of the people, and whose decision consequently will be loyally observed. I stand for arbitration all the time, and would deeply deplore the turning down of the principle because of the failure of the Government to provide for the number of Judges necessary to facilitate the work of the Court. I believe that arbitration is the salvation of the world. We have sitting in Washington to-day a Conference at which representative men of the great nations are arbitrating with regard to naval disarmament. We have the League of Nations urging arbitration as a means of preventing war, and we look forward hopefully to the result of the deliberations of those two bodies. If it is possible for the countries of the world to cease strife by submitting their differences to arbitration, surely we can by the same means prevent warfare in the industrial arena. If one Judge is not sufficient to handle the work of the Arbitration Court, it is a reflection on the Government if they do not appoint other Judges to assist in doing the work and so preventing strikes and lockouts. I feel confident that if a change of Government did take place - we members of the Opposition say that the only way to save the country is a change of Government - steps would be taken to make the Court function more expeditiously and efficiently. By establishing good feeling amongst the industrial classes, and confidence in the arbitration system, I believe that peace and harmony can be brought about. I hope that the Government will appoint additional Judges to the Arbitration Court, and if they propose an amendment of the Act, make provision for representatives of the employers and employees respectively in the industry concerned to take a seat on the Bench. If that were done I believe that both parties would be more satisfied with the awards.

In regard to the Public Service Arbitrator, this Parliament is the direct employer, of the large number of men engaged in the Public Service. Those men have the same rights as other citizens, and it is our duty to see that they are given the most complete facilities to have their grievances adjusted. If they are to have confidence in the Arbitrator, he must show that he is capable of doing his work. So far, the present Arbitrator has not gained the confidence of the public servants, and if they cannot rely on him to deal out even-handed justice to them we shall have a discontented Service, from which it will be impossible to get the most efficient work. Mr. Atlee Hunt has shown by the decisions he has given already, that he is incapable of carrying out his duties, and should be removed from office. If a man refuses to do the work for which he is appointed, what right has he to continue to draw his salary of £2,000 per annum? He has passed over his duties to another body, and has the audacity to say that he does not think the financial condition of the country warrants him taking a certain course of action. One public servant dictates to the other public servants by saying that the state of the finances does not justify an increase of their salaries, although he admits that they are suffering injustices. What sort of an authority is he on the financial condition of the country? If there is a crusted Conservative in this country it is the gentleman who has been appointed Arbitrator, and he cannot have the respect of the Public Service.

Mr ROBERT COOK:
INDI, VICTORIA · VFU; CP from 1920

– He is a good man.

Mr RILEY:

– Does the honorable member mean good, or good for nothing? I hope the public servants will refuse to go near Mr. Atlee Hunt. Let him continue to do nothing; he is doing it well. If they adopt that attitude this Parliament will then have to devise some other means of getting the claims of the public servants adjudicated upon. We were told that the Arbitration Court was congested ; and to relieve it and bring speedier justice to the public servants we created a special tribunal to deal with their cases. They have been locked out of the Arbitration Court, but the Arbitrator appointed to deal with their claims declines to do his work. When I read some of his judgments I, as a member of this Parliament, felt ashamed that such injustices should be heaped upon the public servants. Mr. Atlee Hunt is unsuitable for his position, and if the public servants will make up their minds not to go before him Parliament will be forced to do justice to them by other means.

Mr Atkinson:

– Would the honorable member believe in this Court if it were presided over by a satisfactory Arbitrator ?

Mr RILEY:

– I believe in the principle of arbitration generally, but its success depends upon the appointment of a man with an. open mind and a sense of his duty to the country and Parliament. It is no part of the Public Service Arbitrator’s duty to defer consideration of claims simply because of some proposal that is before this Parliament for dealing with the Public Service. Mr. Atlee Hunt has refused to work; he is going slow on his job, and his salary should be stopped. I hope that before this discussion concludes we shall receive some assurance from the Government that this individual will be instructed to ‘barry out his duties or resign his position. The Prime Minister has told the Committee that Mr. Hunt has no right to refuse to adjudicate, that he should carry out his duties, and give decisions in accordance with the evidence adduced before him. I hope that the right honorable gentleman will give an instruction to that effect so that this Tribunal may function and do something to allay the unrest that is developing in the Commonwealth Public Service. I feel confident that after the speeches of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) and the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan), and the plain speaking by the Prime Minister, the Government will devote their attention to the appointment of more Judges to the Arbitration Court, and will instruct Mr. Atlee Hunt to carry out his duties regardless of what is happening in another branch of. this Legislature.

Mr ATKINSON:
Wilmot

.- I wish to move -

That the proposed vote be reduced by £1.

Mr Foley:

– In every State?

Mr MAHONY:

– Yes.

Mr Foley:

– The honorable member is wrong.

Mr MAHONY:

Mr McWILLIAMS:

– If the award of the Court were altered or annulled,so that employers and employees could come together at a round-table discussion, the mills would be re-opened practically at once. I have the authority of both sides for saying that.

I desire briefly to refer to the Commonwealth Investigation Branch. If the Prime Minister had not spoken, I would have been tempted to cast my vote for the authorization of the payment of the sum set out in the Estimates in respect to that branch. But the Prime Minister and the Minister for Works and Railways furnished to the Committee two entirely differing statements. The Minister responsible (Mr. Groom) stated that the officials of the Investigation Branch are engaged in carrying out duties which were previously undertaken by officers in the Customs House and in the PostmasterGeneral’s Department. I find, however, on reference to the details of the Estimates, that inquiry officials attached to those Departments are still separately employed in their old positions. While my mind was still in doubt about the matter, the Prime Minister gave his version of the duties of the officials attached to the Investigation Branch. The right honorable gentleman said, not that they were engaged in performing tasks hitherto undertaken by the investigation officers of the Departments already named, but that they were really a secret police force. During the war I supported the creation and maintenance of this Investigation! Branch, because I believed that its operations were essential to the welfare of the country. But all my reading concerning She secret police of Great Britain, and of Europe generally, impresses upon me the fact that in many cases these gentry create occasionally more crime than they unmask. Is it possible to imagine a greater farce than that which has been presented to the Committee by the clashing statements of the two Ministers? Members of this branch are well known to the public men of Australia. They have been going out, night after night, attending public meetings, taking notes in their books, scribbling down shorthand records of speeches. Is it any wonder that, in view of the publicity given to their activities, there has not been a single instance of a public man having been prosecuted as an outcome of their endeavours?

Mr Brennan:

– But some have been insulted and persecuted by these secret service people, which, after all, is the main thing.

Mr McWILLIAMS:

– To the best of my knowledge, no one has been prosecuted as an outcome of any discoveries made by the officials, or following upon their reporting of public utterances. Any prosecutions instituted have been based upon press reports or on information privately given. However, in view of the announcement of the Prime Minister that the members of this branch are, in effect, secret service police, I shall vote against providing funds for the branch. I do not believe that conditions existing in Australia are such as to necessitate the maintenance of the force.I opposed this vote last year, and the year before, also, I believe. But I defended the creation and maintenance of the branch during the war, for reasons which I have already indicated. From that moment when the Armistice was signed there remained no need for its retention. The branch might actually be a source of danger to-day, a medium of political impropriety, which ought not tobe permitted to exist.

Mr Groom:

– The Prime Minister did not say that the branch is a secret police force.

Mr McWILLIAMS:

– The Prime Minister said it was necessary to maintain this force in order that it might keep an eye upon certain classes in the community who are a danger to Australia and the Empire. If duties such as those are not the functions of a secret service, I do not know what the term means. I shall vote against the authorization of payment of the sum involved. And, further, if and when a vote is taken in the direction of abolishing the Federal Arbitration Court - provided that a certain period is given for winding up its operations - I shall support the proposition.

Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong

– I have already intimated my intention to move for the deletion of the division embracing the Commonwealth Investigation Branch. I now move -

That the proposed vote be reduced by £8,477.

The effect of my amendment, if agreed to, will be to abolish this secret service business. If there were no other justification for saving the amount indicated in my amendment the diverse statements of the Prime Minister and of the Minister for Works and Railways should be sufficient to impress honorable members.

Mr GROOM:
Minister for Works and Railways · Darling Downs · NAT

– I desire to remove a misconception from the mind of the honorable member for Franklin (Mr. McWilliams). He has misapprehended the Prime Minister if he is still of the opinion that the right honorable gentleman said that the Commonwealth Investigation Branch is only a form of secret service police. I have already explained the nature of the duties of the officials. I have pointed out that they are undertaking investigations hitherto carried on by special officers in other Departments. I have emphasized more than once that their duties amount to taking over inquiries on behalf of various Departments.

Mr McWilliams:

– The Prime Minister said exactly the reverse.

Mr GROOM:

– That is not so. The Branch is now performing special work for the Treasury Department in connexion with taxation matters - questions, for example, relating to evasion of payments, and the like. The officials are also engaged in inquiries having to do with bank notes, coinage, and inscribed stock. They are making investigations relating to payment of maternity allowances and pensions. These officers, I repeat, have been transferred from the Treasury. Formerly they carried on the same special tasks in their various individual departments; they have now been grouped in the Commonwealth Investigation Branch. They are now employed on work for the Department of Home and Territories in connexion with the Immigration Restriction Act, the matter of passports, aliens registration, naturalization, and the like. All these matters are now being attended to by the officials of the Investigation Branch. They are also required to render service in connexion with the criminal law, relating to various Commonwealth Acts. I have before me a list giving the names of the members of the Branch. Their work is essential, and I appeal to the Committee to permit it to be carried on.

Mr Brennan:

– I understood that the discussion was a general one, covering the whole of the Department. I wish to know, Mr. Chairman, whether, if a vote is taken upon the amendment, the effect will be to preclude any further reference to, or amendment upon, preceding divisions.

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:

– The effect of carrying the amendment of the honorable member for Maribyrnong (Mr. Fenton) will be to prevent the discussion of, or the moving of an amendment upon, any of the preceding divisions. The best plan to follow if honorable members wish to move amendments will be to take the Department by divisions. I suggest that course to the Committee.

Honorable Members. - Hear, hear!

The CHAIRMAN:

– As honorable members appear to accept my suggestion, I will, if the honorable member for Maribyrnong (Mr. Fenton) will withdraw his amendment, submit seriatim the divisional votes.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Division 40 (Secretary’s Office), £17,430; division 41 (Reporting Branch), £5,030; division 42 (Crown Solicitor’s Office), £20,518; and division 43 (High Court), £12,556, agreed to.

Division 44 (Court of Conciliation and Arbitration), £6,354.

Mr ATKINSON:
Wilmot

.- I move -

That the proposed votebe reduced by£ 1 as an indication to the Government to abolish the Federal Arbitration Court as soon as practicable, with a view to introducing a more effective means of securing industrial peace throughout the Commonwealth.

I do not intend to say more on the subject than I have said on previous occasions. I am willing that the question shall go at once to a vote.

Question put. The Committee divided

Ayes . . . . . . 13

Noes . . . . . . 41

Majority . . 28

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Sitting suspended from 6.30 to 8 p.m.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 45 (Public Service Arbitrator’s Office), £2,179, agreed to.

Division 46 (Commonwealth Investigation Branch), £8,477.

Amendment (by Mr. Fenton) proposed -

That the division be left out

Question put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 14

NOES: 38

Majority . . . . 24

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 47 (Patents, Trade Marks, and Designs), £40,900

Mr BRENNAN:
Batman

.- The honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley) has directed my attention to the fact that in this division provision is made for a supervisor and an assistant supervisor of publications. I do not like the look of the item. I am wondering whether these officers are in any way auxiliary to that other class of officers with whom we dealt in the last division and whose duties, according to the Minister forWorks and Railways (Mr. Groom), have nothing to do with attendance at public meetings, whereas, according to the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes), they have practically nothing else to do but to attend public meetings.

Mr Fenton:

– The item in this case relates only to supervisors of the Patents J ournal.

Mr BRENNAN:

– They may simply be officers associated with the library of the Department.

Mr Groom:

– The supervisor of publications has been holding his present office for years.

Mr BRENNAN:

– In connexion with patents ?

Mr Groom:

– Yes.

Mr BRENNAN:

– Then I am glad to give a modified approval to the division.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 48 (Copyright Office), £914, agreed to.

Home and Territories Department.

Proposed vote, £771,788.

Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter

.- I do not intend to occupy the time of the Committee at any length in dealing with the Estimates of the Department of Home and Territories, but I wish again to draw the attention of the Government to the position in the Northern Territory. As the people living there are without representation in . this Parliament, we have to be guided largely by reports that we receive from time to time in regard to what is going

On there, and it is necessary, in the circumstances, that we should give f air and reasonable consideration to such representations. There has been for a considerable time a good deal of discontent. The Minister (Mr. Poynton) visited the Northern Territory some months ago, made a report to the House, and took certain steps designed to improve the position of affairs there. Action was taken, amongst other things, to restrict the franchise for the purpose of preventing what the Minister described as the unruly element- from controlling local affairs. It seems strange to me that, notwithstanding that restricted franchise, when an appeal was made to the people to elect their representatives to the local council, those who it was contended were chiefly responsible for the prevailing discontent were returned. Their election suggests that there must be some good reason for the agitation that has been going on from time to time, and, having regard to the fact that the people of the Territory have no direct representation in this Parliament, I think we should be especially anxious to do everything possible to allay the feeling of dissatisfaction which exists. After all, if we are to have a well-governed country we must have a contented and satisfied people. The people of the Northern Territory have been agitating for representation in this Parliament, but under the Constitution have not been able to secure it. That very disability under which they labour imposes upon us a special obligation to consider their interests and to see that no injustice is done them. I make reference to this matter so that the Minister may know that things are not as satisfactory in the Territory as we have been led by the Government to believe. “We are constantly receiving telegrams from the mayor of Darwin with regard to local grievances. A man who holds so high an office must have the backing of the people, and I have come to the conclusion that there must be some justification for his complaints. Our experience is that in order to be elected to the position of mayor of a city, town, or borough in any part of the Commonwealth a man must have the good-will of the majority of its citizens. Holders of such an office are in that respect very much like ourselves.We can secure return to this Parliament only by the expressed will of the people themselves, and I think, therefore, that attention must be given to the complaints made to us from time to time by the mayor of Darwin.

I would draw special attention to the reports as to the large number of the relatively small population of the Territory who are unemployed, and who are urging the Government to do something that will enable them to obtain work. The Minister has told us that inquiries are being made, and that he is endeavouring to carry out certain railway works in the Territory so as to provide work for the unemployed. I wish to impress upon him that this is an urgent matter. Many of these men are in need, and something should be done, and done quickly, to help them. Employment should be found for them at the earliest moment, so that they may have at least two or three weeks’ work before the Christmas season. I have not visited the Northern Territory, but from what we are told it is by no means the best part of the Commonwealth in which to live. A man has no hope of leaving it unless he is in steady employment, and is thus able to save a little money. Many of the men up there have no regular work. Dissatisfaction has been expressed in regard to the internal administration, and in the interests of the whole of the people of Australia we should do our utmost to bring about contentment in that part of the Commonwealth. I ask the Minister to state now whether there is any likelihood of this

Work being started in the near future in order to afford the people of the Territory some employment. I am sure that if we make an honest effort to meet the wishes of the people residing there, and give them reasonable conditions and facilities there will not be so much discontent amongst them, notwithstanding that they hove no representation. Nobody should be taxed without representation, and steps should be taken to give representation to the people in the Northern Territory, but pending that being done the duty devolves upon the Government of seeing that work is provided for them, and that conditions of life are made as comfortable as possible, especially at this season of the year.

Mr POYNTON:
Minister for Home and Territories · Grey · NAT

– The Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) and other honorable members have brought under my notice the necessity for providing work in the Northern Territory to relieve the unemployment there. I promised to see what work could be put in hand quickly. During my recent trip to the Territory I saw that the railway from the terminus to the Katherine River where the bridge will cross is incomplete. The unbuilt section is only about two miles, but it involves a considerable amount of earthworks and other construction. I have had an interview with the Minister for Works and Railways and the Commissioner for Railways, and the Commissioner promised three days ago that he would get the work started as quickly as possible. The necessary tools are available on the spot, and everything possible is being done to expedite the commencement of the job.

It is quite true that I have altered the conditions under which the members of the Darwin Town’ Council are elected. The franchise is now based on the ratepayers’ roll. It is equally true that at the election which took place subsequent to that alteration the three Labour candidates were returned, but I advise honorable members opposite not to take too much credit for that result, because I found that for one little tin shanty four people voted - on the same qualification.

Mr Riley:

– How did they cast their votes ?

Mr POYNTON:

– They classed themselves as owners and voted for the Labour candidate.

Mr Considine:

– How does the Minister know that?

Mr POYNTON:

– The persons concerned were the editor of the local paper and others connected with it, and the assumption is that they voted for the Labour candidates. In respect of another vacant block of land one person voted as the owner and another person as the occupier. I have always understood the Labour movement to be opposed to plural voting. However, I assure honorable members that peace reigns in Darwin at the present time, and I have every reason to believe that things will go on more smoothly in future.

Mr Charlton:

– How many men does the Minister expect to employ on the railway works?

Mr.POYNTON. - I suppose the job will provide employment for one hundred men for from four to five months.

Mr JOWETT:
Grampians

.- I was glad to hear the Minister say that there is some prospect of employment being given to the unfortunate people in the Northern Territory who are out of work. I agree with the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) that it was quite wrong to deprive the inhabitants of the Territory of their right to representation. There is no possible justification for the present state of affairs. The people of the Northern Territory should be entitled to vote in the same way as do the people in Central Queensland and in North-western Australia, and I suggest that by some electoral redistribution portion of the Northern Territory should he attached to the far western division of Queensland and another portion to the far northern division of Western Australia.

Mr Poynton:

– A proposal to that effect was contained in the Bill for the purpose of giving representation to the inhabitants of the Northern Territory, but the honorable member’s proposal cannot be carried out under the Constitution.

Mr JOWETT:

– When next proposed amendments of the Constitution are submitted to the people the present unfair position in regard to the Northern Territory should receive attention. I hope the matter will not be lost sight of.

Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong

– Has a successor yet been appointed to Mr. Knibbs as Government Statistician?

Mr Poynton:

Mr FENTON:

– I understand that Mr. Knibbs now occupies the position of Director of the Bureau of Science and Industry,, but owing to lack of funds, the Bureau will not function completely for at least twelve months, and, possibly, two years. If the Bureau is notdoing very much work, could not Mr. Knibbs still retain the position of Statistician, and so obviate the necessity for appointing another highly-paid officer to that position ?

Mr Jowett:

– That is a very valuable suggestion.

Mr FENTON:

– The Government should pause before making a new appointment. The Estimates include an amount of £850, which, a foot-note indicates, is for portion of the year only. I assume that that amount covers the portion of the year when Mr. Knibbs occupied the position of Statistician, because the salary for the previous year was £1,250. If Mr. Knibbs is not fully employed at present owing to the restriction placed on the Bureau by lack of funds, could he not continue to keep an oversight of the Statistical Department whilst paying casual attention to the work of the Bureau?

Mr BAYLEY:
Oxley

.- Like other honorable members, I am. of the opinion that the men and women of the Northern Territory should have representation in this Parliament, but I am not in agreement with the proposal that that representation should be in the Senate. If they are to’ be represented anywhere, it should be in this, the people’s, Chamber and I do not see why we should not adopt the practice which, has operated so long in the United States of America. Territories like Oklahoma and Arizona, until they attained statehood, had the privilege of electing members to the House of Representatives at Washington. Such members took their seats with the other members, but had not the privilege of voting. I suggest that a Bill be prepared to allow the people of the Northern Territory to send to this Chamber a representative who should not have the privilege of voting until such time as the number of electors in the Northern Territory approximates to the number in the more settled electorates in other parts of the Common wealth.

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

.- I fully indorse the remarks made by the honorable member for Oxley. It is a slur upon the escutcheon of Australia that any men or women of this nation who have agreed to live under the conditions which prevail in the Territory should be robbed of their right to vote. I suppose that many of those who are seeking the rights of Australian citizenship have in the past voted for the Minister for Home and Territories (Mr. Poynton), and,I feel sure that if he were not a member of the Government, but were sitting on this side of the House, no voice would ring out louder than his in denunciation of the present unfair system. We have been friends too long for me to wish to say anything that would hurt the honorable member’s feelings, but I say with regret that I do not think he has shown that amount of energy on behalf of these people that he would have shown had he been differently circumstanced. When the Commonwealth took over the Northern Territory from South Australia the largest constituency in Australia (Grey) had as its representative the present Minister” for Home and Territories. At that time the people of the Northern Territory had the right to vote for him, and they chose a man who represented them well and truly. They had at that time votes for the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the South Australian Legislative Council and Legislative Assembly, but by a stroke of the pen - I care little whether it was my colleagues or others who were responsible for it - Australian citizenship was taken from those men and women.

Mr Jowett:

– Who was responsible for that action ?

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

Mr Poynton:

– The works I referred to are those necessary as a preliminary to the construction of the bridge.

Mr JACKSON:

Mr JACKSON:

– I hope so, at any rate. I suggest also that the Department should make a sum available for keeping roads clear of such obstructions as ant hills, and for making low-level crossings over sandy creeks. There are scores and scores of streams throughout the Territory, most of which, however, are very shallow, and run dry very rapidly. If low-level crossings were made, the overland route to Darwin could be easily accomplished by motor car in a matter of about twelve days. I intend to suggest to the Minister a method whereby this task of smoothing the way could be carried out with a very small expenditure. If nothing can be done this year I hope that a specific sum will be placed on next year’s Estimates so that the track from the south to Darwin may be rendered negotiable. I might mention that two cars followed the party with which I journeyed. In one of them, Mr. and Mrs. Dutton, of South Australia, were travelling. The two motors made a relatively comfortable passage after our party had prepared the way in such a manner, for example, as by cutting down boughs to provide corduroy tracks across the sandy creek beds. If motorists do not journey right through to Darwin in the near future, numbers will certainly travel as far as the Macdonnell Ranges, which will become shortly a health resort.

I desire to bring under the attention of the Minister an unsatisfactory condition of affairs arising from the letting of a contract for the cartage of Government supplies from Oodnadatta to Alice Springs. The conditions, as a matter of fact, are .little short of scandalous. Some time ago the Government called for tenders for the transport of materials, and stipulated that white labour only should be employed. By the ordinary camel teams, freight to Alice Springs from Oodnadatta is £17 per ton. A certain firm secured the contract at £37 per ton, tho basis of the contract being the employment of white labour. Later, the firm communicated with the Department, to the effect that white labour could not be secured; which, by the way, was a deliberate lie. The contractors then intimated that they would be prepared to put a half-caste or an Afghan on to the job, in consideration of which they would reduce their tender to £28 per ton. To-day the Government are in the ridiculous position of having their supplies conveyed for £28 per ton, while ordinary settlers pay only £17 to have their goods conveyed upon the same camels. A returned soldier, whom

– I speak of 2-gallon tins which are soldered, not of 8-gallon drums. Many of the tins when we got them were dry. I am glad that it is the policy of this Department to open up the country by extending its boring operations, and I commend to the consideration of the Minister my suggestions about hospitals and buggy mail services.

Mr BLAKELEY:
Darling

. -I desire to speak of some matters connected with the administration of the Northern Territory, the first of them being the dismissal of Dr. H. I. Jensen, who was at one time Geologist to the Territory. He’ is one of the most eminent geologists in Australia, and, for that matter, in the world ; but not long after he went to Port Darwin he fell foul of the dual administration. Dr. Jensen has initiative and ability, and was considerably hampered by the then Administrator and! the staff generally. He made certain charges against the Administration - eighteen or nineteen, I have been informed by the Minister - and his charges were practically tried by those against whom they were levelled, the trial being virtually an appeal from Caesar to Caesar. The men responsible for Dr. Jensen’s dismissal were unsparingly condemned by Mr. Justice Ewing, who was appointed a Royal Commissioner to investigate the administration of the Territory, a few of whose observations I shall quote. Mr. Justice Ewing said -

Dr. Gilruth is an able man, and, in my opinion, within the sphere for which Providence intended him, very much above the average. Unfortunately, he was called upon to rule a democratic people, a task for which he apparently is unfitted. Mr. Conacher, the managing director of Vestey’s Company, who in his evidence paid the highest possible tribute to Dr. Gilruth’s ability, knowledge, and capacity, and spoke of him as a personal friend, ended a letter to his principals by saying that Dr. Gilruth’s downfall was a direct result of methods. He continued - “ One would naturally like to use a strong hand, but I don’t see anywhere in the world to-day where that is making men work satisfactorily . “

Dr. Gilruth had little toleration for any person who disagreed with him, and was temperamentally unfitted for filling the office he occupied. There canbe no doubtbut that his general method of administration and conduct was one of the factors directly contributing to the unsatisfactory condition of affairs which I found existing.

Of Judge Bevan, who during the strike worked on a wharf, scabbing, and received pay from a local company, the Commissioner said -

During a strike Judge Bevan worked as a labourer upon the Darwin wharf, and received the pay of the company - an incident which the industrial section of the community never forgot or forgave. Judge Bevan admits that his conduct on this occasion was most unwise. I would add that it would appear to me as most improper, particularly in view of the fact that he was the only Judge in the Territory. Judge Bevan’s suspected association in mining transactions with Dr. Gilruth, his close friendship with that gentleman, and’ the existence of a private telephone, not connected with the exchange, between his chambers and Dr. Gilruth’s office, all tended to bring about suspicion. Judge Bevan also, to the knowledge of the people, took active steps to secure the abolition of trial by jury in the Territory-

The Minister has carried on the good work by completely depriving the people of the Territory of the right to trial by jury, except in certain cases- and the residents thought this another stage towards their passing completely into the hands of the Administrator and the Judge. . .

Dr. Gilruth seems to possess none of those qualifications which fit him for the exercise of almost autocratic powers, except personal courage.

With regard to the Arrino lease, the Royal Commissioner found that -

Hope was a partner of Dr. Gilruth and Judge Bevan from the beginning to the end of the transactions in connexion with this mine.

That Judge Bevan was perfectly open in his association as a partner with Hope, but that Dr. Gilruth, the Administrator, was a secret partner.

The report contains a scathing indictment of Carey, which I shall not read now because of a case which is before the Court. Dr. Jensen made certain charges against the administration of these men, and practically every one of those charges waa proved during the investigation of the Royal Commissioner some years later; but he was, nevertheless, dismissed, and for twelve months ‘afterwards was without employment, having at last to accept a minor position under the Queensland Government. He received noi compensation for his dismissal by the gang that was condemned by the Royal Commissioner, and I think that the Government, even at this late stage, should recompense him. Dr. Jensen was a Labour man.

Mr Poynton:

– It was Mr. Barnett, stipendiary magistrate, of Sydney, who held the inquiry into Dr. Jensen’s charges.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– The fact remains that practically the whole of those charges were found by Mr. Justice Ewing to be proved. Because of Dr. Jensen’s Labour tendencies, he was up against Messrs. Gilruth and Bevan and the others of whom Mr. Justice Ewing spoke so scathingly, and they were responsible for his dismissal. The present Minister was not in office at the time, but he should take steps now to compensate Dr. Jensen.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– And we must give them more power.

Mr FLEMING:

– That is so. When officers of the Commonwealth are sent into the far back districts they must be given as much liberty in the discharge of their administrative duties as can safely be allowed them. We have had too much of the system under which references have constantly to be made to the Central authorities, and too little of that necessary liberty on the part of local officers to meet the immediate needs which are constantly arising in the far away interior.

I want again to impress upon the Ministry that we shall never be able to develop the back country of the Northern Territory while we continue to follow the present lines of administration. As far back as 1916, we passed a Bill providing, amongst other things, for the construction of the Katherine River bridge; but the honorable member for Bass, who has just returned from that part of the Territory, tells us that not even a start has been made with the work. When that Bill was passed in 1916the people out there naturally thought that they would speedily be brought into closer touch with civilization. Five years have elapsed without anything being done. They have had all that time in which to lose faith in the Central Administration and to lessen their belief in the future of the Territory. When the Government passes a measure designed to develop the back country it should at once give effect to it. Its object should be not only to develop Australia in the ordinary sense, but to establish confidence on the part of the people who are breaking in the new lands. If we are to develop the country as we should do, we shall have to establish on the part of the people in the back country a more complete confidence in this Parliament than has yet been created. We ought certainly to give the people of the Northern Territory some sort of representation. The honorable member for Oxley (Mr. Bayley) this evening threw but a suggestion which is well worth the consideration of Parliament. I would impress upon the Minister, who knows something of life in the back country, that it is time we showed the people of the Northern Territory that when we promise to do a thing we will see it through. The Katherine River bridge should be built as soon as possible. We should establish on the part of the pioneers up there a feeling of reliance upon rather than a feeling of doubt in representatives here. Little surface undertakings such as the honorable member for Bass has suggested will not settle the north of Australia or bring into its full fruition that magnificent country which has been so much decried in this House. “We must get down to fundamentals and prove to the people up there that we are prepared, not only to talk in their favour, but to pass measures to assist them and to see that they are at once put into operation.

Mr MARKS:
Wentworth

.- It was not my intention to address myself this evening to the question of the Northern Territory, but after listening to those who have spoken on the subject one finds it difficult to refrain from joining in the debate. I agree, to a certain extent, with the remarks made by the honorable member (Mr. Fleming) who has just resumed his seat. In some respects he is right and in others he is wrong. His proposals, plus those made by the honorable member for Bass (Mr. Jackson), will help materially to develop the Territory. We are faced there with great problems, and have to solve them. . We must settle a large population up there if for no other than defence reasons. The honorable member for Bass is to be congratulated on the excellent address, containing so much information of use to us, that he made this evening. We could not have had a better illustration of the necessity for the people of the Northern Territory being represented in this House than was furnished by the honorable member’s speech, and I think that henceforth the people up there will be able to say that they have in him a representative here. The trouble is that we are too far removed from the people of the Territory, and they are too far away from us. What would have happened to the Australian Imperial Force but for that close contact between officers and men on the spot - heart talking to the heart, beat for beat? It is exactly the same with the Northern Territory; we are too far away to appreciate all the troubles of the people up there.

Mr Fleming:

– We know nothing about them.

Mr MARKS:

– That is absolutely so. They have our sympathy, and that is about all. I know that there are contented men on the ships of our Navy, because the Minister (Mr. Laird Smith) is close to them, he understands their grievances, and he can settle them. But with the Northern Territory the position is different. During the course of the day I have had the privilege of several hours’ conversation with some gentlemen who have just arrived from the Territory, and I heard from them facts exactly as they were stated by the honorable member for Bass. He is perfectly right; he has come right down to the human level. We shall not get white men to go to a place to which they cannot take their wives. These gentlemen told me that women up there have given birth to children 400 miles away from the nearest doctor and nurse. That cannot continue. Women will not risk their lives in that way unless . they are assured of proper medical attention. To-night, I have to take part in a deputation to the Prime Minister to ask for a subsidy by the Commonwealth Government for that fine organization, the Inland Mission, which to-day is fighting for its financial life, to enable it to keep up its small nursing centres. It must have financial assistance if it is to carry on; and I am sure that, when the facts are put before him, the Prime Minister will give them every consideration, and I know that the request will have the support of this Committee. If we can, we should assist this body by a subsidy of £2 for £1, or £1 for £1, of the money privately contributed, to send nurses and doctors to within reasonable distance of the settlers. I think that the advance in flying machines will, to a certain extent, get over the difficulty of getting doctors and nurses quickly to the spot where they are required, but the doctor and nurse cannot be quickly summoned unless we establish wireless stations or telephone services. Perhaps the Minister might suggest to the Postmaster-General that he should consider the possibility of establishing wireless telephones at. certain centres, or a small wireless plant, which, I understand, can be driven by a motorcar engine, if necessary.

Mr Poynton:

– The PostmasterGeneral has already that matter in hand.

Mr MARKS:

– I am very glad to hear that, and I hope he will get a Yankee spurt on, and have something done. We talk a good deal in this Chamber, but nothing more is heard about our proposals. I trust, however, that we shall soon hear something more about the provision of representation for the Northern Territory. How can we expect people to pay taxes and play the game if we do not give them a. fair deal? It is only human nature to fight, and I think we should consider this matter of representation at the earliest possible moment. If there were only two dozen people in the Territory, they should have somebody in this Parliament who could speak for them. As I said before, the heart must talk to the heart j we must get closer to those people. I know that the Minister (Mr. Poynton) did his best when he went to the Northern Territory, but he walked into a pretty hot shop. I do not know whether the fact that writs were about to be issued at the time he arrived had anything to do with his reception, but he- did hia best. I know, however, from men who have just arrived from Darwin, that the people there are not n happy community, and we must do something to improve their lot. I again ask the Government to give every consideration to the provision ot nurses and doctors, in order to give assistance to the people, who are trying to populate the Northern Territory. Again I congratulate the honorable member for Bass (Mr. Jackson) on having placed before us a lot of facts of which we knew nothing ‘before. The visit of that parliamentary party which recently made the trans-Australian trip will be of very great benefit to honorable members, for we can go to them and learn at first hand of the troubles which the people in the Northern Territory have to face.

Mr BRENNAN:
Batman

.- In 1912 I had the privilege of paying a visit te- the Northern Territory. That was at the beginning of the administration of the late Administrator, which closed somewhat ingloriously a few months back. When we went there, having instituted a newt regime, there was every promise that a new era of progress and prosperity for the Territory would set in, and I shared the optimism that appeared to be general at the time. Those hopes have not been very fully realized, but, so far as the settlement of the Northern Territory is concerned^ I arn not one of those who entertain any high hope that this vast area can be settled in advance of the rest of Australia. In other words, we cannot transplant a large and progressive population to a Territory which is so many hundreds of miles away from the present centres of population while there is abundance of rich territory much nearer to the coastline- and more easily accessible. I rose particularly to refer to the fact that we have left the people in the Northern Territory during all these years without representation in this Parliament. I think that that conduct’ on the part of the Government, because the responsibility rests with them, is utterly inexcusable. The honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. Marks) complimented the honorable member for Bass (Mr. Jackson) on the speech he made in the House this evening, and he said that at all events, for to-night, the Northern Territory was represented in this House by the honorable member for Bass. That serves to illustrate the fact that every time same gentleman of leisure from this Parliament finds it convenient to make a flying visit to the Territory he returns to this Parliament to give us the latest information as to what he saw and heard and felt during his flying journey across but a small part of this vast Territory. The truth is that such a trip as that, and such a speech as that of the honorable member strikingly demonstrate! how shamefully we have neglected those people. At long intervals some one pays a visit to the north, and at long intervals discussions on the Northern Territory take place in this House ; but we have very little first-hand knowledge concerning the actual conditions. If we are candid we must admit that. As one who has visited the place, I admit having only a slight knowledge, and any one who has made only a flying visit, if he .is candid, must make a similar admission. ‘ This is a vast Territory, comprising about 335,000,000 acres, or 520,000 square miles, of land, and if we pause to consider how that area compares in size with some of the most progressive countries in Europe, we shall have a better idea of its extent. Our first duty is to see that the Territory is represented. One would suppose that we had reached a stage in our history when it was no longer necessary to argue against taxation without representation. One with any knowledge of history realizes that disturbances are bound to follow, and political and industrial unrestis sure to exist in a most acute form where there is no outlet for the opinions of people through representative spokesmen.

Mr McWilliams:

– Would it be possible, by means of a special arrangement, to attach the Northern Territory to one of the Northern Federal electorates?

Mr BRENNAN:

– I think so. I believe there is more than one way by which the people in the Northern Territory could have a representative in this Parliament. Probably the just and proper way would toe to attach it to one of the Northern Federal electorates.

Mr Poynton:

– That was suggested in the Senate, but it could not be done constitutionally.

Mr BRENNAN:

– If that is a fact, does it really end the matter? Are we to resort to deportation and imprisonment as an alternative? Have we no greater resources than simply to say that there are constitutional difficulties in the way which prevent Australian citizens enjoying fundamental rights ? Surely that is a weak answer. There are no insuperable constitutional difficulties, but, of course, I do not profess to express the last word on the constitutional aspect of the question. There was a proposal that the people of the Northern Territory should have direct representation in the Senate or in this Chamber. Of course, I do not believe that mere territory, as distinct from people, should necessarily have representation. I have had occasion to fight very strenuously against the grossly unfair system of representation in the Victorian Parliament, wherein representation is given to land rather than to people. I do not view with complacency the suggestion to give representation to territory irrespective of voters. While one should be opposed to giving representation to mere territory, without regard to the paucity of numbers, one should be equally as insistent that every adult in the Commonwealth should have the right to become articulate by virtue of a parliamentary vote. These people are neglected, and the result is as we see it. We find there are virile men with strong convictions and pronounced views upon political and social questions taking a firm stand because they have no voice in shaping the laws which they are required to obey. I may say at once that all the best rebellions - and there have been many justifiable ones - have been founded on the same wise principle, and one with which I entirely agree. I propose, in order that we shall not merely repeat these platitudes every time we pass the Estimates, and then go away for our Christmas holidays feeling satisfied that we have said and done the right thing, to ask the Committee to adopt an amendment. As an expression of opinion on the part of the Committee that representation in this Parliament should be granted to the residents of the Northern Territory, I move -

That Division 55, “(Northern Territory - general services), £104,346,” be reduced by £1.

Mr POYNTON:
Minister for Home and Territories · Grey · NAT

– From some of the speeches delivered one would think that I was the culprit, and was responsible for not attempting to give the residents of the Northern Territory representation in this Parliament. It is a remarkable fact that, although the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) has been a member of this Parliament for many years, he has never before raised his voice on this question, even when Governments which he was supporting were in office. Some time ago a request was made for the people of the Northern Territory to have representation in the Senate. Did I shirk my responsibility? The Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) promised them representation in another place, and a Bill was acceptedby Cabinet and introduced in the Senate, where it was rejected, but it was suggested that the Northern Territory should be attached to a northern Federal electorate, probably in Queensland or South Australia. I then consulted constitutional authorities to see if that could be done, and I was assured that we had not the constitutional power. I then made inquiries as to the position in other countries where the population was small, particularly in some of the American States.

Mr Prowse:

– Is the amendment in its present form in order, in view of the Constitution ?

– Did you ever know a mission that was not?

Mr LIVINGSTON:

– That mission spends its money wisely and well, and I am pleased that the Government intends to extend to it a little help. If we cannot send telephones to that part of the country, let us provide railways, wireless stations, and aeroplanes. I feel quite sure that the report of the Public Works Committee will be very valuable. We ought to do everything we possibly can for the Territory from this hour on, for if we do not settle those lands, some one will settle them for us - and settle us as well. I hope the speech of the honorable member for Bass (Mr. Jackson), and the report of the Public Works Committee will result in very great benefit to Australia. I also wish to have the support of the honorable member for the Grampians (Mr. Jowett) in regard to the construction of the North-South railway. This work would be of advantage, not only to the whole of Australia, but to the British Empire.

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

.- I am very pleased to have heard the remarks of the honorable member for Bass. If every honorable member visited the Northern Territory their sympathies would be with the residents - men, women, and children. When I was on the Pearling Commission I had the pleasure of meeting the Bishop of Carpentaria.

Mr McWilliams:

– A fine man, too.

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

– Yes . Bishop White stated in our presence that after thirty years’ residence among the aborigines, he had never known a single instance of a native attacking a white woman. He said that he only wished he could say the same of the white men. He also informed us that, for many years, Government after Government had been most niggardly in the provision of drugs for the welfare of the natives. He stated that he, and all his missionaries, were pleased to provide drugs wherever possible. It is infamous that any Department should refuse the paltry quantity of drugs that would be required for the treatment of venereal disease among the natives. The honorable member for Franklin (Mr. McWilliams) made representations in the matter to the Government of that day. We hope that some benefit has resulted, but we are not quite sure of it. The members of the Commission heard of a case in Western Australia where a doctor tried, by telegraph, to instruct a layman, 200 “miles distant, how to perform a dangerous operation. The instructions were carried out splendidly under the circumstances, and with the courage of a brave heart, but the unfortunate patient passed away. When we have established an aerial defence system, with stations surrounding Australia, it will be possible to attend to such cases.

It is sometimes contended that women cannot live in the Northern Territory. An instance was brought under my notice in Sydney of a mother who had come down from Darwin to find a wife for her son. He was a stalwart fellow, 18 years old, 6 feet in height, 13 stone in weight, and with a chest measurement of 42 inches. I have never seen a finer specimen of humanity.

Mr Foley:

– I have never seen a man there with fine development.

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

– If the honorable member said that in the presence of this young man he would suffer for it. I have a portrait in my possession of a mother of ten children, two of whom were born in the Northern Territory, and I cannot imagine a finer family. Dr. Gilruth, who is in disgrace to-day - where he deserves to be - hounded this woman out of the Territory, having sold up her farm and stock, the money for which had been advanced by the Government. Her husband was drowned and buried twentyfour hours before the unfortunate woman received any news about it. This brave souI bought a couple of horses and a dray and carted firewood into Port Darwin in order to support her children. The police authorities there and in Melbourne, be it said to their eternal honour, assisted this woman. She is endeavouring to raise a little money from her father’s estate, and she merely asks to be treated the same as the big landholders were, and be charged rent on the same basis. The woman hopes to return to the Territory, notwithstanding her misfortunes, and I refer to the incident merely to show that women can be useful settlers there.

It has been stated by the Minister (Mr. Poynton) that the parliamentary representation sought by residents of the Northern Territory could not be constitutionally granted.

Mr Poynton:

– Representation was refused in the Senate, but it suggested that the Territory could be added to a present constituency.

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

– I can follow* that; but I would like to point out that there is only a difference of 209,200 between the population of the Northern Territory and that of Tasmania. The population in the Territory, according to the last official figures, is 3,800, and, in Tasmania, 213,000; yet Tasmania has no less than six representatives in the Senate. The difference in the populations of Tasmania and Victoria is 1,300,000, and between Tasmania and New South Wales 2,095,000. Yet each of the three States have the same number of senators, viz., six. Where, then, is the common sense in refusing our fellow citizens in the Northern Territory the right to representation? If the Government see their way clear, let them add the Territory to one of our present constituencies. I feel sure the Minister would not object to its being added to his electorate, nor would the honorable member whose district is so close to Canberra object. I do not suppose, either, that the honorable member for Capricornia (Mr. Higgs) would mind the Territory being tacked on to his elec torate. If Parliament had the power to take away the electoral rights of the people of the Northern Territory, surely it can restore th,em.

Strong complaints have been made regarding the treatment of patients at the Hospital in Papua. A certain medical man there will not allow people in tha hospital to be treated by their own medical man when they wish it. As the institution is wholly and solely supported by Government grants, and is really a national hospital, it should be used for the benefit of the community, and if a patient desires the services of an outside doctor, surely the medical officer in charge of the hospital should not be permitted to stand in the way. The patient would have to pay the fee of the outside doctor, whereas if the resident physician attended to him, there would be no fee. Faith cures more than half the cases of illness. A patient who will get well under a doctor in whom he has confidence would, perhaps, sink into the grave under the attention of another physician in whom he had none. The Government hospital authorities should not forbid another medical man to attend patients in the hospital, at any rate, unless he has been proved to be incapable. To one gentleman who has wielded authority in the Territory praise should be given for his services. I refer to Mr. Staniforth Smith. In a lecture which he delivered in these buildings that gentleman said that the Territory was the only part of Australia which had. been free from labour troubles for fifteen consecutive months. He indicated that lies had been circulated throughout the Commonwealth when it was alleged that labour conditions were responsible for the closing down of Vestey’s meat works. The reason ‘why Vestey’s works ceased activities was that sufficient coal supplies could not be secured owing to the disturbance of shipping during the war.

I understand that the Prime Minister once definitely gave his word that the people of the Northern Territory would be afforded representation in the National Parliament. I plead with the right honorable gentleman to keep his word, and I plead with the Minister for Home and Territories not to . continually nag at the residents of the

Territory. The withholding of the franchise is an infamous scandal almost unprecedented in the recent history of the world. Only in Australia are there civilized people whose undoubted rights and privileges as free citizens are being withheld. Now they are actually being robbed of the right and privilege of trial by jury, thanks to an infamous Judge, who ought to be put in gaol for the rest of his life. I refer to Judge Bevan. If that fine stamp of Australian worker which is to be, found in the Territory had not retained a respectful awe of the law, those three- officials would have been hanged instead of driven out of the Territory. Would the manhood of many parts of the United States of America, or even of Canada, have suffered the domination of three such vile men as those to whom I refer ? Among them was Dir. Gilruth, who hounded a woman out of the Territory. She had gone to Darwin to1 take a. position in an hotel, but she was ordered to return south in the steerage because she would not obey Gilruth’s orders. She was told to take up meat intended for the table and shake it so that the maggots would fall out, and then put it on a plate and serve it in the hotel. She refused to do so. She was brought before Dictator Gilruth, who said, “ If you do not obey orders, I shall send you for 150 miles into the interior.” That plucky Australian girl said, “ I will not go. My contract would not permit you to send me there.” Then the dictator said, “You shall be sent back south by steamer in the steerage along with the Chinese.” I looked into this matter, and called upon the then Secretary to the Home and Territories Department, Mr. Atlee Hunt. He told me that Dr. Gilruth was in Melbourne, and happened to be in the Department at the time. I saw the gentleman. I asked him, “Do you want to claim the steerage- fare from this girl?” He said, “Yes; she will have to pay.” The workers in the Territory, learning that the girl was to be sent back south in the .steerage, had subscribed sufficient money to give her a saloon passage; but this man, Gilruth, wanted to claim from her the equivalent of a steerage fare. ‘I said to him, “ How would you like to have your wife or daughter sent on board among the Chinese and other occupants of the steerage?” I have been a medical officer, journeying to and from Japan on the type of ship in question, and I know something of the steerage condition^. Following my interview with Dr. Gilruth at the Department of Home and Territories, I asked certain questions in this House. I wanted to know how long Dr.Gilruth had been in Melbourne, and how much he was drawing per diem by way of expenses. It appeared that he had been in this city for some six months. Here was the dictator of the Territory, managing the Territory from Melbourne, and drawing £2 2s. daily for travelling expenses while remaining here.

Mr Laird Smith:

– That was not during the term of office of the present Minister for Home and Territories.

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

– No. My point is that, within ten days after I had asked my questions, Gilruth was packed off to the Territory again. What a brilliant type of a gentleman he is, to be sure! Dr. Gilruth had a friend and crony and fellow-conspirator in Judge Bevan - the man who talked over cases before they came before him in Court. He is another of those who ought to be in gaol for the rest of his life; and I repeat that if the Australian workers at Darwin had not been a fine, self-contained type, even though they were smarting under the infamies of the vile three, they would have strung each of them up. And, if they had done so, I would not have been very sorry, remembering as I do the manner in which an unfortunate woman, together with her large family of fatherless children, suffered at the hands of those brutes.

Mr PROWSE:
Swan

.- The whole policy of administration in the Northern Territory ha3 been, and is still, wrong. Arising from the experience of settlement in Australia, it has been found that a certain period or extent of leasehold conditions - particularly pastoral leasehold - has been the forerunner of closer settlement. No one can say, however, that the States have yet been fully settled. As a matter of fact, they are still so sparsely occupied that the cost of working them is far too great. We are hot land-poor. The great object of Australian

Parliaments ought to be to settle the people more closely and insure the more intense cultivation of the land. I am “ quite satisfied that if we make any attempt at the present time to settle the Northern Territory permanently, we shall be making a great mistake. We are making very costly blunders now. If we carry on the present policy we must anticipate further troubles. I think there ought to be some conditional arrangement whereby the Territory could be annexed for franchise purposes to adjoining electorates. The whole matter might be investigated, and pastoral leases granted under reasonable conditions for the whole of the Territory. What the Minister (Mr. Poynton) has said to-night strengthens that idea in my mind. Water is available over the whole Territory, and pastoral leases could be given for twenty-five, thirty, or forty years. This would be better than the present occupation of the Territory by a huge Civil Service, the members of which are always quarrelling with one another: The question of the representation of the Territory in Parliament - rests more on sentiment than anything else, and although sentiment is a shadowy thing, we cannot kill it.

Mr Laird Smith:

– I have been told of a .station on which there are 112,000 head of cattle.

Mr PROWSE:

– I know the country is capable of carrying large numbers of cattle on big stations. In Western Australia we have a large territory of a similar character. It is settled naturally, and we have law-abiding citizens all over it. It is gradually becoming more closely settled, and the Western Australian Parliament is steadily reducing the size of the holdings in such a way that time will work out the solution of the problem without friction. By that means much increased wealth .will be brought into the exchequer of the State. We have no unreasonably dissatisfied people in the Western Australian territory adjoining the Northern Territory. Is there any reason why there should be any difference in the Territory % Western Australia has no troubles, but the Northern Territory has, for the simple reason that it is a “ Pooh Bah “ State with a Civil Service over which the Government has no control, and the members of which develop laziness, and subsequently quarrel with the people. The people are as much inclined to quarrel with them as they are with the people. A condition has now arisen in which the residents refuse to submit to any kind of authority. That is why the Minister is seeking to take away the right of trial by jury. The trouble is a result of the faulty system, and it will only become worse if we continue the system. I recommend the Government to bring down a proposal to Parliament for ratification, if it is within our constitutional powers, to annex temporarily the Territory to the adjoining States for the purpose of franchise and land settlement under pastoral leases. If that is done it will save the Commonwealth from a huge burden of expenditure that serves no useful purpose. The Northern Territory is the most costly appendage we have in connexion with Commonwealth administration. Let us utilize these vast fertile lands for theraising of stock. The stock-raising areas of Australia are gradually coming under cereal cultivation. We are using for closer settlement the areas that bred the merino sheep which have made Australia famous, and opportunities should be given to pastoralists to extend into the Northern Territory. They would not require so much spoon-feeding as is needed when the Government attempts to create a hot-bed State with no authority except in Melbourne, which knows nothing about the local conditions. “Under the present system there will be trouble to the end of the chapter. I urge that we adopt a line of policy the value of which has been proved for over a century in Australia. It was a mistake to take the Territory away from South Australia. I would make the size and conditions of the leases reasonable, and I would give an opportunity to more people to obtain leases. The areas of land leased might be 70,000, 80,000, 100,000, or 300,000 acres, in accordance with the fertility and watering facilities of the land.

Mr Poynton:

– Boring is the forerunner to everything the honorable gentleman has advocated.

Mr PROWSE:

– That is exactly so. There may be a certain area around. the Macdonnell Ranges which can be associated with South Australia, and for a period can go into other occupation; but I recommend strongly that the Government should seriously consider the ques- tion along the lines I have suggested and rid itself of this interminable, quarrelling burden.

Mr CONSIDINE:
Barrier

.- I understand that the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) is not pressing the amendment which he has moved. If he will withdraw his amendment, I propose moving another.

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:

– Does the honorable member for Batman . propose to withdraw his amendment ?

Mr Brennan:

– In view of what the Minister (Mr. Poynton) has said, I do not propose to press the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– I move-

That the proposed vote of £104,346, Division 55, Northern Territory - general services, be reduced by the sum of £1 as a protest by this Committee against the abolition of trial by jury for offences other than those carrying the death penalty, and provisions for deporting residents of the Northern Territory.

I have had to sit listening to honorable members talking on matters which were of much less importance to me than the item to which I am addressing myself. I am prepared to stay here as long as the rules will permit to make my protest, even if I am the only one in the Committee who makes a protest, against the iniquitous administration of the Northern Territory. In theCommonwealth Gazette of the 20th October last, Ordinance No. 13 of 1921 was published. Sections 6, 7, and8 of that Ordinance read -

The trial on indictment of any offences against any law of the NorthernTerritory, other than an offence for which the punishment is death, shall be by a Judge without a jury:

Provided that where a person is charged with an offence for which the punishment is death, nothing in this section shall prevent or render illegal -

a verdict by the jury that the person is guilty of an offence not so punishable; or
a sentence passed upon that person for the offence of which he is so found guilty. 7. (1) Where a person, liable to pay income tax or land tax fails, within the time provided by law, to pay the tax, and in a suit for the recovery thereof judgment is given against him and remains unsatisfied, the Minister may cause a notice to be served upon that person calling upon him to satisfy the judgment.
1. Where a person fails to comply with a notice under the last preceding sub-section within thirty days of the service of the notice the Minister may, by order in writing direct that the person shall be removed from the Territory, and any person ordered to be removed in pursuance of this section shall be removed accordingly. 8. (1) Any person who has been removed from the Territory in pursuance of the last preceding section, and who, without the premission in writing of the Minister, returns to the Territory shall be guilty of an offence.

Penalty: Fifty pounds or imprisonment for six months.

When any person is convicted of an offence against this section the Court may, in addition to the penalty imposed upon him for that offence, order him to be removed from the Territory to a State or other Territory of the Commonwealth, and he shall be removed accordingly.

Mr Poynton:

– I have given the Committee the assurance that I will ‘bring the matter of the parliamentary representation of the Northern Territory under the notice of the Cabinet.

Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · FSU; CP from 1920

– I am very pleased to get that assurance from the Minister. I would not ask that the representative of the Northern Territory should he given a vote in this House, but I think that the people there should be represented in this Parliament by. some person who would be aw fait with the conditions in the Territory. Any proposition brought forward to give the residents of the Northern Territory such a voice in this Parliament will receive my support.

I should like to ask the Minister what is the position regarding the administration of Papua. There is a vote of £50,000 on the ‘Estimates, which is apparently a subsidy towards the cost of the administration. Does this vote represent the amount by which the revenue of Papua falls short of the <-cost of its administration, or is .the position of Papua really better than appears on the surface?

Mr POYNTON:
Minister for Home and Territories · ‘Grey · NAT

.- The position in Papua up to this year was that the Administration received a subsidy of £30,000 from the Commonwealth. Prior to the Commonwealth taking over Papua, it received from the Imperial Government and the State of Queensland a subsidy of £15,000 per annum. When I went up there recently, I took with me, at the request of the Administrator, an officer, of my Department who had gone into the accounts of the Northern Territory. That officer made a full examination of the financial position of Papua; and, as the result of that investigation, I recommended to the Cabinet, through the Treasurer, that the subsidy should he increased by £20,000 per annum. I recommended that that increase should date back to the 31st December last, so that the Territory should receive an additional £10,000 in respect of the last financial year. New Guinea is passing through a very critical period. Copra, as honorable members know, is at a very low price. Large quantities of rubber are also held in stock, and are almost unsaleable. Until the present great slump took place, the lowest price at which rubber from either German New Guinea or Papua was sold was ls. 2d. per Jb. The .planters now have great difficulty in selling it at 6$d. per lb.

Mr Hill:

– Is that why rubber goods are so dear here?

Mr POYNTON:

– I cannot explain the reason for the high price of rubber goods; but the position in New Guinea is undoubtedly very critical.

Earlier in the evening I gave the Committee an assurance that I would place before the Cabinet a recommendation in regard -to the representation of the Northern Territory in this House. I told the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) of the promise I had made, and he approved of my action. It will be remembered that I caused to be introduced in the Senate a Bill providing, for the representation of the Northern Territory in this Parliament. That Bill, however, was rejected, and a suggestion was made by another place that the Northern Territory should be attached to an existing Federal division. The Crown Law authorities advise that that suggestion cannot,, under the

Constitution, be carried out. I shall place before the Cabinet a proposal that the Northern Territory shall have in this House a representative, who, however, will not have the right to vote. In making that recommendation I shall be following a precedent relating to the representation of a number of territories in the Congress of the United States of America. In this respect I have no sins of omission or commission to admit.

Question - That the amendment (Mr. Considine’s) be agreed to - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 6

NOES: 30

Majority . . . . 24

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative,

Amendment negatived.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Progress reported.

page 13448

LOAN APPROPRIATION BILL

Bill returned from the Senate without amendment.

House adjourned at 11 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 30 November 1921, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1921/19211130_reps_8_98/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives30 November 1921

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH JURISDICTION OVER STATE INSTRUMENTALITIES

Mr FENTON:MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

Mr HUGHES:Prime Minister · BENDIGO, VICTORIA · NAT

QUESTION

DISMISSAL OF TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES

Mr MARKS:WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr HUGHES:NAT

Mr MAKIN:HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr HUGHES:NAT

Mr GREGORY:DAMPIER, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Sir GRANVILLE RYRIE:Assistant Minister for Defence · NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

QUESTION

NORSEMAN-ESPERANCE POSTAL NEEDS

Mr FOLEY:KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr WISE:Postmaster-General · GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA · NAT

QUESTION

MINISTERIAL VACANCY

Mr WEST:EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr SPEAKER:

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH SHIPBUILDING

Mr MARKS:

Mr HUGHES:NAT

QUESTION

MURRAY RIVER WORKS

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr GROOM:Minister for Works and Railways · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · NAT

HISTORICAL MEMORIALS

Mr WEST:

Mr SPEAKER:

QUESTION

WAR SERVICE HOMES COMMISSION

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

Mr HUGHES:NAT

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH FUNDS IN BANKS

Mr RILEY:for Mr. McDonald

Mr HUGHES:NAT

QUESTION

BRITISH EMPIRE EXHIBITION

Mr FLEMING:ROBERTSON, NEW SOUTH WALES

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

QUESTION

S.S. MORUYA

Mr FENTON:for Mr. Mahony

Mr HUGHES:NAT

QUESTION

STANDING ORDERS

Mr LISTER:CORIO, VICTORIA

Mr HUGHES:NAT

QUESTION

CAPITAL SHIPS

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

Mr LAIRD SMITH:Minister for the Navy · DENISON, TASMANIA · NAT

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN MANUFACTURE OF TRACTORS

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

PAPERS

QUESTION

ESTIMATES 1921-1922

Mr GREGORY:Dampier

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

Mr CHARLTON:Hunter

Mr Hughes:

Mr CHARLTON:

Sir Robert Best:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr Maxwell:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr Hughes:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr McGrath:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr Hughes:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr Hughes:

Mr CHARLTON:

House of Representatives
30 November 1921

Mr FENTON:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

Mr HUGHES:
Prime Minister · BENDIGO, VICTORIA · NAT

Mr MARKS:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr MAKIN:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr GREGORY:
DAMPIER, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Sir GRANVILLE RYRIE:
Assistant Minister for Defence · NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Mr FOLEY:
KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr WISE:
Postmaster-General · GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA · NAT

Mr WEST:
EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr GROOM:
Minister for Works and Railways · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · NAT

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

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr RILEY:
for Mr. McDonald

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr FLEMING:
ROBERTSON, NEW SOUTH WALES

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

Mr FENTON:
for Mr. Mahony

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

Mr LISTER:
CORIO, VICTORIA

Mr HUGHES:
NAT

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

Mr LAIRD SMITH:
Minister for the Navy · DENISON, TASMANIA · NAT

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

Mr GREGORY:
Dampier

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

Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter

Mr HUGHES:
Prime Minister and Attorney-General [3.10]. - I am. sorry that ‘ the honorable member for 1 Hunter (Mr. Charlton · Bendigo · NAT

Mr BRENNAN:
Batman

Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong

Mr GROOM:
Minister for Works and Railways · Darling Downs · NAT

Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · FSU; CP from 1920

Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · FSU; CP from 1920

Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · FSU; CP from 1920

Mr RILEY:
South Sydney

Mr ROBERT COOK:
INDI, VICTORIA · VFU; CP from 1920

Mr ATKINSON:
Wilmot

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

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Watkins:
NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr MAHONY:
Dalley