House of Representatives
15 August 1923
9th Parliament · 2nd Session
- SUGARPURCHASES
- MR. BAMFORD, M.H.R
- QUESTION
- QUESTION
- QUESTION
- SOLDIER SETTLEMENT
- QUESTION
- QUESTION
- PAPERS.
- BUSINESS AFTER 11P.M
- WAR SERVICE HOMES BILL
- WITHDRAWAL OF PAIRS
- WAR SERVICE HOMES BILL
- THE TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN . -
- QUESTION
- TASMANIA GRANT BILL
- RIVER MURRAY WATERS BILL
- POST AND TELGRAPH RATES BILL
- HOUR OF MEETING
- ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Speaker (Rt. Hon. W. A. Watt) took the chair at 11 a.m., and read prayers.
page 2767
SUGARPURCHASES
Proposed Royal Commission
Mr.CHARLTON.- I ask the Prime Minister, in view of his statement yesterday regarding the Royal Commission that Sir Edward Mitchell will be charged generally to inquire into and report upon whether, in connexion with certain purchases of sugar by the Commonwealth through W. E. Davies, any gift or considerationwas offered or given to, or received by, any person or persons employed by the Commonwealth, is he aware of certain rumours in circulation that there are persons, other than those employed by the Commonwealth, involved in this matter? In the circumstances, will he, in order to clear up the whole matter, extend the scope of the Commission, and not restrict it to an inquiry whether any gift or consideration was offered, or given to, or received by, any person or persons employed by the Commonwealth ?
Mr BRUCE:
Minister for External Affairs · FLINDERS, VICTORIA · NAT
– The Commissioner is being appointed to inquire into the circumstances of the purchase of a certain quantity of sugar through the agency of Mr. Davies, and to ascertain if any impropriety took place with regard to it. This means, of course, any impropriety which might concern the Government or its administration generally. The precise terms of the reference to the Commissioner have not yet been determined.
Mr Charlton:
– Then, perhaps, the Prime Minister will make the terms of reference sufficiently wide to enable the Commissioner to make a full inquiry.
Mr BRUCE:
– I can assure the honorable gentleman that the Commission will be so framed that all the circumstances of this case may be fully considered by the Commissioner.
page 2768
MR. BAMFORD, M.H.R
Leave of Absence
Motion (by Mr. Bruce) agreed to -
That leave of absencefor one month be given to the honorable member for Herbert (Mr. Bamford) on the ground of ill-health.
page 2768
QUESTION
PAN-PACIFIC CONFERENCE
Mr FENTON:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA
– Will the Prime Minister, prior to his departure for the Imperial Conferences, or during his absence from Australia, communicate with the Governments of the United States, Canada, and Japan, and other nations fronting the Pacific, with a view to arranging a Pan-Pacific Conference, or interchange of delegates between those countries for the purpose of considering the best means of maintaining the harmony and peaoe of the Pacific generally?
Mr BRUCE:
NAT
– As the honorable member is no doubt aware, some time ago I made the suggestion that possibly peace in the Pacific would be insured if some such action were taken. I am glad to say that the suggestion was taken up by the Pan-Pacific League. I saw one of the representatives of the League yesterday in regard to the matter; but I am not in a position, at present, to make any statement as to the action to be taken in furtherance of the object.
page 2768
QUESTION
PARLIAMENT HOUSE, CANBERRA
Mr E RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP
– Has the Minister for Works and Railways fixed the date for the turning of the first sod in connexion with the erection of the Provisional Houses of Parliament at Canberra, and, if so, will honorable members have an opportunity of attending the ceremony?
Mr STEWART:
Minister for Works and Railways · WIMMERA, VICTORIA · CP
– The date fixed is Tuesday, 28th August. Any members who desire to attend will be very welcome.
page 2768
QUESTION
ROWAN COLLECTION
Sir ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES
asked the Treasurer, upon notice -
- Whether any decision has yet been arrived at by the Government in connexion with the matter of the Rowan Collection which has been under consideration by the present and the previous Governments for many months past?
- Does he propose to make any recommendation to the House during tbe current session regarding the suggested acquisition by the Government of the Collection?
Mr BRUCE:
for Dr. Earle Page · NAT
– This matter will be submitted to the House as soon as business permits.
page 2768
SOLDIER SETTLEMENT
Mr HILL:
ECHUCA, VICTORIA
asked the Prime Minister, uponnotice -
Whetherhe will supply the following information : -
Since the work of repatriation was commenced, the number of returned soldiers only who have been settled on land in the Commonwealth, showing number in each State?
What is the average size of each holding?
Number in dry areas in each State, giving total dry area?
Number on irrigation areas in each State, giving total wet area?
Number engaged in each State growing lucerne, soft fruits, citrus, and vine fruits, giving total area in each State planted with lucerne, soft fruits, citrus, and vine fruits?
Mr BRUCE:
NAT
– It will be necessary to communicate with the various State Governments to obtain the desired particulars. I am taking action accordingly, and will transmit the information to the honorable member as soon as possible.
page 2768
QUESTION
PORT AUGUSTA TO CONDOBOLIN RAILWAY
Mr BLAKELEY:
DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES
asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -
- Is it a fact that the report of the Conference between the different State Railways Commissioners and certain military experts held at Sydney, in 1915, shows that the consensus of opinion at that Conference favoured a Trans-Australian railway from Sydney to Port Augusta viâ Condobolin-Broken Hill, also that this line was regarded as an important connexion between the different States?
- In view of the above, will the Prime Minister sympathetically consider the completion of the Broken Hill-Condobolin section, and the commencement of the Broken Hill-Port Augusta section ?
Mr BRUCE:
NAT
– The report of the Conference referred to, after reviewing the Broken Hill and other routes, recommended the construction of the railway viâ Morgan, Wentworth, and Hay.
page 2769
QUESTION
FEDERAL CAPITAL
Industrial Tribunal at Canberra.
Mr BLAKELEY:
asked the Minister for Works and Railways, upon notice -
Whether the Industrial Tribunal has yet commenced its deliberations in connexion with the trouble at Canberra. If not, what is the reason for the delay?
Mr STEWART:
CP
– The Federal Capital Industrial Board met last week, and it is understood the matter in dispute has been settled.
page 2769
PAPERS.
The following papers were presented : -
Arbitration (Public Service) Act - Determination by the Arbitrator, &c. - No. 11 of 1923- Australian Postal Assistants’ Union.
Iron and Steel Bounty Act - Return (New South Wales) for 1922-23
Iron and Steel Products Bounty Act - Return (New South Wales) for 1922-23
Quarantine Act - Regulations Amended - Statutory Rules 1923, No. 98
Shale Oil Bounty Act -Return (New South Wales) for 1922-23
page 2769
BUSINESS AFTER 11P.M
Mr BRUCE:
Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT
.- I move-
That Standing Order No. 70 be suspended until the end of this month.
Mr Blakeley:
– The “gagging” Government!
Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt:
BALACLAVA, VICTORIA
– Order!
Mr BRUCE:
– As honorable members who have been in this Parliament in previous sessions are aware, towards the end of a session it becomes necessary, in the ordinary course, for the Government to be in a position to bring on new business after 11 o’clock at night. While we desire, so far as possible, to avoid taking that course, or requesting honorable members to sit late at night, it may be necessary to enable the business of the House to be disposed of before the close of the session.
Mr Charlton:
– The Government measures should be properly prepared before they are introduced.
Mr Blakeley:
– Why should the convenience of honorable members be subordinated to the wishes of the Prime Minister ?
Mr SPEAKER:
– Order! I warn honorable members that if these interruptions continue I shall be obliged to take the course provided for in the Standing Orders.
Mr BRUCE:
– In order to avoid sitting late at night, the Government have allotted certain times for the passage of a number of measures on the businesssheet. This, we believe, will give honorable members on both sides a reasonable opportunity for debate, and should render unnecessary a number of all-night sittings when, as honorable members will agree, the best work cannot be done. Nevertheless, it is advisable to suspend standing order No. 70, so that, if necessary, new business may be introduced after 11 p.m.
Mr CHARLTON:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP
.- We are getting surprise after surprise.
Mr Anstey:
– And there will be more yet.
Mr CHARLTON:
– Only last night the Government decided that the , House should meet this morning at 11 o’clock. I have never been in a Parliament in which members have been asked to sit so long. Members are working from Monday morning till Saturday, all day and at night, and now the Government propose to suspend the Standing Orders to allow of the introduction of new business after 11 o’clock at night.
Mr Blakeley:
– London at all costs!
Mr CHARLTON:
– The Government are determined to bludgeon through the business whether measures are properly prepared or not. Whynot suspend all Standing Orders, and give us complete freedom in debate? That is about the only way in which our rights can be protected. But while you, sir, preside so wisely over this House, we must have regard for our Standing Orders. I protest against the suspension of this standing order in order to bludgeon Government measures through. In all my parliamentary experience I have never seen so much evidence of bad draftsmanship as in connexion with measures that have been brought before the House lately. The Minister must take the responsibility: An examination of the War Service Homes Bill will show honorable members that the draftsman was unfamiliar with his work. I shall probably be told that I am taking up the time allotted for the discussion of this measure, but we, on this side, are not as docile as are the Government supporters. We are the representatives of the people, and we insist that our rights shall not be infringed. At the last election, the majority of votes was cast for the Labour party. We have the confidence of the people, and must protest against the Government trampling upon their rights by rushing through measures without a proper consideration of them. Have honorable gentlemen opposite any conscience? Do you know the difference between right and wrong?
Mr SPEAKER:
– I ask the honorable member to address the Chair.
Mr CHARLTON:
– Through you, Mr. Speaker, I ask whether the Government are following the proper procedure, and whether they are acting in the interests of the people? It is quite possible that when the War Service Homes Bill is passed it will contain many defects, and l eave loopholes for further scandals. The Government threaten to proceed with new business after 11 o’clock to-night. If they intend to govern the country in this way, we might as well go home. What rights have we in this House ? What can we do for the country? It is time we proclaimed from every platform the Government’s inability to carry out their business. Throughout mypolitical history I have endeavoured to be fair and reasonable, but I have never yet known a session to be closed after ten or eleven weeks merely to suit the convenience of the Prime Minister. The Government do not consider this party. Their supporters ignore the proceedings of the House until the bells ring for a division. We are kept here at extraordinary hours to permit the right honorable gentleman to go abroad. This has never occurred in the history of any other country. Honorable gentlemen opposite probably think that they are exceptionally clever. They have the “gag” at their disposal, and they are using it to the utmost. No body of fair-minded men would attempt to do such a thing. If they had any spark of manhood in them, they would refuse to accept the dictation of the Prime Minister. Their attitude is a disgrace to the conduct of public affairs of this country, and it is time some one indulged in frank speaking. The righthonorable gentleman, in his desire to go overseas, is subordinating every interest to his will. He is a “ come-by-chance “ Prime Minister, the biggest fluke that ever occurred. I do not know but what there was a breach of faith in the formation of the Government.
Mr SPEAKER:
– The honorable member is not discussing the question before the House.
Mr CHARLTON:
– I am speaking as I feel. I am absolutely disgusted with the attitude of the supporters of the Government. This is the weakest Ministry in the history of Australia.
Mr SPEAKER:
– Order ! With very great respect to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton), I suggest that, on reflection, he will see that his remarks are not apposite to the question before the House.
Mr CHARLTON:
– Probably they are not; but, if I have transgressed at all, I hope that you, Mr. Speaker, will forgive me. During my twenty years’ experience in the Federal Parliament and a State Parliament I have always endeavoured to. obey the Standing Orders, and I hope I shall not be caused to do otherwise. Why should we sit twelve hours a day, and allow legislation to be bludgeoned through this House merely to suit the convenience of the Prime Minister? What is taking place is no credit to the supporters of the Prime Minister, who are just as guilty as he. I hope the Prime Minister will have sufficient manhood to withdraw the motion. Under the Standing Orders, he can bludgeon legislation through this Chamber.I venture to say that, if this House adjourns on Thursday week for the purpose of giving a banquet to the Prime Minister, in view of the disgraceful methods of the Government in conducting the business of the country, and the treatment received by the Opposition, this party will refuse to attend the function.
Mr GREGORY:
Swan
.- I am prepared to support the motion conditionally upon getting some information from the Prime Minister about the business likely to be brought before this House. If there is to be any vital alteration of the notice-paper, I shall oppose the motion.
Mr West:
– Under all conditions, the honorable member’s position will be the same.
Mr GREGORY:
– Certain business must be done to enable the Prime Minister to go abroad.
Mr Charlton:
– Would the honorable member say that, while the Prime Minister is absent, the House should not sit?
Mr GREGORY:
– I can quite understand that, if the House were sitting, it might interfere with the work of the Prime Minister at the Imperial and Economic Conferences. I ask the Prime Minister to indicate to the House the nature of any new business.
Mr ANSTEY:
Bourke
.- The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) wanted to know whether the gentlemen who support the Government have any conscience. In forcing legislation through this Chamber the Government and their supporters have no need for such an encumbrance. They have set a limit on debate. There is one step further, and that is to suspend the Standing Orders, and prevent discussion altogether. I am reminded of the lines -
Might was rightwhenCaesarbled upon the stones ofRome;
Might was right when Joshua ledhis hordes o’er Jordan’sfoam;
Might was right when German odds swept down on Paris gay;
The maxim of the ancient world is the maxim of to-day.
The Government have used their might, and used the “ gag.” They do not know what is right. Without any analysis, Bills are rushed through this Chamber, though crudely and rudely drafted. It is evident that the Crown Law officers have not had sufficient time to consider them properly. The Government exercise their power by. brute force. Honorable members opposite are indorsing a policy of which, if opponents of the Government, they would bitterly complain. No information is volunteered by Ministers concerning their Bills, and honorable members have to rely upon their investigations outside this Chamber. One of the newspapers to-day, commenting on a certain measure, substituted for “ 2 “ the figure “7.” No explanation is made by the Minister. Owing to the short space of time at the disposal of Ministers, they, themselves, cannot give the necessary attention to the measures they in troduce. If the Prime Minister persists in his present attitude, he will leave Australia with a very bad taste in his mouth that will by no means be diminished when he returns.
Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa
– I rise for the purpose of showing the muddle into which the business of the House is being brought by reason of the actions of the Government. On the businesspaper this morning fifteen important questions appeared, not one of which could be answered because, owing to the length of time honorable members are asked to sit, Ministers are unable to attend to the work of their Departments.I was astounded when I saw that the Prime Minister intended to move this motion. Do the Government intend to rush through legislation at high pressure from 11 o’clock in the morning until 11 o’clock at night, and then introduce new measures when honorable members are worn out and are not in a fit state mentally to give to those measures the consideration that is warranted? The time which honorable members have between sittings must be devoted to sleep. This is not responsible government - it is the rule of the jungle; it is brute force. There is also a good deal of stupidity in it. I strongly protest against this action of the Government. Those honorable members who support the motion will regret their action in the future. Parliament . might as well be closed up altogether. Why work this joke on. the people and endeavour to convince them that legislation is being properly considered by their representatives? The War Service Homes Bill contains provisions affecting the men who fought in the war. Honorable members are not able to anaylze that measure, or give proper consideration to it. Do the Government hope that by the use of these tactics honorable members on this side will become so worn out that it will be possible to slip through important legislation having as its object the giving of assistance to the big interests represented by honorable members opposite? If they do, they will be disappointed. The Opposition will continue to expose these tactics. I support the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) in the remarks which he has made, and I assure honorable members that we on this side will not accept in the weak and spineless spirit evidenced by honorable members opposite this tyrannical imposition.
Mr WEST:
East Sydney
.- During my long political career there have not been circumstances which I regret so keenly as those that have existed during this session. The position is a serious one. My Leader (Mr. Charlton) has been “ gagged “ on,no fewer than 113 occasions when be has attempted to address this Chamber. What is the reason for it? Is it because the Prime Minister (Mr. Bruce) occupies a higher position socially? Is it because the Leader of the Opposition owns to humble parentage, and by his own efforts has raised himself to the position he now occupies, and has demonstrated his ability to assist intelligently the development of this country? There must be some reason underlying this action of the Prime Minister. The right honorable gentleman is one of Australia’s fortunate “sons. He has possessed opportunities which enabled him to have a university education. He was enabled to go to the Middle Temple, in London, and obtain a legal training.
Mr SPEAKER (Et Hon W A Watt:
BALACLAVA, VICTORIA
– Order! The honorable member for East Sydney is well aware that the matter to which the is now referring has nothing whatever to do with the motion. I asls him to confine himself to the terms of the motion.
Mr WEST:
– I feel confident that you, sir, like me-
Mr SPEAKER:
– Order ! If the honorable member will not discuss / the motion, I shall put it to the House.
Mr WEST:
– I understand that the object oi the motion is to enable the House to proceed with new business after 11 o’clock at night. I do not believe there is a living soul who will contend that proper consideration can he given to legislation if this practice is adopted. Since I have been a member of this House I have always endeavoured to bc in my place from the beginning to the end of every ‘ sitting. I realize the responsibility and the duty which I owe to my constituents. When I went before the electors of East Sydney I told them that, if I were elected, I would faithfully carry out my duties. I challenge you, Mr. Speaker, I challenge the Prime Minister, and those supporting him, to say that those duties can be satisfactorily performed under the conditions proposed. I have had experience of parliamentary life in Australia, extending over a period of forty-five years, and I say, without hesitation, that every scandal that has occurred has been the result of legislation which has been passed at a late hour of the night. Does the Prime’ Minister, and those sitting Behind him, know that after 10 o’clock at night the press does not report the proceedings of this Chamber? Does he not realize that these conditions do not > make for a good report of our debates by the official staff? Will any honorable member. deny that there is some reason, which does not appear on the surface, that is’ actuating the Prime Minister in this course of action ? Has not the Prime Minister, during this session, used every power conferred upon him by the Standing Orders, to force through legislation. The rights and privileges of honorable members during recent years have been slipping away from them one by one. The men whose portraits hang in the Queen’s Hall would never have tolerated such action as this. They were men of ability, and they believed that it was necessary to conserve the privileges and the liberties of honorable members. This standing order was framed to prevent the victimiz-ing of those who happen to be in a minority in this Chamber. What is proposed is beyond human endurance. When Parliament agreed to increase the salaries of honorable members it did so in the belief that that> action would result in greater attention being paid to the affairs of the country. It was not intended that honorable members should be brought to an early grave. Members of the Labour party with whom I had been associated have gone to an early grave because of the efforts they put. forth to make Australia an example in the eyes of the *world in regard to its social legislation, and the improved conditions of the people. Good work cannot be done if Bills are to be brought in after 11 o’clock at night, after honorable members have been sitting continuously for twelve hours. Honorable members on this side have no opportunity to ascertain the contents of measures until they are laid upon the table of this House. They have then to exercise all their ingenuity in seeking methods hy which improvement can be affected to those measures. Does the Prime Minister think that all the brains in this Chamber arc possessed by those honorable members who support him, and that he is the only man who can conduct the business of the country? If the Prime Minister did not return from England Australia would not be the loser, judging by his conduct since he has been at the head of the Government of this country. I know that anything I may say will have no effect whatever on him. His environment has been entirely different from mine. My environment has been that of the humble section of the community, his has been that of those who desire to rob the poor.
Mr SPEAKER:
– Order ! Will the honorable member deal with the motion.
Mr WEST:
– The passing of the motion will enable measures to be placed on the business-paper after 11 o’clock at night. It is peculiar that the Prime Minister did not attempt to justify this action. He moved the motion in a most callous, indifferent manner. There can be no justification for it. T feel indignant. The spectacle of my Leader appealing to the Prime Minister went to my heart. He could not have been more sincere in his appeal to the Prime Minister to allow the business of this House to be conducted in a proper manner. I feel confident that the people generally will indorse the action of the Opposition in protesting so vigorously against this proposal. I am the son of a Britisher who loved liberty dearly, and I feel constrained this morning to speak a word for the liberties of the people of my adopted country. It is a retrograde step that is proposed, and the country must suffer through it.
Mr E RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP
.- Mr. Speaker-
Mr Hill:
– Give the returned soldiers a chance!
Mr Charlton:
– Why do the Government and honorable members opposite occupy time with this motion if they have a desire to proceed with the War Service Homes Bill?
Mr Mathews:
– “ Give the returned soldiers a chance!”
Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt:
– I appeal to honorable members to allow the debate to proceed in a decorous way.
Mr Charlton:
– Lt is most unfair for honorable members opposite to charge us with taking up time that ought to be devoted to the War Service Homes Bill.
Mr Gabb:
– This is sheer bullying on the part of the Government!
Mr SPEAKER:
– The honorable member is out of order. I did not hear the interjection from the corner.
Mr Mathews:
– The honorable member for Echuca (Mr. Hill) said, “Give the returned soldiers a chance!”
Mr SPEAKER:
– That did not justify other interjections.
Mr E RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP
– I appeal to the common sense of honorable members. We are getting towards the close of the session, and up to the present progress has been made according to the programme of the Prime Minister. The hour for meeting has already been changed from half-past 2 o’clock in the afternoon to 11 o’clock in the morning, and now the Government ask for power to introduce fresh business after 11 o’clock at night. Our Standing Orders were carefully drawn up by former members of this House, with a view to preventing business being brought on at an hour when members might be absent or tired ,out. Standing order No. 70 is a protection, not only to honorable members, but to the country at large ; nevertheless, the Prime Minister breezily moves its suspension. The right honorable gentleman has said that the Government does not desire to have all-night sittings, but the suspension of the standing order really encourages the evil. Surely it should be sufficient to devote twelve hours a day to the programme of the Government? It is a grave reflection on honorable members opposite to say that, in the absence of the Prime Minister, not one of his colleagues is capable of carrying on the business of Parliament for a week or so. I should be ashamed to be a supporter of a Government the leader of which had so bad an opinion of his colleagues and party. The members of the .Country party have almost an equal share of power in the Cabinet, with the ex-Leader (Dr. Earle Page) as Treasurer, and yet they allow that gentleman to be snubbed as he is when, the Prime Minister tells him that ho is not competent to conduct the business of this House for a time. The truth is that the Government is trying to do too much. An attempt is being made to establish a record, the only result of which must be ill-considered and ineffective legislation. I remind honorable members opposite that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) has to examine every measure, so as to be able to intelligently and effectively criticise it. There are eight or ten Ministers who introduce Bills, and they have at their disposal all the machinery of government, with which to thoroughly inform themselves. The Leader of the Opposition enjoys no such advantages. In the name of common sense and fair play, I ask the Government to give the Opposition a chance. Are the Bills introduced by the Government not worth discussing? If they are not, they ought not to be on the noticepaper.Would the Prime Minister, if he were in opposition, like to be treated as we on this side are ? We have been working every day of the week from. Monday to Saturday, with extended hours, and, as I have already indicated, the rush and hurry can only result in ill-digested legislation, which will give rise to confusion, and possibly expensive litigation. Why, this morning we were told by Ministers that they had not had time to obtain answers to questions of which notice was given yesterday. I cannot blame Ministers for this under the circumstances, but it is a most extraordinary occurrence. If we cannot do all the work this session, let some of it stand over till next session. It ought to be remembered that the last election was fought largely on the question of the conduct of business by the ex-Prime Minister (Mr. W. M. Hughes), and I warn the present Government that they are making a great mistake. This is not a party question, but one to be settled by the entire House, and my own opinion is that a day of twelve hours is enough.
Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong
– I indorse the remarks of my Leader (Mr. Charlton). Even the Prime Minister will admit that when that honorable gentleman makes a request in this Chamber it comes from the most reasonable man here.
Mr Blakeley:
– The most patient, too.
Mr FENTON:
– Yes, the most patient, courteous, and considerate. I do not know whether the fact is recorded in Hansard, but the Prime Minister has intimated that he is exceptionally thankful to the Opposition for the way in which they had met the Government up to, practically, the other day. Are we to fritter away the rights and privileges for which the Radicals of the old days fought ? The methods of the Government are enough to make some of these old political pioneers turn in their graves. We met on the 13th June, and to-day is the 15th August, almost two months to a day, and the Parliament has already done work that usually occupies six months. Even when a period of six months is allotted, mistakes are made in legislation ; and I can quite see that next session will be devoted to amending measures. If there is any spirit of fairness in the majority of honorable members opposite, they will give more consideration to the position of the Opposition. When I realize the work that faces us in the next few days, I feel inclined to ask the State authorities to send round a factory inspector to deal with the sweaters in this institution. I certainly think a prosecution would lie against the Prime Minister. . As the honorable member for South Sydney (Mr. E. Riley) has pointed out, we have the exhibition this morning of Ministers, one after the other, admitting their inability to answer questions on notice.
Mr Blakeley:
– I draw attention to the state of the House. [Quorum formed.]
Mr FENTON:
– This indicates that the business of the country is absolutely neglected. The answers to some of these questions were required as early as possibletoday, but in the rush Ministers are unable to supply them. Last week, £62,000,000 was voted to the accompanying snores of tired members on the Ministerial side reclining on the seats. However, if we are denied the right to speak here, we still have the right of addressing public meetings. I hope that in the coming recess the platforms of the country will ring with denunciation of the disgraceful conduct of the Government and their supporters. I can well imagine Australian fellow passengers of the Prime Minister, on his way to England, asking him how he managed to get away, and I can also imagine the answering smile of the right honorable gentleman. What is meant by the taunt of honorable members opposite when they ask, “ Do you blame the Prime. Minister for shutting up Parliament ? “ The meaning simply is that there is no one competent to take his position. Could anything be more humiliating to Ministers and supporters of the Government? This is the time for plain speaking, and plain speaking there will be both here and outside. The step proposed by the Government is retrograde and disgraceful. Surely honorable members opposite have opinions of their own? However that may be, they now present a miserable spectacle as dumb dogs and tools of the Leader of the Government.
Mr Marr:
– The complaint has been made that honorable members on this side have spoken too frequently.
Mr FENTON:
– We complained when charged with obstructing the business of the House that we were unable to retaliate. Honorable members opposite followed each other; but when an effort was made by members of the Opposition to express their views down came the guillotine.
Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt:
– The honorable member must confine his remarks to the motion.
Mr FENTON:
– The proposal of the Government is to suspend standing order No. 70 to enable opposed business to be taken after 11 p.m. A Minister will probably present a measure at that hour, and after the second reading has been moved, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) will probably be allowed a quarter of an hour in which to debate the Bill. It is mentally and physically impossible for honorable members to give proper consideration to important measures, in the early hours ofthe morning, in such a limited time. I have great respect for the institution of Parliament, and for the Standing Orders, which have been framed with a view to carrying out business in a reasonable and proper way. I have never supported the application of the closure, and I trust that I shall never be guilty of doing so, because, in Parliament, the freest possible discussion should be allowed. Although we are the largest party in this House, we are in a minority, but the day is not far distant when a Labour Ministry will occupy the Treasury bench, and when that time comes, I shall see that every honorable member has the right to freely discuss whatever measures may be submitted for consideration. I know that it will be said that a Leader of this party was once responsible for a procedure similar to that now proposed, but on that occasion I did not support him in amending the Standing Orders. The positionis different to-day. If the Labour party was in power, and there were only five honorable members in Opposition, I should extend to them the utmost courtesy, and allow the fullest possible opportunity to discuss Bills of national importance. It is a diabolical trick for any Government or party to deprive the representatives of the electors of their right to be heard. The guillotine will fall from time to time during the remaining days of the session, but, thank God, another guillotine will descend, not upon the representatives of the Opposition, but upon those who have debarred us from exercising the rights and privileges which were fought for and maintained by the fine old radical fighters in the early political history of Australia. I support the Leader of the Opposition, and shall resent every effort made to encroach upon the liberties, rights, and privileges of the people of the Commonwealth.
Mr BLAKELEY:
Darling
.- No other Government would seekto restrict the debating of important matters in this House, as is now proposed by this Administration. I know perfectly well what the Labour party would do in similar circumstances. It would not impose restrictions of this character. A Labour Ministry would not dare to submit such a proposal, because it could not possibly expect the support of its followers. This matter has been discussed in the caucus room of the Nationalist party, and those who showed signs of resentment have been flattened by the party steam-roller. Even now the supporters of the Government do not seem to realize the enormity of what they are attempting. Before and since the establishment of the parliamentary system, the fight for free speech has proceeded, and immediately an attempt is made to tamper with the parliamentary machine trouble will be encountered. If any representative of the people, be he ever so humble, desires to speak on measures submitted by the Government, no one has a right to say him nay. In the opinion of some honorable members, he may speak without knowledge, but as a representative of the people he has the right to speak, and is entitled to the respect of other honorable members. This morning, a declaration was made by the Leader of the Opposition - I cannot recall similar action ever having been taken before - that this party refuses to be associated with the send-off to the Prime Minister (Mr. Bruce). Do honorable members realize the seriousness of the position ? Surely to God the declaration of the Leader of the Opposition is sufficient to remind honorable members opposite of what the possible consequencesof their action may be?
Mr Nelson:
– I draw attention to the state of the House. [Quorum, formed.]
Mr BLAKELEY:
– Questions such as this are, apparently, of no consequence to honorable members opposite, who are capable only of inane giggling and laughter.
Mr Bowden:
– The members of the honorable member’s party have left the Chamber.
Mr BLAKELEY:
– If the Government is going to adopt sharp practices, their supporters will be compelled to remain in their places instead of loafing in the corridors, as they are doing to-day. Honorable members opposite do not appear to possess a spark of manliness, and it is damnable and diabolical to have to submit to inane giggling and laughter. The position is too serious for that.
Mr Manning:
– Does the honorable member suggest that we are political puppets?
Mr BLAKELEY:
– Yes. The honorable member and his party are interfering with the rights and privileges of honorable members.
Mr Corser:
– We are not as bad as-
Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt:
– Order! I cannot allow-
Mr BLAKELEY:
– The honorable member for Wide Bay (Mr. Corser) should go back to his “ pirating “ days - go back to his “ black-birding “ days.
Mr SPEAKER:
– Order ! The honorable member for Darling was aware that the Chair had risen.
Mr BLAKELEY:
– I am sorry, Mr. Speaker. I did not know that you were about to speak.
Mr SPEAKER:
– The honorable member, even in passion, must obey the order of the Chair. The debate cannot proceed in this disorderly way, and I ask honorable members on both sides to restrain their natural inclination to interject.
Mr BLAKELEY:
– It is physically impossible to restrain one’s indignation when there are indications of such imbecility.
Mr SPEAKER:
– If the honorable member intended to apply that term to honorable members, I tell him at once that it will not be permitted, and must be withdrawn.
Mr BLAKELEY:
– I shall most certainly withdraw; but when one is greeted with inane, empty laughter-
Mr Fenton:
– Their imbecility is apparent.
Mr Manning:
– I rise to order. The honorable member for Maribyrnong (Mr. Fenton) has just said that the imbecility of honorable members on this side is apparent, and I desire to ask if such a statement is in order.
Mr SPEAKER:
– I did not hear the remark ; but if it was made in this Chamber, it must be withdrawn.
Mr Fenton:
– I used the expression, and I believe it to be true; but I withdraw.
Mr SPEAKER:
– The honorable member must withdraw unreservedly.
Mr Fenton:
– The remark was not directed to any particular honorable member, but I withdraw.
Mr Yates:
– Would it be in order to say that they were mental paralytics?
Mr SPEAKER:
– That would not be in order.
Mr BLAKELEY:
– The Leader of the Opposition has announced, on behalf of the Labour party, that its members do not intend to be present at the send-off to the Prime Minister. Honorable members opposite can take time off when they so desire to attend social functions - we do not intend to join them on such occasions - but cannot devote sufficient time to the transaction of public business. While this is being perpetrated, with, rare exceptions the newspapers of Australia are carrying on a Conspiracy of silence and withholding from the people accounts of what is actually being done in this House. Bills are being forced through at such a rate that Royal Commissions and Committees of Inquiry will have to be appointed to correct the mistakes made. There is hardly a word in the press about it; but that will not prevent us explaining the position to the people in our electorates after the House rises.
Mr Mahony:
– And in their electorates, too.
Mr BLAKELEY:
– Yes ; we shall give the people an opportunity of knowing what is being done.
Mr SPEAKER:
– The honorable member must confine his remarks to the motion.
Mr BLAKELEY:
– I shall do so. I appeal to honorable members opposite to be at least fair and honorable to honorable members on this side. The action of the Government is dishonorable, and those who are supporting it are acting dishonorably towards the representatives of the people.
Mr SPEAKER:
– The honorable member is not in order in imputing dishonorable motives or procedure to any honorable member.
Mr BLAKELEY:
– Then I shall substitute for that remark the statement that the action of the Government is most unfair and reprehensible; That the Prime Minister is new to his job is palpable; if he were not, he would not attempt what he is doing. He is actuated more by the desire to leave for London than to conserve the welfare of Australia. In that desire he is ably helped by his docile followers, who have not the courage and probably not the ability, to speak on the Bill, but sit like so many dumb-driven cattle, and vote as they are told.
Mr NELSON:
Northern Territory
– As a new member, I am beginning to realize why the Northern Territory has been neglected for so long. The explanation is that honorable members are not allowed an opportunity of intelligently discussing matters of national importance that come before the ‘House. As this is a silent Parliament, the thought has occurred to me that the Government would be wise to replace this pretence of legislation by a picture show. There is an excellent place for hanging a screen, the pictures could be projected from the Strangers’ Gallery, and from time time the Prime Minister during his travels abroad could send back a film to add to the programme. The Sergeant-at-Arms might stand on the steps outside the building, and act as spruiker, to advise the public that a good show was to be seen inside. Responsible government has been reduced to a farce. The War Service Homes Bill, a measure of vital importance to Australia, is to come before the House,, and members will have no opportunity of discussing it. We have received invitations to a dinner to the Prime Minister on Thursday week, and I understand that it is proposed that the House shall adjourn to enable us to attend. In ordinary circumstances I should be pleased to attend such a function; but, whilst I have no desire to show disrespect to the Prime Minister, I think the business of the country is of paramount importance. Therefore, if an official dinner must be given, it should take place during the ordinary dinner adjournment. If it is impossible for the Parliament to dispose of a certain programme of business before the 24th August, surely the proper course’ is to either postpone the business or prolong the session. Every honorable member has a perfect right to discuss each measure, but last night we witnessed the spectacle of three soldier members desiring to speak on the second reading of an important Bill, with only twelve minutes remaining before the guillotine would fall. That is a state of affairs that no honest member can condone. Responsible government is being abrogated, for honorable members cannot get an opportunity to express the opinions of the people whom -they represent. I enter my emphatic protest against the policy that the Government are adopting.
Mr MARR:
Parkes
.- Honorable members opposite have protested against the stirling of discussion, and have made some . extraordinary statements about the application of the guillotine and the closure. The honorable member for Maribyrnong . (Mr. Penton) said that he would never vote for the application of the “gag” or to curtail the rights of the Opposition, even if it comprised only five members. I remind the honorable member that, on the 18th June, 1915, he voted twenty-six times for the application of the closure.
Mr Mahony:
– I rise to a point of order. The remarks of the honorable member are not revelant to the motion before the Chair.
Mr SPEAKER (Et Hon W A Watt:
– The honorable member for Parkes would not be in order in dwelling at length upon the past actions of honorable members, but he is at liberty to make a brief reply to a remark made by another honorable member. .
Mr MARR:
– If honorable members had devoted themselves to the discussion of the War Service Homes Bill, it could have been dealt with comfortably in the time allotted by the Government. Every honorable member on both sides of the House is in favour of that measure, and I believe that honorable members of the Opposition equally with honorable members on this side of the House, will agree to every clause in the measure, when it has been explained. The honorable member for the Northern Territory (Mr. Nelson) said that last night three soldier members of the Labour party desired to speak on the second reading of the War Service Homes Bill, but were “gagged.” There were not three members of the Labour party, let alone three soldier members, in the chamber when the guillotine fell. One soldier member of the Opposition was in Sydney. Last night, the debate was carried on for nine-tenths of the time without one member of the Labour party being in the chamber. Honorable members opposite should discuss this motion fairly. They must not attempt to throw all the blame on this side of the House.
Mr Charlton:
– Honorable members opposite will have to accept the responsibility. Does the honorable member indorse the Prime Minister’s action in proposing this motion during the time that he had allotted for the discussion of the War Service Homes Bill?
Mr MARR:
– The Prime Minister has taken that action only because members of the Labour party have stated emphatically in this House during the last few days that they intend to prevent any business being done.
Mr Charlton:
– That- is absolutely untrue.
Mr MARR:
– That statement was made to me as Government Whip.
Mr Charlton:
– I rise to a point of order. I take exception to the remark of the honorable member that members of the Opposition have said that they intend to obstruct business. The statement is absolutely untrue, and I ask that it be withdrawn.
Mr SPEAKER (Et Hon W A Watt:
– The Leader of the Opposition must realize that he may not raise a point of order for the purpose of contradicting some statement that has been made. If any honorable member feels that he has been misrepresented by another honorable member, he can, at the conclusion of the honorable member’s speech, make a personal explanation, and thus put himself right.
Mr MARR:
– The remark I mentioned was made, not by the Leader of the Opposition, but by the Secretary of the Labour party.
Mr SPEAKER:
– The honorable member’s remarks are not strictly relevant to. the motion.
Mr MARR:
– The House has plenty of time in which to deal with the War Service Homes Bill, if it will apply itself seriously to the matter. I hope that we shall be able to proceed without resort to the guillotine. Nobody wants that standing order to be put in operation. It certainly causes more trouble to me as Whip than to anybody else. If honorable members would discuss the business before the House, instead of the actions of the Government, we would have plenty of time to deal with the various measures.
Mr GABB:
Angas
– I oppose the suspension of standing order 70. The introduction of new business after 11 o’clock at night has proved, in the past, to be not in the best interests of the country. That course is also distinctly unfair to the Leader of the Opposition. He sits in the Chamber from 11 a.m. till 11 p.m., and’ then, after he has done twelve hours’ work, members opposite, whom I am required to designate “honorable,” and who consider themselves sportsmen, will introduce new business. They know that our Leader has recently suffered a serious illness, yet they expect him to sit in his place day and night and be ready to debate every measure in opposition to seven or eight Ministers. If honorable members opposite think that that is fair and bonny play they have forgotten the meaning of the term. The honorable member for Parkes (Mr. Marr) said that there were not three returned soldier members of the Labour party in the Chamber last night ready to speak on the War Service Homes Bill. The paid hireling of the Government-
Mr SPEAKER:
– The honorable member knows that it is unparliamentary to apply the word “hireling” to any honorable member. I ask that it be withdrawn.
Mr.G ABB. - Then I shall call him the paid servant of the Government, which means the same. His duty is to get his docile flock to stand behind the Government through thick and thin, and when he finds that honorable members on this side are putting up a fight, he makes a statement which he hopes will encourage the Ministerialists in their docility. The statement he made was contrary to fact. The honorable member for Adelaide (Mr. Yates) was on his feet when the guillotine fell last night, and two other soldier members - the honorable member for Cook (Mr. C. Riley), and the honorable member for Ballarat (Mr. McGrath) - were in the chamber at the time.
Mr Marr:
– They were not.
Mr GABB:
– If the Government Whip has any sense of decency he will withdraw his incorrect statement, and apologize for having made it. He also said that honorable members of the Opposition had declared that they intended to obstruct business. We are not doing so. If we had attempted to unreasonably obstruct business I could understand severe measures being taken by the Government against us, but our attitude throughout the session has been reasonable, and on various occasions the Prime Minister has admitted that the Opposition has helped the Government in the transaction of business. I say frankly that our Leader has treated the Government too kindly, and my experience in life has been that if one is too lenient to one’s opponents, they interpret that forbearance as weak ness and proceed to abuse it. The Leader of the Opposition has very onerous duties to discharge, and his task becomes heavier when the House sits for such long hours. The Prime Minister is quite prepared to undergo the ordeal of continuous sittings because he has the prospect of a six-weeks sea trip, which will enable him to recuperate. No such prospect is before the Leader of the Opposition. Honorable members opposite should, in fairness, consider these facts. Thesole reason for all this bustle and hurry is the desire of the Prime Minister to go to London. In the last eighteen months this House, honorable members of which are paid £1,000 per annum to attend to the country’s business and legislate for the benefit . of the people, has been in session for only three months. I challenge any honorable member on the other side of the House to accompany me into his own district and fight a campaign for a month on the attitude the Government have adopted, and on his attitude of sitting silently behind the Government. I make bold to say that no honorable member could face his district in such a campaign and justify himself. I do not care which district it is or who the member is. The fact of the matter is that many honorable members opposite have two or three jobs, and they want to get back to their farms, their offices, or their gardens as soon as possible. But when honorable members accept membership in this House, the business of the country should be their first consideration. They cannot justly excuse their action in assisting to close Parliament by saying that they wish to get back to their ordinary business. I feel very strongly on this matter, although this is the first speech I have made in protest against the action of the Government. I admit that I have thrown some strong interjections across the chamber, but no honorable member can say that my attitude is unjustifiable. Honorable members were elected to represent the people and to do certain work, and they should do it. I can understand the desire of the Prime Minister to go back to Great Britain. He left that country a few years ago, as a private citizen, and he desires to go back now as the Prime Minister ofa great Commonwealth. I have no objection to his doing that, but I do object to him Keeping honorable members in this House such long hours, and refusing them the opportunity to give proper consideration to the various matters that are brought before us. Some honorable members have said that this action is an illustration of the Prime Minister’s strength. I reply that it is the action of a despot, and despotism can only become possible with the “permission of weaklings. Honorable members opposite can take that statement as they like. I believe that the Prime Minister is trading on the inexperience of the new members he has behind him. I was once a new member, and I freely admit that for the first three years I was in this Chamber I did not know the ropes, and I felt strange. That is the position of a number of honorable members behind the Government at present. In the party room they are told that certain things happened iu other sessions, and that the Government proposals are quite a!ll right. I have been a fairly close student of Hansard, and I say, without fear of contradiction, that at no period .during our twenty odd years of Federal parliamentary history has Parliament met for only three months in eighteen months, and in that period had the “ gag “ and the guillotine applied as the Government is now applying it. T],e thing that galls me more than anything else is the remembrance of the attitude adopted in the last Parliament by some honorable members who are now sitting behind the Government. I refer to the representatives of the ; Country party. I have great respect for many of those honorable members, and I like to chat with them and obtain their advice on certain matters ; but I cannot comprehend how they can sit behind the Government and assist to restrict the. rights of the people, when only last year they were so emphatic that Parliament should be free and untrammelled. In the last election campaign, as well as in the last Parliament, their Leader boasted of their desire to restore proper parliamentary government. We find, however, that although twenty-five measures axe on the business-paper, honorable members are not to be permitted sufficient time to deal properly with any of them. The Government has given us less than a fortnight to complete the programme. The
Minister for Works and Railways (Mr. Stewart) is a party to this.
Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt:
– The honorable member will realize that he has had more than reasonable latitude. The general procedure of the Government is not before the House. The question is whether a certain standing order shall be suspended. I ask the honorable member to confine his remarks to that subject.
Mr GABB:
– I admit, Mr. Speaker, that I have had latitude, but so have others who have preceded me in this discussion. “I am opposed to the suspension of this standing order unless the Government is prepared to suspend all the Standing Orders. If, however, the Government is going to do this by brute force - if it intends to adopt the policy of “might is right,” let it throw aside all the Standing Orders, and let us go out into the Queen’s Hall, and settle matters there. I confess that I should find a good deal more enjoyment in that than I find in sitting in this chamber, and seeing the guillotine operating. Honorable members on this side are compelled to sit here fuming and smarting under the indignities that are heaped upon them, while honorable members opposite sit in their places with a bland Chinese smile upon their faces and permit the Government to do what it pleases. If the Government wants brute strength to prevail, let it suspend all the Standing Orders, and let us go outside, or else let the Speaker leave the chair, and let us remain here and fight (he business through.
Mr SPEAKER:
– The honorable member must not incite to disorder within the precincts of the House.
Mr GABB:
– Perhaps I am saying something that I should not say; but I am amazed that honorable members opposite can sit quietly and calmly in their places, and permit this kind of thing to go on. I ask them whether.it is fair to the Leader of the Opposition that new business should be introduced after 11 p.m. After the Leader of the Opposition hassat in this House for twelve hours, which surely is a good day’s work, is it reasonable to oblige him at any hour of the night to face any matter of business on the notice-paper, which the Government cares to bring forward? Such is the docility of members opposite that, apparently, the Government can do as it pleases. A measure may be brought forward at any time, and honorable members opposite will pass it through. I have much respect for some of the members on the Government side of the House; but I am astonished at their attitude on this matter. The only excuse I can offer for the new members is that they do not understand parliamentary procedure. If we had members of the last Parliament like Messrs. Fleming, Lamond, Massy Greene, Rodgers, and Wise here, they would not tolerate this procedure. They would have opposed it had they been in the Cabinet, or had they been private members. I trust that the Government will not persist in this policy.
Mr Marr:
– I rise to make a personal explanation. The honorable member for Angas (Mr. Gabb) disputed my statement with respect to returned soldiers speaking on the War Service Homes Bill, and said that three soldier members were “gagged “ whilst the vote on the second reading of the measure was being taken. That is not so. They were not here. The honorable member for Ballarat (Mr. McGrath) was paired with the honorable member for Martin (Mr. Pratten) in that division.
Mr Charlton:
– But he was here during the discussion.
Mr Marr:
– He was paired when the division was taken.
Mr Charlton:
– And he was prevented from speaking because the division was taken.
Mr Marr:
– I do not wish to do the honorable member for Ballarat (Mr. McGrath) an injustice. I did not say that he was not in the House during the discussion.
Mr Blakeley:
– The honorable member said he was not in the chamber when the vote was taken.
Mr Marr:
– Neither was he, because he was paired with the honorable member for Martin.
Mr Blakeley:
– That is a gross misrepresentation of the position.
Mr MAKIN:
Hindmarsh
.- We have reached the limit of our endurance of the extraordinary way the Government is conducting the business of this House. Before honorable members support this motion, I ask them to consider for a moment the unfortunate history of some of the best statesmen who have been elected to membership of this Parliament. A heavy mortality has occurred amongst members of the Federal Parliament. The severe strain that has been placed upon some of the ablest men whohave entered this Chamber has resulted in their early death. Those men, however, were not obliged to submit to such procedure as the Government has been following during the last two or three weeks. The strain that is now being put upon honorable members is almost beyond physical endurance. Honorable members are unable properly to discharge their duties or to stand up under the heavy load of work that the Government is heaping uponthem. An extraordinary course is now proposed to which honorable members should not consent. We should consider, not only our own health, but also the health pf those who are engaged in other duties within the precincts of the Parliament. I ask them whether they think that they are doing a fair thing to our officers and, in particular, to the Hansard staff. We know that we have a highly competent Hansard staff, but it is not reasonable to expect the members of that staff to follow as closely as they should the debates in this Chamber when they are called upon to continue their work for unduly protracted periods. When a sitting extends beyond a certain period they cannot possibly endure the strain and do their work as it should be done. I appeal, not onlyon behalf of the Hansard staff, but also on behalf of those who are engaged in the more menial duties of this Parliament. Such heavy claims are being made upon them that they have about reached the limit of their strength. It is not fair to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) or to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Anstey) that they should be compelled to sit in this House for such long hours. Those gentlemen are expected to acquaint themselves with all the measures that are introduced by the
Government. If this motion is agreed to a Minister on the front bench may bring forward any Bill, and put his view to the House, and the Leader of the Opposition or his deputy is expected to follow him in the discussion. His position is not similar to that of the Minister. When the Minister comes forward, says his lesson, and finishes his part of the work, he can go away for a rest. It is not so with the Leader of the Opposition. He must remain in the House the whole time, and closely follow the measures introduced by other Ministers. If honorable members agree to this motion they will place upon the Leader of the Opposition an impossible task. Why are they asked to do this? It is simply to suit the convenience, and in some measure, the vanity of the right honorable the Prime Minister. I trust that we shall not agree to any further proceedings of this character. I have not forgotten our experience of Friday last, when we were required to vote millions of pounds in connexion with the Estimates without being afforded a reasonable opportunity for debate. We have already had an illustration of the futility of passing, in accordance with a time schedule, ill-considered legislation. As far as I am concerned, I intend henceforward, to show the most uncompromising hostility to the Government, and I shall exhaust to the limit the opportunities afforded by our Standing Orders to challenge the position taken up by them. Honorable members should not be expected to conduct the business of the country in this way. Already, within a period of two months, we have passed legislation which, in ordinary circumstances, might well occupy the attention of this Parliament for twelve months. The people of Australia are not unmindful of what is happening. They are watching this autocratic Administration, and I am confident that, at the first opportunity, they will express their disapproval in no unmistakable way. I trust that the Government will realize that a continuation of this procedure must result in a breaking down of the health of honorable members, as well as the officers connected with the Parliament. The Government should not be so indifferent to the welfare of honorable members as to persist in their present unreasonable attitude. We should have reasonable opportunity for debating the measures that come before us. I hope that the House will reject the motion, and that, although the Prime Minister may have to leave Australia by the 1st September, we shall be able to continue with our legislative duties.
Mr BRUCE:
Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT
– I regret that the debate has occupied the attention of the House for so long.
Mr Fenton:
– Is the Prime Minister closing the debate?
Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt:
– Order! It is not usual, if honorable members desire to speak, for the Leader of the Government to close the debate, if that is the intention of’ the right honorable gentleman.
Mr BRUCE:
– If the debate on the motion is continued until 1 o’clock, the motion must lapse. I think it probable, therefore, that honorable members would prefer that I should say a few words. I regret that the discussion has gone on for so long. The motion is usually submitted towards the end of a session.
Motion (by Mr. Anstey) agreed to -
That the question be now put.
Question - That the motion be agreed to - put. The House divided.
AYES: 33
NOES: 25
Majority . . . . 8
AYES
NOES
Question so resolved in the affirmative.
page 2783
WAR SERVICE HOMES BILL
Personal Explanation.
Mr McGRATH:
BALLAARAT, VICTORIA
– By way of personal explanation, I desire to say that last night I was denied the opportunity of sayinga few words in the debate on the motion for the second reading of the War Service Homes Bill. I understand that the Government Whip (Mr. Marr) has denied a statement by the honorable member for Angas(Mr. Gabb) that three returned soldier members on this side of the House were present and desired to speak. It is quite true that I was not present when the division was taken, but I sat in the chamber till a quarter to 11 o’clock, waiting for a chance to speak. I knew that the guillotine was to fall at 11 o’clock, and as another honorable member received the call at a quarter to 11, I realized that there would be no opportunity for me. Therefore I left the chamber, and I understand that my name was paired with that of the honorable member for Martin (Mr. Pratten). I can promise the Government that, for the future, nobody will pair my name against that of another honorable member so long as the present Ministry occupy the Treasury bench.
Mr FENTON:
– I wish also to make a personal explanation. During the debate that preceded the division that has just been taken, I made a statement to the effect that I had never voted for a motion or an amendment for the purpose of limiting debate; and, further, that I did not believe in curtailing the rights of minorities. The honorable member for Parkes (Mr. Marr) has turned up Hansard, and has pointed out that, on 18th June, 1915, I voted with the Government on a number of occasions for the motion “ That the question be now put.” I may point out, however, that the questions referred to were motions for leave to introduce Bills and present them for the first reading. According to our Standing Orders there can be no debate on the first reading of a Bill, but there may be a discussion on the motion for leave to introduce a Bill. I may add, further, that after the divisions were taken on the occasion referred to, ample time was allowed members of the Opposition to discuss the various Bills which had relation to certain proposed amendments of the Constitution to give the Federal Parliament power to deal with exploiters during the war.
Sitting suspended from 12.59 to 2.15 p.m.
page 2783
WITHDRAWAL OF PAIRS
Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter
.- (By leave.)- I desire to state, for the information of honorable members, that, in consequence of the manner in which the proceedings of this House are being conducted, all pairs, with one exception, must be considered “ off.” No further pairs will be allowed by honorable members on this side this session. The one exception is that which I promised the Prime Minister would be given for the honorable member for Calare (Sir Neville Howse), because he is a delegate to the League of Nations.
page 2783
WAR SERVICE HOMES BILL
In Committee (Consideration resumed from 14th August, vide page 2724) :
Clause 1 (Short title).
Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter
.- Although the clause refers only to the short title, I should like to be allowed to say that I very much regret that the time at our disposal will not permit of the proper discussion of this Bill. It has been decided that the Bill must go through all its stages by half-past 4 or a quarter to 5 o’clock this afternoon, and, owing to the Prime Minister bringing forward the motion for taking fresh business after 11 o’clock at night, practically half the time set apart for the consideration of this Bill has been occupied in the discussion of that motion. In the circumstances, we must make the best of the matter, hoping that, perhaps, in another place justice may be done. I am not in favour of the Bill as it stands, but I am aware that I cannot discuss it generally upon this clause. I believe that the title, as printed, is a very unsatisfactory one, and that the clause should read, “ This Act may be cited as the War Service Homes Breach of Promise Act,” because the Bill is really a distinct breach of promise to the returned soldiers.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 2 -
Section 4 of the principal Act is amended by omitting therefrom the definition of “ Dwellinghouse” and inserting in its stead the following definition: - “ ‘ Dwelling-house ‘ includes -
a house or building used or to be used by a person, who is includedin paragraph (b) or (d) of the definition of ‘ Australian soldier,’ as a hospital, sanatorium, or nursing home; and
the appurtenances, outbuildings, fences, and permanent provision for lighting, water supply, drainage, and sewerage provided in connexion with a dwellinghouse, but does not include any land; “.
Section proposed to be amended - “ Dwelling-house “ includes a house, or a building used or to be used, by a person who is included in paragraph (b) or (d) of the definition of “Australian soldier,” as a hospital, sanatorium, or nursing home, and the appurtenances, necessary outbuildings, fences, and permanent provision for lighting, water supply, drainage, and sewerage of the house or building, but does not include any land.
Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter
.- I do not know why the definition of “dwelling-house” has been altered, and should like some explanation from the Minister in charge of the Bill. The object may be to liberalize the definition, but there appears to me to be very little difference between the definition in the existing Act and that proposed in this Bill. The existing definition includes appurtenances, necessary outbuildings, and so on. The alteration proposed may be in the interests of the returned soldiers, but it should be explained by the Minister. We cannot permit the clause to pass when it may ultimately be shown that its effect is not what we anticipated. When the Minister in charge of the Bill proposes alterations of this kind, he should give reasons for them.
Mr STEWART:
Minister for Works and Railways · Wimmera · CP
– There is really nothing in this amendment. The definition of “dwellinghouse” in the present Act is faulty.
Mr Mathews:
– I move -
That the Minister be no further heard.
Mr Charlton:
– The honorable member had better permit the Minister to answer me.
Mr Blakeley:
– No, why should we?
Mr Stewart:
– The honorable member’s Leader asked me for an explanation.
Mr Blakeley:
– Yes, and another time the Minister would move the gag on the Leader of the Opposition.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Bayley:
OXLEY, QUEENSLAND
– Order! There can be no discussion on the motion moved by the honorable member for Melbourne Ports (Mr. Mathews). I should like to point out that under the standing order for the application of the guillotine, no such motion as the honorable member has submitted can be moved.
Mr Mahony:
– I rise to a point of order. Only as late as yesterday the very same motion was moved whilst the discussion of the measure under consideration was subject to the provisions of the guillotine. With all respect, I submit, sir, that you have fallen into error. The motion “That the question be now put” cannot be moved when the guillotine provisions have been applied to a debate, but the question “ That a member be no further heard “ is a totally different question. You will, I think, see, upon reflection, that, probably unwittingly, you have fallen into error in the ruling you have given, because the motion submitted by the honorable member for Melbourne Ports was “ That the Minister be no further heard “ and not “ That the question be now put.”
The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN:
– In reply to the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Mahony), the standing order is as he has stated, but I am of the opinion that the effect of the two motions is the same.
Mr Blakeley:
– A liberal translation of the Standing Orders!
The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN:
– For the benefit of the Committee, I shall read the standing order.
Mr Blakeley:
– How long is it since you put yourself up as a translator of our laws?
The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN:
– Standing order 262a, section vii, which was adopted by the House on the 16th October, 1918, and applies to the limitation of debate, says -
The closure adopted by the House on the 23rd November, 1905, shall not apply to any proceedings in respect of which time has been allotted in pursuance of this standing order.
I rule that as a certain time has been allotted for the consideration of the measure under discussion, under section vii of standing order 262a, providing that the closure shall not apply to any proceedings in respect of which time has been allotted in pursuance of that standing order, the motion submitted by the honorable member for Melbourne Ports, whilst not the closure in precise terms, is the same in effect.
Mr Mahony:
– I propose to move dissent from your ruling. I am reluctantly compelled to do so. The standing order, as quoted by you, is without ambiguity. It says that the closure shall not apply to any proceedings in respect of which time has been allotted to the consideration of a particular matter under the guillotine provisions - that is to say, the closure is not to apply to discussions generally on any question, but it may be applied to any individual member. For instance, it is quite competent for the Committee to decide that certain members shall not be heard at all, and that one or two honorable members shall be allowed to occupy the whole of the time allotted under the guillotine provisions. The object in preventing the moving of the closure when the guillotine provisions have been applied is to prevent the time allowed for the consideration of the particular matter being further restricted, than the House has decided that they shall be. That is obviously the intention of the standing order. The House deliberately allots a certain time for the discussion of a matter.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.Order !
Mr Mahony:
– I am moving dissent from your ruling, sir.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN:
– I have recognised that.
Mr Mahony:
– Do you agree with my dissent ?
Mr Blakeley:
– Do you want to alter your ruling?
The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.I wish to inform the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Mahony) that there is a way under the Standing Orders by which he or any other honorable member may dissent from my ruling. Dissent may only be given expression to in writing, and I ask the honorable member to express his dissent in writing.
Mr Mahony:
– I am entitled, in moving dissent from the ruling, to give my reasons.
Swan -- I think the Committee might just as well deal with the whole question of the definition. To my mind this definition is proposed for one purpose, and one purpose only, and that is to enable extra charges to be made by the Commissioner for lighting, sewerage, and other services set forth in the Bill. {: .speaker-KV8} ##### Mr Stewart: -- Nothing ofthe kind. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- I rise to a point of order. The honorable member for Swan is now dealing with subsequent clauses, and in reality making a second-reading speech. Ought not the honorable member to be confined to clause 2 ? {: .speaker-JOG} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Bayley: -- The point of order is not sustained. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- Then I move - That the ruling be dissented from. I submit my motion of dissent in writing, and I desire to point out. that the honorable member for Swan- {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- Is the honorable member in order in making a. speech on this motion ? {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- Yes. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- The Committee is now dealing with clause 2, but the honorable member for Swan was proceeding to deal with other portions of the Bill. The Committee is the place for discussing each clause, and the second-reading stage is the proper time to deal with general principles. You, **Mr. Bayley,** a young man inexperienced in the chair, very foolishly- {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- The honorable member must not comment on the Chair. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- But we must tell the truth sometimes, you know. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.Will the honorable member resume his seat? An honorable member is not in order in commenting personally on the occupant of the chair. Every honorable member knows that the personal equation must be eliminated entirely. It is the office, and not its occupant, that honorable members are expected to respect. I ask the honorable member for Ballarat to refrain from making personal statements about the occupant of the chair. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- Honorable members on this side are desirous to assist the Government to their very utmost. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The honorable member must deal with the point of order. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- When **Mr. Speaker** is in the chair, there are none of these scenes. That gentleman would never dream of giving a decision such as you, **Mr. Bayley,** gave against the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Mahony).** The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The honorable member cannot discuss that matter. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- **Mr. Speaker** gives his decisions in accordance with the Standing Orders. If, **Mr. Bayley,** you. expect to keep order, you must conform to the Standing Orders. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The honorable member has risen to a point of order, and I ask him to confine himself to it. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -i have risen to submit a motion of dissent from your ruling. I do not think that much progress can be made until the decision of a few moments ago is reversed and I think the proper course would be for the Minister to report progress, call in the Speaker, and have the question settled. It is a most vital question which affects the rights of every member. The ruling, if carried into effect, when a time limit has been fixed, would enable one member to occupy the whole time of the Committee to the exclusion of other members. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- The honorable member is not in order in discussing a previous ruling. He has risen to submit a motion of dissent from my ruling, and I ask him to confine himself to that. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- I was trying to show that your ruling is not altogether free from bias. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- The honorable member is not in order. I ask him to respect the Chair, and address himself to the question. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- First of all, **Mr. Bayley,** you gave a wrong decision, and then you were permitting the honorable member for Swan to make a second-reading speech. When I rose to a point of order you said, " The point of order is not sustained." I hope honorable members opposite will not be so meek and dumb in voting on this question as they have shown themselves to be in previous divisions. I hope this question will not be viewed from a party stand-point, but that my motion will have the wholehearted support of every member, irrespective of paid Ministers - of every member who is free. The honorable member for Swan is an old Parliamentarian, with experience in both State and Federal Parliaments, and I can quite understand his taking advantage of your usefulness in order to make a second-reading speech. Unfortunately, **Mr. Bayley,** you sustain the honorable member in his attitude. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The question is that my ruling be dissented from. {: .speaker-KLG} ##### Mr Mahony: -- I rise to a point of order. When you started to put the question, **Mr. Bayley,** I rose with a view to discussing the motion, as I am allowed to do under standing order number 228. As previously, you, probably again unwittingly, misled the Committee, forI do not say that that was done deliberately. Standing order 228 is as follows: - >If any objection is taken to the ruling or decision of the Chairman of Committees,such objection shall be stated at once in writing, and may forthwith be decided by the Committee; and the proceedings shall then be resumed where they were interrupted. The point is that the motion " may be," not " shall be," discussed forthwith. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: -- The Committee has decided that question. {: .speaker-KLG} ##### Mr Mahony: -- The Committee has not decided that question . The ruling of the Chair was that the motion of dissent must be put forthwith; but it is not within the province of the Chair to decide the point. It is a question for the Committee itself. I claim that your action was wrong when you failed to see me as I rose to discuss the motion. I now ask you, before I take further action, to permit me to exercise my right to discuss it. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- The honorable member is in order. {: .speaker-KLG} ##### Mr Mahony: -- I take the stand,Mr. Bayley, that your ruling is wrong. If the point raised by the honorable member for Ballarat is not sustained, it means that an honorable member might, when we are in Committee on a particular clause, drift into a second-reading speech on the whole measure. For instance, on the "short title," a member, under your ruling, might cover the whole gamut of a Bill. If the honorable member for Swan is permitted this latitude, then it should be permitted to every honorable member, with the result of wasting time, delaying business, and preventing proper consideration of details. A measure is taken into Committee for the discussion of details only; we are confined to particular clauses, which must not be clouded with generalities. If honorable members are to be allowed to proceed as the honorable member for Swan wishes, we shall never get any explanation of the details of the measure beforeus. Upon every clause, all honorable members could make long speeches of a general character, and the discussion would be endless. In order that proper attention may be paid to the details of the measure, I support the motion to dissent. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- During the last five minutes you, **Mr. Chairman,** have given two opposite rulings on the same point. Firstly, you ruled that it was not competent to discuss a motion to dissent; and a few minutes later, you reversed your ruling, and allowed debate to take place on another motion to dissent. Can honorable members on this side of the Committee protect themselves against the consequences of your unwitting mistakes? {: .speaker-L4X} ##### Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- I rise to support the motion to dissent. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- I desire to know what the Chairman has to say in regard to the point of orderI have raised. I intended to speak to the previous motion for dissent; but I was ruled out of order by the Chairman. {: .speaker-JOG} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Bayley: -- The honorable member for Hume. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- I am reluctant to be compelled to ask you, **Mr. Chairman,** for the third time for certain information. You have treated this Committee most discourteously, and have given rulings that are not conducive to the preservation of order. When a question is put to the Chair, it should be answered. What redress have we on this side for the bungling of which you were guilty in giving your ruling? {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- - The honorable member is not in order in speaking disrespectfully of the Chair. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- What is the position of honorable members who are misled by your ruling? I would like the matter to be reported to the Speaker, so that you may be properly rebuked or removed from the Chair for the rulings you have given. What redress have we for the mistake you made? It is about the sixteenth mistake made by you during the last three months. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- I think I see a way out of thedifficulty. If the Temporary Chairman will be courageous enough to admit that he was in error in ruling against the honorable member for Darling **(Mr. Blakeley),** the point of order will besettled. {: .speaker-JOG} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Bayley: -- Standing order 228 provides that an objection to the decision of the Chairman of Committees "may forthwith be decided by the Committee." {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr Lazzarini: -- When you read the standing order earlier you used the word "shall." {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- Put in what words you choose. You have done so in the past. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- The honorable member for Darling is not in order. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- Nor are you. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- The honorable member for Darling knows quite well that when I read the standing order previously I read the word "may." {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr Lazzarini: -- And you ruled "shall." {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- You ruled that I could not speak to the motion for dissent, and you had no right to do so.You have since reversed your ruling. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The honorable member is out of order in speaking when the Chairman is on his feet. It has been the practice for the Chairman to decide, after sufficient debate, in his opinion, has taken place upon the point of order, to put the question forthwith. When the first motion for dissent was moved I resolvedin the interests of the Committee to allow it to be decided forthwith. {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr Lazzarini: -- In the best interests of the Government. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- On my own authority I refused the honorable member for Darling permission to speak. That is in accordance with past custom. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- Why was I singled out? The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The honorable member was not singled out; he was on his feet when I gave my ruling. When the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Mahony)** raised a point of order regarding the right of members to speak to a motion for dissent, I recognised that it was not the will of the Committee that the question should be put forthwith. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- How did you interpret the will of the Committee? {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- The fact that the honorable member for Dalley rose to a point of order on this question was proof conclusive that he, at least, was desirous of discussing the motion to dissent that had been made by the honorable member for Ballarat **(Mr. McGrath).** I, therefore, ruled that it would be in order for him to discuss the motion. {: .speaker-L4X} ##### Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- I quite understand that the long and tedious sittings are responsible for the chaos in the Committee, and for the confusion in the Chairman's rulings. A man would be more than human who could sit here for such long hours as have been imposed upon us by the Prime Minister, and yet retain his clear judgment. I support the motion to dissent from your ruling. The division upon the point raised by the honorable member for Melbourne Ports was nothing short of a reflection upon honorable members opposite. I believe that at least a dozen of them voted in the dark. It is very interesting to find that tho honorable member for Swan is the victim of the guillotine, which he helps to operate: He has been a very consistent supporter of tho Government through thick and thin, right or wrong, and he has always been ready to build a little bridge to enable the Government to escape from any difficulty. He voted for the limitation of the speeches upon this Bill, and, consequently, he was not able to make uponthe second reading the speech which he intended to broadcast through his electorate. Therefore, he attempted to make it on clause 1. It was amusing to us to see the honorable member hoist with his own petard. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- I spoke on the second reading last night when the honorable member was away. {: .speaker-L4X} ##### Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- I was not. away. I was here and heard the speech. The honorable member was not able to say all he wanted to say, and perhaps when he saw the proof of his speech this morning he realized that it was not worth distributing to his constituents. Therefore, he attempted to make another general speech upon clause 1. The honorable member for Ballarat detected that the honorable member for Swan was actually discussing sub-clause *a* of clause 2 on page 5 of the Bill, and he drew the attention of the Chair to that fact. You, sir, ruled that there was no point of order in the honorable member's objection. I would not mind if we could all make a second-reading speech on a clause of this Bill; but even a loyal, diligent, thickandthin supporter of the Government should not be treated differently front honorable members of the Opposition. I suppose the treatment given to the honorable member for Swan was in return for services rendered. You, sir, have been good enough to say that your previous ruling in regard to the discussion of a motion to dissent was wrong. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- Order! The honorable member is incorrect in saying I stated that my ruling was wrong. {: .speaker-L4X} ##### Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- I am sorry if I misinterpreted your words. I do not wish to do you an injustice, sir. {: .speaker-L1T} ##### Mr Yates: -- The Temporary Chairman refused me the right to discuss a motion for dissent. {: .speaker-L4X} ##### Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- And since then he has given a different ruling on the same matter. I do not take exception to the remarks of the honorable member for Swan **(Mr. Gregory).** {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- I think the reason for the honorable member's action is transparent. {: .speaker-L4X} ##### Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- I wish to show that we are proceeding in an impossible way. We have a long way to go, and I want honorable members to see what will happen if measures are to be bludgeoned through the House according to set times. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- The honorable member is not discussing the motion moved by the honorable member for Ballarat. {: .speaker-L4X} ##### Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- I hope honorable members will realize the result of their action if they refuse to support the motion of the honorable member for Ballarat. I ask them to treat this matter on its merits, and not on party lines. The Minister for Works and Railways has determined that the vote on this matter shall be taken at 4 o'clock. It is absurd to fix times in that way. This practice robs honorable members of their privilege to discuss all the measures that come before them. The whole thing is farcical. To be treated on its merits, a Bill like this should be discussed for two or three days. I for one shall not be a party to this hypocrisy. I shall not agree to letting the Temporary **Chairman (Mr. Bayley)** conduct the business as he likes. {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr Lazzarini: -- Or as the Government tells him. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- The honorable member for Hume **(Mr. Parker Moloney)** is not in order in saying that the Temporary Chairman is conducting the business as he likes. He must conduct the business of this Committee according to the Standing Orders. {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr Lazzarini: -- We do not know what is order, and what isnot order. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- Order ! {: .speaker-L4X} ##### Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- It is wrong fair the Minister to say that we are encroaching upon the time allotted for the consideration of this Bill. This should be a lesson to him that the House will not submit to a cut-and-dried programme such as he has put before us. The Minister should give reasonable time for the consideration of the Bill. It is ridiculous to say that this discussion shall conclude at 4 o'clock. {: .speaker-KIT} ##### Mr Mackay: -- I think honorable members opposite are under a misapprehension concerning your ruling, **Mr. Bayley.** I took your ruling to mean that the honorable member for Swan **(Mr. Gregory)** did not depart from consideration of the clause before the Committee. Honorable members opposite seem to understand that the honorable member for Swan may, discuss the whole Bill. Will you explain your ruling to the Committee ? {: .speaker-JOG} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Bayley: -- The honorable member for Swan was addressing the Committee on clause 2 of the Bill when the honorable member for Ballarat rose on a point of order that the honorable member for Swan was not addressing himself to clause 2, but was really making a secondreading speech. I had followed closely the remarks of the honorable member for Swan, and, in my opinion, he was dealing with clause 2, which refers to dwelling houses, andstates what that term includes. Because I held that opinion, I informed the honorable member for Ballarat that I could not sustain his point of order. {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr Lazzarini: -- I regret, **Mr. Bayley,** that it was necessary for you to call me to order a moment ago; but you have given so many conflicting rulings during the last half-hour- The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.Order ! The honorable member must confine himself to the motion before the Chair. {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr Lazzarini: -- All I say is that if I was out of order, it was not my fault, but the fault of the Temporary Chairman. I strongly support the motion of dissent moved by the honorable member for Ballarat **(Mr. McGrath).** If the Committee does not support the motion,a dangerous precedent will have been established. Since the extraordinary vote taken a few moments ago, the business of the Committee has got into such a tangle that we do not know where we are. If this motion is dealt with on its merits, the Committee will dissent from the ruling. I hope that you, sir, will not make that necessary, but that you will admit that you were wrong, and order the honorable member for Swan to resume his seat or keep his remarks relevant to the clause before the Committee. {: .speaker-KQS} ##### Mr F MCDONALD:
BARTON, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- To a certain extent, I agree with the motion. The honorable member for Swan **(Mr. Gregory)** was rather out of order, because the standing order states that honorable members must confine their attention entirely to the clause under notice ; but it may be wise for us to defeat this motion, and uphold the Temporary Chairman, so that honorable members may discuss this Bill fully. It would be an excellent thing to take the time still available for a debate on this measure to consider it in all its bearings. Honorable members had no adequate opportunity to do so when it was at the second-reading stage. Several returned soldier members wished to speak to the Bill, but were prevented by the guillotine. One honorable member on this side of the chamber **(Mr. Coleman)** left important business in Sydney to attend this House to express certain wishes of the Returned Sailors and Soldiers League in relation to the Bill. He had some important amendments to move. He was not able to speak on the second reading, and it appears now that he will not have any opportunity to move amend ments that he has to certain clauses. I agree wilh the honorable member for Swan **(Mr. Gregory)** that we should not be bound by formalities. Recently, this House has been made the slave and servant of the machine we know as the guillotine, which has prevented honorable members from expressing their views. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- The honorable member for Barton must confine his remarks to the motion before the Chair. {: .speaker-KQS} ##### Mr F MCDONALD:
BARTON, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- ^1 am endeavouring to put forward reasons why the honorable member's motion should be affirmed or negatived - I have not yet quite made ,up my mind which. I am rather inclined to vote against the motion of the honorable member for Ballarat. We should have more opportunity to discuss this Bill. The three or four returned soldiers on this side of the Committee who wish to speak should be given an opportunity to do so. I desired *o* address the House on the measure, but I gave way to the returned soldier members. I thought I would have an opportunity in Committee to state my views. It appears that that opportunity will not be afforded me. The honorable member for Swan **(Mr. Gregory)** is quite right in saying that we should put formality to one side. Let us use formality, but let us never become its slaves. It is an excellent thing to use in certain circumstances, but it becomes tyrannous when it is made master of a situation. Let us have " bung " rules if we like, but let us do something practical. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- I do not want to give honorable members opposite the opportunity of saying that I prevented this Bill from being discussed. The clause to which I was referring when the honorable member for Ballarat rose to his point of order, is of a retrospective nature. Seeing that returned soldiers have come forward, and caused this obstruction, I retire from the field altogether. I shall leave it to those honorable members to take what action they choose. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr Makin: -- I am one of the panel of Temporary Chairmen, and I am much interested in rulings that may be given on the proceedings of this Chamber. I understand, **Mr. Bayley,** that your ruling which is being challenged was that the honorable member for Swan **(Mr. Gregory)** was not discussing this. Bill generally, but was really dealing with only one clause. For the future guidance of Temporary Chairmen, and in order to insure that we shall not have conflicting rulings, I would be glad if you would inform the Committee on what authority you base' your ruling - whether you are acting according to precedent, and what standing order, if any, supports you. I do this so that we may have guidance for any future happening of a similar nature. I am anticipating what may be my own position in the future. I have the right to ask that you, sir, should ' amplify your ruling in order that I may be enabled to give an enlightened rote on the motion now before the Chair. To permit the honorable member for Swan to proceed in the way he did requires some explanation. If we are to allow a member to traverse the whole of the provisions of a Bill on one clause it is difficult to say where such procedure will end. If we do not strictly adhere to the. Standing Orders how can we expect to carry on the' business of this Chamber with credit to ourselves, and advantage to the country? In view of the limitation of the time allowed for the consideration of this Bill it is unfortunate that an honorable member should so obtrude his opinions as to justify th«s raising of a point of order. Earlier in the day the Government intruded, with a very contentious motion, upon the time allowed for the consideration of the measure, and so has deprived honorable members of a proper opportunity for its consideration. I hope, sir, that you will be able to support your ruling by som? precedent. {: .page-start } page 2792 {:#debate-13} ### THE TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN . - For the benefit of honorable members who have been absent from the Chamber, I may state that the honorable member for Swan **(Mr. Gregory)** was addressing himself to. clause 2, and before he had proceeded very far the honorable member for Ballarat **(Mr. McGrath)** rose in his place to a point of order on the ground that the honorable member for Swan was making a second-reading speech. {: .page-start } page 2793 {:#debate-14} ### QUESTION {:#subdebate-14-0} #### THE TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.- Order! I had listened to the honorable member for Swan, and held that he was addressing himself to the clause before the Committee. I consequently informed the honorable member for Ballarat that I could not sustain his point of order. Upon that, the honorable member gave notice of his intention to move that my ruling be dissented from. This he subsequently did, and the question now before the Committee is that my ruling be dissented from. Question put. The Committee divided. AYES: 27 NOES: 34 Majority ... ... 7 AYES NOES Question so resolved in the negative. Motion to dissent negatived. {: #subdebate-14-0-s0 .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN:
Reid .- Before attempting to discuss the clause, I direct attention to the fact that very little time is given for mature consideration of it, or, indeed, of any portion of. this Bill. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: -- It is a pity the honorable gentleman did not think of that earlier in the afternoon. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN: -- I think that we are entitled to enter our protest in the way we think best against the tactics of the Government. I feel that we shall have behind us in the procedure wehave adopted the public opinion of Australia, and particularly of the returned soldiers who sent me here with various amendments which they desire to have made in this Bill, but which time will not permit me to submit to the Committee. I am aware that I must keep to the discussion of clause 2, but I direct your attention to the fact that on the interpretation of this clause depends the whole structure of the Bill. The Minister in charge of the measure has given no explanation of the reasons which have actuated him in submitting the amend? ments of the existing Act embodied in this clause. {: .speaker-KV8} ##### Mr Stewart: -- Honorable members opposite gagged me when I tried to do so. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN: -- We gagged the Minister as an indication of our indignation at not being given an opportunity to fairly discuss the measure. The honorable gentleman had an hour and a half last evening to discuss it, but we have not had a fair opportunity to consider it. I direct the attention of the people to the fact that we had no notice of the introduction of the Bill. If it had been tabled a week ago we would at least have had an opportunity to peruse it, and would have less cause for complaint. It was introduced on Monday last without any previous notice, and now a time limit has been fixed for its consideration which does not give us the opportunity to bring forward constructive amendments. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The honorable member should discuss the clause. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN: -- I am answering an interjection of the Minister. I ask the Minister **(Mr. Stewart)** whether it is intended to add to the cost of dwellings as prescribed by the Bill the expense incurred in connecting them with water, drainage, sewerage, and lighting services? I have already referred to the unfair costs which were prescribed by the War Service Homes Commissioner and the Adjustment Boards for the installation of water, sewerage, and lighting services. In one street several houses were charged at different rates. The Bill relates to lighting, water supply, drainage, and sewerage to be provided for in connexion with a dwelling-house. The original Act referred to , the drainage and sewerage of the house or building. Evidently it is intended to add to the cost of soldiers homes by the expense incurred for water and lighting connexions. I would like to know from the Minister what is actually intended by the alteration of this clause. I enter my protest against the lack of time allowed for the discussion of this Bill. We have to deal with thirty clauses in the limited space of three-quarters of an hour. It is a damneddisgrace, and a reflection upon responsible government. I am here to express the views of the people who elected me, and the privilege of a calm deliberation of proposed legislation has been denied me. Clause agreed to. Clause 3 agreed to. Clause 4 - >Section 14a of the principal Act is amended - > >by omitting therefrom the word " Five," and inserting in its stead the word "Two"; and > >by inserting therein, after the word "for," the words ", and obtain,". > > *Section proposed to be amended -* 14a. *Before exercising any power under this Act in connexion with the acquisition of land or building material or with any contracts incidental thereto, the Commissioner shall, if the exercise of the power involves the expenditure of more than Five thousand pounds, submit his proposal for the approval of the Minister.* {: #subdebate-14-0-s1 .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY:
Darling .- I move - >That the word "Two," line 5, be left out with a view to insert in lieu thereof the word " One."' The amendment now proposed by the Government is to substitute the word " Two " for the word " Five." {: .speaker-KV8} ##### Mr Stewart: -- And the insertion of the words " and obtain." {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr BLAKELEY: -- The care which has been exercised in the drafting of this Bill shows that the Minister **(Mr. Stewart)** is determined that there shall be no more War Service Homes scandals. He has carefully restricted the powers of the Commissioners. With that I agree, but in this instance, where the Commissioner is to be limited to an expenditure of £2,000, the amount should be reduced to £1,000. It would place more responsibility on the Minister, because, after all, Commissioners come and go, and for that matter, so do the Ministers. But they are directly responsible to Parliament, whereas we cannot deal with the Commissioner except by conferring the " order of the sack." According to the clause, for every expenditure exceeding £2,000, the Minister must be consulted, and must give his consent. Throughout the drafting of the Bill we see the suspicion of maladministration, and the precaution taken to prevent it. Ten transactions will involve £10,000, and twenty transaction, £20,000. The Commissioner will have the power to expend, at any rate, £20,000. The proposed amendment will place more responsibility upon the Minister. {: #subdebate-14-0-s2 .speaker-KV8} ##### Mr STEWART:
Minister for Works and Railways · Wimmer a · CP -- I am glad to know that the honorable member who moved the amendment agrees to limiting the power of the Commissioner and increasing the responsibility of the Minister. It is apparently a question as to how far we shall go. I ask the honorable member not to go from one extreme to another. The clause hasbeen framed carefully, and a reasonable responsibility is placed on the Commissioner. Whilethere is danger in giving him too much power, there is also a disadvantage in giving insufficient power. I ask the honorable member not to insist on his amendment. {: #subdebate-14-0-s3 .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa .- I support the amendment moved by the honorable member for Darling. It is only reasonable. I object, and I have always objected, to giving Commissioners too great a power to expend moneys without a sufficient check. Last night the Minister stated how anxious he was to avoid past scandals, and he stated that he intended to exercise a strict supervision over the War Service Homes Department. The Minister will prove his sincerity by accepting the amendment. It does not place any onerous duty upon him or the Department. Many scandals have developed concerning War Service Homes, and each succeeding Minister has shifted the responsibility to some one else, and very often at considerable expense. The Minister should be held responsible for the transactions of this Department. I would go further than the amendment of the honorable member for Darling, and restrict the expenditure for the building of a home to £1,000. Few of these buildings cost more than that sum. As has been pointed out, under the proposed amendment twenty transactions would involve £20,000; but if the clause is allowed to stand, the Commissioner will be responsible for the expenditure of about £40,000 on those transactions. If the amendment had proposed a reduction to £500 instead of to £1,000, it would have received my support. {: #subdebate-14-0-s4 .speaker-L1T} ##### Mr YATES:
Adelaide .- I support the amendment. The clause as proposed by the Minister is a strong indictment of the preceding Minister. The original Act provided that when an expenditure of £5,000 was contemplated, the Commissioner should submit his proposal for the approval of the Minister. The proposed clause is tantamount to saying that the Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner ignored the Minister when incurring expenditure. It is not a very nice thing to say of a predecessor, but probably the Minister has found that such was the case. The previous Minister is not at present in this House, since he has been dealt with by the electors. I remember that one Minister of the Crown, when referring to the Kidman-Mayoh contract, stated that some one ought to have been put in gaol. I am of the opinion that if a Minister accepts the responsibility and emolument of office, and administers an Act containing the definite direction that a Commissioner shall submit proposed expenditure for his approval, when maladministration is proved it is time that some one was put in gaol. The words " and . obtain ", as proposed by the Government, mean that the preceding Minister has not carried out his job. I want to know whether previous expenditure was submitted for the approval of the Minister. This is a national Department, and the " saviours of the nation " spent money indiscriminately. The chickens are now coming home to roost, and this is one of them. The Minister admits a deficiency in the neighbourhood of £3,000,000, caused in our efforts to give our suffering warriors the best that the nation can give them. But who has had the best that the nation can give? Those with whom the Government are now pleading to reinvest in the loans. {: #subdebate-14-0-s5 .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- Order ! {: .speaker-L1T} ##### Mr YATES: -- I admit that that remark is not quite *apropos* of the amendment, but it is relevant to the position as we find it to-day. This clause is a striking indictment of the previous administration, seeing that it reduces from £5,000 to £2,000 the amount which the Commissioner may spend without approval, while the honorable member for Darling **(Mr. Blakeley)** suggests that the sum should be £1,000. {: .speaker-KV8} ##### Mr Stewart: -- The honorable member does not object to this provision? {: .speaker-L1T} ##### Mr YATES: -- No, but I wish to place on record its true meaning, so that the people may see how the past administration has been carried on. The late Government got into power as the only one which could restore the equilibrium of the nation after four years of war, and it is now disclosed how that Government did it. Evidently the Minister is not sure of himself, or sure of his officers, so he places this limitation on unapproved expenditure, and restricts his own power. I shall support the amendment, but not because I have any doubt or fear in regard to the present Minister, who has tried to meet the situation. I take it that the honorable gentleman rather anticipates that he may not always be Minister, and, therefore, he wishes to insure that any neglectful successor shall not have the latitude which he himself now enjoys. Question - That the word proposed to be omitted stand part of the clause - put. The Committee divided. AYES: 36 NOES: 27 Majority . . . . 9 AYES NOES Question so resolved in the affirmative. Amendment negatived. Clause agreed to. Clauses 5 and 6 agreed to. Clause 7 - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Section 18 of the principal Act is amended - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. by inserting therein, after the word " erected " (second occurring), the words " but not including any cost incurred under section eighteen A of this Act,"; *Sectionproposed to be amended -* *The total cost to the Commissioner of any dwelling-house acquired or erected in pursuance of this Part together with the cost of the land on which it is erected shall not exceed Seven hundred pounds:* {: #subdebate-14-0-s6 .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr BRENNAN:
Batman .- A matter of principle is raised in this clause, about which the Minister **(Mr. Stewart)** has been good enough to give me some information, but which, on the face of it, is not very clear. It involves the question of excess costs so far as they relate to sewerage, drainage, and matters of the kind. I move - >That the words " but not ", line 5, be left out, with a view to the insertion' after the word " pounds " in section 18 of the principal Act of the words, " but in no case shall the price charged to the soldier exceed the actual cost to the Commissioner of the dwelling-house and land." The object I have in view is twofold. In the first place, I wish to make it quite clear that the soldier is to have a home with sewerage, drainage, and other usual and necessary additions, complete, so far as they are applicable to the neighbourhood at the time the home is allotted. Further, I wish to provide that if the actual cost of the building turns out to be less than £800 or whatever the cost may be, in no case shall the price charged to the soldier exceed the actual cost to the Commissioner for the dwelling-house and land. I shall be glad to hear the Minister on this amendment. {: #subdebate-14-0-s7 .speaker-KV8} ##### Mr STEWART:
Minister for Works and Railways · Wimmera · CP .- The time is too limited for me to go fully into the matter. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- Whose fault is that? {: .speaker-KV8} ##### Mr STEWART: -- I shall not discuss that matter now, but try to reply to the question asked by the honorable member for Batman **(Mr. Brennan).** The provision of the services indicated in clause 8 is concerning many of the representatives of the soldiers, and I have explained the matter to individual members as far as lies in my power. It was stated by the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Charlton)** last night that in cases where a house cost, or was valued at, say, £900, the policy of the present Government was, in the absence of any agreement made by the soldier to pay more than the £800 provided in the Act, the latter price should include sewerage and other conveniences attached to the house at the time he took possession. The Leader of the Opposition said, in effect, that the Government, under the Bill - and he thus spoke, because, I suppose, he had not had an opportunity to make himself thoroughly acquainted with the measure - tells the soldier on the one hand that he will not be charged more than £800 for a £900 house, and, on the other hand, that he will be charged an extra £100 for conveniences attached to the house. That is not so. Any conveniences, such as sewerage, added after the soldier has taken possession must be paid for by the soldier. There have been cases in which local governing bodies have refused, for instance, to make a road to a group of War Service Homes, on the ground that there was no security for the money thus expended. {: #subdebate-14-0-s8 .speaker-JOG} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Bayley: -- The time allotted for the Committee stage has expired. *Bells rung.* {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- There is an important clause in the Bill on which I desire to speak. According to clause 10, two cottages may be erected for one man. {: #subdebate-14-0-s9 .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- Order ! Will the honorable member for Darling be seated? {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- Clause 10 says- >The Commissioner shall not, except with the approval of the Minister- The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.Order! Will the honorable member for Darling be seated? {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- I have something to say, and I will say it. I desire to protest The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.Order! The Honorable member is not in order in protesting at this stage. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- I desire to protest against the Bill, which allows the Commissioner, with the consent of the Minister, to erect more than one cottage for one soldier. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.Will the honorable member be seated ? {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- I was on my feet when you interrupted me, **Mr. Chairman.** The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.I order the honorable member for Darling to be seated. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- The Prime Minister yesterday moved a motion which allotted a certain time to the Committee stage of this Bill. To-day he proposed a motion which took two hours off that time. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The honorable member for Ballarat must be seated. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- You had better consult the Prime Minister. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The Chair has no option but to put the question that the remaining clauses of the Bill be agreed to. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- I object to this Bill being passed by the guillotine, while it contains a provision that two cottages maybe erected for one man. Ministerial Members. - Chair! Chair ! The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.Order ! Ministerial Members. - Chair! Chair ! {: #subdebate-14-0-s10 .speaker-10000} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: -- I have allowed the honorable member every latitude. He is not in order in continuing to speak. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- This Bill has not yet been discussed. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.Will the honorable member be seated ? {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- I will not. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.Then I have no option but to name the honorable member for Darling for wilful and repeated disobedience of the Chair. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- I desire that at least some portions of this Bill shall be discussed. Clause 10 says - >The Commissioner shall not, except with the approval of the Minister - > >erect more than one dwelling-house for; or > >sell more than one dwelling-house including the land upon which it is erected to, any one eligible person, and shall not erect a dwelling for, or sell a dwelling-house to, any person to whom an advance has been made in pursuance of this Act." That means that with the consent of the Minister the Commissioner may erect two or three or a dozen cottages for one man. I desire to eliminate the words " except with the approval of the Minister." It is not right that the Minister should be able to empower the Commissioner to erect more than one cottage for any soldier. I protest against the Bill being forced through the Committee without honorable members having an opportunity to discuss it. {: .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr Bruce: -- **Mr. Chairman-** {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- I move - >That the Prime Minister be no longer heard. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The right honorable the Prime Minister - {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- I move - >That the ruling of the Chairman be dissented from. {: .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr Bruce: -- I do not desire to take drastic action against the honorable member for Darling, and I appeal to him and to honorable members generally to realize that the prestige of this Chamber is involved in the proper and orderly conduct of our business. I ask the honorable member to show that respect to the Chair that all honorable members must show if our proceedings are to be conducted in a proper manner. I appeal to him to recognise the position he holds in this National Parliament, and submit to the authority of the Chair. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- Here is a Bill containing twenty-five important clauses- Ministerial Members. - Chair ! Chair ! {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- The Chairman is doing the job quite well enough for honorable members opposite. There are twenty-five important clauses in this Bill, and only seven have been dealt with. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The honorable member is not in order. {: .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr Bruce: -- I have appealed to the honorable member- {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- I protest against being "gagged" by the Prime Minister and his servant in this Committee. {: .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr Bruce: -- I am reluctantly compelled to move - >That the honorable member for Darling be suspended from the service of the Committee. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- He can only be reported to **Mr. Speaker.** Question - That the honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley) be suspended from the service of the Committee - put. The Committee divided. AYES: 36 NOES: 28 Majority ... ... 8 AYES NOES Question so resolved in the affirmative. *In division -* >That the ruling of the Chairman be dissented from. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.There can be no debate at this stage. *In the House:* {: #subdebate-14-0-s11 .speaker-JOG} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Bayley: -- **Mr. Speaker,** I have to report that . the honorable member for Darling **(Mr. Blakeley)** has been named for wilful disobedience of the Chair, and has been suspended from the service of the Committee! {: #subdebate-14-0-s12 .speaker-KXG} ##### Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt: -- Before submitting the motion which the Standing Orders render mandatory, I ask the honorable member for Darling whether he desires to offer any explanation to the House. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- Yes, sir. Yesterday I addressed you, and pointed out that members had very little freedom or liberty left in this Chamber. I stated that the. patience of honorable members on this side of the House had been completely exhausted because the Prime Minister and his Government were refusing to allow the Opposition the necessary opportunity for deliberationon measures that came before this Chamber. I pointed out Chat there were thirty-two measures to go through the House, and that it was impossible for honorable members to properly consider the business which was placed before them. I protested against the guillotine. I protest against the guillotine being used on the measure now under consideration. This Bill has thirty-five clauses. I was attempting, in Committee, to point out the iniquity of passing this Bill in thisway. I had an amendment to move, and many of my colleagues had amendments which they believe would improve the Bill. I attempted, **Mr. Speaker,** to place my views before the Committee just as the guillotine was operating. I still maintain that I should have been given that opportunity. Surely honorable members of this Parliament have some rights and privileges! {: #subdebate-14-0-s13 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- That is not the kind of explanation that the honorable member is entitled to make. {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- I feel that there must be some protest against this thing. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- The honorable member has been guilty of an infraction of the Standing Orders, and has incurred the displeasure of the Committee, which displeasure has been registered in the action taken by the Committee. Unless the honorable member apologizes for his wilful conduct, the motion provided for by the Standing Orders must be put. Is the honorable member prepared to withdraw and apologize ? {: .speaker-JPV} ##### Mr Blakeley: -- Seeing that the Government has refused to allow us to discuss the business of the House in a proper manner, I am not prepared to withdraw and apologize. What I have said is the truth. I am sorry that I cannot withdraw it. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- Then I must put the question to the House. Question - That the honorable member for Darling be suspended from the service of the House - put. The House divided. AYES: 36 NOES: 28 Majority . . . . 8 *In division -* AYES NOES Question so resolved in the affirmative. The honorable member for Darling withdrew. In Committee: {: #subdebate-14-0-s14 .speaker-JOG} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Bayley: -- I shall now put the amendment of the honorable member for Batman **(Mr. Brennan).** It is - >That the words " but not " in line 42 be deleted and the following words be added after the word " pounds " in section 18 of the principal Act : - " but in no case shall the price charged to the soldier exceed the actual cost to the Commissioner of the dwelling-house and land." Question - That the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the clause - put. The Committee divided. AYES: 37 NOES: 27 Majority . . . . 10 AYES NOES Question so resolved in the affirmative. Amendment negatived. Remaining clauses agreed to. Bill reported without amendment; report adopted. Bill read a third time. {: .page-start } page 2801 {:#debate-15} ### TASMANIA GRANT BILL *In Committee* (Consideration of GovernorGeneral's message) : Motion (by **Dr. Earle** Page) agreed to- >That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purposes of a Bill for an Act to grant and apply out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund a sum for financial assistance for the State of Tasmania. Resolution reported, and adopted. Motion (by **Dr. Earle** Page) proposed - >That the Standing Orders be suspended to allow of the Billbeing passed through all stages without delay. {: #debate-15-s0 .speaker-KYV} ##### Mr E RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- Perhaps the Treasurer will be good enough to say what is the urgency of the matter. Is the usual grant being proposed, or is there a special grant to be submitted. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- I shall explain on the motion for the second reading. {: .speaker-KYV} ##### Mr E RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- What is the urgency. Is Tasmania unable to pay its debts, and must the Commonwealth come to its assistance? The Treasurer should give reasons for making this an urgent matter. {: #debate-15-s1 .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa .- We have not yet seen the Bill. Is it the intention of the Treasurer **(Dr. Earle Page)** to move the second reading and then go right on with the Bill and pass it straight away? If that is his intention, it is very unfair to honorable members. We cannot understand a Bill merely by listening to the speech of a Minister on the motion for its second reading, which very often merely camouflages what the Bill contains. We should not proceed with such haste. There are many matters of importance on the businesspaper which we might discuss, and I protest against this procedure, which is unfair to the House. {: #debate-15-s2 .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra -- I should like to know from the Treasurer where we stand in this matter. We are not going to obstruct in any way, but we have had some rather bitter experience. I hope the honorable gentleman will give us an assurance that after he has explained the Bill on the motion for the second reading, it will not be declared an urgent matter, so that proper discussion of it may be prevented. If we can get the assurance for which I ask, we are willing that there should be all the expedition possible. {: #debate-15-s3 .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · Cowper · CP -- I understood honorable members to desire that the explanation of the Bill should be given on the second reading. On that motion opportunity will be afforded for its discussion. Question resolved in the affirmative. *Ordered -* >That **Dr. Earle** Page and **Mr. Groom** do prepare and bring in a Bill to carry out the foregoing resolution. Bill presented by **Dr. Earle** Page and read a first time. {:#subdebate-15-0} #### Second Reading {: #subdebate-15-0-s0 .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · Cowper · CP -- I move - >That the Bill be now read a second time. The purpose of the Bill is to vote an amount of £85,000 for financial assistance to the State of Tasmania during the current financial year. It will be remembered that, commencing with the year 1912-13, financial assistance was rendered by the Commonwealth to the State of Tasmania for a period of ten years, at the rate of £90,000 a year, the total payments amounting to £900,000. The last payment of £90,000 was made in 1921-22. During the last financial year a special measure was passed granting financial assistance to Tasmania in an amount of £85,000, because it was felt, that it would be quite unfair to suddenly withdraw the grant which had been made for the previous ten years, in view .of the special .'circumstances off Tasmania, because it is rather but of the main current of Commonwealth progress, and has not participated to the same extent as the mainland 'States in the expenditure of Commonwealth moneys. The then Treasurer informed the House that he did not wish the people of Tasmania to understand for a moment that the grant of £85,000 was to be indefinitely continued. It was merely to enable, some provision to be made during the year. {: .speaker-K1J} ##### Mr Pratten: -- Was not that matter dealt with at the Conference with State Ministers ? {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- An attempt was made at that Conference to arrive at some final arrangement with the States. It was intended to review the whole of the financial arrangements, not merely the question of taxation and this grant, but also that of transferred properties, &c. That was found to be impossible, because certain figures were not available until at least September next. But it was there proposed that the grant of £85,000 should be . diminished by an amount of £10,000 per year during the next ten years. The proposal we submitted was eminently satisfactory to the Tasmanian Ministers, but, unfortunately, it was postponed for one year. The Commonwealth Government consider that the grant of £85,000 should be continued for the current year, pending the final adjustment of the arrangements between the Commonwealth and the States. {: .speaker-KYV} ##### Mr E RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- What is the grant for ? {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- Tasmania considered that during the operation of the provision known as the Braddon blot she had been very unfairly treated, because a large amount of her Customs revenue had come from Victoria - in fact,' at that time an action was pending between the Governments, of Vic-' toria and Tasmania concerning a refund of moneys. At any rate, in - 1912 the Commonwealth Parliament decided to grant to Tasmania £900,000 over a term of ten years. The payments were renewed by the last Parliament, and this Government are now proposing to make a grant for this year. By the time the next Estimates are -brought down, it is hoped that some permanent understanding with Tasmania will have been made. {: #subdebate-15-0-s1 .speaker-JZ9} ##### Mr O'KEEFE:
Denison .- I am very glad that the Government have introduced this measure. The Treasurer, in his brief explanatory speech and in his reply to the interjection of the honorable member for South Sydney **(Mr. E. Riley),** did not go fully into the details of the origin of this grant. As a ' Tasmanian representative, and as this . question vitally affects that State, I shall briefly explain the facts. When Federation * took place, Free Trade was established between the States of Australia. It meant that any goods manufactured or produced on the mainland of Australia, and shipped to Tasmania, had to be admitted there duty free. Before Federation, Tasmania very largely relied for revenue upon the duties ""collected by the Customs on goods that were produced or manufactured on the mainland. Federation immediately brought about a dis- organization of Tasmania's financial position, and for a number of years the State Government were seriously hampered . in their administration of the country's affairs! Year after year they approached the Federal Parliament for assistance. I remember in the early days moving a motion in another Chamber of this Parliament, that the system of distributing revenue collected in all the ports of Australia should be altered. I showed clearly that if the motion were carried Tasmania would benefit by some £80,000 or '£90,000 in revenue. I satisfied that Chamber that the request was reasonable. However, the motion was lost by one vote. That started the idea of adjusting the financial arrangements between the State of Tasmania and the Commonwealth. It was recognised that, sooner or later, the system would have to be altered. In 1910, the Labour party came into power, and almost immediately a resolution was carried that a Royal Commission be appointed to inquire into the whole of the financial arrangements between Tasmania and the Commonwealth. The Commission reported that Tasmania had lost, since Federation, at least an average of £90,000 a year for ten years. The report was based on irrefutable evidence taken from all possible sources. Tasmania's revenue over those ten years, instead of increasing, had decreased. The Labour Government, in which **Mr. Fisher** was Prime Minister, passed an Act making a special grant of £500,000 to Tasmania, spread over a number of years. Later, an additional £400,000 was granted. That amount was paid in yearly instalments, and when the last instalment was falling due the Tasmanian financiers were very much disturbed because the Treasury . collected only from £1,500,000 to £2,000,000 from all sources. {: .speaker-KJM} ##### Mr Jackson: -- Tasmania has only 45,000 taxpayers. {: .speaker-JZ9} ##### Mr O'KEEFE: -- That is so. The Treasury was face to face with a dead loss of £80,000 or £90,000. An attempt was made in this Parliament to renew the grant for another term of years. In justification of Tasmania's claim, I point out that Western Australia, in the early years of Federation, obtained from this Parliament a considerably larger amount. When the last instalment was paid to Tasmania, it was proposed that a further grant should be given over a further term of years. The last Parliament granted £85,000 for one year. The then Treasurer stated that it was intended to hold a Conference between the Commonwealth and the State financial authorities during the following year, when the whole question of the financial adjustments would be considered. As we know, the Conference was held, and the financial proposals df the Ministers at the Conference have not yet been adopted. Tasmania is certainly entitled to the grant proposed by this Bill, but it should not be a yearly arrangement. It should provide for a special grant of £100,000 a year, over a term of five years. After that period, the financial situation could again be reviewed. Even if the grant were £100,000 a year, I doubt whether it would be on a par with that paid to Western Australia. {: .speaker-KJM} ##### Mr Jackson: -- The amount for .Western Australia is £140,000. {: .speaker-JZ9} ##### Mr O'KEEFE: -- Western Australia has a larger population than has Tasmania, but I submit that greater justice would have been done if this Bill had proposed a special grant. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- The arrangement we suggested to Tasmania was contingent on the acceptance of our proposals. {: .speaker-JZ9} ##### Mr O'KEEFE: -- On every occasion when I have had the opportunity, on the public platform and elsewhere, I have urged that £100,000 was only a fair sum, but that the payment of it should not he subject to an arrangement made from year to year. I do not feel inclined to move an amendment, simply because I am satisfied that it would not be carried. I am not disposed to offer any objection on the score of the amount, but if any honorable member opposite desires to move that it be increased, I shall support him. However, I welcome the Bill as. at least, an. instalment of justice long overdue, though I should have much preferred if it had provided for £100,000 over a term of five years. {: .speaker-KJM} ##### Mr Jackson: -- Under the proposed new financial agreement Tasmania will get much more {: .speaker-JZ9} ##### Mr O'KEEFE: -- I am. not in lon with the proposed new financial arrangements. I have studied and dissected them from every angle, and I think I shall be supported by the majority of the electors of Tasmania when I say that they will not work as satisfactorily as would a special grant with a continuation of, the *per capita* system. 1 am doubtful what would happen if the proposed new arrangements are accepted, seeing that the Commonwealth would then withdraw the *per capita* payment of 25s. per head, allowing Tasmania to practically cover the whole field of taxation with the exception of that relating to companies. Of course, the new arrangements would be quite satisfactory to the large land-holders and other wealthy people - they would be splendid for the land monopolists of the State - but if the *per capita,* allowance were withdrawn, the Tasmanian Government would have- to raise an equivalent in other directions. Bitter experience has shown me that the legislative Council of Tasmania always leans to the side of the wealthier classes. I have not; the slightest doubt that the Tasmanian Government, in order to make up the loss of the *per capita* grant, would increase taxation on the necessaries of life, and thus place the burden on the shoulders of those least able to bear it. That has been the way of the Tasmanian Government ever since the State had Government, with the one bright exception of a Labour Ministry for two years and a half. However, the *per capita* payment still stands, and we. can deal with the proposed new financial arrangements when the time comes. If any honorable member opposite desires to move an amendment increasing the amount, I think 1 can promise fair support from honorable members not on the Nationalist side. {: .speaker-K0A} ##### Mr Gabb: -- I call attention to the state of the House. *[Quorum formed.]* {: #subdebate-15-0-s2 .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter .- I am pleased that assistance is to be granted to Tasmania. Under the Constitution, the Commonwealth has power to assist necessitous States, and Tasmania,I think, comes within that category. The Prime Minister **(Mr. Bruce)** has said that he doubts very much whether this assistance should continue ; so there is just a chance that this may be the last grant to the- State. I do not quite know what the position of Tasmania will be if the new proposed financial arrangements are accepted. It is quite possible that the State may be in a worse position than at present. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE Page: -- It will be in a better position. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- The Prime Minister introduced a similar Bill in September last year. He then stated that, as the financial relations between the States and the Commonwealth had to come up for review, he could only say that the present arrangement with Tasmania could not continue indefinitely. I do not think we should be put into the position of having to continue it indefinitely; but so long as the State is in need we are bound to come to its assistance. What the Prime Minister means by " indefinitely " 1° do not know, but I shall be pleased to support any proposal to aid Tasmania if aid be required. The Treasurer **(Dr. Earle Page)** and others are advocating the creation of new States, and it is interesting to conjecture what the resultant financial relations would be if their ideas were carried into effect. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- My new State would not want any financial assistance ! {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- I am not sure of that; I have often heard similar statements. When the new States, if they com,© into being, are allotted their fair share of the public debt incurred by the States from which they are carved, and all the paraphernalia of sovereign States is adopted, it is quite possible that financial assistance may be required by them, and that the Commonwealth will be placed in a most difficult position. I do not wish to Be misunderstood. I am not opposed to the establishment of local government in restricted areas, but to set up sovereign States all over Australia is very likely to lead to difficulties much greater than those we are experiencing in the case of Tasmania. It will be seen that care and caution are required when dealing with proposals of the kind. My own opinion is that there ought to be one Parliament only, and that State bodies, such as provincial councils, shire councils, or municipal councils, should be endowed with sufficient power to deal with all matters of local concern, leaving the larger interests to the Commonwealth. In such circumstances, the present States could be subdivided with advantage. However, all this has little to do with the Bill, except to show the dangerous ground on which we are when we propose the creation of new States. When the subject of the Tasmanian grant was discussed' previously, the Minister for Trade and Customs **(Mr. Austin Chapman)** had some observations to make. He then objected to the grant, but to-day he supports it. The honorable gentleman then said that the application for the grant afforded an argument against the creation of more " finpot " States, and that, the practice seemed to be to spend, and keep on spending. He added that taxation was up to breaking point, and members should not be "bluffed into making the grant merely because a certain number of votes are at stake." Since that time the honorable gentleman appears to have undergone a conversion, though I do not know who in the Cabinet possessed the influence to bring it about. {: .speaker-KQW} ##### Mr Seabrook: -- The Minister for Trade and Customs realizes now that the grant is a right, and not a charitable gift. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- He has not said so publicly. I thought that perhaps his conversion was due to representations by the honorable member and his friends. The - Tasmanian representatives have looked after the interests of their State very well, and I support them, because I think that the claim to this grant is genuine. I. am ready to support any proposal that is fair and reasonable, ana I think the proposed grant is necessary. I know of many of the disabilities that Tasmania labours under, especially its isolation. Nature has endowed the State with good land, a healthy - climate, and fine water-ways, but it has the disadvantage of being unable to have railway communication with the mainland. {: .speaker-JZ9} ##### Mr O'Keefe: -- That is the reason why there should be a regular service by Commonwealth steamers. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- If arrangements were made by which the Tasmanian producers could market their products, possibly the financial position of the State would be so improved that it would not require to ask for this annual dole from the Commonwealth. That is a matter that should be considered by the Government. The Commonwealth owns "many idle ships, including those captured from" the Germans, which have cold storage installations, and they should be employed in carrying the primary products of Tasmania and other States to markets overseas. Tasmanian members should urge that policy upon the Ministry. I am sure' that the people of Tasmania would not ask for a grant from the Commonwealth if they could do without it. The island State cannot be properly developed unless provision is made for. the producers to get their fruit and other perishable products to market. I remember the former member- for Franklin **(Mr. Mcwilliams)** telling the House of the great losses suffered by Tasmanian producers, owing to the fact that steamers with refrigerated space were not calling at the island to lift their fruit and vegetables. If some reasonable provision could be made to meet the circumstances of Tasmania in this regard, there would be no need for the State to come to the Commonwealth for assistance. There is no reason why, if its disabilities were removed, it should not become prosperous. I recommend honorable members representing Tasmania to endeavour to induce the Government to make some of the steamers of the Commonwealth Line available to assist their people. The Prime Minister has said that this is the last grant that Tasmania may expect from the Commonwealth. {: .speaker-KQW} ##### Mr Seabrook: -- We shall get busy earlier next year. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- The Tasmanian representatives will require to do so. It is in the power' of the Prime Minister to provide shipping services for the island State, which will mean to its people, not merely £85,000, but, perhaps, - £1,000,000, and will provide more employment, and make the State generally prosperous. I support the Bill. {: #subdebate-15-0-s3 .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST:
East Sydney .- When this grant by the Commonwealth was first sought, we were told that it would be required for only the one year, but ever since Tasmania has been coming cap in hand for financial assistance from the Commonwealth. {: #subdebate-15-0-s4 .speaker-JZ9} ##### Mr O'KEEFE:
DENISON, TASMANIA · ALP -- Do not forget that the Tasmanian people pay a fair proportion of the expenditure upon Canberra, which will confer no benefit upon them. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- I have always found that the slowest people are those who return Liberals or Conservatives to represent them in Parliament.. The nature of the Tasmanian representation accounts, - to some extent, for the financial position of the island. If Tasmania is to make any material progress, it must change its public men. I cannot understand why the people of Tasmania retain a Legislative Council. I have visited the island on many occasions, and its people have always appeared to me to be very slow. Their State has the natural advantages of good rainfall, splendid soil, and attractive scenery; but very little provision has been made to transport tourists from the mainland. If the Tasmanians were as progressive as are the people of New South Wales, they would have supported the proposal put forward by the Labour party in 1913, for a . Commonwealth steam-ship service between the island and the mainland. But they were opposed to the scheme, because they thought it meant the socialization of the means of transit. I believe strongly in that proposal. If proper shipping facilities were provided, many thousands more people from Victoria and New South Wales would visit Tasmania every year; but at present the service across Bass Strait is very poor, and it will continue to be so under present conditions. The Labour Government of 1913 regarded a Commonwealth Line of steamers between Tasmania and the mainland as likely to prove a good business enterprise, and to confer substantial benefits upon the people of the island. The latter, however, took a very lukewarm interest in the project. A few years ago I met a **Mr. Davies,** one of the largest landholders in Tasmania, and I found him a very conservative person. When I mentioned to him the Labour party's proposal, he lectured me. I told him that I was satisfied that if other Tasmanians adopted the same attitude as he did I should some day have to put my hand in my pocket to help them. I have to do that to-day in order to help the State out of its financial difficulties. There should be no occasion for Tasmania to ask this Parliament for money, but the men who have controlled the public affairs of the island for some years are not such as could be expected to place the State in a sound financial position. If the people of Tasmania would liven themselves up, and take a little more interest in the progressive policy of the Labour party they would not be in the humiliating position of having to appeal to the Commonwealth for assistance. They have no more excuse than have the people of Western Australia for seeking such aid. {: .speaker-JMG} ##### Mr Atkinson: -- Western Australia receives special treatment, and always has done so. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- I should like the people of Tasmania to be imbued with a spirit of independence and progressiveness. They might also, by abolishing the Upper House of the State Parliament, avoid an unwarrantable expenditure. I shall have to explain the reason for this grant to my electors, and I shall tell them that it is necessitated by the Tasmanian people's lack of independence and their unprogressiveness. {: .speaker-JZ9} ##### Mr O'Keefe: -- We do not mind what the honorable member tells them, so long as he votes for the Bill. - {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- As Tasmania is in needy circumstances, I must vote for the Bill. In connexion with the last grant, a good deal of electioneering took place, and I quite expect that honorable members opposite will, tell the people of Tasmania that they owe this grant of £85,000 to the Nationalist Government. I hope the electors will not be deceived by such catch cries. If they would elect a competent body of men to the State Parliament, they would no longer require to hang on to the apron-strings of the Commonwealth. This Parliament must do something to curtail Federal expenditure. Tasmanian representatives cannot consistently preach economy and at the same time cadge £85,000 from the Commonwealth. The action contemplated in this Bill may be compared in some respects to the action taken by the Government in its general financial arrangements. The time is coming when we shall have to thoroughly reconsider the financial policy of this country. Something will have to be done to insure a proper expenditure of public money and a proper method of floating loans. I ask the Tasmanian representatives in the House to consider whether the time has not arrived when they should live within their means. The doctrine of living within our means has been preached in this Parliament for a long while. I can quite understand that when the Customs and Excise duties were taken away from Tasmania, at the fame of Federation, she found some difficulty in squaring accounts, but the same" was true of all the States. The mem- bers of tlie Upper House of Parliamentin Tasmania have been able to prevent the application of a proper system of land taxation or any other form of direct taxation. What that State needs is a change of .Government. {: .speaker-KJM} ##### Mr Jackson: -- They had one yesterday. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- That was only an exchange of Tweedledum for Tweedledee. It is difficult to tell one Government from the other. Tasmania has been following a system of continuous Ministries, such as Queensland had for a number of years. The northern State has departed from that principle, and is on the highway to prosperity. If Tasmania followed the example of Queensland it would be better off. For the good of Tasmania the existing *regime* should be got rid of lock, stock, and barrel. {: #subdebate-15-0-s5 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- I do not see anything in the Bill about that matter. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- There may be nothing in the Bill about it, sir, but I am pointing out that the reason why the Tasmanian Government year after year comes cap in hand to the Commonwealth Government for assistance is that.it will not dismiss from power the party which now has control. I do not want to injure the little island in any way, but I wish its public men would show a more progressive spirit, and attempt to establish the State on sound business lines. It would be a good thing for this Government to run the Commonwealth Shipping Line between the mainland and Tasmania. If that were done, many wealthy people in the other States would visit Tasmania in the holiday season. The Fisher Government in 1913 proposed to run a steamer from the mainland to Tasmania in much the same way as we run railways, but, unfortunately, it was not able to put its proposal into practice. I advise this Government to use some of the Commonwealth steamers for that purpose. I realize that Tasmania has difficulty in establishing manufacturing industries. It has very few tradesmen. Some years ago I found that about every third man in the Government Printing Office in Sydney came from Tasmania. A similar condition of things prevailed in the building trade. I made some inquiries to find the reason for this. I was told that when a young fellow grew to manhood in Tasmania it was hard for him to get a job. The printing offices were run by boy labour. All the land available had been taken up, and young men were not able to obtain blocks. Consequently they had to leave their home State and come to the mainland for employment. I hope the honorable members from Tasmania will accept my words as pearls of wisdom. I desire to help their State. {: #subdebate-15-0-s6 .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa .- I shall not oppose the granting of this money to Tasmania. The Treasurer told us that the isolation of Tasmania prevented the development of its industries and the growth of its business and other activities to the same degree as was possible on the mainland, and therefore Tasmanian finances suffer. I shall vote for this Bill, but I must say that it does not attempt to meet the needs of the situation in a logical and effective way. Tasmania needs help to develop her industries. If the Commonwealth Government would utilize some' of its ships to provide Tasmania with an adequate shipping service, it would materially help agricultural and industrial development in the State. People in many parts of Australia would be glad to receive Tasmanian products if they could be obtained at a reasonable price. The establishment of a satisfactory shipping service would make this possible, for it would open markets for Tasmania. Under present conditions, much of Tasmania's produce is wasted. The policy of making grants in this way is stupid. It may be compared in some ways with the Government policy of paying doles to the unemployed, instead of providing proper employment for the men, so that they may render useful service to the States for the money they receive. I do not wish to compare the people of Tasmania with the unemployed, but honorable members will recognise some analogy. The Government should get down to basic principles in dealing with the situation. I understand that the financial arrangement which the Government wishes to make with the various States will not be advantageous to Tasmania, and that we may be required later on to grant further money to assist the Tasmanian Government. I suppose the Government's financial proposals will be agreed to by this House. It seems to be able to get its supporters to agree to anything. It would act wisely if it did something of a more definite character to develop Tasmania's resources by providing an outlet for the produce of the people. Proper shipping communication with the mainland is necessary before there will be any reliable market for Tasmania's produce. I hope the Government will realize this, and that it will do something definite to enable Tasmania to develop in the same way as the other States are developing. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. *In Committee :* {: #subdebate-15-0-s7 .speaker-KX9} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Watkins:
NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES -- Is it the pleasure of the Committee that the Bill be taken as a whole ? {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr Charlton: -- I have no objection, but I hope the Government will not charge us either with hasty legislation or with "stone-walling." Bill agreed to. Bill reported without amendment; report adopted. Bill read a third time. {: .page-start } page 2808 {:#debate-16} ### RIVER MURRAY WATERS BILL Bill presented by **Mr. Stewart,** and read a first time. {: .page-start } page 2808 {:#debate-17} ### POST AND TELGRAPH RATES BILL {:#subdebate-17-0} #### Second Reading {: #subdebate-17-0-s0 .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr GIBSON:
PostmasterGeneral · Corangamite · CP -- I move - That the Bill be now read a second time. I am sorry to have kept the House waiting for a moment or two, because evidently every moment is precious at the present time. The Bill is to provide for the reduction of postal rates. Such a reduction is, I think, necessary. Practically every section of the community has been asking for it. The request has not been confined only to people living in city areas; it has also been made by the residents of country areas.Many deputations have waited upon me to ask that the existing rates should be somewhat reduced. It is necessary that this Bill should be passed if effect is to be given to the financial proposals set out in the Budget. Practically every country has reduced its postal rates from those existing during war time, to something like the rates which existed in pre-war days. Australia is practically the last country to come into line in this regard. For quite a long time we have been receiving mails from abroad witha rate of l½d. per half ounce, whilst we have been charging external rates of 2d. per half ounce. An extraordinary anomaly is created by the fact that we fix the whole of our postal rates for inland postage by an Act of this Parliament, and the whole of tne rates for postage abroad by regulation. In the case of telephones, the rates are fixed by regulation, whilst the rates for telegrams are fixed by an Act of this Parliament. That has been the practice followed in this country for many years, and it is proposed to let it remain in operation for a little longer. We estimate that the loss of revenue that will be occasioned by the reduction of the postage rate from 2d. per half ounce to l½d. per ounce, will be somewhere in the vicinity of £930,000. We have made big profits in the Post Office during the last few years. I have no doubt that some honorable members representing country districts will be inclined to say that profits made by the Post Office should be utilized for the extension of the services of the Department. If that practice had been followed, we could not expend the amount it is proposed to spend at the present time on the extension of these facilities. Up to 1912, practically no commercial records of the business of the Post Office were kept. From that time onwards records have been kept. A charge of 3½ per cent. as interest on assets has been made against the Post Office, and I find that from 1912 to 1917 the operations of the Department showed a loss of £2,031,417. From 1917-18 up to the present year we have had profits amounting to £4,084,830. If the extension of the services of the Department had been determined by the profit made by the Post Office, we should have had only some £2,000,000 to spend over that long period. As a matter of fact, we spent £2,000,000 last year; we are pro posing to spend £4,000,000 this year, and probably some £3,000,000 will be spent next financial year on the extension of the services of the Department. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- Would not the honorable gentleman expect the rate of profit from 1917 to. the present year to continue in the future? {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr GIBSON: -- I do not expect thesame rate of profit to continue; I do. not think the Post and Telegraph Department should make a profit of £1,500,000 a year. It should afford facilities, especially to residents of out-back districts. If the Department's operations pay expenses, provide an adequate sinking fund for the redemption of moneys borrowed and keep the telephone system in a state of efficiency, that is all that should be expected. ' The internal postage rates proposed will be found set out in the schedule to the Bill. It is only fair to state what is proposed in regard to rate's not governed by this legislation, but fixed by regulation. The letter rate for New Zealand and other parts of tha British Empire will be l£d. per 1 oz., instead of 2d. per oz. On letters for foreign countries, the present rate is 4d. for the first 1 oz., and 2d. for each additional 1 oz. It is proposed to reduce that rate to 3d. for the first 1 .oz., and L£d. for each additional 1 oz. On lettercards, the present internal postage rate is 2d. each, and it is proposed' to reduce it to 1 1/2d. It is proposed, also, to reduce the letter-card rate from 2d. each to ld. each for the British Empire and for foreign countries. This will make the letter-card rate a universal rate. The present rate on printed papers, as prescribed, is Id. per 2 ozs. or part of 2 ozs. We are in this Bill proposing a rate of Id. for 4 ozs. The same rate will apply to New Zealand and the British Empire. The rates on books printed outside and inside Australia are set out in the schedule to the Bill. In 1914 our letter postage rate was Id. ; in 1918 the rate was lid., and in 1920 it was increased to 2d. per £ oz. It was necessary in 1920 to raise money for special purposes, and this was one of the means by which money could easily be raised. The increase in the rate provided £720,000 per year additional revenue. I do nob think that any man would propose to continue that levy in the existing condition of affairs. The - postage on news papers is quite another matter. It is nob proposed to reduce the rate on bulk postages of newspapers. {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr Lazzarini: -- Does not the postage depend on the kind of newspaper ? Is there not a condition that the paper shall contain a certain amount of news? {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr GIBSON: -- No, so long as it is a registered newspaper. It is proposed to allow the rate on bulk newspapers to remain as it is - J4d. per 20 ozs. There is no country in the world that imposes such a low postage rate on newspapers as Australia. What happens as a result of our liberal rate is that news-agents get through the post-office half-a-ton or more of newspapers, posted in built at the rate of 1 1/2d. per 20 ozs. As a matter of fact, many of these papers are addressed to individual subscribers. The actual postage on them is a fraction over id. per paper. It is unreasonable for the press to ask for a lower postage than that obtaining at present. Country newspapers have not the weight of the city papers, and more of them can be sent at the 20-ozs. rate. The postage rate in the country districts is thus less than, Jd. per newspaper. The terms of the Bill are very liberal. We have to remember that the Railway Department make no special concessions for the carriage of newspapers. Our revenue from 20 ozs. of letters is 2s. 6d., and from 20 ozs. of newspapers 1 1/2d. Newspapers are carried between the capital cities of Sydney and Melbourne at a loss of about 25 per cent. Honorable members will recognise that the press are in a good position. The rate for 20 ozs. is $d. higher than it was in 1914. The rate for letters is d. higher than it was in 1914. Letters and papers are now both £d. higher than they were in pre-war days. From that stand-point, honorable members will realize that the provisions of this Bill are fair and reasonable. In framing the schedule of the new rates, careful consideration has been given to the relative" value of the different articles. I hope honorable members will not see fit to amend the Bill, because if any item "is altered it will affect the whole of the schedule. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr Charlton: -- Why " gag " the Committee? This is an instruction to the » Government supporters. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr GIBSON: -- I am suggesting that honorable members should keep the rates in line with the schedule, so as to prevent any anomalies. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr Charlton: -- Any alteration that the Committee decides upon will have to be adjusted. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr GIBSON: -- I recognise that effect must be given to any decision of the Committee. But I suggest that if' honorable members want scientific rates they should accept those laid down by the Department. Hie schedule has caused a great deal of anxiety and work. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr Charlton: -- That does not prove that the rates are equitable. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr GIBSON: -- It is not a simple matter to adjust anomalies. The Leader of the Opposition must recognise that it would require more than a casual knowledge of postal rates to warrant any alteration of the Bill. {: #subdebate-17-0-s1 .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter .- The Minister **(Mr. Gibson)** has pointed out that a loss of £937,000 will be occasioned by the passage of this Bill. He considered that it was unwise for the Postal Department to make big profits, but that a profit of £1,250,000 had been made last year. He said, further, that on the postal service they had expended £2,000,000 last year, and intended to expend £4,000,000 this year, and £3,000,000 next year. With that I am in hearty accord. Every honorable member wants to see better telegraphic and telephonic facilities. The point is whether this is the proper way to deal with this Department. It is admitted that its profits have been paid into revenue. I take it that the . revenue this year will be about £1,250,000. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- The profit will be £1,500,000. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- We are to borrow £4,000,000, and to charge the interest against the Post Office. I want to know why the £1,500,000 profit could not be utilized by reducing the £4,000,000 of borrowed money to £2,500,000. This would conform with the Government's intention to run everything on business lines. The Minister contends . that, because there have been losses in the past, the profits should not be used for- .postal purposes. What did the Government decide to- do when they passed the Shipping Bill ? They decided to place the Commonwealth Government Line of Steamers under a Board of Con trol as a separate business. The capital was written down to place the venture on a proper footing. But, with the Post Office, the excess profits are placed into revenue, and at the same time money is borrowed and charged against this Department. This is retarding the progress of the Department. If the money earned by it were utilized to extend the postal facilities, then less money would be borrowed, and a less amount charged against the Department. The Department would be run as a business proposition, and cheaper postal rates would possibly follow. {: #subdebate-17-0-s2 .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA -- Under the Bill, over £1,000,000 will be taken up by concessions. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- The honorable member the other day voted for the Shipping Bill. - He must be consistent. He cannot advocate that the Commonwealth Government Line of Steamers should be placed on a business footing while objecting to the same principle being applied to the Postal Department. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Foster: -- One is earning £1,500,000 and the other was practically losing that amount. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- The sum of £1,250,000 has been paid into revenue. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- Under the Constitution the profits must be paid. into the Consolidated Revenue. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- Provision can be made by legislation so that the money can be utilized by the Department. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- We have to appropriate money for the use of the Postal Department. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- It is merely a question of bookkeeping. For years past I have urged that the Postal Department should be placed on a business footing, and that excess revenue ' should be utilized to extend the postal facilities. When money is borrowed and charged against the Department, the people who use the postal services pay for it. By borrowing year after year, a large debt will accumulate. This can be considerably reduced by utilizing the revenue for departmental purposes. The Minister stated that he hoped no amendment would be made in Committee. When dealing with a public service, we should endeavour to make alterations that will be equitable all round. I ask the Minister in what way will the reduction of the letter rate from 2d. to 1 1/2d. be equitable? The weight is *i* oz. to-day, and lt is to be increased to 1 oz. The letters of the general public, particularly in the country districts, do not weigh * oz.* The concession in that case will be Jd. But large businesses, particularly those in the cities, will be able to . send letters right up to 1 oz. in weight, and save 2£d. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- Only 5 per cent, of the total letters posted exceed *I* oz. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- That 5 per cent, consists chiefly of the business people, who will receive a concession for every letter posted of 21d., as against *d.* for other people. The difference is not equitable. I do not doubt that any alteration of this schedule will involve a considerable amount of work. A schedule of rates is a difficult problem, but it does not always follow that that proposal is the best and most equitable scheme. If the Committee consider it necessary to make any amendments, there is no reason why they should not be included in the Bill. The Minister stated, that provision was made for magazines and reviews. The rate in that case has a different application. The schedule provides a rate of Id. for 8 ozs. or part of 8 ozs. This rate will not work satisfactorily, because a lot of reviews do not weigh over 2 ozs. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- They will be treated as printed papers. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- Many of them are from 2 ozs. to 4 ozs., and it is a very costly matter for those who distribute them. I have here a review, not weighing over J oz., termed *The Safety Valve.* It is the official organ of the Federated Enginedrivers and Firemen's Association of Australasia* It costs £22 to send one issue through the post. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- Is it a magazine or a newspaper ? {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- I should term it a review, which puts it in the same category as magazines. There are quite a number of small publications in the country districts, and the rate could be divided, say, *id.* for 4 ozs. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- If newspapers, they can be pasted for less than Jd. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- They are charged as magazines. My informant asked that the rate be fixed at Ad. for 4 ozs., instead of Id. for 8 ozs. If the Minister does not agree to that, these reviews might be sent in bulk at the rate of Id. for every 8 ozs.' That would be fair and reasonable. *Sitting suspended from 6. SO to 8 pm.* {: #subdebate-17-0-s3 .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa .- I submit the weight of *i* oz. should have been retained as the basis for the proposed reduction of the letter-postage rate. This afternoon the Postmaster-General **(Mr. Gibson)** told us that only 5 per cent, of the letters that go through the Post Office weigh over $ oz. The honorable gentleman may have the official records, but that percentage seems very low. It all derpends, of course, on what is called a letter. If reference is made to all matter in sealed envelopes, then the percentage mentioned undoubtedly is extraordinarily low. Where is the advantage of a reduction of rate which applies to only 5 per cent, of the letters posted? It is hardly necessary to introduce legislation for a proportion of letters that does not affect the community generally. Does the 5 per cent, represent legal documents, land agents' documents, and others of that kind? Are these counted as letters? {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- Tes; unless they are posted as commercial correspondence. {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI: -- Well, to me, it is astounding that only 5 per cent, of the letters that go through the Post Office are over % oz. However, as I have already said, if it be a fact, then it is an absurdity, at a time like this, when we have so much business to do, to waste time on such a Bill. I fancy that when the Bill becomes law the PostmasterGeneral will find that letters up to 1 oz. will increase considerably. As a matter of fact, this legislation is for the benefit of one class, and one class only; I mean those men in a large way of business who mail lengthy documents. I question whether there is one ordinary letter from the general public that weighs over oz. If there are such letters, it can be only on rare occasions. This Bill, of course, will suit those commercial interests which the Government wishes to serve. To the ordinary letter-writer the Bill gives a reduction of $d., whereas to the business men who broadcast lengthy documents the advantage amounts to 2£d. This is unfair from beginning to end. The money which the Department will lose by reason of this legislation could be utilized to great advantage in righting many of the anomalies and grave injustices which are suffered in country centres. Not only the defective carriage of mails, but the small receiving and nonofficial post-offices and small telephone exchanges urgently require attention. As an illustration I may cite a telephone exchange in my electorate, where there are 1,700 effective calls in the year. In addition, the lady in charge sends large numbers of telegrams over the telephone to the nearest telegraph office; and for all this work she is paid the splendid salary of £4 5s. per annum! {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- That is according to the arbitration award. {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI: -- Then it is time the award was altered; in any case, I suppose it- was an award by the Public Service Arbitrator. The person in charge has to provide the room in which the exchange is installed, and the Department, in order, I suppose, to cut down expenditure, so as to be able to reduce the postage rates to the large business interests, has informed her that she must operate the telephone for only three hours per day. This she endeavours to do, but, after allowing for Sundays and holidays, it means that the exchange is worked for 900 hours in .the twelve months. Then, the restrictions put on this and other country exchanges constitute a great hardship and danger to the residents. Quite recently, while a farmer was away from home, and his house in charge of his wife and two children, three haystacks near the homestead caught fire. If the lady in charge of the exchange had strictly followed the instructions of the Department, and only operated it for three hours in the day, there would have been most serious consequences. The haystacks WeIr destroyed, but because of the prompt aid summoned by telephone, the homestead was saved. The operator, ignoring the departmental instructions, called up several farmers in time to prevent, greater damage. In that district at the present time, pneumonic influenza, mumps, and bronchitis are prevalent, and the telephone is operating day and night calling for doctors and nurses. Yet the- Department continues to pay this lady £4 5s. per annum! This is a shame and a scandal, which should not be tolerated by this House for five minutes. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- This exchange is not theoperator's only source of income. Had she had no other, she would not have had the offer to take charge. {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI: -- We have heard that tale before. The honorable gentleman told us in the past that many of these anomalies were to bc righted. Does the Government accept as a principle the necessity of linking up outlying districts in the back country with a telephone system, so as to make the lot of country people not only more pleasant, but safer? Happily, this, operator, in spite of her small salary, works many more than the official hours, and all for the sake of humanity. Very often half-a-dozen people wish to ring up at the same time, and the three hours soon slip by; but, like the "guillotine" of the Government in this Chamber, the departmental order prevents the use of the telephone, even if some one be dying. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- That is not so. {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI: -- In this case, it is so. {: .speaker-KJM} ##### Mr Jackson: -- Is there not the same arrangement as in other post-offices? {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI: -- This is not a postoffice, but a telephone exchange. The honorable member has been very dumb for the last couple of weeks. I suppose the hint of the Postmaster-General this afternoon that the Committee was not to be allowed to amend any clause has intimidated the honorable member, along with other followers of the Government. That announcement by the Minister was certainly the most extraordinary I ever heard in a House of Parliament. He practically told honorable members that no amendment of the Bill would be permitted. There are other directions in which the money sacrificed by this Bill could have been used, instead of devoting it to bolstering up vested interests in the big, cities. The Postmaster-General, an- alleged representative of country interests, who entered this House to further those interests, is now found introducing mere class legislation in the interests of "big business." For quite a long time I have been trying to get & new post-office provided, together with money order and savings bank facilities, at a little place called Douglas Park. The residents were informed, that something would be done in this direction bythe 1st August, but that is the last heard. of the matter. Then, at Burrowa, there is an antiquated, unhealthy, and most inconveniently situated post-office; in fact, the place is almost falling to pieces. The Government did spend a few pounds in propping it up, but this is of little avail. When **Mr. Webster** was ' PostmasterGeneral, he visited the district, realized how necessary was a new post-office, and promised that one should be provided. I have letters from the Department admitting the facts as I have stated them, but informing me that there are no funds available for the work. My quarrel with the Bill is that it gives up money sufficient to do much necessary work in my electorate, as well as in others. If the Bill were going to save money to the gene.'..1 users, of the post-office, I should not mind. Instead of giving relief only to a few big interests in the cities, the Department should continue to collect this revenue, and devote it to purposes such as I have mentioned. I shall never oppose a Commonwealth instrumentality, like the Post Office, being employed to the fullest possible extent to provide quick 'means of communication between different parts of the Commonwealth and between this. and other countries. ".The Post Office is a Department which has done much to break down the barriers of prejudice between different sections of the community and between nations. But I do object to such an instrumentality, which should be utilized by the Commonwealth to promote national development and prosperity, being made to serve the. interests of a few individuals who can well afford to pay for the services they are getting. For that reason only, I oppose the proposal to reduce the postage rate by increasing the weights that may be carried for the respective charges. I am prepared to support even further reductions in the rates upon magazines and educational works. If the Bill proposed to reduce the letter rate from 2d. to lid. per $ oz., I would not" object to it, but I do oppose the increase of the letter weight to 1 oz., thereby giving assistance to big concerns that can well afford to pay on the -6z. basis for the services they get from the Postal Department. {: #subdebate-17-0-s4 .speaker-JVT} ##### Mr NELSON:
Northern Territory -- It is not my intention to delay the House. I shall get to my point quickly. My main purpose in rising is to protest against the abolition of lettergrams as a means of conveying business information, and to point out the effect of that action upon the development of the Northern Territory. So far as I can se6, the only people who will benefit to any great extent by the proposed reductions in postal and telegraphic rates are those living in the towns. In places like the Northern Territory and north Western Australia, families who are endeavouring to 'develop the empty spaces are struggling for a living. Some of them receive a mail only once in two months, and they have recently been deprived of the opportunity of using the lettergram for business purposes. If they should miss a mail, three or four months may elapse before they can complete a business transaction. 1 appeal to the PostmasterGeneral to restore to the people of the Northern Territory the privilege of communicating business matters by lettergram. If he does that, a good deal of hardship will be averted, and considerable assistance will be given to the people who are pioneering under very bad conditions. I consider that the people of the "outback" should receive as much consideration, or, even more, than their *confreres* of the south. {: #subdebate-17-0-s5 .speaker-KLG} ##### Mr MAHONY:
Dalley .- The Government proposals represent a remission of about £1,000,000 of taxation. While the Government is prepared to surrender that amount of revenue, postal facilities from one . end of the Commonwealth to the other are being starved, the conditions 'of the employees in the Department are shocking, and some of the buildings in which postal work is conducted are disgraceful. It is a remarkable fact that in many suburbs and country towns the most dilapidated and outofdate building is the local post and telegraph office. Some of them would be condemned by the local health authorities, if they had the power to do it, because of their insanitary condition. It' is disgraceful that the PostmasterGeneral should propose to give away £1,000,000 of revenue, while his Department everywhere shows evidence of such shocking neglect. The parsimony of the Department is illustrated by its treatment of junior officers. They are paid a salary of £106 per annum, equivalent to £2 0s. 2£d. per week. One of these young fellows was transferred to a country town in New South Wales. Out of his salary of £2 Os. 2$d. per week he was compelled to pay 35s. per week for board and lodging. He held' a fairly responsible position under the Government, and hundreds of pounds of public money passed through his hands .every month. He had a balance of 5s. 2Jd. with which to clothe himself, pay his laundry bill, and meet the hundredandone little expenses that a young man has to incur. When he complained and asked for an allowance to meet his increased expenses, the Department wrote to all the hotels and boarding establishments in the district to inquire whether cheaper board could be obtained. It is remarkable that a. vast Government Department, which can throw away .£1,000,000 per annum, should write dozens of letters and use a large number of " O.S." stamps in seeking to get cheaper quotations for the board of a junior officer. Probably the Postmaster-General will reply that the salary was fixed by the Public Service Arbitrator. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- That is so. , {: .speaker-KLG} ##### Mr MAHONY: -- The Arbitrator is only a creature of the Government, and is doing the work of the anti-Labour forces in this country. He is in receipt of a large salary, but when this junior officer's case came before him he delivered a lecture on the danger of young men who are living away from home having too much money to spend. He said that an excess of spending money would not be good for the young fellow. If increased payments were made to him he might waste the money on cards and horses. It is about time that sort of parsimony ceased. I will not support the remission of one farthing of the taxation to the wealthy people until the Department pays a fair and decent living wage to its employees. The conditions of the servants of the Department, from the highest officer to the lowest temporary employee, are disgraceful, and should not be tolerated by this Parliament. I hope that honorable members will instruct' the Minister to' withdraw this Bill, and apply the money which he proposes to remit, to the payment of a living wage to employees of the Department. Great necessity exists for building new offices. I. do not wish to say much about my own electorate. The people in it are well able to take care of themselves, as shown by their wisdom in returning me to this Parliament; but I must mention the case of the post-office at Balmain East. I have endeavoured for some time to get the Department to put a decent building there. The Postmaster-General **(Mr. Gibson)** told me two or three weeks ago that his chief inspector was about to visit Sydney. He asked me whether I had any matter I would like inquired into. I again mentioned the condition of the Balmain East Post-office. The Chief Inspector visited the place, but. because of the fumes and the insanitary state of the building, he got out of it as quickly as possible. Unofficially lie expressed surprise that people should be asked to work under such conditions. The walls of the building were damp and dirty, and the appearance of the place was filthy. Altogether it was a disgrace to the Commonwealth Government. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- Action has been taken. {: .speaker-KLG} ##### Mr MAHONY: -- Not before it was needed. If the property had not belonged to the Commonwealth, the Balmain Municipal Council would have condemned it years ago, but honorable members know that Commonwealth buildings are exempt from State enactments. {: #subdebate-17-0-s6 .speaker-L1J} ##### Mr LISTER:
CORIO, VICTORIA -- The council could have drawn the attention of the Commonwealth Government to the condition of the building. {: .speaker-KLG} ##### Mr MAHONY: -- The council wrote to me, and I forwarded the letter to the Postmaster-General, and also interviewed him on the subject. I am glad to have his assurance that- something will be done. I trust that it will be done speedily. If the Postal Department is in such a bad financial condition that it cannot keep its buildings 'in decent repair, I will undertake, if the Minister will give me permission, to get a gang of men to paint and renovate these premises. The furnishing of many post-offices in Sydney and suburbs is a disgrace. I hope that my friends in Victoria will acquit .me of attempting to raise State jealousies when I say that a remarkable difference is apparent between the postoffices in and around Melbourne and those in and around Sydney. The postoffices around Melbourne are not by any means 1 what they ought to . be, but in comparison with many buildings near Sydney they are palaces. I have seen officers in the General Post Office sitting *t >* on kerosene cases doing most .important work for this country. That should not be so. The Government should remedy that condition of things before it attempted to remit postal charges to" the extent of the £1,000,000 per annum. That will be the effect of agreeing to thiB Bill. The unofficial post-offices, which are carried on by small shopkeepers in many districts, are a .reproach to the Commonwealth. Complaints innumerable have been made about these post-offices by people who desire to transact confidential business through the Postal Department. The Postal Department is a confidential Department, but many people do not feel that they can use it when the post-office is in charge of a small shopkeeper who has no responsibility whatever to the Government, but is only running the post-office as a side line. In many places around Sydney, and I suppose the same is true of Melbourne, and other capital cities, the antiquated postal system of twenty or thirty years ago is still' in operation. Some of the districts represented by honorable members on this side of the House have grown in the last nine or ten years from, little villages to flourishing suburbs, with a population of thousands. The residents in such localities should not be asked to suffer the' inadequate postal arrangements provided at present. The Government should spend some of the £1,000,000 proposed to be remitted under this Bill to provide decent buildings and proper facilities for these people. The manner in which mails are carried in many country districts is a disgrace to the Department. I have been shocked, when travelling in some small country districts, to find that His Majesty's mails are carried by old broken-down "crocks," harnessed to dilapidated sulkies or other disreputable vehicles. The harness is 'very often tied up by bits of string or wire. This should not be permitted. Instead of remitting postal charges to its wealthy supporters, the Government should improve the conditions of the mail contractors. These men should be given a decent - allowance for carrying the mails, and should also have a decent forage allowance for their horses. "When suggestions like this are made to the Government, it says, "We cannot afford . it ; the Department has no money." Surely, when the Government- proposes to make a present of £1,000,000 to its political friends, it should be able to give the mail contractor & little more money to enable him to get a decent vehicle in which to carry the mails, and to give his horse a decent feed. We should not have these broken-down turnouts going about the country carrying the Royal mail. The Government, however, must serve its masters. The Ministry realizes that it owes its gratitude to the wealthy commercial houses in Flinderslane, Melbourne, and York-street, Clarencestreet, and Wynyard-square, Sydney, and it proposes to recognise the debt by remitting the postal charges to these and similar firms to the tune of £1,000,000. The Government is giving this bribe so that its existence may not be endangered; but the workers in the Department, the contractors who carry the mails in rural areas, and the people who live in the country and in many metropolitan, districts must continue to submit to inadequate telephonic, telegraphic, and postal facilities. I am hostile - to this measure, and I shall take every step I can to defeat it. I hope other honorable members will do the same. We should not give such a bribe to the wealthy supporters of the Government ; and we should provide reasonable postal conditions for the country. , {: #subdebate-17-0-s7 .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE:
Capricornia .- This Bill deals with a matter of vital importance to Australia, especially to people living in country districts, who are denied adequate postal, telegraphic, and telephonic services, while the Government proposes to hand £1,000,000 a year to the wealthy commercial interests by . a reduction in postage. I oppose the measure, and so must every honorable member who travels in the country districts of Australia and hears ' how the people in remote parts are clamouring for better postal 'facilities. When they ask for such to be provided, frequently they' get a reply from the Department that it would not be a good business proposition to do as they ask, and that the expenditure would not be justified by the revenue from the population in the neighbourhood. If we wish to develop the country districts of Australia and settle them with a contented population which is willing to do pioneering "work, we' must give facilities which will make life as congenial as possible.- I ask honorable members, and especially those who belong to the alleged Country party, whether they can justify the remission of the postal charges in this Bill while the conditions in the country districts are as I have stated? In my opinion the' small, struggling farmers, who are cutting homes out of the scrub in the unsettled areas of Australia, are entitled to far more consideration than the wealthy merchants of Flinders-lane, Melbourne, and Sussex-street, Sydney. The proposal in this Bill will benefit the city commercial houses, which send out thousands of letters a year; but it will be of no advantage to the average small farmer or worker who sends out, on an average, about two letters a month. It will mean a benefit of about ls. a year for these people, while it will benefit by thousands of pounds a year the great warehouses and commercial interests of Australia, which are well able to pay the 2d. postage. I am surprised that the .alleged Country party Postmaster-General has proposed such a reduction, when he knows that the people who live in -the country districts, for whom I am fighting, must still be deprived of improved telephonic and postal facilities. Many new postoffices are required in the country districts of my own electorate. New post-offices are required in every country district in Australia. Approval was given twelve months ago for the erection of some country post-offices,, but the work has not been carried out. I ask the PostmasterGeneral to make a note of this, because I intend to write to him to request that the work be expedited. I refer particularly to the approval given to erect post-offices at Springsure and Yeppoon, in Queensland. Certain works were also authorized at the Post Office in Rockhampton. Many other requirements have been promised,, but nothing Kas been done, . because the Government wishes to curtail expenditure. If possible, it wishes to carry these works over to the next financial year, whilst the people have to put up with post-office buildings that are not fit for stables. I have in mind particularly the post-office at Yeppoon, a seaside resort to which thousands of people go every Christmas. I was hoping that the new post-office would be erected by next Christmas, but that cannot now be expected because of the indifference of the Department. I should like to bring under the notice of the PostmasterGeneral the congestion in the Brisbane General Post Office, as a result of which mails from Central and Northern Queensland are alleged to be seriously delayed, and people all over the State must suffer great inconvenience if what I am informed is true. I propose to make some extracts from a letter I have received from a reliable informant, who is in a position to supply authentic information. He writes: - >The men employed in the mail branch have to endure. ' the speeding-up tactics of their superior officers, which are found necessary by the Department because the mail room is hopelessly under-staffed, and it is only by speedingup and working them double shifts, long hours, and also on Sunday, that any work is being done at all. That shows the attitude adopted by superior officers of the Department in Brisbane, no doubt following instructions from the central administration to economize and get the very last ounce of work out of their men. No honorable member on this side will complain if men are asked to do a fair day's work for a fair day's pay. We stand for that policy; but the cheese-paring and parsimony practised by the Post and Telegraph Department is not in the best interests of the service or of the country. The honorable member for Dalley **(Mr., Mahony)** has mentioned officers who have been sent to the country districts on the munificent salary of £106 per annum, out of which they are expected to pay for board, and lodging, washing, clothing, and all the necessaries of life. It is impossible for such officers to carry on satisfactorily. What applies to New South Wales in this regard applies also to Queensland. People in charge of allowance post-offices are very poorly paid, and the payment to mail contractors is. entirely inadequate. It is no Wonder that we have statements such as those of the honorable member for Dalley, that some of them do not get sufficient to enable them to purchase a decent conveyance for the carriage of mails or to provide reliable horses. They are driven to tie up their harness with wire and string, and all because of the parsimony of the Department. In periods of drought the mail contractors are unable to buy proper, fodder for their horses, and I know of many cases in which during such periods they have had to carry on their contracts at a loss. Surely a great public Department that makes a profit of over £1,000,000 per annum should not treat men carrying on useful work in remote parts of Australia in such a parsimonious way." If such is done when the Department is making a profit, what will happen after the proposed reduction takes place? Postmasters and postmistresses in charge of allowance offices are paid much below a living wage, and must engage- in some other occupation, with the result that they cannot give satisfaction to the public or themselves. In some cases where these people have got behind in their cash, the Department concerned has pursued them with the utmost rigour of the law. I have said that the congestion in the Brisbane General Post Office affects remote districts of Queensland, and the reliable authority from whom I have quoted further says: - >The superintendent is unsympathetic, and it is no use calling on him or the three mail-room heads for a report. An independent inquiry should be held by an impartial person. Everything is smothered up from the knowledge of the Deputy, And it is made to appear to him that the work of the mail room is being satisfactorily managed. I might mention that, besides the staff being called upon to work excess time, as previously stated, all recreation leave has been stopped, and even thus they cannot cope with the congestion. Besides being understaffed, the mail room has now become too small for the work performed in it. The frames, furniture, and facilities are quite out of date, making it impossible for the officers to do their work efficiently and expeditiously. Methods forty years old are still in vogue. When the officers ask for the necessary materials for carrying out their work, they are referred from one head to another, each one evading his responsibility, and if any mistake is made, or things go wrong, the men are made the scapegoats, and they have no means of getting justice Owing to the insufficiency of the staff, mails often miss, the whole central mail, including Rockhampton, which happened quite recently, as also did a northern mail, including Townsville. Other mails too numerous to mention have also missed. It is only by the good graces of the railway officials that mails do not miss more frequently, because, owing to the reasons quoted above, mails are despatched from the General Post Office with barely time to catch the train. The railway officials will be able to substantiate this statement.- There is such chaos in the office through congestion that small mail bags containing ' registered articles are often missed for days and weeks, and turn up in some corner of the office, having been buried amongst catalogues and other classes of mail matter which have been unconsciously placed upon them. Such an instance occurred on the 6th July,, 1923, when the mail from Cooroy, containing registered mail, was missing for over a week, and turned up after lying under some ^second class mail matter all that time. Of course, the men were made the real scapegoats. American mails arriving in Brisbane on 15th June remained in the office unsorted until Sunday, 1st July, and were despatched to country offices on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th July, or nearly three weeks after the arrival of the mail in Brisbane. Just imagine an American mail arriving in Brisbane, and being sorted and sent out to country districts three weeks after its arrival, because of the congestion in the Brisbane General Post Office and the inadequacy of the accommodation *a.wi* staff in the mail room. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr Makin: -- I have seen' the conditions in the Brisbane General Post Office, and they are scandalous. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- I am interested to get that impartial admission. These scandalous conditions exist although the people are paying for a proper service. The least they have a right to expect is that a sufficient staff shall be employed to enable them to get their mail matter expeditiously, and that necessary accommodation shall be provided, irrespective of cost, to enable -them to receive the service to which they are entitled. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr Makin: -- Some of the surplus should be spent for. that purpose. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- As the honorable member suggests, why cannot the Government spend for this purpose some of the £1,500,000 surplus and future similar amounts it proposes to concede to the wealthy commercial interests which contribute substantial donations to the mysterious National Union that is ' so effectively condemned by the Melbourne *Age* and other newspapers in possession of inside information. My reliable informant further says - >It was only through special staff being recalled on Sunday that this mail was sorted. A part of an English mail received prior to this, American mail was sorted that same Sunday, just three weeks after its arrival in Brisbane. Three weeks after its arrival an English mail was sorted in Brisbane "because- of the inadequate staff and accommodation provided at the General Post Office. Is that not really scandalous? Honorable members can realize the discomfort and anxiety of people living in Brisbane and other parts of Queensland expecting letters, and remittances, from, relatives in England, when they had. to wait for over three weeks after the arrival of the mail in Brisbane to receive their letters. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- Has there been , any public protest by the people of Brisbane about this state of things! {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- Comments have, I understand, appeared in the newspapers; and a statement was made in reply that some of the delay was due to the influenza epidemic. Honorable members will understand that the public have not been aware of the cause of delays. Although certain men were absent because of the influenza epidemic these serious delays, I am assured, cannot be truly attributed to it at all, because delays occur when there is no epidemic. They are due to the cheeseparing methods adopted by the Department. This is at a time when many returned soldiers are walking the streets clamouring for positions in Commonwealth Departments for which they are supposed to be given preference. In the circumstances further parsimony will be practised if a reduction in postage is made. My informant states further - >Whilst this last American mail was lying in the post-office, unsorted, an English mail, consisting of over 300 bags, was stored at the railway because there, was no room for it at' the congested office. Just imagine 300 bags of English mail having to be stored at the' railway station, the property of the Queensland Government, because there was no room for . it in the General Post Office at Brisbane. At a time when the Government is endeavouring to hand ' back to' the great commercial interests over £1,000,000, it makes use of the State Government's property for accommodation for the storing of a mail when the Department should provide all necessary accommodation for the carrying out of its own work. The position would be different if the Department did not pay, and could not provide money for necessary facilities. But we know that this Department has been making profits- for the last six or seven years approximating £1,000,000 per annum. The letter continues - >When the American mail was sorted, this English mail was brought to the office, and was still there on 5th July, although it arrived in Brisbane on 22nd June. In that case, the English mail arrived, in Brisbane on 22nd June, and was- still in the General Post Office, Brisbane, on 5th July. This mail probably contained thousands of letters from English people to their relatives here, who' were anxiously waiting for their correspondence. The,Postal Department should be run on business lines, giving the same efficiency that would obtain if competing with halfadozen other post-offices. There is no reason why a maximum of efficiency should not be reached, since the people are paying dearly for the service. This writer continues - >The place is so congested with stacks of catalogues and other mail matter-- {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- Who is the writer of that letter? {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- If I disclosed the name of the writer, trouble would probably arise. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- Not if the statements are true. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- I know human nature too well. I believe the PostmasterGeneral would act fairly. He has been in public life sufficiently long, and is broadminded enough, having received many similar complaints, not to dismiss this man, but that does not apply to the heads of the Departments. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- He deserves a V.C. for his courage. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- He is doing a great, service to the public. It would not be fair to disclose his name. I have the greatest respect for the Queensland Deputy Postmaster-General **(Mr. J. McConachie).** He has had many years of. honorable service in the Department, and he, personally, is an efficient officer, but cannot possibly keep in touch, personally, with all the ramifications of the service. I do not know the heads of the mail department. I could not tell you one of their names; but I am informed that they smother up the delays and dislocations, in order to hide their own incompetency or the lack of efficient administration. It would not be in the interests of this person . to disclose his name. Certain men, who are his superiors in the Department, will do their utmost to discover his identity, and, if they succeed, he' would be 'victimized at the first opportunity. If that occurs, I hope that the Postmaster-General will make an inquiry into the circumstances. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- I shall' see that an inquiry is made. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- I am glad to have the Minister's assurance. My correspondent further states - >The place is so congested with stacks of catalogues .and other mail matter that it is hard to Bay when it will be sorted. The catalogues advertising ten-day sales from various firms were lodged at the General Post Office on 15th June, some a little earlier, and others a little later. They were not despatched until some time in July, long after the ten-day sales were over. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- It would be extraordinary if the Brisbane people tolerated those conditions. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- I remind the honorable member for Fawkner **(Mr. Maxwell)** that the business houses do not know what transpires. They pay postage on catalogues sent to persons, say, in Cunnamulla, 500 miles away. If the catalogues are not received in time the business houses are none the. wiser. A business proprietor does not worry, so long as he transacts a certain amount of business. But the people living in the remote parts of Queensland are denied the opportunity to take advantage of the sales which are held periodically by the big business houses of Brisbane. In many cases prices of goods are considerably reduced during those sales, and the farmers in the country districts are entitled to receive the catalogues in time to enable them to get the benefit of sales which usually can be taken advantage of by the city people. This writer continues - > **Mr. Byerly,** of the A.C.B. House, can give some information regarding the despatch of his catalogues. He is aware of the delay that takes .place, and has to demand the despatch of his catalogues immediately. I know **Mr. Byerly** personally. He is one of the most astute business men in Australia. A few years ago, as a commercial traveller, he went to Rockhampton to interview a business firm. The proprietor was so struck with the business acumen displayed by this man that he offered him the position of manager of the firm. **Mr. Byerly** accepted the job on his own terms. I think they were that he was to get, in addition to a salary, half of the profits made over £3,000, which was the profit for the previous year. **Mr. Byerly** displayed such commercial ability that in the first year of management he made a profit of about £10,000. To-day he owns that business. In addition, he owns the A.C.B. House, which is one of the finest establishments in Brisbane. It has large branches in Bundaberg and Maryborough. **Mr. Byerly** probably found out from his country customers that they were not receiving their catalogues in time, and he now insists on the catalogues being sent out expeditiously. This I am told by the person who has written to me. Th» letter continues - >Other firms do not appear to have awakened. McDonald and East's catalogues were posted on 15th June, and they were .not despatched until 3rd and 4th July. This was long after their sale was over. Is any compensation to be paid to McDonald and East? Both principals of the firm I know well. They are honest men, striving to run their business with a minimum of profit. Will the PostmasterGeneral's Department refund the huge sums this firm have paid" for the postage of catalogues that have been, allowed to remain in the General Post Office of Brisbane long after the sale was over? The writer further states) - >The whole staff has been cut so line that if a few men are away through sickness the concern is almost in a state of collapse, and it is only by double-banking the shifts, keeping men on from 1,30 to 11 at night, and working them on -Sundays, that the concern is kept going at all. Another matter which I omitted was the question. of the northern mails, which go by sea. North Queensland is penalized by the fact that often second-class mail matter is detained in Brisbane for a contract boat to take lt north. The Administration here holds the mail so as to avoid paying gratuity on the non-contract steamers. I think this is very unfair to North Queenslanders. {: #subdebate-17-0-s8 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- Will the honorable member now show what application his remarks have to the question of postal rates? {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- It affects the question of rates in this way: I object to the Government reducing the rate- at a time when the postal services are inefficient. They could absorb the £1,500,000 profit by vastly improving this universal public service. A reduction in the rates cannot be justified while inefficiency exists. The people of the North of Queensland have to suffer the rigors of the climate and other disabilities. Their mails, packages, and parcels are seriously delayed in Brisbane awaiting despatch by a contract vessel, so that the Department will not have to make a payment to a non-contract vessel. This I am told by - a person in a position to speak with authority. I appeal to the Postmaster-General to probe this matter to the bottom. It is of no use to ask the heads of the Departments concerned to supply a report, because, their own positions being at stake, they would frame a suitable reply to hide their gross bungling and malad-ministration, and by all means in their power they would victimize the officer who has had the courage to expose the whole business. The letter continues - >J might also add that frequently officers have to be recalled to work double shifts, and sometimes four times a week they are re-called at night time, and detained over schedule time on some occasions to 9.15 p.m. and even later. This does not allow the break of ten hours between shifts as provided in the award. At ' a time when it is proposed to remit £1,000,000 of public money to the large commercial interests, is it fair that the Post Office in Brisbane should be understaffed ? Many men are out of employment, and amongst them are returned soldiers walking the streets of Brisbane penniless and foodless, and in dire need of clothing. I ask the PostmasterGeneral whether he, personally, is in favour of this reduction? He knows that the people in country districts and the' remote parts of Australia are clamouring for better postal and telephonic facilities. He is aware that the people of Queensland generally are suffering from serious delays in the sorting and delivery of mail matter owing to the inadequate postal accommodation and the insufficient staff. Probably the Country party had to yield to the dictation of the great commercial interests that really control, body and soul, the Government of the day. Probably the Postmaster-General will tell the general public that this slight reduction in postal charges will mean the postage of an increased number of letters. The facts are to the contrary. In October, 1920, the letter rate was fixed at 2d. per half-ounce. The postings for 1920-21 showed an increase of, approximately, 10,000,000 letters exclusive of packages; in 1921-22 the increase was 9,000,000 over the postings of the previous year. There was also an increase of 5,600,000 packages. Does that show that the great commercial houses will cease to send letters if the present rate is continued ? The facts lead to another conclusion. This Bill is but a sop to the great com- **Mr.** *Forde.* mercialinterests for their support of this alleged Country-Nationalist composite Ministry. As an honorable member near me says, it is some recompense for payments made to the Nationalist party funds. I .hope ,this Parliament will rise above that kind of thing, and stand for free democratic Government, untrammeled by the pernicious influence of great commercial houses which would, if they could, run this country in their own interests, and not in the interests of the people who are doing the real developmental work. Penny postage was enacted in 1910, and in 1911 the increase in the number of letters posted was 14.40 per cent.; in 1912, over 1911, it was 3.76 per cent. ; in 1913,. over 1912, it was 4.15 per cent.; and in 1914, over 1913, it was 3.82 per cent. These are normal increases, not due in any way to Id. postage. I have quoted figures to show that following 2d. postage, the increase in the number of letters was 10,000,000, and in the next year to' 9,000,000. If further figures are necessary, I may say that for the year ending 30th June, 1912, the total number of letters and postcards posted was 456,142,239, and in 1921, the year after 2d. postage was established, the figure was 533,539,744. The average number of letters posted per head of population under Id. postage in 1912 was 96.36; and in 1922, under 2d. postage, it was 104.24. This clearly shows that with 2d. postage, the people of Australia wrote a greater number of letters per head than with Id. postage. I hope that honorable members on the cross-benches will not treat this important matter lightly. It affects the everyday life of people in the remote parts of Australia, where they undergo all kinds of trials and tribulations in carrying on that pioneering work so essential if we are to make Australia a great nation. Many of these people live from 10 to 30, and even 40, miles away from a railway station, and the intervening roads are such that they get almost impassable in wet weather. In case of sickness there is no way of conveying women or children to the nearest railway station, or the nearest doctor or nurse, except a rough spring-' cart, or, if the people are lucky, a sulky. In the initial stages of settlement, motor cars and other more suitable means of conveyance cannot be commanded. I submit .that people so circumstanced are deserving of liberal postal and telephone facilities without being asked, as they are to-day, to contribute to the cost. {: #subdebate-17-0-s9 .speaker-KXG} ##### Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt: -- I am afraid I cannot hear the honorable member any longer on that line; he must stick to the Bill,, or desist. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- I am contending that if the postal rate were allowed to remain at 2d., the Department, with the revenue received, would be able to provide the additional postal and telephone facilities that are so necessary. The PostmasterGeneral cannot justify this proposed reduction. I oppose it because it is sought at a time when people have not efficient services, especially in the country districts, and even in the cities. I have instanced Brisbane, where, at the General Post Office, there is inadequate accommodation, and an insufficient staff to cope with the volume of work. As one who represents a country electorate containing approximately 74,000 square miles, where the people have asked for telephone services {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- Order ! I have intimated that I cannot hear argument, any further on that question. The honorable member must apply himself relevantly to the Bill. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- T wish to ask the PostmasterGeneral, even at this stage, to refrain from reducing the postal rates. I shall use all the influence I may have in the House, by my vote or in any other way, to prevent a reduction, with a view to improving the existing services, and more generously treating the employees. This Bill is in the interests of the great commercial houses of Flinders-lane, which really control this Government, to the detriment of the people of Australia. {: #subdebate-17-0-s10 .speaker-KJM} ##### Mr JACKSON:
Bass .- I am rather astonished to hear honorable members opposite talk of £1,000,000 as the revenue that will be lost by this proposed reduction in the postage rates. As a matter of fact, the actual amount will be £530,000, taking last year's total as the basis. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr Fenton: -- The Minister tells us that the amount is £930,000. {: .speaker-KJM} ##### Mr JACKSON: -- The Minister did not say that. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr Fenton: -- Yes, he did. {: .speaker-KJM} ##### Mr JACKSON: -- It must be remembered that that larger figure has reference to country, telephone facilities. It has been suggested that this Bill is a bribe to big business firms. While there are very many business men who send out hundreds of letters every day, there are probably 2,500,000 people who, on an average, post no more than one letter per week. Some of the big business, firms will receive a big concession, but that made to the ordinary family is large also. I remind honorable members that, although there has been a profit during the last five years of £4,080,000, much of which was raised to meet war expenditure, the loss in the previous five years amounted to £2,000;000. It will be seen that over the last ten years a profit of only £200,000 a year has been made by the Department. The charge that the Government are doing nothing for the outback people will not bear investigation for a moment. Last year £2,000,000 was expended, and expenditure of £4,000,000 is proposed this year, and something like £3,000,000 for next year, much of which is for out-back extensions. There are two other matters to which I would like to call attention. I suggest that in the matter of postage, friendly societies are entitled to special consideration, and I trust that the regulations will allow the Postmaster-General **(Mr. Gibson)** to make provision in this respect, if it is not already made in the Bill. I know that it is not proposed to make any reduction in the bulk rates, but I was hoping that the Postmaster-General would have given some slight concession. Our newspapers at the present time enjoy the cheapest rates in the- world. {: .speaker-KLM} ##### Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936 -- They are not the cheapest, but among the cheapest. {: .speaker-KJM} ##### Mr JACKSON: -- I am not prepared to debate the question, but will accept the word of the Postmaster-General. Prior to the war, newspapers in bulk were carried for Id. per 20 ozs., and I suggest, as a compromise, that the rate should be made l£d. for 24 ozs., representing a 20 per cent, reduction. 'This, I think, is not too much to ask. {: .speaker-K0A} ##### Mr Gabb: -- I draw attention to the state of the House. [ *Quorum formed.]* {: .speaker-KJM} ##### Mr JACKSON: -- I trust the PostmasterGeneral will give the matter his serious consideration. I am not making the suggestion in the interests of the hig daily newspapers in the cities. I remind the House that people in the country depend entirely for their market news, and news of the world generally, on the newspapers; and every possible facility should be afforded for their quick and cheap conveyance. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- Will the readers of the newspapers get the benefit of such reductions ? {: .speaker-KJM} ##### Mr JACKSON: -- All the extra expenses that are piled on newspaper proprietors help to keep up the price, and it is a' significant fact that whilst some of the city newspapers have reduced their prices, country newspapers have been unable to do so. It is on behalf of the latter that I make this plea. {: #subdebate-17-0-s11 .speaker-KLM} ##### Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936 .- I am in favour of cheap postage always. I agree with that writer who said that the civilization of a country may be judged by the number of letters written and newspapers published. There was a time when the Government of Queensland used to deliver newspapers throughout the length and breadth of the State, and even to the Home Land, free of charge. In regard to an interjection I made earlier in the evening, I wish to make it clear that the postage of the Solomon Islands was not increased during the period of the war. Therefore, the PostmasterGeneral will agree with me that the postage rates in those islands are cheaper than those in Australia. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- My reference was only to newspapers. {: .speaker-KLM} ##### Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936 -- The Solomon Islands never charged more than Id. for letters, whether sent to Australia or the United Kingdom. In Australia it costs 2d. to send a letter across the street, and that is why so many agencies save money by the hand delivery. of letters and circulars. I have often wondered why the Postmaster-General did not. make a regulation preventing such deliveries, because they represent a big loss to the revenues of the Postal Department. If the Minister proposed to reduce the postage upon letters to Id., I would support him, not for the sake of big commercial enterprises, which I have fought at times as bitterly as has any member of the House, especially when they supported the National Association, which the *Age* exposed, but because I believe that the lower the postage rates the better for the community. I recently spent six weeks in Western Australia, and I heard there great complaint against the excessive postal charges. I post regularly to one farmer in that State a valuable American magazine. He posts it to another farmer, who in turn sends it to a third farmer. The postage on that journal from America to Australia is 3 cents, but it costs me 4d. to send it to Western Australia, and it costs the receiver 4d. to send it to the second farmer, and the second farmer 4d. to send it to the third. Thus ls. is paid in postage for the circulation amongst four people of an educational paper of great value. Cheap postage rates for magazines, books, and newspapers would make for the advantage of the whole community. I was somewhat perturbed by a deputation of representatives of newspapers that are published weekly, fortnightly, or monthly, who feared that the fixation of postal rates would be left to departmental officers. I have been informed by the Postmaster-General that Australia is the only large nation whose Parliament settles the postage rates. I hope that as long as the honorable gentleman remains in office he will help me in preventing the fixation of these rates being intrusted to departmental officers. I have respect and friendly regard for many men in the Postal Department, but I hope that Parliament will never surrender the right of fixing these charges. No departmental officer has the same opportunity as has a member of Parliament to meet the people and learn their views. Therefore, if my influence can prevent it, the suggested- change will never be brought about. I understand from the Postmaster-General that He does not propose to make any change in the charges upon newspapers published weekly, fortnightly, or monthly. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- The only change will be that in respect of newspapers sent to the United Kingdom, the weight has been increased from 8 ozs. to 10 ozs. {: .speaker-KLM} ##### Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936 -- That is an improvement, and I may, therefore, assure my friends that their apprehensions are unfounded. In order to reduce postage rates it is necessary sometimes to reduce expenditure, and I, therefore, suggest to the Postmaster-General that he should immediately complete the Post Office building in Elizabeth-street, substituting the noble idea of the architect for the present disgraceful galvanized-iron shed. Money would be saved in so far as accommodation would be provided for many of the Commonwealth Departments that are now scattered about Melbourne for the office accommodation of which the Commonwealth is paying unnecessarily something like £30,000 per annum. I indorse the complaint that has been made regarding the pittance paid to those in charge of allowance post-offices. No clerk or teller in a bank has as many and diverse duties to perform as 'has the ordinary postmaster or postmistress. Often while waiting to send a telegram I have watched these officers at work. An oldage pensioner would come in, and the postmistress would have to do the duty of a teller, making the payment and entering it in the books. Then she would pay out repatriation money and invalid pensions, sell a 2d. stamp, and receive a telegram. Perhaps the next person to enter the office would ask the postmistress to witness his signature to an application for a vote for the Federal or State Parliaments. I think the Postmaster-General will agree with me that, most postmasters and postmistresses are underpaid for the splendid work they are doing. It is a matter of wonder to me that. they avoid making mistakes. A person writing to me from Tasmania put the case in a nutshell - >Now, it is the shameful 'allowance that is paid to these officers. They are paid, such as it is, on the scale rate, and a mighty obsolete scale it is. It is an absolute disgrace to any Government to pay such paltry salaries to their officer's, the way they do. The scale rates were fixed years ago - That is so. For thirty years I have been endeavouring to get the allowance for these persons increased - and have never been altered. An allowance postmaster is expected to find an office, light, and fuel, and work eight and nine hours daily, week in and week out, for £1 and 25s. per week. Why, the messenger boy at my official post-office receives more than *hundreds* of underpaid postmistresses and postmasters, and _ has no responsibility, and provides nothing. The duties consist of Savings Bank business, war pensions, old-age pensions, repatriation repayments, besides ordinary postal and telegraphic work. The men who carry the mails also are' underpaid, and, in- the circumstances, I have often smiled at the term " His Majesty's mails." The road from Yarra Glen to Toolangi is one of the most difficult in Victoria in winter time. Often I have poked my umbrella into a rut, and it went below the level of the road. Yet the mail carrier receives only 3s. 4d. for the journey of 15 miles each way. During the time when the States controlled postal matters I endeavoured to get the payments increased, but the Postmasters-General of those days were very hard-hearted. They may have had some excuse in the fact that they had a constantly recurring deficit, but the postal accounts were not kept so accurately then as they have been during the last ten years. During the first five years of the last decade, the operations of the Postal Department showed a loss of about £2,000,000, but during the latter half of the decade a profit of about £4,000,000 has been made. Unfortunately, the Postmaster-General has to pay the profits of his Department into the Consolidated Revenue, instead of being .able to apply them to an improvement of the facilities for the public. I have had experience of the difficulty of obtaining a telephone, not in the back-blocks - I wish more telephones could be provided there, but I hope that wireless will advance so that it may be employed for the benefit of the settlers - but in the suburb of Windsor. I understand that to add one more telephone line to a certain exchange - I thin>k it was Windsor - would cost £1,000. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- More than that; but for the same amount of money 1,000 telephone lines could be provided. {: .speaker-KLM} ##### Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936 -- I understand that that is the reason for the great delay in supplying telephone services. I hope that from the profits made by the Postal Department a little more money will be made available for the officers in charge of allowance post-offices,' and that mail carriers, who work winter and summer, in hail and rain, will receive better remuneration than 3s. 4d. for a journey of 30 miles. Such a payment is a reflection upon our White Australia policy. More would have to be paid in China, where the mode of transport ils by waggon, barrow, or on the shoulders of a porter. I hope that the PostmasterGeneral will do what he can to help those "under dogs" who are not getting fair play at the present moment. {: #subdebate-17-0-s12 .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST:
East Sydney .- I have previously said so much about the maladministration of the Postal Department that the Government, if it had any decency, would have resigned. I desire to say a few words about the Sydney General Post Office, and I should like to remind representatives of country districts that even in the metropolitan areas postal conditions are far from being ideal. The Sydney General Post Office is the most congested in the world, and it.? income is the greatest in Australia. About fifteen years ago the Department made a promise to build a General Post Office suitable for the city of Sydney. Last week the Sydney Chamber of Commerce held its annual meeting, and if the PostmasterGeneral, had heard the remarks made at that meeting about the Sydney General Post Office, he would catch the next train to Sydney to try and improve matters. The Sydney General Post Office has been neglected for many years. It was built in 1874, and extended in 1876, but since then no increased accommodation has been provided in it. Honorable members should realize that Sydney has a population of over a million, which is more than the total population of Queensland and Tasmania. Twelve years ago I endeavoured to get the PostmasterGenerail to make better provision for the girls working in the Telephone Department. I went so far as to offer to spend ?300 myself to ventilate the building in which they were working. Nothing has been done. I call the attention pf the Postmaster-General to the post-office in William-street, Sydney. The honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Lambert),** who has been Lord Mayor of Sydney, will corroborate my remarks in this connexion. The Sydney City Council has spent ?1,500,000 to widen William-street for half-a-mile, and its work cannot be completed because we are told that the Williamstreet post-office cannot be removed for two years. The *Sydney Morning Herald,* the *Daily Telegraph,* and other Sydney newspapers have pointed out how the work of widening this thoroughfare has been obstructed because of the postoffice. At the last Federal elections the then Lord Mayor of Sydney, a Liberal, who tried to win my safe seat from me, did all he could to blame me for the situation created by the 'refusal to remove the William-street post-office. For tunately for me, I had kept my correspondence with the Department on the matter. Notwithstanding that, I had a hard job to convince the people that I had done what I could to get the postoffice removed. It is five and a-half years since I got the first letter from the PostmasterGeneral's Department on this matter. I was told that provision had been made to obtain a new site for the postoffice. I went to the office of the Works Department in Sydney, and saw plans and specifications which had been drawn out for the erection of a new building. I waited for two years, which I thought gave the Department a fair time to act. Nothing had been done in that time so far as I could see. When I went back to the Department I learned that the plans which had been drawn had been rejected as unsuitable, and new proposals had been made. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- It is not a matter of shifting only the post-office. The telephone exchange, with 5,000 subscribers, must also be removed. That will cost ?200,000. We will do it as soon as we can. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- Surely the people who drew up the first set of plans knew that the telephone exchange would have to be altered. The Department should have had the decency to tell me what' had been done. I knew nothing about it until I communicated with the present P Postmaster-General . {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- I have advised you of everything we propose to do. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- That is so, butt your predecessors did not do so. It is not very much to ask that the ' Department shall advise people when it intends to make alterations. Twelve years ago the introduction of the automatic telephone service in Sydney was proposed, and one of the biggest firms in the city spent ?960 in preparation for the installation of that system. They have not got it to-day. In circumstances like these, is it any wonder that the Chamber of Commerce and also the Chamber of Manufactures should make strong comments on the methods of the Postal Department ? **Mr. ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr. Watkins).** Does the honorable -member intend tb connect his remarks with the Bill before the House? {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- I am referring to these matters, sir, to show that while the Government proposes, on the one hand, to remit postal charges to the extent of £1,000,000, its actions, on the other hand, show that it has not sufficient income to meet the present needs of the Commonwealth. Before the Government reduce the postal charges it should provide a sufficient service for the people. I challenge the PostmasterGeneral to name anybody who has requested this reduction. I advise the Postmaster-General to take early steps to remedy the condition of affairs which exists at the General Post Office and the William-street post-office, Sydney. The Sydney General Post Office is a building of which any city may be proud, but on its balconies are a lot of wooden hutches which serve as telephone boxes. They have been put on the balconies because there is no room for them in the building. As they are made of nine timber, which anybody with wicked and vicious intentions could easily. set on fire, they are a menace to the building. It has* been pointed out that people in the country have complaints about the postal administration. I assure the honorable members who made those complaints, that the people in the city have as much to put up with on account of postal maladministration as have the people in the country. It should be remembered that any surpluses which the Postmaster-General, has are provided by the city people. The country postal services do not pay, because the mails have to be carried great distances, and the telephone and telegraph lines have to be run out for many miles. In the cities . the revenue is so great that the Department shows a profit. I wish to refer briefly to the conditions which prevailed for a long time at the Oxford-street post-office in Sydney. I had a hard job to get any alteration made there, although the revenue was £180,000 a year. Whenever the Public Service Commissioner was asked to send additional assistance to that office, care Was taken not to send a person with big feet, because the accommodation in the office was so limited that no room could be found for such a man. I had a great struggle to get that condition of affairs altered. As the representative of Sydney, I suffer much abuse on account of the inadequate accommodation at the General Post Office, and the inaction of the Postal Department with respect to the William-street post-office. -I may say that I get " particular hell " because of these things. Even when I get in the trams in Sydney, passengers turn to me and say, ' ' Look here, West, why don't you get that damned old post-office shifted from the middle of Williamstreet ? " I ask the Postmaster-General to take compassion on me. In its present position, the William-street postoffice is dangerous. There is a great deal of traffic in that street. I think three persons were killed in it in one week by motorists. Honorable members can therefore understand the indignation of the people. The honorable member for Wentworth **(Mr. Marks)** knows that what I have said about the William -street post-office is true. I am satisfied to have brought the matter under notice, because I did' not wish to provide any persons with a lever to turn me out of Parliament. {: #subdebate-17-0-s13 .speaker-KF9} ##### Mr A GREEN:
KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936 .- I wish to repeat what I have said before, and that is that I am against the proposed reduction in postal rates. If I were not, I consider that I would have no right to refer to postal grievances. I am in a position, to link up postal grievances with the reduction in revenue contemplated from the proposed reduction of rates. It is reasonable to suppose that with a reduced revenue employees of the Post and Telegraph Department are likely to receive less generous treatment than they could otherwise look forward to. I admit that profits made by the Post Office go into the Consolidated Revenue, and that money required for works must be drawn from the Consolidated Revenue. The Post Office would not necessarily be required to balance its accounts, but if it did not show a profit, I think the Treasurer would not be very willing to advance large sums to extend its services. In the circumstances, I view with a certain amount of alarm the reduction of postal rates proposed by this Bill. The honorable member for Bass **(Mr. Jackson)** made, for an old member of this Chamber; the astonishing statement that the contemplated reduction of £930,000 in revenue will cover, not only losses of postal revenue, but also losses of revenue on telephones and other facilities provided by the Department. *It* the honorable member would read the Treasurer's Budget more carefully, he would see that it is laid- down clearly there that the contemplated loss of £930,000 of revenue will be directly due to the reduction of postal rates. There are probably 2,000,000 people in the Commonwealth who do not write more than one letter per week. On the reduced letter rate they will save fd. per week each. This means that for the vast majority of the people of the Commonwealth the reduced rate will represent a saving of only £216,000, and consequently the proposed reduction really represents a gift of over £700,000 to "big business" in Australia. No matter how much we may desire cheap postal communication, such a proposal in the interests of " big business " is not likely to receive- the support of Democrats in this Chamber. Let me pay some tribute of praise to my ex-fellow-officers of the Post and Telegraph Department, in which I served for seventeen years. I say that, considering the magnitude of its undertaking, the Post and Telegraph Department is a pretty well-managed concern. Though I say this, I believe it to be my duty, if I know of matters which can be remedied, to bring them before this Chamber. The employees of the Department are required to pass medical and other examinations, which prove that they are above the average in general health and in scholastic attainments. That being so, I believe it to be our duty to treat them in such a way as to offer some incentive to young men to join the Service and keep up its present high standard, and at the same time to give "those already in the Service some encouragement to carry on. When we consider that the services of this Department extends throughout the Commonwealth, and to very remote places,' which district inspectors can visit only at long intervals, the fact that there is so small a number of defalcations occurring is a proof that we have in the Service a very fine class of men, of whom we may well be proud. To refer to some matters which I think require to be looked into, I may mention, first, the promotion of a certain class of telegraph messengers. Their present difficulty has arisen out of the war. Messengers who entered the Service in 1912, say, at the age of fourteen, thought they had an assured prospect of early promotion if they showed the necessary ability. The fact, how- ever, is that, due to war causes, at the present time they have no prospect whatever of advancement. A number of these messengers are now twenty-five years of age, and because of the provision made for preference to other persons for ' positions in the Clerical Division, these young men are debarred for ever from qualifying for promotion to that division. I am prepared to do all that is possible for the returned soldiers, but I do not consider it is right that the future of these young men should be ruined because they entered the Service in 1912 and were too young to enlist and go to the Front when war was declared. They represent a comparatively small number, but they are suffering a grave injustice in that they have no pcs,sible chance of promotion. I believe that examinations within the Service should be held, and if these young men can qualify they should be given the first opportunity of transferring to the Clerical Division, and before the appointment of other persons from outside the Service. I want to refer to the senior assistants and senior positions generally, particularly in Western Australia, a State which I know most about. {: #subdebate-17-0-s14 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER:
Mr. Watkins -- I am afraid the honorable member will not be in order in doing so. {: .speaker-KF9} ##### Mr A GREEN:
KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936 -- I think I can connect my remarks with the Bill. The contemplated reduction of postal revenue by £930,000 per annum, due to the proposed reduction of rates, will in all probability mean that skimping methods will be pursued in the Department. It will be impossible for the Postmaster-General in that case to deal justly with the officers to whom I wish to refer. If the Minister will agree to withdraw this provision from the Bill, I shall be able to show him how, with the additional revenue, he may remedy certain grave injustices. Very few officers of the Postal Department in Western Australia have a higher designation than that of " assistant," 'which really means that a man must be a jack.ofalltrades, and opportunities for promotion above that grade are limited. Because of this contemplated reduction in postal charges, and the probable reduction in revenue, the PostmasterGeneral will not be able to go to the Treasurer, and, pointing to an overflow- ing Treasury, make a request for additional funds to improve the prospects of these postal assistants, among whom are included officers in the telegraph, telephone, and the engineering branches, telegraph check clerks, and despatch clerks. Just as in Napoleon's armies every private felt that he carried a marshal's baton in his knapsack, so should every employee in the Postal Department feel that the way is open to him to rise to the highest position in the Service. The question of superannuation is also affected by the Government proposals. No doubt, the Postmaster-General has heard of this complaint before, but I may be pardoned if I repeat it. Every unmarried employee in the Public Service has to contribute to the Superannuation Fund at the same rate as a married man, but his relatives receive no benefits in the event of his death. This anomaly ought to be rectified. The dependants of unmarried men should receive the same benefits as the dependants of married men. Still another injustice is being perpetrated, and in this case upon defenceless women. Hitherto, when a girl on the eve of her marriage retired from the Department, she was entitled to an allowance. This concession has now been withdrawn. As honorable members are aware the girls employed in the Public Service have to dress in keeping with their position. This involves considerable expenditure, and as a consequence a girl has very little opportunity of saving against the time when she is going to be married, "When the parliamentary allowance was £600 a year, and there was a proposal to increase it to £1,000, no doubt many honorable members made this mental calculation - " When I get £1,000 a year, I shall probably be able to .live on £600, and save £400." We all know, of course, that nothing of the sort happens. It may be very reprehensible, but still it is a fact that, with our increased parliamentary allowance, there has been a corresponding increase in expenditure. The women employees of the Postal Department and other branches of the Public Service are in the same position, and it is to be regretted that the retiring allowance has been withdrawn in the terms of a memorandum issued from the Public Service Commissioner's Office on 9*th July, on' the' ground that there was no provision -for it in the Act. 1 am quite sure that honorable members did not realize when the Bill was being passed that the regulation referred to, and framed in accordance with the Act, would be withdrawn, thus working a grave injustice upon women employees in the Public Service. The PostmasterGeneral assures me that he is not a member of the Public Service Board. I am sure that I have only to mention this injustice to insure the reinstatement of the privilege hitherto enjoyed. The district allowance at Geraldton has been discontinued. If there had been a reduction in the cost of living; commensurate with the proposed reduction in the postal rates, I could understand it; but there has been nothing of the kind. According to *Knibbs' Quarterly Statement,* the issue of which, unfortunately, was discontinued in 1922, out of thirteen places mentioned in Western Australia, Geraldton was the third highest on the list relating to " cost of living " figures. In those circumstances, there is no justi<fication for the alteration. Another grievance is the reduction of the travelling allowance. I know the PostmasterGeneral is not a party to it. The responsibility rests upon those who insist on the postal reductions. By sweating the employees, they lessen the loss to the Department. In Western Australia, and presumably throughout Australia, the travelling allowance for linesmen, as from the 19th July of this year, was reduced from 14s. 6d. to 13s. per day. This is, no doubt, in accord with the cheeseparing policy of the Government, and it is most unjust to the servants of the- Department. I hope the PostmasterGeneral will seriously consider the various matters I have placed before him. New regulations concerning sick leave have been issued, and this complaint has since been forwarded to me - >The Public Service Board, in the new regulations recently promulgated, has made 'very inadequate concessions for sick leave in the case of returned soldiers, inasmuch as the regulations contain absolutely no concessions for permanent war-caused injuries, but only for injuries that are of a temporary nature of not more than three years' duration after discharge from the Australian Imperial Force. > >This is most unfair to those returned soldiers at present in the Service, whose injuries are of a permanent nature. . To illustrate thiB, I would particularly point out the: case of soldiers who have lost a limb and those who have been badly gassed and are now sufferingfrom permanent chest or lung trouble complaints such as T.B., &c. > >In the case of the amputee, changes of the weather sometimes cause acute nervous troubles and pains in the stump, rendering him unfit to perform his duties, also the amputee requires time off periodically for the purpose of repairs to his old artificial limb or the fitting of a new one. > >In the case of gas patients, changes in the weather, particularly during excessive heat, cause acute aggravation of the complaint from which he may be suffering as a result of having been gassed. > >In view of this aspect of the case, the Board should be asked to rectify this gross injustice to returned soldiersby making adequate provision for permanent war-caused injuries, as the new regulations have evidently been compiled to suit the case of fit men whose injuries are only of a temporary nature. > >To overcome this, I would suggest that in addition to the one week per year for each years' service provided, there should be added, in the case of returned soldiers, a clause providing that: - > >In the case of returned soldiers, they shall be allowed any sick leave that may be necessary on account of permanent warcaused injuries, provided that same is certified to by a duly qualified medical practitioner, or any medical officer that the Board may specify. > >I would point out that the Department would be protected from imposition, because the fact that a medical certificate was necessary would render imposition impossible. I have no sympathy with people who absent themselves from work and thrust their duties upon their fellow workers. During my seventeen years' service I have known some very good servants, and a few wasters. I have a great deal of sympathy with men whose sick-leave is to be reduced. While I recognise that the Department, to justify their proposals, require to make drastic alterations, I trust that they will do nothing to harm the returned soldiers. This is an extract from a letter I have received on that subject: - >The soldier is appointed on 1st July, 1922, and ante-dated as before, to 15th May, . 1916. As the regulation stands he would only be entitled at 30th June, 1923, to one week on full pay, two weeks on half pay, and four weeks on third pay. Had that privilege not been withdrawn he would 'have been entitled to seven weeks on full pay, fourteen weeks on half pay, and twenty-eight weeks on third pay. A large number of returned soldiers have been appointed to the Postal Department, and rightly so. Many of these men, al though able to do postal work, are suffering from permanent injuries, and are affected by climatic conditions. I appeal to the Minister to issue special regulations to cover returned soldiers who are suffering from war injuries. {: #subdebate-17-0-s15 .speaker-K9H} ##### Mr GARDNER:
Robertson -- The honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Mahony),** acting under a misapprehension, strongly criticised the proposed postal reductions. His conclusions were taken from wrong premises. He assumes that because the Postmaster-General has seen fit to remit a considerable amount of taxation to the benefit of the country, the country interests and the employees of the Postal Department will be neglected. As a member of the Nationalist party I have as much concern for the country interests as has the honorable member, and, as I have previously asserted on the platform, I am just as much concerned for the interests of the postal employees. What is the position? I am satisfied that the Postmaster-General is doing more at the present time to provide postal, and particularly telephonic, facilities in the out-back country than has ever previously been the case. Therefore, I do not share the fears of honorable members opposite. Considerable concessions are to be made for trunk-line telephones in the cities and country towns. Cheaper rentals are charged, and more liberal provision is being made in the erection of country telephones. We are invariably told that taxation is passed on. Therefore, there will now be £1,000,000 that these merchants, to whom honorable members opposite refer so frequently, will be able to remit, and thus we can hope that great benefit will accrue. I am in sympathy with honorable members opposite in their desire to assist employees in the Department. In my electorate there are officers who have rendered valued and efficient service for periods ranging up to twenty years, yet they are not receiving an adequate salary. There are postmasters who are receiving only about £260 per annum. Although it might be contended that the matter of remuneration can more properly be dealt with by the Arbitration Court, I trust that the Postmaster-General will tangibly recognise the great services which have been rendered to the country by the postmasters in his Department. In New South Wales the Deputy PostmasterGeneral, who occupies a position requiring in the man who holds it the possession of expert knowledge, receives a salary of something like £800 or £900 a year. That is totally inadequate. In America, Ifeel sure, positions of similar importance carry a much greater salary, and I contend that that officer should receive at least £1,200 per annum. If the more highly-paid officers were given increases, the inspectors and others holding more lowly positions could have their salaries raised, and the whole service would benefit. Mr.F. McDONALD (Barton) [10.34]. - Away over on the Sydney side there is a picturesque and historic spot. None is more famed in the history of Australia. Captain Cook landed there in 1770. {: .speaker-KXG} ##### Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt: -- Does the honorable member seriously propose to connect Captain Cook with this Bill? {: #subdebate-17-0-s16 .speaker-KQS} ##### Mr F MCDONALD:
BARTON, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- I do, **Mr. Speaker,** and I do not desire to do any injustice to the work or name of Captain Cook by doing that. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- The honorable member will take some time to do what he proposes. {: .speaker-KQS} ##### Mr F MCDONALD:
BARTON, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- I also took some time, sir, to receive the call. I might never have received it had not you resumed the chair. Near Botany Bay are Gungah Bay and Never Fail Bay. When Captain Cook landed at Kurnell, the surrounding country was inhabited by the aborigines of this continent. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr Fenton: -- Did they have a postoffice? {: .speaker-KQS} ##### Mr F MCDONALD:
BARTON, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- No; they were not worried with postal matters. I believe that their communications were in terms something like this - " Yerala naia nerma dhmali nurri," to which the reply, I suppose would be, " Murruba inda." They were not concerned with postal matters, and not angered over them.But to-day people of our own race inhabit those shores and write most appealing letters in the English language to their member regarding the postal facilities - which, they say, are not much better than they were when Captain Cook landed on those shores. I simply ask the PostmasterGeneral **(Mr. Gibson)** to take the hint, and let imagination do the rest. {: #subdebate-17-0-s17 .speaker-L1T} ##### Mr YATES:
Adelaide -- I am glad that the honorable member for Barton **(Mr. F. McDonald)** was so easily " connected with Central." I shall endeavour to be equally successful. I intend to oppose the reductions set out in the Bill. I fail to see how the PostmasterGeneral can justify them. He cannot say that a man does not receive value for the money he spends when he has a letter carried for the small sum of 2d. It is not fair to propose this curtailment of our sources of revenue. It is a sop to the commercial community, to the big institutions, and not to the ordinary taxpayer. Some honorable members suggest that it will be returned to the general community in lowered prices. Does any one seriously contend that there will be a reduction in the prices of wearing apparel or of food, and that rents will come down, because a half -penny is knocked off the rate of postage, and because those who make use of the postal facilities are allowed to increase by 100 per cent. the weight of matter carried at the reduced rate? We ought not to pass this Bill until the Minister makes quite clear the benefit that is to be conferred, and to whom it is to go. There is neither rhyme nor reason for the reduction at the present time in the manner proposed. A great deal has been said regarding the development of Australia and the settlement of people upon the land. If there is one way in which we can bring the country closer to the city, it is by providing telegraphic and telephonic facilities. A reduction in the letter rate will not assist the people on the land one iota. If the amount which the Minister proposes to forego were expended in providing increased facilities for country people, a great deal more good would be done. The cost of running the Department will be increased as a result of this proposal. It must not be supposed that the commercial community will not take full advantage of the privileges given them. Instead of the weight of a letter being½ oz., as at present, in future it will be 1 oz. The weight of postal matter handled, therefore, will be doubled. This reduction, with the increased weight, will necessitate increased facilities for the conveyance of mails. A letter-carrier, for instance, will, practically, have to clear about double the amount of matter that he does now. The ordinary taxpayer who writes two or three letters a year, as a rule has not the need to write enough to take advantage of the increase in the weight; and, therefore, all the advantage will go to the large business houses. If there are any surplus funds they should be used for extension purposes, and to make up for a reduction in the telephone rates. Once a telephone is installed, apart from ordinary depreciation, which is negligible, the revenue is, practically, all profit. The charge for telephone calls was raised in the cities and suburbs to 2d., but we hear of no reduction in that charge. There is scarcely a constituency in which the people are not crying out for increased facilities. The telephone is, no doubt, of the greatest convenience, not only to the city dwellers, but, in the case of trunk lines, to country residents. It is an unwise move at the present juncture to reduce the postage rates; but if a reduction is made, I remind the Government that, while the public get a *quid pro quo* in the service rendered, the emoluments of the men in the Department are not what they ought to be. I now call attention to the position of returned soldiers who were appointed on a six months' probation, and after they had had two years' service, were made permanent employees. On 5th October, 1922, the Public Service Act was amended so as to provide that returned soldiers who had been employed continuously for a period of not less than two years might be permanently appointed without examination if the chief officer certified that their duties had been performed in a satisfactory character, and that those duties were of a nonclerical character. The promise contained in that provision should be honoured in letter and in spirit. Tho service of these men ranges from two to six years, with an average of four years. They are placed on the lowest grade, and their service dates only from their permanent appointment. They suffer much injustice in more ways than one; and I hope that a fair deal will be given to them. They are paid the minimum rate of £132 a year, plus the cost of living allowance of £30, and the basic wage allowance of £12, making a total of £174. Prom this, however, is deducted £1 2s. 5d. per fortnight in respect of two and a half units under the Superannuation Act; and this, of course, reduces their wages very much. They desire thattheir service shall date back to their employment as temporary employees, when they were two or three years younger, thus reducing the amount of their subscriptions to the superannuation fund. This is clearly a justice that should be done before any reduction in the postage rates is sanctioned; and I hope the Postmaster-General will consult the Public Service Board on the matter. This is only another instance of a neglected or half-honoured promise made to returned soldiers. If the Government requires a good Public Service, it must have a satisfied one. I understand that there are some 23,000 returned soldiers thus situated, or who will become so situated as they are made permanent employees, and they ought not to be allowed to suffer what they deem to be a grievance. The only other matter to which I have to refer is connected with a book of poems by an ex-member for Wannon, and a sympathizer with the Labour side, **Mr. J.** K. MacDougall, which has for a long time been held up by the postal authorities. It is said that the matter is in the hands of the Attorney-General; but some explanation should be made by the Government. It is a work breathing fine sentiment right through. I can suggest a reason why this book is under the ban of the Postal Department, inasmuch, as I have said, the author is a sympathizer with the Labour movement. In my opinion, the ordinary taxpayer never expected or desired a reduction in the postage rates, and the Bill is only to placate a certain section of the community, whose interests honorable members opposite naturally represent. {: #subdebate-17-0-s18 .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGRATH:
Ballarat .- I am opposed to this Bill. During the last election campaign Country party candidates gave no indication to the electors that if they obtained possession of the Treasury bench they would reduce the rates of postage. That was the last thing that the people expected of them. It therefore comes as a surprise that the Postmaster-General, who is a member of the Country party, has been induced by vested interests in and about the big cities to introduce this preposterous proposal. It will benefit only " big business " ; the masses of the people in the cities and the country will derive no advantage from it. If the Government can afford to forego £1,000,000 of postal revenue, it could surely afford to pay an extra 2s. 6d. per week to the old-age and invalid pensioners. I hope that the PostmasterGeneral **(Mr. Gibson),** who is not unsympathetic towards the employees, will carry out some of the promises made by his predecessors. One related to semi-official post-offices. Those who are conducting them have to give the whole of their time to postal work, and are not being treated fairly in respect to either salary or holidays. Again and again they have been promised that provision would be made to increase their remuneration and provide them with an annual holiday. I hope that the Postmaster-General will give serious consideration to this very reasonable request, and that during the next twelve months these persons will get a decent holiday on full pay, and that, if possible, arrangements will be made to increase their emoluments. Time does not permit this evening of a general discussion of the grievances of postal employees, but I have a number of complaints that I would like to submit for the consideration of the House. No doubt this Bill will be carried, but I hope that it will not result in a reduction of the payment to officers in the Department. Already an award has been made which has meant a reduction in the wages of linemen. That is very unfair. The Department, though it can be generous to big business interests, is interpreting awards of the Arbitration Court in a manner detrimental to the employees. I refer particularly to assistant sorters. A number of these men in Ballarat are doing the work of sorters, but are not receiving the award rates for that employment. Repeatedly during the time that **Mr. Poynton** was in charge of the Postal Department I drew his attention to the unfairness of the Department's action. The award of the Court provided that certain work would entitle men to a certain rate of pay, but assistant sorters in the country get a lower rate than is paid to assistant sorters in the city. I ask the Postmaster-General to give further consideration to this matter. Question - That the Bill be now read a second time - put. The House divided. AYES: 34 NOES: 24 Majority . . . . 10 AYES NOES Question so resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. *In Committee:* Clause 1 - (Short title and citation.) {: #debate-17-s0 .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGRATH:
Ballarat .- When dealing with theWar Service Homes Bill affecting soldiers' interests, we were practically debarred from debating its provisions or moving necessary amendments, but when it is a question of benefitinga wealthy section of the community, practically unlimited time is allowed. Clause agreed to. Clauses 2 and 3 agreed to. Clause 4 -
Maribyrnong -- The Government must not think that the result of the division on the second reading can be regarded as an indication that a majority of honorable members are in favour of the proposed reduction in postal rates. In order to test the feeling of the Committee I move - >That the figures "1½ ", line 1, second column, be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the figure " 2 ". Even if the amendment is adopted we shall be granting a very liberal rate. The Postmaster-General **(Mr. Gibson)** is not only reducing the letter postage, but is also increasing the weight which may be posted for the minimum charge. When one considers the conditions under which postal employees are working, it is unreasonable to give a sop to a section of the community which does not need assistance. By reducing the postage on letters to 1½d., and. increasing the weight to 1 ounce, we shall benefit the big- business houses chiefly. I have been to considerable trouble to ascertain the bulk of a letter which could be despatched for1½d. under the proposed alteration, and have found that' at least ten sheets of foolscap could be dent. I have not had sufficient time to ascertain the number of sheets that could be sent in a letter weighing half an ounce. The Nationalist section of the composite Ministry has put in this peg for its own supporters, merely because the representatives of the Country party have received certain concessions in connexion with sulphur duties. The PostmasterGeneral, who is now supporting " big business," stated during the election campaign before the last that if he placed a gun on the front steps of Parliament House he could shoot down a good many of the profiteers. But, as pointed out by the honorable member for Kalgoorlie **(Mr. A. Green),** he is now subsidizing these profiteers to the extent of £700,000 per annum. His constituents are not in favour of reduced postage rates, and at a meeting of farmers' wives it was unanimously decided that the 2d. rate should be retained. The Government are not prepared to increase invalid and oldage pensions to 20s. a week, but they are willing to reduce further the expenditure of big business men. {: .speaker-KV8} ##### Mr Stewart: -- Does the honorable member think that the reduction will be passed on? {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr FENTON: -- Increased costs are passed on, but it is very unlikely that consumers will, in this instance, receive any benefit. If the Minister could assure honorable members that a reduction to the extent of £700,000 would be made in the price of commodities in consequence of reduced postal rates, I would support the clause. The PostmasterGeneral knows very well that the bulk of the people of this country will not benefit by the proposed reduction in postage. I am sorry to find him and other members of the so-called Country party allied with the representatives of Flinders-lane in serving up this sop to the big business people. I wish to have a test vote taken to see where honorable members stand. A former PostmasterGeneral, **Mr. Josiah** Thomas, followed a succession of Postmasters-General who tried to reduce the postage rate on letters to1d. He achieved what they had failed to do, and I have the satisfaction of knowing that on that occasion I voted against him. I hope that honorable members on the other side have not pledged themselves in caucus to support the Government's proposal. {: #debate-17-s2 .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN:
Reid .- I desire to support the amendment moved by the honorable member for Maribyrnong **(Mr. Fenton).** I am surprised at the attitude of the Postmaster-General **(Mr. Gibson).** I recognise his ability. and admit that in the administration of his Department he has done his best, and has treated members generally with courtesy. But I am at a loss to understand how he can reconcile his Country party principles with a proposal to reduce postal rates, when there are complaints from all over Australia regarding the limited facilities for telephone communication in both country and suburban areas. I would draw his attention to the fact, that in the outer suburbs of Sydney and elsewhere, there has been a substantial increase in population in recent years, and that the residents of those districts have to depend upon allowance post-offices which are not nearly so satisfactory as permanent post-offices, with permanent staffs. In view of the complaints from country districts, and the pronounced dissatisfaction in the outer suburbs of big cities, I support the amendment. I have had occasion to draw the Minister's attention to the need for improved postal facilities in my electorate, and, although he has provided in the Estimates for the partial construction of four very necessary post-offices as a result of my insistent demands, he, has not provided the full amount required for their completion. In view of the fact that the complaints which I voice seem to be general, I think that any reduction in postal charges at the present moment is unjustified. I warn the Minister and his party of the consequences when they next face the people, who sent them here in the belief that they would legislate in the interests of the country. {: #debate-17-s3 .speaker-JZ9} ##### Mr O'KEEFE:
Denison .- I wish to state three reasons which impel me to support the amendment. I represent a city constituency, where I know that a reduction in postage would probably be a popular move. I support the amendment because I know, in the first place, that many of the postal employees throughout the Commonwealth are not receiving sufficient wages. Many of them could receive an increase, and they would not even then be receiving the basic wage. The second reason is that in the country districts of Australia, with which I was brought into close touch when I represented the whole of my State in another place, the postal facilities are provided. Much has been said to-night about the miserable rates of pay of those persons who are in charge of allowance offices in out-back parts. The third reason is that we members of the Opposition who supported an increase in the rates of invalid and old-age pensions, were told that the Government could not afford to pay it. We moved an amendment to the Estimates which would have had the effect of increasing old-age pensions. Until the Government increase old-age pensions, until the postal employees of Australia are well paid, and until the allowance postmasters and postmistresses in remote parts of Australia receive reasonable remuneration for the work they do, I shall not feel justified in, supporting a proposal to reduce the rate of postage on letters from 2d. to1½d., although I know that such an alteration would be popular in the city electorate which I happen to represent. {: #debate-17-s4 .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr GIBSON:
PostmasterGeneral · Corangamite · CP -- The Government cannot accept the amendment. Australia should keep abreast of the times. As a fact, we are the only country that still has a twopenny rate of postage on letters. Every other country has reverted to the postage that it had in pre-war days, or, at least, has come down a step towards it. The proposed rate of1½d. per oz. in Australia compares with1½d. per 2 ozs. in the United Kingdom,1½d. per oz. in Canada,1d. per oz. in the United States of America, and1½d. per oz. in New Zealand. We are still 50 per cent. above the pre-war rates of postage, because in those days we had penny postage. Honorable members seem to think that, in order to reduce the rate from 2d. to 1½d., we shall have to curtail some of the postal and telephone facilities. That fear is not well grounded. If we were to apply the whole of the profits of the Post Office to the extension of those facilities, we could only do so to the extent of £200,000 a year; but, as honorable members know, the postal revenue must under the Constitution. be paid into the Consolidated Revenue of the country. We spent £2,000,000 last year; we shall spend £4,000,000 this year, and we propose to spend £3,000,000 next year on improving the services of the Department. I assure honorable members that there will be no curtailment of the privileges of the country. I hope that the honorable member will withdraw his amendment, and so let us keep abreast of other countries. **Mr.** e. . riley (South Sydney) [11.21]. - I am prepared to vote for the amendment. The big business houses, such as banking companies and insurance companies, will reap the largest benefit from the proposed rate. The Postal Department renders a great service now for 2d. ' It is, in fact, the cheapest service rendered in the community. It is unthinkable that we should remit postal charges amounting to £1,000,000 while we have such a heavy national debt to carry. There is no great clamour for this reduction. I have not been approached by one business man in Sydney to vote for it. I admit that the PostmasterGeneral is doing the best he can in existing circumstances to provide communication facilities for the country, but I- must also admit that up to date I have not obtained many bricks for post-offices. I have had a number of nice letters from him, but they are not bricks and mortar. Under present conditions the Committee should keep to the 2d. postage rate. {: #debate-17-s5 .speaker-K88} ##### Mr CUNNINGHAM:
Gwydir -- I am in agreement with that part of the amendment which fixes the rate of 2d. for an ounce; but as we have talked for a considerable time in Australia about getting back to pre-war conditions, I think the time has arrived for us to return to the Id. postage rate for -J-oz. letters. Some honorable members say that we should make the post-office pay. I do not agree with that, because the post-office is a developmental service. A minimum charge of 2d. for letters is too heavy. Some of my colleagues : do not agree with that view, but I stress it. One penny is enough for ordinary people to have to pay for -oz. letters. The postage rate on ordinary correspondence has gone up 100 per cent, since the Labour party went out of office. While we can afford to provide millions of pounds for expenditure on an. obsolete defence system, there should be no necessity for us to compel people to pay 2d. on ordinary letters. I think there should be a Id. rate for -J-oz. letters. It would be in the interests of the poorer sections of the community, and would - also benefit the com mercial community. Thousands of small business men in the country would post their accounts if the rate were only Id. Our policy should be to do the greatest good to the greatest number. Any loss in the Postal Department should be made good out of Consolidated Revenue. I believe that unbridled expenditure is being incurred in various Departments, and that a proper discussion of- the Estimates would have brought this fact to light. I consider that there is too great a difference in the weight of letters to justify us fixing a 'mini mum 2d. rate. The ordinary letter which honorable members receive from their constituents consists of two sheets. People in the country rarely write letters larger than that. It has been pointed out to-night that ten sheets of ordinary paper and an envelope weigh hardly 1 oz. It would be much fairer to provide a Id. rate for 1/2-oz. letters, and a lid. rate for J-oz. letters, and a rate of 2d. for letters up to 1 oz. That could be tried for twelve months, and if the loss in the Postal Department was too great, we could readjust the charges next session. {: .speaker-KJM} ##### Mr Jackson: -- It would require a staff of clerks to weigh the letters. {: .speaker-K88} ##### Mr CUNNINGHAM: -- A large staff is employed in the Defence Department to-day to do practically nothing. {: .speaker-JRH} ##### Mr Bowden: -- Rubbish! {: .speaker-K88} ##### Mr CUNNINGHAM: -- The Minister cannot justify the existence of that Department. The salaries of the higher officials are responsible for the enormous expenditure. My amendment would be i *a* the interests of the Post and Telegraph Department itself. Only in the direction of a reduction in the wages of the workers have honorable members opposite shown a desire to return to pre-war conditions. While I do not disagree with the amendment of the honorable member for Maribyrnong **(Mr. Fenton)** - I consider the charge should be Id. for ^ oz. - I hope that my proposal will be accepted. {: #debate-17-s6 .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa .- I support the amendment of the honorable member for Maribyrnong **(Mr. Fenton).** The Government has pushed this measure forward with indecent haste, but it has not brought in the promised Bill to increase the invalid and old-age pensions. I desire to know when it intends to bring the latter Bill down ? Question - That the amendment (Mr. Fenton's) be agreed to - put. The Committee divided. AYES: 20 NOES: 33 Majority 13 AYES NOES Question so resolved in the negative. Amendment negatived. Amendment (by **Mr. Cunningham)** proposed - That the words " lid. per ounce," . line 3, second column, be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words "Id. per 4 oz., 2d. per 1 oz." {: #debate-17-s7 .speaker-JWN} ##### Mr F FRANCIS:
HENTY, VICTORIA · IND NAT; NAT from 1922 .- I sincerely hope the Government will see the wisdom of accepting the amendment. In view of. the lengthy debate upon this measure it is hardly necessary that I should take up the time of the Committee. I intend to support the amendment, because I believe in the principle of Id. postage. Amendment negatived. {: #debate-17-s8 .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter .- I move - >That after the words " 8 ounces " (rates for magazines), the words " £d. per 4 ozs. or part of 4 ozs." be added. This is the amendment which I indicated when I had to give way to a prior amendment. It relates to the postage on magazines; reviews, and other publications wholly set up and printed in Australia. The Government proposal is to charge Id. per 8 oz., or part of 8 oz. This will be a very heavy impost upon quite a "number of smaller magazines, such as the one I hold in my hand, entitled *The Safety Valve,* published by the Federated Engine Drivers' and Firemen's Association of Australasia. I have been assured by the publishers that they paid £22 in postage upon the last issue. Obviously it is unfair to charge the same rate for these small magazines as for the larger publications like the *Australian Industrial and Mining Standard.* If the Postmaster-General cannot see his way to accept the amendment, perhaps he could allow the smaller magazines to be posted in bulk. This concession is allowed to newspapers. {: #debate-17-s9 .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr GIBSON:
PostmasterGeneral · Corangamite · CP -- I should like to accept the amendment, but the honorable member will see that its adoption would affect the schedule relating to printed papers. "We are endeavouring to keep the whole schedule in unison and to do away with certain anomalies. If magazines such as that to which the honorable member refers, were registered as newspapersand this could be done by the insertion of certain news - they would come under the same postage rates as newspapers. I am sorry that I cannot accept the amendment. {: #debate-17-s10 .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN:
Reid .- I direct the attention of the PostmasterGeneral to the fact that a special rate is provided in the postal regulations for magazines, and that an alteration in that rate will not affect the schedule as he suggests. I speak with some experience in this matter, having been associated with trade unions, that publish papers quarterly or halfyearly, which come within the category of magazines. The Government, in the interest of education, should agree to the amendment. If anything, it will have the effect of increasing rather than of decreasing the revenue, because it will encourage the issue of such publications. Quite a number of organizations would issue publications of an educational character at present if they had cheaper postal facilities. I cannot understand the attitude of the Minister. The rates for newspapers are specially low, in order to encourage the dissemination of knowledge. The same principle should be applied to the magazine rates. {: #debate-17-s11 .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa -- It appears to me that the PostmasterGeneral **(Mr. Gibson)** has made up his mind not to accept any amendment, no matter how reasonable it may be. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- I would accept the amendment if I could, but I cannot. {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI: -- When the Leader of the Opposition moved this amendment, the Postmaster-General immediately said that printed matter, papers and other publications would be involved. When he was shown that that was not so, but that magazines and similar publications came under a different section, he said they were charged a reasonable rate. When one excuse will not hold good, he immediately finds another. That is not the treatment which we on this side should receive. I realize that the amendment will be lost, although if carried it would assist education and allow the smaller publications to grow. I suppose that that is against the policy of the Government; it desires to prevent the smaller publications from circulating amongst the people. If they did so, they might conflict with the interests of the larger publications. Question- That the words proposed to be added be so added - put. The Committee divided. AYES: 14 NOES: 32 Majority .. ..18 AYES NOES Question so resolved in the negative. Amendment negatived. , {: #debate-17-s12 .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong -- I have had difficulty in connexion with trade union journals in obtaining a definition of a newspaper. I should like an assurance from the PostmasterGeneral **(Mr. Gibson)** that the journals issued by farmers' organizations, rural associations, or trade unions, can be sent as newspapers at the rates prescribed. A journal I have in my mind is one that has been existent for forty years, and only a few weeks ago was challenged as a newspaper. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- Only challenged. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr FENTON: -- The journal was held up for a considerable time, and it required three members of Parliament to convince some of the postal officials that it was one that ought not to be challenged. The words "as prescribed" sometimes prejudicially affect very deserving newspapers, as they may be called, issued by associations. These journals are usually issued for the information of members of an association, organization, or union, and I do not see why they should not pay the same rates as those enjoyed by the giant daily newspapers. I hope the Minister will turn a liberal eye in the direction of these publications. {: .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr Gibson: -- The honorable member may expect a liberal interpretaton of the regulations. Clause agreed to. Title agreed to. Bill reported without amendment; report adopted. Motion (by **Mr. Gibson)** put - >That the Billbe read a third time. The House divided. AYES: 33 NOES: 21 Majority ... ... 12 AYES NOES {: .page-start } page 2837 {:#debate-18} ### HOUR OF MEETING {: #debate-18-s0 .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr bruce:
Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT [12.9]. - I move- That the House, at its rising, adjourn until 11a.m. to-day. Honorable members may desire a later hour of meeting, but when they realize that the earlier hour of meeting enables us to adjournso early as this, they will, I think, accept the motion. {: #debate-18-s1 .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter -- The House has been sitting today for thirteen hours and ten minutes, andI enter my protest against the proposal of the Prime Minister to bring honorable members back at 11 o'clock this morning. Question put. The House divided. AYES: 33 NOES: 21 Majority ... 12 AYES NOES Question so resolved in the affirmative. {: .page-start } page 2837 {:#debate-19} ### ADJOURNMENT {:#subdebate-19-0} #### Gratuity to Australian Seamen Motion (by **Mr. Bruce)** proposed - >That the House do now adjourn. Mr.lacey (Grey) [12.17 a.m.]. - i do not apologize for detaining the House, notwithstanding the lateness of the hour, because honorable members have no other opportunity to bring under the notice of Ministers matters of great importance in which they are interested. In the initial stages of this session I asked the following questions: - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is it the intention of the Government to pay a war gratuity to all Australian seamen who suffered loss through the submarine campaign while serving on Australian ships? 1. Is it the intention of the Government to pay a war gratuity to all Australian seamen who, while serving on British ships,suffered any loss through the submarine campaign? 2. Is the British Government paying a gratuity toseamen who have suffered loss through the submarine campaign? The answers given by the Treasurer were - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. No. 1. No. 2. No. I am informed, however, that, under the war risks scheme formulated by the British Board of Trade, pensions were paid in respect of British seamen who were incapacitated or killed as the result of enemy action. If I am able to obtain more definite information on this matter at a later date, I shall advise the honorable member. Since then I have received the following letter: - >REPATRIATION CLAIMS DEPARTMENT (BOARD OF TRADE). > >Cornwall House, Stamford-street, {:#subdebate-19-1} #### London, S.E.1, 26th June, 1923 **Sir, -Iam** directed to refer to your letter of 25th February, addressed to the RegistrarGeneral of Shipping and Seamen, and transmitted to this Department for attention. In reply, I am to inform you that in August, 1921, a Royal Commission (The Royal Commission for Suffering and Damage by Enemy Action) was appointed to consider cases in which there is a moral claim by British nationals, other than those belonging to parts of the Empire to which a separate share of reparation receipts has been allotted, for compensation for suffering and damage arising out of the acts of the enemy during the war within Annex 1 to Part VIII. of the Treaty of Versailles, and to make recommendations as to the distribution of a sum of not more than £6,000,000 out of the first receipt on account of reparation allotted to the Exchequer of the United Kingdom in ex gratia payments to such persons. This Royal Commisssion in due course, when they were of the opinion that ample time had been given for lodging or proper and *bond fide* claims announced by advertisement in the papers that their lists would be closed on the 15th February, 1922, and at the end of the year a further advertisement was published, fixing a closing date for cases of whioh they had been notified to some Department or other in sufficient time, had not been supplied with the necessary particulars. But to prevent injustice by a too rigid enforcement of these dates, the Commission have reserved to themselves power to admit special cases where exceptional circumstances pf excuse for delay in lodging them are proved to their satisfaction. If there are any exceptionable circumstances of excuse for delay in your case, you are therefore requested to furnish the Department, within four months of the date of this letter, with particulars of any suchcircumstances, and of the evidence available in support of any material facts. In default of your furnishing such particulars within the time mentioned, it will be assumed that this special provision for the examination of belated claims does not apply in your case. I am, **Sir. (Signed)** W. NEILL, Controller. I wish the Treasurer to give consideration to the facts contained in that letter concerning the payment of a war gratuity to seamen who suffered loss in consequence of the submarine campaign. It must be apparent to the Minister that many of these men made a greater sacrifice and suffered more than some soldiers to whom the gratuity was paid. Question resolved in the affirmative. House adjourned at 12.23 a.m. (Thursday).
Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 15 August 1923, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1923/19230815_reps_9_105/>.