View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives
28 May 1924

9^th Parliament · 2^nd Session

CANNED FRUIT BOUNTY BILL
LOAN BILL
BANKRUPTCY BILL
MINISTER FOR TRADE AND CUSTOMS
- Resignation of Mr. Austin Chapman
QUESTION
- NAMING OF SHIPS
QUESTION
- HOUSEHOLD LETTER-BOXES
QUESTION
- NEW GUINEA
QUESTION
- MINISTER FOR HEALTH
QUESTION
- AUSTRALIAN BAND
QUESTION
- SENATOR WILSON
LOAN FLOTATION
QUESTION
- NATIVES IN NEW GUINEA
QUESTION
- PUBLICITY OFFICER
QUESTION
- MILITARY TRAINING CAMPS
QUESTION
- MELBOURNE-HOBART STEAMSHIP SERVICE
QUESTION
- COCKATOO ISLAND DOCKYARD
QUESTION
- WIRE NETTING
QUESTION
- JUTE GOODS
QUESTION
- OIL EXPLORATION IN NEW GUINEA
QUESTION
- AUSTRALIAN MARBLE
QUESTION
- CONSTRUCTION OF SUBMAKINES
QUESTION
- TENDERS FOR LOCOMOTIVES
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH BANK
QUESTION
- WAR SERVICE HOMES
QUESTION
- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF PENSIONS, QUEENSLAND
QUESTION
- UNITED STATES SOLDIERS
POSTAL DEPARTMENT
- Examinations for Telephonists
QUESTION
- IMPORTATION OF SHOVELS AND SPADES
QUESTION
- COCKATOO ISLAND DOCKYARD
COMMONWEALTH LINE OF STEAMERS
- Bay Steamers: Cost of Repairs
SHIPBUILDING TRIBUNAL
COMMONWEALTH BANK, MELBOURNE
PAPERS
NORTHERN TERRITORY CROWN LANDS BILL
NAVAL CONSTRUCTION BILL
DEFENCE EQUIPMENT BILL
ADJOURNMENT
- Soldiers Committee - Japan and U.S.A. : “ Herald “ Cartoon

Mr. Speaker (Rt. Hon. W. A. Watt) tookthe chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 914

CANNED FRUIT BOUNTY BILL

Assent reported.

page 914

LOAN BILL

Message recommending appropriation reported.

page 914

BANKRUPTCY BILL

Bill received from, the Senate and (on motion by Sir Littleton Groom) read a first time.

page 914

MINISTER FOR TRADE AND CUSTOMS

Resignation of Mr. Austin Chapman

Mr BRUCE:
Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT

– It is with very great regret, which I am sure will be shared by all honorable members, that I have to announce that the honorable member for Eden-Monaro (Mr. Austin Chapman) has, owing to the state of his health, felt compelled to ask me to submit his resignation as Minister for Trade and Customs to the Governor-General, who has accepted it. I am glad to be able to say that, while the honorable gentleman has taken this course at the suggestion of his medical adviser, his present state of health is not such as to cause alarm to his friends.

Honorable Members. - Hear, hear!

Mr BRUCE:

– He has taken this course only because his medical adviser has told him that, in the interests of his health, it is essential that he should not continue to carry the very heavy burden of high office which he has borne for so long. We all recognize the great services which the honorable gentleman has rendered to Australia throughout his parliamentary career, and all sincerely hope that he may long be spared to continue a1’ member of ‘Hhib House and’ ‘assist “us with’ his counsel and knowledge. “

Honorable Members. - Hear, hear!

Mr BRUCE:

– For the present, the Attorney-General (Sir Littleton Groom) will act as Minister for Trade and Customs, and will answer in this House questions with which the Department is concerned.

page 914

QUESTION

NAMING OF SHIPS

Mr MARKS:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Last year, I brought under the notice of the Prime Minister the fact that the 12,000-ton ship which was then being launched at Cockatoo Island Dock was to bear the name Fordsdale. This greatly incensed the people of New South Wales. I understand that next week the second of these magnificent ships is to be launched, and is to bear the name “Ferndale.” Representatives of newspapers saw me during the week-end, and suggested that I should ask the Prime Minister whether it is not possible to find typical Australian names which these magnificent ships might bear. The second question I was requested to ask was whether the new ship might be launched on a Saturday afternoon, in order that the general public might witness the- launching. The third point raised by those who interviewed me was whether a committee of citizens-

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! The honorable member is making a speech, not asking a question.

Mr MARKS:

– I am sorry; but I do not see how I can frame my questions in any other way.

Mr SPEAKER:

– I cannot allow them in the form which the honorable member has adopted.

Mr MARKS:

– The third question which . I wish to ask the Prime Minister is whether a committee of citizens might he formed to see that proper names for these ships are allotted to -them ?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– The naming of these ships has received very careful consideration, and I shall give the honorable member the fullest information as to what led to the adoption of the present names. With regard to the second question, suggesting the postponement of the date of launching from the 12th to the 14th of next month, I will have the matter looked into, and will see , whether action can be taken, in. that direction. In his third question the’ honorable member asked that a committee of citizens should be created to determine what the names of these ships should be. The Government do not see their way to accede to that request,

page 915

QUESTION

HOUSEHOLD LETTER-BOXES

Mr E RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– I ask the Minister representing the Postmaster-General whether this House will be given an opportunity to discuss the order which has been issued, that every householder must provide a letter-box at his dwelling? This order may involve great hardship and injustice upon people who are only tenants of the houses in which they live.

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:
Attorney-General · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · NAT

– I will inform the Acting Postmaster-General of the objection raised by the honorable member to . the order referred to, and will ask him to give consideration to his complaint.

page 915

QUESTION

LOAN FLOTATION

Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · Cowper · CP

– (By leave.) - The loan of £10,000,000 which was issued in London on the 20th May, is to be used partly to pay off £5,000,000 of Treasury bills issued by the Commonwealth in London on the 1st of April last, and partly to provide funds for carrying out the programme of developmental works which the Government now have in hand and which were approved by Parliament when the last Budget was dealt with. The loan carries interest at 5 per cent, per annum, and was issued at par. The yield to the investor will therefore be exactly 5 per cent, per annum. The date of maturity is the 1st of June, 1945; but the Commonwealth Government have the option of redeeming the loan on or before the 1st of June, 1935, on giving three months’ notice. The terms of the loan were fixed after very careful consideration by the Government, and after consultation with the Commonwealth’s financial advisers in London. They are better than those of any of the loans floated by the Commonwealth or the States in London during the last financial year, all of which were floated at a discount. , The loan moneys secured by.this issue are to be spent in Australia, but the -Government do not propose actually to transfer any of the money from London to Australia. The Treasury has considerable revenue moneys on hand in Australia, and will transfer portion of these from the Revenue Account to the Loan Account, and, at the same time, transfer from the Loan Account to the Revenue Account the cash received in London. The London cash will thus become available to meet oar revenue commitments in London, whilst the cash in Australia will be available for carrying out the loan programme of developmental works here. The flotation of the loan does not create any exchange difficulty for the Commonwealth, which will not.be faced with the task of actually transferring cash from London to Australia.

Mr CHARLTON:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Is the £5,000,000, which the Treasurer says will provide funds for carrying out the Government’s programme of developmental work, to be spent upon immigration?

Dr EARLE PAGE:

– The money raised by this loan is part of the £18,000,000 authorized in the last Loan Bill, to be spent upon postal and other works, as well as immigration.

Mr.WEST. - Have the Government -taken steps to raise the loan through the Commonwealth Bank or has it been raised through the stock-broking firm of Sir John Nivison and Company?

Dr EARLE PAGE:

– The Commonwealth Bank is the Government’s bank.

page 916

MELBOURNE-HOBART STEAMSHIP SERVICE

Mr O’KEEFE:
DENISON, TASMANIA

– Will the Government try to arrange with the shipping company at present trading between Melbourne and Tasmania to have the s.s. Nairana - which is used in the summer months only, and is not at present in. commission - run a service once a week from Melbourne to Hobart and back? I would like this done as soon as possible, particularly because the service between Melbourne and Launceston is being continually delayed by heavy fogs, and the delays cause a great amount of inconvenience and extra expense to passengers who have occasion to travel at this time of the year to the southern part of Tasmania.

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– I shall ascertain what the position is, and whether there is any possibility of the arrangement being made which is suggested by the honorable member.

page 916

QUESTION

COCKATOO ISLAND DOCKYARD

Mr MAHONY:
DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Is it the intention of the Government to re-transfer the dockyard at Cockatoo Island to the Naval Board?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– I have no knowledge of any such intention.

page 917

QUESTION

WIRE NETTING

Mr FENTON:
for Dr. Maloney

asked the Acting Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

When was the money for wire netting made available to the various States <by the Commonwealth Government ?
Have continual representations been made to the Government referring to the continued delay in forwarding the farmers’ applications to him or his Department?
In view of the wheat being planted, will he urge the Government of Western Australia to stimulate their Departments so that the generous help of the Commonwealth will be in time to mitigate the ravages of rabbits?

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:
NAT

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

The sum allotted to each State has been available since the 19th July last, but no application has yet been received for an advance except from Queensland.
Representations have been made to all the States concerned.
There is no occasion to do this, as applications are now coining forward from Western Australia.

page 917

QUESTION

JUTE GOODS

Mr HILL:
ECHUCA, VICTORIA

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

In view of the high cost of potato and new season’s corn sacks, will he have inquiries made as to (a) the f.o.b. price of same at port of shipment, ( b ) the landed pricec.i.f . e. at various Australian ports (c) prices askedby distributors in the various States?
If it be shown that unfair profits are being made, will he take action to protect the interests of the primary producers of the Commonwealth?
Has the jute harvest been a normal one; if- so, what is the reason for the increase in the price of sacks?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– The information desired by the honorable member is not at present available, and will take some time to collate. I am having inquiries made, and will advise him of the result as early as possible.

page 917

QUESTION

OIL EXPLORATION IN NEW GUINEA

Mr BLAKELEY:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice-r-

Is it a fact that a Commonwealth geological party, in 1916, discovered a seepage of oil on the Wakip River, inland from Matapu, New Guinea, and that several gallons of crude oil were collected from the surface of the water ?
Is it a fact that Captain Mcintosh brought many gallons of crude oil to Melbourne from this source?
Is it a fact that the geologists of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company, operating onbehalf of the British and Australian Governments, visited this seepage, and neither bored nor explored this particular locality, but went to other less likely localities in their search?
Is it a fact that the geologists of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company located an anticline and favorable strata on the Linihok River, which are almost certain to produce oil, and that such geologists have made no mention, of this anticline in their reports to the Commonwealth and British Governments?
Is it a fact that the Anglo-Persian Oil Company’s geological party discovered favorable oil conditions inland from Smein and at the village of Ulau, and that when the party returned to Melbourne, an unfavorable report was presented to the Commonwealth Government. Moreover, that although additional surveys were recommended, no further action was taken by the geologists?
Is it a fact that the Government are notsatisfied with the reports of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company’s officers?
Is it a fact that the Anglo-Persian Oil Company has an agreement with the Commonwealth Oil. Refineries Limited (in which the Commonwealth Government have a half interest) by which the Anglo-Persian Oil Company agrees to supply the refinery with crude oil from its Persian oil wells until such time as oil is discovered by its officers acting for the Commonwealth Government in New Guinea? ‘
Has a private syndicate been given oil leases of much of the country which was explored and condemned by the Anglo-Persian geologists ?
Will he appoint a special committee of inquiry, or instruct the Public Accounts Committee to make an investigation of the operations of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company’s geologists in New Guinea in their search for oil? 10. (a.) How many oil leases have been* granted in New Guinea; (b) What is the areaof such leases; (c) To whom have such leasesbeen granted?
Have such leases been surveyed by theAngloPersian Oil Company’s geologists, and, if so, what report was made in connexion with the leases?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

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

Yes.
Eight bottles containing samples of oil from the Wakip River were brought to Melbourne. .
The geologists made a thorough survey of the area and reported that, while small quantities of oil could probably be obtained at shallow depth by drilling into the fault planes, they were of opinion that such operations would probably not repay outlay and working costs, and, consequently, a test well was not recommended. 4 and 5. The report of the geologists in regard to Linihok and Smein states that the stratigraphic and structural conditions of these areas are definitely unfavorable for oil prospects. No additional surveys of these areas were recommended.
I am unaware of an)’ reason for dissatisfaction with the reports of Anglo-Persian Oil Company’s officers.
No. The Commonwealth has an agreement with the Anglo-Persian Oil Company by which that company agrees . to supply crude oil to the Commonwealth oil refineries until indigenous oil is available to the Commonwealth.
Some of the areas which were reported upon and condemned by the Anglo-Persian geologists have been included in licences to prospect for mineral oil and coal granted to private companies.
I am unaware of any reasons for the necessity for an investigation into the operations of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company’s geologists in New Guinea.
No oil leases have been granted. If this question is intended to relate to oil prospecting licences the answers are as follow : - (a)Eight.
1. Approximately 1,000 square miles each. The Wapik River Prospecting and Mining Company has only 650 square miles.
2. (1) Mandated Development Company.
1. Colonial Exploration and’ Development Syndicate.
2. North-West Pacific Oil Development Company. (4.) New Guinea Oil Development Company.
3. Wapik River Prospecting and Mining Company.
4. Astrolabe Oil Development Company Limited.
5. Huon Gulf Mining and Development Company.
6. Kudukudu Mining and Development Company
See answers to 8 and 10.

page 918

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN MARBLE

Mr FORDE:

asked the Minister for Works and Railways, upon notice -

Whether the Government will see that Australian marble is used exclusively wherever practicable in the erection of the Federal Capital at Canberra?
Will the Government see that the claims of the Central Queensland marble industry for a share of the supply of marble for that purpose will receive favorable consideration?

Mr STEWART:
Minister for Works and Railways · WIMMERA, VICTORIA · CP

– With the exception of minor items, all materials used in the construction of buildings carried out by the Public Works officers of my Department are of Australian origin and manufacture. When the use of such material is contemplated the marble offering from Central Queensland will receive due consideration.

page 918

QUESTION

CONSTRUCTION OF SUBMAKINES

Artisans Sent to England

Mr C RILEY:
COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP; FLP from 1931

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

How many artisans have been dispatched by the Government to Great Britain since 1913 to gain experience in the construction of submarines, T.B. destroyers, and cruisers?
What was the total cost incurred by the Government in dispatching t.Viu artisans and maintaining them whilst absent from the Commonwealth?
For how long were the services of these specially trained artisans retained by the Commonwealth after their return from Great Britain, and how many are still employed by the Government at Cockatoo and elsewhere ?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

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

In May, 1910, ten artisans were sent to Great Britain to gain experience in submarine construction.
£5,767.
The construction of submarines was not undertaken at Cockatoo Island, and some of. the men resigned after varying periods of service. Three are still employed at Cockatoo Island.

page 918

QUESTION

TENDERS FOR LOCOMOTIVES

oodnadatta-Q uorn railway.

Mr GABB:
ANGAS, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister for Works and Railways, upon notice -

What were the grounds upon which the tender of the successful tenderer for engines for the Oodnadatta-Quorn railway was accepted in preference to that of the Perry Engineering Company, seeing that the accepted tender was £550 per engine higher than that of the Perry Engineering Company?

Mr STEWART:
CP

– I regret that a wrong impression was created by the answer to the honorable member’s question of the 23rd instant. The Australian tenders were as follow: - Thompson and Company Proprietary Limited, Castle- maine, £136,400; Perry Engineering Company, £.143,472; Walkers Limited, £147,896. The difference in price per engine between the tender submitted by the Perry Engineering Company and that of Thompson and Company Proprietary Limited is £505.

page 919

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH BANK

Interest on Current Accounts.

Mr FENTON:
for Mr. A. Green

asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

Willhe, in accordance with his promise of the . 1st August last, state what is the result of his submission to the Acting Governor of the Commonwealth Bank of the following questions, asked on that day by the honorable member for Kalgoorlie, viz: -

Is it- a fact that a banking company has started business in Melbourne and Sydney which allows interest on current accounts?

In order to keep abreast of progressive banking methods, is he prepared to give the same system a trial in the Commonwealth Bank?

Dr EARLE PAGE:
CP

– As promised, the suggestion to allow interest on current accounts was submitted for the consideration of the Acting Governor of the Commonwealth Bank, but he has not advised me as to his views on the matter.

page 919

QUESTION

WAR SERVICE HOMES

Plans Supplied by Messrs Kirkpatrick.

Mr FENTON:
for Dr. Maloney

asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

How many buildings were erected by the Commonwealth Bank in accordance with the Kirk-pa trick 2,892 separate sets of plans?
How many buildings or erections were supervised by the said firm?

Dr EARLE PAGE:
CP

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

1,874 buildings, and, in addition, 1,018 homes were not completed or the contracts for them were cancelled.
All those referred to in answer 1.

page 919

QUESTION

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF PENSIONS, QUEENSLAND

Mr FORDE:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

Whether a permanent appointment has yet been made to the position of Deputy Commissioner for Pensions for Queensland?
If not, ‘when will this appointment be made, and who is to be the appointee?

Dr EARLE PAGE:
CP

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

No.
The matter is now under consideration.

page 919

QUESTION

UNITED STATES SOLDIERS

Mr FENTON:
for Dr. Maloney

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Is it a fact that a large sum of money has been voted by the United States Congress for the benefit of the soldiers of the late war?
Will he cable for full particulars^ re the treatment of soldiers of the United States in the great war, with particulars of pension, life insurances, monetary assistance, land settlement, &c?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

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

No official information is available, but it is understood from the cabled reports which have appeared in the press that a bonus has been voted to United States ex-soldiers of the nature of the war gratuity which was granted to Australian ex-soldiers in 1920.
Arrangements are being made to obtain the information.

page 919

POSTAL DEPARTMENT

Examinations for Telephonists

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– On the 21st May, 1 promised the honorable member for Newcastle (Mr. Watkins) to have inquiries made regarding the position of telephonists who may have been employed in a temporary capacity for long periods, and who have passed an examination for permanent . appointment but have failed to secure such appointment. The Public Service Board has now advised me as follows : -

Under the Public Service Regulations successful candidates, at entrance examinations, are eligible for appointment for a period of eighteen months, and the published conditions of the examination contain an intimation to that effect. This is a necessary limitation. The number of permanent appointments made is limited by requirements, and the provision made by Parliament. The fact that a successful candidate has , been fortunate enough to obtain temporary employment does not affect the question of permanent appointment in the order of passing of the prescribed examination.

page 919

QUESTION

IMPORTATION OF SHOVELS AND SPADES

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:
NAT

– On the the 23rd May the honorable member for Forrest (Mr. Prowse) for the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Gregory) asked the Minister for Trade and Customs the following questions: -

What quantity of shovels and spades was imported into Australia during the’ year 1922-23?
How many were imported from Great Britain?
How many were imported from foreign ports?
Prior to 1919, is there anything on record to justify the statement that shovels, as tools of trade, were admitted, duty free, from Great Britain, and with 10 per cent. Customs duty if of foreign origin, because they were not being manufactured in Australia; if so, when and by whom were they so admitted?

I am now able to furnish the honorable member with the following information : -

The Statistics record “Value” only in this Item. The value of shovels and spades imported in 1022-23 was £40,244.
From Great Britain the importations were valued at £35,001.
From other countries the importations were valued at £5,243.
Shovels appeared in the Tool of Trade List in the first Federal Tariff of 1902, and were then free of duty. In the Customs Tariff, 1 903, the item of Tools of Trade was made subject to by-laws, and shovels were placed under the by-law. It is understood that the question of their inclusion in the list came up for review in connexion with the 1908 Tariff, but no papers on the subject are now available. The statement referred to in the question is based on the underlying principle of the Department that goods are not placed under the by-law items of the Tariff if they are being made commercially in Australia, and that they will be removed from such by-laws if it can be proved that they are being manufactured in this country.

page 920

QUESTION

COCKATOO ISLAND DOCKYARD

General Manager’s Motor Garage

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– On the 15th May the honorable member for Cook (Mr. C. Riley) asked the following question: -

Whether he will ascertain the cost of the general manager’s motor garage, Cockatoo Island, by causing an examination to be made of the job cards headed “ G.M.’s Motor Oarage,” the total cost of same being charged rup to a standing job number for offices and “buildings?

As the result of further inquiries, I am now able to inform the honorable member that there is no trace of the job cards referred to by him, nor have any of the foremen at Cockatoo, who would have been employed in the construction, any knowledge of work being carried out by Cockatoo Island men at King Lane, Balmain. The owner of the garage referred to states that Mr. King Salter hired the building from him for a period during the year 1915, and that certain improvements were effected in that year at his (the owner’s) expense and by his own workmen.

page 920

COMMONWEALTH LINE OF STEAMERS

Bay Steamers: Cost of Repairs

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– On the 15th May the honorable member for Cook (Mr. C. Riley) asked what money has been spent on repairs and alterations to each “Bay” boat of the Commonwealth Line since being taken over from the builders. I am now in receipt of the following advice from the Australian Commonwealth Shipping Board: -

The amount of money which has been spent on repairs and alterations on the “ Bay “ steamers, since ‘taking over from the builders, is as follows: -

Where complete accounts have not been received from branches, &c, estimates have been made of the approximate amount which would be expended to date and included in the above figures.

page 920

SHIPBUILDING TRIBUNAL

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– On the 7th May the’ honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Mahony) asked that the decisions of the Shipbuilding Tribunal, subsequent to March, 1921, should be printed for the information of the various unions connected with the shipbuilding industry. I promised to look into the matter with a view to meeting the wishes of the honorable member if possible. I am now able to inform the honorable member that action is being taken to have all the decisions of the Tribunal, subsequent to March, 1921, printed, and it is expected that copies will be available at an early date.

page 920

COMMONWEALTH BANK, MELBOURNE

Dr EARLE PAGE:
CP

– On the 16th May the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) asked me whether I would consult with the Acting Governor of the Commonwealth Bank, regarding the advisability of having a formal opening of the new bank premises in Collinsstreet, so that the public might have an opportunity of viewing the building. The suggestion was conveyed to the Acting Governor who, in a written reply, said -

It is intended to invite the public to view the building when completed, which it is thought would be fairer to the general public than inviting a selected few to a formal opening. Arrangements have been made for the opening to receive full press publicity.

page 921

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Lands Acquisition Act - Land acquired at -

Bunyip, Victoria; - for Postal purposes.

Invermay, Tasmania - for Postal purposes.

Mount Hawthorn, Western Australia - for

Postal purposes.

North Norwood, South Australia - for Postal purposes.

War Service Homes Act - Land acquired at Coogee, New South Wales.

page 921

NORTHERN TERRITORY CROWN LANDS BILL

Debate resumed from 23rd May (vide page 913), on motion by Mr. Atkinson -

That this Bill be now read a second time.

Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt:
BALACLAVA, VICTORIA

– Before the honorable member for the Northern Territory (Mr. Nelson) continues his remarks, I should like to make one observation for his guidance and for the guidance of the House. It will be within the recollection of the House that the Standing Orders were suspended on Friday last to enable the honorable member to have extended time, and at the conclusion of that day’s sitting, he was given leave to continue his speech on the resumption of the debate. I have investigated the history of this procedure in the rulings of previous Speakers, with the object of determining how much longer the honorable member is entitled to speak. I have found no very definite rule, but the last occasion on which -this matter was dealt with was when the late Speaker (Sir Elliot Johnson) ruled, By suggestion and by enforcement, that an honorable member who had had his time extended could speak only for double the period allowed by the Standing Orders, which, on the motion for the second reading of a Bill, is 65 minutes. On that occasion, when the honorable member whose time had been extended had spoken for double the time allowed by the Standing Orders, he was ordered by Mr. Speaker to conclude his remarks, and the speech terminated. Having no other guidance, I shall feel obliged to continue to enforcethat ruling until the House sees fit to determine otherwise. The honorable member for the Northern Territory has now 33 minutes left to him.

Mr NELSON:
Northern Territory

– In view of your ruling, Mr. Speaker, I shall have to speak fast to conclude my remarks within thetime allowed. In the first place, I should like to reply to the following statement, which appeared in last Saturday’s Sun. It was made by the Minister for Home and Territories (Senator Pearce), whom I am pleased to see present in one of thegalleries this afternoon - “ It would be a great advantage to Mr.. Nelson,” said Senator Pearce, with gentle, sarcasm, “ if he had read and understood the. Bill before talking about it.”

I can afford to ignore that statement. I shall leave it to honorable members to say whether I understand the subject. Regarding my complaint that I was unable to interview him when this Bill was in preparation, the Minister said that he had adhered to every appointment made with me either by letter or telephone. I admit frankly that I have been treated courteously by him on every occasion of our meeting, but I was referring to the time when the Bill was under preparation, and I emphasize, the statement that I could obtainno details of the measure. I know that a meeting of pastpralists interested was being held at Scott’s Hotel, and when I asked the Minister if lie would discuss the matter with me, he referred me to a Mr. Hicks, in the Lands Department. I declined to see Mr. Hicks, and when I requested the Minister to postpone the promulgation of the Land Ordinance for three days to give me an opportunity to discuss its provisions with him, he refused to do so. Subsequently I informed him that I intended to move the adjournment of the House to deal with the matter, and asked him to be present. I still adhere to my statement that whilst I was unable to secure admittance to the Minister to discuss this matter with him, the board of which I spoke was in close touch with the Minister all the time. In the press this morning I notice a long interview with Mr. C W. D. Conacher, the attorney for

Lord Vestey in the Northern Territory. Mr. Conacher sta’tes- lt is only in the last few years that one or two members of the’ House of Representatives have been able to make themselves to some extent personally familiar with some sections of the country, but the total knowledge of the Ho’us^e does not by any means cover all the Territory. Even Mr. Nelson himself owes what little knowledge he possesses of the country to his trip across the Barkly Tableland with Senator Pearce last year, find that with Mr. Stewart to Alice Springs and Barrow Creek this year. Apart from these journeys, Mr. Nelson’s, knowledge is confined to Darwin and the railway lines, with one excursion to the Victoria River d6p6t, which is only on the fringe of the Victoria River country.

That is a malicious and misleading statement. Mr. Conacher knows perfectly well that I have traversed a great deal of the Northern Territory, and that, in addition to touring the coastal areas, I have ridden hundreds of miles, on horseback through country that Mr. Conacher has never seen. On more than one occasion he has asked for my opinion in regard to country with which he was unfamiliar. Mr. Conacher also makes this statement -

Mr. Nelson had the opportunity of giving the facts when he referred ‘to the size of Vestey holdings, but he preferred, instead, to double the area held by our company.

On this point I refer honorable members to the following statement in the sworn evidence of Mr. McGee, manager of the Wyndham Meat Works: -

Vestey’s own and Gontrol the output of fourteen stations, covering 45,000 square miles, and carrying 200,000 head of stock.

In my remarks I was referring to certain leasehold areas on the Western Australian border. Mr. Conacher also denies that I produced the minutes of . the jneeting of pastoralists held at Scott’s Hotel, or gave the list of pastoralists present. Honorable members know that I did produce the minutes, which were signed by Mr. Massy Greene, as chairman. They also know that I gave a list of the persons present, and emphasized the fact that in the main they were holders of leases that were about to ‘ expire, and therefore were interested in the proposed legislation. These are the men who were in close touch with the Minister during the preparation of the Bill. During my speech on Friday the Minister in charge interjected to the effect that the Bill had then already been drafted. Again I refer honorable members to the remark made by Mr. Massy Greene, that the Minister had agreed to work in conjunction with them.

Mr Bayley:

– What was the date of that meeting?

Mr NELSON:

– ‘The 28th February, 1923.

Mr Bayley:

– Mr. Massy Greene was not a member of this House then.

Mr NELSON:

– That is immaterial. I do not suggest that Mr. Massy Greene deliberately misled the pastoral lessees present at that meeting, but I know that, according to the minutes, he informed them that the Minister had agreed, during the preparation of the Bill, to deal with a committee that might be appointed by the meeting. Ail this goes to show that Mr. Conacher’s statements in reply to my speech are anything but reliable. He also excuses the resolution of the meeting with regard to the dingo ordinance on the ground that it was due to a misunderstanding. I contrast that resolution with a motion on the same subject carried at a meeting of small leaseholders -

That this conference urges the necessity for immediate action in regard to dingo destruction, and until the dingo ordinance is decided upon, it requests the Government to supplv strychnine to pastoralists at half lahded cost in Darwin.

From this it would appear that ohe section of pastoralists wants the dingo ordinance and the other does not. 1 submit that the meeting of large leaseholder’s at Scott’s Hotel was not an expression of the opinion of the small men in the Northern Territory. I also desire to refer to a. letter which appeared in this morning’s press over the name of Mr. J. C. Warrington Rogers, another gentleman whose name is associated with the meeting held at Scott’s Hotel in February last. In this communication Mr. Rogers ridicules the statement I made on Friday in connexion with the possibility of profitably conducting sheepraising operations in the Northern Territory. My statement was emphatic. It is interesting to note that the Minister for Home and Territories (Senator Pearce), in moving the second reading of this Bill in another place, stated -

Mr. Lloyd, the manager of Avon Dow,ns Station, has had twenty years’ experience in managing sheep stations in the back country of New South Wales. I had an interesting talk with him when passing through, and he told me that, in his opinion, that station could carry 65,000 sheep.

I contend that that in itself is a sufficient answer to the utterance of Mr. Rogers, who attacked the credibility of my statement concerning the sheep-carrying capacity of the country.

Mr Prowse:

– How many sheep to the acre will it carry?

Mr NELSON:

– I said that in parts the country will carry one. sheep to the acre, and that there is a large area which will carry one sheep to three acres. On Friday, when I obtained leave to continue my speech, I was dealing with clause 58 of the Ordinance, and ‘ was pointing out that that provision defeats the whole object of the measure, because when portions of existing holdings are available for resumption, the present lessees can nominate “ dummies” who can carry on, and that, in some instances, the leases could be extended for another period after 1965. I made that statement notwithstanding the assurance of the Minister in charge of the Bill (Mr.. Atkinson), to the effect that the whole of the leases would expire in 1965. Clause 43 provides that when a lease expires the lessee then in possession shall have priority as regards- a subsequent lease of the portion to be resumed. It will, therefore, be seen that it is impossible for the land to revert to the Crown, in view of the fact that provision is made in the Bill for the present lessee’ to nominate a successor and carry on operations for an extended term. Clause 43 gives a further preference to those in possession of leases expiring in 1965. The Minister said that the conditions ‘regarding improvements set out in the original Ordinance were most stupid, and later he will probably tell the House that the Government are adequately safeguarded by the stocking provisions which can be enforced. The stocking conditions, however, will not do what the Minister expects, because under the .Bill the Land Board can only take into consideration the carrying capacity of the land in ite natural state, and cannot impose stocking conditions in accordance with what the land “might carry when improved. The Minister has decreed that improvement conditions for large lessees are unnecessary. In Mr. Conacher’s letter, which is also referred to in the article I have just quoted, it is admitted that the interests which he represents do not intend to improve their holdings, and that they must have larger areas on which to carry stock. The stocking capacity of any land without water is nil, and the Land Board, in considering stocking conditions, can only take into account the water available. It will be impossible, even if this measure becomes law, to effectively stock the land and to insist on improvements which’ the Minister says are ridiculous. Another grave anomaly is contained in clause 52, which deals with rents, and under which the big interests are again catered for. In the case of a lease granted in exchange for a lease under a South Australian Act in the Darwin and Gulf districts, the rental is to be 2s. per square mile, whereas in the case of a lease granted in exchange for a lease under the Crown Lands Ordinance 1912-1918, as determined by the Board, the rent in the Darwin and Gulf districts is to be not less than 2s. and not more than 6s. per square mile. In the.first instance, the maximum is 2s., and in the second 6s. per square mile. In the “Hctoria River district a lease granted in. exchange for a lease granted under a South Australian Act is 2s. 6d. per square mile, but for a lease granted in ‘ exchange for a lease issued under a Crown Lands Ordinance in the ‘ same district the rate is not less than 2s. 6d. and not more than 6s. per square mile. The rents in the case of areas in the Barkly Tableland, under the Commonwealth, as against those under the South Australian Acts, which are expiring, show a difference of just under 300 per cent. The figures will, not stand careful analysis. I ask the House not to permit this Bill to pass in its present form, but to support the amendment I intend to move, the adoption of which will mean that we shall at least be properly informed as to the true position. I have endeavoured to show that Part II. of this Bill repeals all Acts and ordinances under which improvement conditions can be enforced. Any one knows that it is impossible to obtain satisfactory results from land until it has been improved, but the Honorary Minister says that in the case of large holdings such work is impracticable. If honorable members will refer to the clauses which govern the conditions relating to mixed farming and agriculture they will see that there the Minister has conveniently changed his ground, because, although he considers that it would be ruinous to impose stocking conditions on the big pastoralists, such restrictions are imposed upon the smaller holders, who have not only to fence and cultivate their land, but have to reside on it and comply with the other conditions imposed. These conditions are embodied in the Bill, which relieves the big pastoralists of the necessity of improving their holdings. The small holders, who will be the principal sufferers if this measure is passed in its present form, are limited in area to 1,200 acres, while the holdings of the big pastoralists are confined only by the geographical boundaries of the Northern Territory. I think I have made it clear that the Bill, if enacted, will assist in indefinitely looking up land now held by big pastoralists, as it will allow them to nominate “dummies,” who, under clause 58, will be able to obtain preference in the matter of » renewal of leases expiring in 1965. I have shown that there is no provision for the resumption of land for closer pastoral purposes such as sheepraising, and I have demonstrated, on documentary evidence by the manager of Vestey Brothers, that his firm does not want to see sheep in the Northern Territory. I have pointed out that two years’ notice has to be given for the resumption of agricultural land, and that no permanent waters can be resumed. I refer honorable members to clauses 55 and 79. The Minister proposes, in addition to a Board of three to administer the Act, to appoint another Commission. He should have been fair, and enlightened the House as to what this scheme would cost when put into operation, and whether it was his intention to proceed with the appointment of a second Board. I have drawn attention to the fact that in clause 52 discrimination is made between the big and the little men in the matter of rents. There is no provision for selection of land before survey, but I maintain that in a great empty country like the Territory, if a man has the energy, capacity, and will to make the country profitable, he should be allowed every opportunity to do so. No attempt has been made to place conditions in the Bill that harmonize with scientific methods of land settlement. There should be provision for practical assistance in the shape of transport facilities. Although the small men will have none of the protection given to the big land-holders, they are quite prepared, if assisted with railway facilities, -“ire netting, &c, to develop in the Territory an industry that requires little or no protection, and whose main requirement is practical assistance in the matter of transportation. I have shown that the Bill has been inspired by the big financial interests. These have been catered for in detail, while small men have been ignored. I have made it clear, on documentary evidence, that the large interests in the Territory do not want to see improved holdings, railways, agriculture, irrigation, or sheep-raising, although these things are essential to the development of any country. I have shown that the big men are prepared to perpetuate the dingo evil, while the small land-holders are appealing to the Government to help them to destroy it. The Northern Territory has been condemned owing to a lack of accurate knowledge concerning it, since most people who visit it only go to the northern portion, which is the sour end. Great complaint is made about the millions of money that have been wasted there, but I have never heard any one tell the people of Australia that many of those millions have been paid directly to South Australia. I have not read of .any section of the press, or anybody else, emphasizing the fact that millions of money were paid for the railway within South Australia from Quorn to Oodnadatta, and that the loss sustained by the Commonwealth, since it took that line over, has been £1,500,000, which is debited to my constituency. One hears’ all the points that tell against the Territory, but none of the good features. When I stated that 99 per cent, of the members of this House know nothing about the country, I did the honorable member for Bass (Mr. Jackson) an injustice. I realize that he has done good work in trying to educate the people of Australia regarding the possibilities of this muchmaligned land, and the residents greatly appreciate his efforts on their behalf. If the Minister for Works and Railways (Mr. Stewart) had visited the Territory and made a report upon it, the Bill would have been entirely different in many respects. He would have drawn our attention to the great possibilities of sheep-raising, because he knows what can be accomplished under a sympathetic policy of land development such as Western Australia has adopted. I have, to a .great extent, indulged in a dream over the Territory. I felt justified in hoping that as a result of the consistent efforts and agitation of the local people, this Government would at least tackle the problem of settling and developing the Territory on national lines, but since I have been a member of this House I have come to the conclusion that State jealousies still blight the deliberations of Parliament to a considerable extent. This is highly regrettable. The only fair course is for the Government to admit its failure, create a new State in the Territory, and hand it over to the people who are prepared to do the pioneering work. Those pioneers have been allowed to struggle on against colossal odds, and they have even had to submit to injustice. I marvel at their tolerance. They are expected to remain loyal, although bitter experience has taught them the many flaws in the administrative methods of the Government. Owing to a lack of judgment on the part of their own rulers, these settlers are now weighed down under an intolerable burden, but they are as capable as any people of responding to a constructive policy. They are willing and anxious to participate in a new programme of development. Unfortunately, however, the Bill makes it impossible for them to do what is necessary in the interests of Australia and the Empire; that is, to develop the country. I have no regrets for the part I have played in the affairs of the Territory in recent years. I have endeavoured, with others, to lay the foundation stone of progress, and to create sympathies and habits of thought that would some day result in the overthrow of the present tyrannical system of government that is strangling the nation. If Parliament refuses to concede full State rights to the Territory, it is at least deserving of the appointment of a Minister to devote the whole of his attention to the development of the country and the solution of its many problems. It is not sufficient for a Minister to pay periodical flying visits, and then introduce legislation based on the most meagre information; nor is it enough for. the House to legislate on the advice of Administrators, who, to say the best of them, past and present, have been mere time-servers. If honorable members of the Country party were going to develop a large tract of land, they would not enlist the. services of a man who had spent a lifetime in tha

Police Force; but for the administration of the Northern Territory any one has been regarded as good enough. My one idea has been to conserve the Territory for the white people of the British Empire. I have sounded a note of warning concerning the alarming increase in the coloured population, and unless care is exercised we shall establish a race there that may one day threaten the stability of Australia. I have been endeavouring to awaken the minds of politicians to the true position. I trust that my appeal, which is not a challenge to the prestige of the Government, will be successful. My advice to Parliament is that next time it sets out to legislate on a new problem of settlement, it should obtain practical advice as to the best methods to pursue. I am satisfied that if the Committee that I suggest is appointed a very different complexion will be’ placed upon the .Bill. I imagine that the Government desires least of all that 8 practical report should be made to this House, because such a report would have the effect of disclosing the motives of those who have inspired this Bill. I ask honorable members to support my amendment. I move -

That the Bill be deferred pending an investigation by a Committee of this House and report thereon.

Mr Nelson:

– I stated the reason for the decline.

Dr EARLE PAGE:

– In fact, there are to-day 200 fewer leases than there were 40 years ago.

Mr. Nelson and other honorable members interjecting- ;

Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt:

– Order! I point out to the honorable member for the Northern Terrritory (Mr. Nelson) that he was granted the indulgence of the House while making his Speech, and he must not disturb its proceedings when another honorable mem’ber is replying.

Mr Nelson:

-I would like the Minister to answer questions occasionally.

Mr SPEAKER:

– The honorable member will have the opportunity of asking questions when the Bill is in Committee.

Dr EARLE PAGE:

– This grotesque exaggeration of the honorable member regarding the area to be dealt with under the Ordinance is, however, of little importance, compared with his second statement that this land will be- locked up for 100 years.

Clause 51 of the Ordinance provides -

Any pastoral lease granted under . - this Ordinance in exchange for a lease existing at the commencement of this Ordinance shall expire on the 30th day of June, 1965.

Nothing could be more definite than that. In regard to such leases, clause 53 (a) provides that the Minister may, on 30th June, 1935- eleven years hence - resume an area not exceeding one-quarter of the total area included in the lease, and a further area not exceeding one-quarter- of the total area originally included in the lease on 30th June, 1945- about 21 years hence. It will thus be seen that under this Ordinance one-half of the total area leased will revert to the Crown at the expiration of 21 years, and it will rest entirely with the Government at that time to say what shall be done with it. That is as plain as it can possibly be made. In June, 1935, and June, 1945, the wholeof these lands, will, become subject to any conditions that the Government of the day may see fit to impose. The Crown will’ be unfettered by any consideration, ‘ other than that of the public interest, in releasing the areas it has- resumed. Clause- 53 (6) of the Ordinance sets out the powers of resumption in the case of any other lease granted under the proposed Ordinance ; that is, an entirely new lease granted to a person who is not at present a lessee. Clause 4’0 of the Ordinancelays it down that pastoral leases shall be for a term not exceeding 42 years. Clause 53 provides for the reservation, of the power of resumption. What, then., becomes of the honorable member’s contention that these lands will be locked up for a century? He said that this would be effected in the guise of a subdivision made in pursuance of clause 58 of theOrdinance. The lessee, he alleged, would make a pretence at subdivision, and by enlisting the services of a dummy, secure a lease of the subdivided area for a further term of 42 years. Honorable members need have no misgivings on that point, because clause 58 (2) expressly provides ‘ that subdivisions must be transferred to persons approved by the Minister, and the transfer shall be merely for the remainder of the term of the original lease. The honorable member’s criticism in this regard is, therefore, shown to be as grotesque a misstatement as his calculation of the area involved. There can be very little scope for the. exercise of ingenuity iu the direction of dummying in regard to the length of notice - two years - required to be given under clause 58 (1). There can be no doubt, either, that the subdivided portions of the leases will expire, on the same date as the original leaser - 30th June, 1965. It- must be clearly borne in mind, however, that these powers relate only to resumption for closer pastoral settlement. In addition, clause 78 (1) of the Ordinance expressly empowers resumption for a variety of other purposes. That clause provides -

– (1.) Subject to this Ordinance the Go vernor-General may, at any time, by Proclamation -
1. resume any Crown lands not subject to any right of or contract for purchase -
2. for the use and benefit of the aboriginal native inhabitants of the Northern Territory;
1. for the purpose of military defence;
2. for forest reserves or for the purposes of afforestation and sylviculture ;
3. for mineral reserves or reserves for gold-mining purposes;
4. for travelling stock reserves;
5. for places for the recreation or amusement of the public;
6. for roads, tramways, railways, or railway stations;
7. for water conservation purposes ;
8. for any other public purpose which he thinks fit; and
9. for cultivation purposes;

That is to say, this Ordinance gives to the Crown the right to resume land for those specific purposes. If mixed farming is found to be possible, the Crown will have the opportunity of dealing with this land at any time on two years’ notice, which is adjacent to railways already constructed and other probable routes. The honorable member also stated that the Commonwealth is already vested with the power to resume for pastoral purposes portion of the pastoral leases held under the South Australian Acts. That is a layman’s opinion, and it is interesting to know that an entirely opposite view is held by the Crown Solicitor. Does the honorable member for the Northern Territory want the Commonwealth Government to emulate Mr. Theodore in his famous Repudiation proposals? Mr. Theodore, by his actions, brought Queensland’s credit to the verge of destruction, and was only able to secure the recent conversion of Queensland loans in England by an assurance that the Queensland Government had been duly advised that the Act in question did not in any way constitute a breach of contract. He expressed the opinion that had he been advised otherwise, the Act would never have been passed. The honorable member for the Northern Territory, after a definite legal opinion has been given that his- resumption proposals constitute a breach of this Government’s legal obligations, now says “ For God’s sake go on and do it.”

Mr Nelson:

– I distinctly referred to leases that expired by effluxion of time.

Dr EARLE PAGE:

– The honorable member said: “Go ahead and break the contract.” No quicker way to destroy Australia’s credit, and prevent the development of the Northern Territory, as well as the rest of Australia, could very well be suggested. In putting a proposal of that sort before this Parliament, the honorable member does not do himself justice. The fourth point on which the honorable member apparently attempted to mislead honorable members related to conditions of resumption. These are dealt with in clause 79, subclause 2b, and in clause 55, sub-clause 1d. They are in identical terms, and have been specially drawn up to put beyond all question such a construction as the honorable member has attempted to put upon them. The provision reads -

The part or parts which may be resumed shall not comprise the head station, or any of the leased lands within 5 miles thereof, or the principal watering place upon the land.

The word “ thereof “ clearly relates to the words “head station,” and the clause can only be made to read as the honorable member has endeavoured to read it by inserting the word “ of “ after the word “ or “, second occurring. But even then only lands within 5 miles of the principal watering place would have been included, so there is no justification for concluding that lands within 5 miles of any watering place were exempt from resumption. Only one watering place, and that, quite equitably, the principal watering place, is expressly non-resumable. Two-thirds of the area of the Northern Territory is not occupied, and if we impose conditions which are not quite equitable on land already occupied, ere long the whole of the Territory will be abandoned. Such provisions as I have read are usual in leases, and are quite necessary when one remembers that 200,000,000 acres of the Northern Territory, despite the fact that its rainfall is much greater than that of Western Queensland, are unoccupied. . This can be confirmed by a glance at the Government Meteorologist’s map. We must offer some inducement, especially that of fair dealing, to the people that we desire to settle in the Territory. The honorable member for the Northern Territory has complained of the proposed omission of the improvement conditions. He apparently fails to realize that effective occupation depends primarily upon adequate stocking conditions, and that if the lands are kept adequately stocked, improvements will follow without any compulsion of law. The lessees will be compelled, by force of circumstances, to effect such improvements as are necessary to carry their stock. The Ordinance, indeed, by providing for compensation for improvements upon the determination or resumption of the leases, tends to encourage lessees to undertake improvements voluntarily. Everything possible is done to ensure the provision of improvements. Clauses 25a and i, 26a, 396, and 41 lay down reasonable stocking conditions, and it is proposed to rigidly enforce compliance with them. Inthe past, onerous improvement conditions have been imposed, but it is considered to be the wiser course to refrain from subjecting lessees to financial obligations to the prejudice of the primary needs of their pursuits. There is nothing in the Ordinance itself to prevent improvement conditions from being imposed in any new lease if the Government sees fit. Paragraph j of clause 25 reads -

any other reservations, covenants, conditions, and provisions which are prescribed, or which are considered by the Board to be necessary under the circumstances of any particular case, and are specified in the Gazette notice that the lands are available for leasing.

Mr JACKSON:
Bass

.- I think I can claim to have given the subject of the Northern Territory quite as much attention as any other member of this

Mr JACKSON:

– I do not know from what source the honorable member gets his information, but expensive fences are no doubt erected for some particular purpose, generally to protect their own stock. In vast areas in other parts of the Territory no fences are to be seen. For instance, one can go from Oodnadatta to Mataranka, a distance of over 900 miles, without noticing a solitary fence-. If half the money that has been wasted in the Northern Territory had been spent in the southern portion- of it there would be something to show for the expenditure to-day. As I have previously declared, development has been commenced at the wrong end of the country ; it should have taken place from the south. ‘ It has been suggested that a secret conclave of pastoralists was really responsible for the introduction of the Bill. I have before me a copy of the policy speech of Mr. Hughes, as reported in the Sydney- Morning Herald, of 25th October, 1922. The ex-Prime Minister is credited with these words: -

The Government desires to extend to the pastoral industry in the Territory all the assistance and encouragement possible,, but regards the subdivision of the larger holdings as a necessary precedent to any effective scheme. Subject to the- lessee acquiescing in any equitable surrender of portions of their leases (which acquiescence it is believed will be forthcoming, and which will enable the Government to provide holdings for additional settlers) the Government proposes: liberal expenditure on bores, wells, and roads, and to provide access to markets.

On the 3rd November, 1922, the Minis ter for Home and Territories (Senator Pearce),. speaking at the Unley Town Hall, South. Australia, on “ The Problem of the Northern Territory,” said, in reference to- the Land- Ordinance -

The principal provisions of the- Ordinance would be submitted as follows : - (1) That a Land Board of three members be constituted; (2) the Territory to be divided into districts.; (3) a minimum rental per square mile, and a minimum stocking rate per square mile to be determined for each district; (4) the Government to have the right of resumption of lease or portion of lease, subject to the following provisions : -

Lessees whose leases are resumed to continue to hold the total area for a. term not exceeding two years. At the. end of such term one-quarter . of the area held on lease may be resumed, and at the end of ten years a further quarter of the total area originally held may be resumed. and so on, outlining further provisions that are. in this Bill.

J. L. Dubois), Messrs. C. W. D. Conacher and G. J. Edwards (Vestey’s),
Frazer and T. “A. Snelling (Wollogorang, McArthur River, Tanumbarini Tobermory, Bathurst Downs, and Alroy Downs), J. R. Murray (Newhope), A. M. White (Renner’s Springs), J. C. Warrington Rogers and W. Warrington Rogers (Roper Valley), and John Asche (Rocklands).

Sitting suspended from 6.30 to 8 p.m.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– Prior to the adjournment, I was debating whether companies or persons who take up land in the Northern Territorty, suffering the disadvantages of heavy cost of transportation and labour, and of remoteness from civilization, should be compensated for their risk and work in the development of that country. I do not object to any person or company being well paid for any developmental work, but the pioneering of the Northern Territory is totally different from what has taken place in other portions of Australia. The pioneers of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Queensland, in the majority of cases, lost everything, and made way for. the banks. But in the Northern Territory, while those conditions may have been applicable to some of the smaller settlers, in most instances men have gone there with large sums of money, content to wait for many years for a return from their outlay. So far as one can gather from .reports on the Northern Territory., the land has not been properly stocked. The men who have taken up holdings in the Territory are not typical of those who usually go on the land. They ,get other persons to manage and work it for them., so we are not dealing with the man on the land in the ordinarily accepted sense of the term. We are dealing with persons who, living in the cities of Australia and overseas, employ managers and servants to guard their interests in. the Northern Territory. The question of land settlement and development must be ‘approached in a manner totally -different from that adopted, many years ago, by the State Legislatures. Many of those .holding unstocked land in the Northern Territory, and making no real attempt to develop it, are awaiting the unearned increment. This curse is prevalent throughout Australia. We know the disadvantage of building railways to develop the natural resources of a State - the whole of the people bearing the burden, in the form of extra taxation - and allowing private individuals to reap the .benefit of the money so spent. I am strongly in favour of an active developmental policy for the Northern Territory. Before sheep can be grown there, we must provide cheaper transportation to reduce the cost of improvements, and of. marketing stock, and the line which seems to me the’ most important for this purpose is one running south from Port Darwin, for perhaps 300 miles, then across to Wyndham, Western Australia on the one side, and on the other, towards Camooweal on the Queensland border, with perhaps a branch line to Borroloola, in the Gulf of Carpentaria. Such a line would undoubtedly serve good sheep country. I am not referring to cattle country; I would not spend a penny on developing cattlecountry by railways. To me a railway such as I have outlined seems inevitable, but not one clause in this Bill provides for the unearned increment remaining with -the Commonwealth. As the leases may extend until 1965, it can easily be imagined that the interests held in the Territory to-day will,, indeed, be very valuable in 1965. Many years ago a large tract of country in New .South Wales was placed in the hands of the Western Lands Commission. In the Walgett -district, portion of the Darling electorate, is some of our best pastoral land, producing very fine wooli While in the Western Lands Act and its amending legislation, there is a provision to resume one-sixth of this area at certain periods, the .great proportion of it does not .become available to the people of Australia, its .rightful owners ( until 1942’. Some stations comprise from 60,000 to 110,000 acres ,of land, which, if .properly subdivided, would, on an average, carry a family to «very 3,000 acres, and provide a very fair living indeed. The Government of the day, being at the beck and call of the pastoralists holding those leases, were responsible for withholding from the people areas of land, the development of which is so much needed for the progress of Australia as a :nation.’ Everywhere in that district can be seen men, looking longingly at beautiful land which at ‘present is held, not by pioneers, but by companies and persons who took over from them. The New South Wales Government decided to carry out a resumption policy, but no land has been resumed, since this policy has not been endorsed by the ‘great pastoral interests and institutions of New South Wales. When the Minister for Lands, some few months ago, visited Walgett to confer with the representatives of the lessees, they offered their land to the Government at 10s. per acre for the unexpired portion of th« leases. The Minister, in reply- and the

National Anti-Labour Government endorsed, that reply - said that as the land would become available in 1942, when the. Government would obtain the land for. nothing, there was no need for re^ sumption. In the meantime, the people cannot claim land which rightly is theirs, and which was bartered away by politicians to interested parties, purely for “ Doodling “ purposes. What was done respecting the western lands of New South Wales- is about to- be perpetrated by this Government in regard to the Northern Territory land’s. I have a vision of men in the Federal Legislature, 30 or 40 years hence, talking of the Parliament and the. Government which bartered away the birthright of the people to vested interests - people who. to-day arc holding lands with a view to making large profits, The mem who. torday desire certaiu valuable concessions from this Parliament, are the very men who a few months ago- were given great concessions by this same Government and’ Parliament, when attempting to remit large sums of money which they owed in taxation. First and foremost is Sir Sidney Kidman, who owes the Commonwealth of Australia, over £100,000 in respect of taxation due; on leaseholds-. This Government has not attempted to collect, that tax. It has already relieved him of the obligation to- pay further taxation on those leaseholds,, and is now prepared to extend! his leases in the Northern Territory to the year 1965. I can imagine’ the Kidmans* who- follow Sir Sidney blessing the “ boodling Government” of 1924, which laid the foundation of’ their . fortunes. When the honorable member- for Yarra (Mr. Scullin) tried to obtain information respecting the amount, of money owing to the Commonwealth by Sir Sidney Kidman, the Treasurer (Dr. Earle Page) informed him that as it would take too long to collect the information, he could not see his way to supply it. That was two months ago. When a similar- question was recently asked, the Treasurer told the House that it was not the policy of the Government to divulge such information. We know perfectly well that particulars of income, tax are- kept secret, but that land taxation is viewed differently. The Government, refusing to divulge the information asked for, was actuated by exactly the same motive that’ lies behind the intro* duction of this Bill. It is a desire to look after the interests of the wealthy squatters. We have already had experience of the great “ squattocracy “ of Australia, and, generally speaking, its members have obtained far more out of Australia than they have ever conferred upon it. In western New South Wales, all the country is held practically by one man. It is what is generally termed as “the Kidman blight,” and what has taken place in New South. Wales this Government seeks to have repeated in the Northern Territory. This “ blight “ in the western division of New South Wales has. . caused a serious decrease in flocks. The figures show that in the Milparinka district flocks totalled- 331,597 in 1904,- and only 51,957 in 1924, the decrease thus being 279,640. Figures for the same period’s for Wanaaring district are 291,307’ and 62,981 respectively, ‘ the decrease being 228,326; and f or; Wilcahnia district 329,895 and 166,862 respectively, the decrease being 163,033. In 1904 the flocks in the western division of New South Wales totalled 5,051,404, and in 1924 the total was only 3,770,034, the decrease being 1,281,370.

Mr Lister:

– Have not droughts beep responsible for that?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– I must remind my. honorable, friend that the figures. I have quoted cover a period -of - twenty years.. Tha decrease, has been caused mainly by. such, actions as this Government now propose to take to assist, the “ boodleiers.” Certain interests in Australia have obtained substantial benefits from this. Government. The “ rag merchants,” for instance,.’ obtained possession- of the Commonwealth Woollen Mills at half their value as. a quid pro quo for the moneythey put into party funds. The oversea shipping companies, which operate their vessels, by black labour,, secured a com-. cession worth £100,000. When, it was proposed last year to remit taxation, amounting to £1,350,000 to ‘.certain: leaseholders, the supporters, of the Government “fell down on- their jobs.” They were frightened to give their assent to the Government proposal. Because the Government’s proposal to remit that money was not agreed tOj they now propose to present to the “ squattocracy of Australia a- still greater prize in the Northern Territory.. The anxiety of the

Government to assist these lease-holding “boodleisrs” is clearly shown in this measure. But the transactions which led to the “ rag merchants” of Flinderslane and York-street obtaining protection from State instrumentalities by purchasing the Commonwealth Woollen Mills for half their value; and to the black-labour shipping companies, which appeal- to have a secret control over this Government, obtaining a remission of £100,000, sink into insignificance when one contemplates the rich prize which is being laid at the feet of the great “boodling” schemers in the Northern Territory by this great “boodling” Government.

Mr McNEILL:
Wannon

– I am in hearty accord with every movement to promote the welfare of Australia. I realize that in attempting to develop the Northern Territory we are undertaking a gigantic problem, but success is well within the bounds of possibility. The responsibility for Northern Territory development rests with this Parliament. We must remember, however, that the land laws of a country should be just and fair to all parties. It would be inequitable to pass land legislation which would be most lenient to one section of the community and extremely hard on another. There are several most objectionable features in this Bill. In years gone by, opportunity was given in the legislation of every State for land “ boodleiers “ to greatly enrich themselves at the expense of the country. I consider that clause 31 in the schedule of this Bill throws the door wide open for more land “ boodling.” It reads -

Where any land leased under pastoral or agricultural lease in pursuance of this Ordinance has been mortgaged, and the mortgagee enters into possession thereof, he may remain in possession for the unoxpired period of the lease and shall, during such possession, be subject to the terms, covenants and conditions of the lease, as if he were the lessee under the lease.

It seems to me to be quite clear that under the provisions of that clause a man who desires to secure a lease may say to a friend of his: “You go on the land; I will supply the stock and will accept a mortgage from you.” The man who in such a case actually goes on the land has no intention whatever of remaining there. He obtains the lease simply to oblige the one who finances him. That clause appears to me to afford every opportunity for land dummying, for when the mortgagor is called upon for payment, and is unable to meet his obligations, the mortgagee enters into possession of the lease, and occupies it for the remainder of the term.

Mr Atkinson:

– I have circulated an amendment which I intend to move to meet that’objection.

Mr McNEILL:

– I have not seen the proposed amendment, but I hope it does meet the case. I think that it would be an outrage to pass the clause as it is. The clause which provides for resumptions by the Minister contains the following paragraphs : -

The part or parts which may be resumed shall not comprise the head station, or any of the leased lands within five miles thereof, or the principal watering place upon, the land ; and
So far as practicable, any land which, under the existing lease or under a prior lease, has_ been improved by the destruction of noxious plants shall be excluded from the resumption.

– It cannot be done under the new. Ordinance.

Mr.FOSTER. - The honorable member has a lot to learn ; otherwise he would not have laid himself open to contradiction on almost every statement he has made by official facts as brought forward by the Treasurer. A 42 years’ lease is not unheard of in respect of pastoral holdings. It must be borne in mind that these leases do not apply to country close to centres of settlement. They can only be taken up in country far away from railways and facilities of all descriptions and exposed to all sorts of pests.When the Government of South Australia introduced the 42 . years’ leases, with a revaluation at the end of the first twentyone years, . they knew what they were doing. At that time the pastoral industry was almost being wiped out of existence. Men were starving on their holdings. Fortunes were being lost, and leases were being abandoned on all sides. South Australia was the pioneer of the Commonwealth in the matter of giving long leases with security of tenure, and then offering assistance to the lessees by the formation of vermin districts. As a result of that policy, enormous areas in the interior of the State have been recovered, and arc today better stocked than they over were, so that the golden fleece is producing revenue for the Government from stations which once were abandoned. It has proved to be a godsend in times which would otherwise, have been periods of intense distress. The western country of New South “Wales and Queensland, referred to . by the honorablemember for Darling (Mr. Blakeley), where the flocks are decreasing year by year, will never recover until the policy initiated in South Australia is applied, and vermin districts are established, notwithstanding the great cost likely to be entailed. Only in that way will the returns from sheep be anything near their standard of a few years ago. Lessees under the 42-years’ system in South Australia have advances made to them by the Government for the erection of dog-proof fences 6 ft. 6 in. or 7 feet high. These advances have ‘ to be repaid within 21 years, and an idea of the cost involved may bo gathered from the fact that in some instances these repayments are double, and even treble, the actual amount of rent paid by the lessees. This will also give honorable members some idea of what it will cost to recover the pastoral country in the Northern Territory. The lessees will be taking on a contract that the bravest men will do well to accomplish within the next 20 years, but the sooner we get a fair start and give them every encouragement to go ahead, the sooner will the object in view be accomplished. Settlement is everything. We must keep there the men we have there. It is unfortunate that some of the leases run to thousands of square miles, but the lessees have not made a penny out of them.

Mr Nelson:

– Kidman sold one for £200,000.

Mr FOSTER:

– I know that Sir Sidney Kidman has enormous territories, and I know a thousand times more about him than does the honorable member. I wish there were 50 men there to share Sir Sidney Kidman’s areas, but, for 80 per cent, of the leases he has bought during the last 20 years, he has given nothing more than the price of the stock on them. He has not given a penny for the leases themselves. When people talk about the problem of recovering the way-back country they must thoroughly understand the conditions to be faced. Therefore, let us understand the position of the Northern Territory. The first step towards establishing successful progressive occupation is the provision of railway facilities. Some people talk about turning the Territory into sheep country. It cannot be done until a railway is built to enable the lessees to get to their holdings the material which can make them fit for sheep. In these days of dingoes, rabbits, and foxes, it takes an enormous amount of money to run sheep, and only the rich man, who can command capital and is working under the best conditions, can undertake the task in many parts of the Northern Territory. The day of the small man there - at all events beyond Barrow’s Creek - has not yet arrived. What is the position of the big lessees as they exist to-day? I suppose that because of the unprecedented position of the beef industry they are having a .bigger gruelling than they have ever had before in the Territory. Not only in the Northern Territory, and in the outer districts of the Commonwealth, but also in the inner areas closer to the centres of population, there is nothing in the raising of beef to-day. The men of Queensland who a few years ago were called “ beef barons “ are paupers to-day, and they are plucky men to hold on as they are doing. I believe that there will be a solution of the export problem that will be favorable to the successful raising of beef in Australia, and when we once get a market for our beef properly established in the Old World these men will probably again amass fortunes, which they will thoroughly deserve, and which no one ought to begrudge them. The position of the lessees in the Northern Territory is very much worse than that of pastoralists in other parts of Australia. Heaven only knows how they are able to hang on. The man who has stuck to his land in the Northern Territory is a hero. He is the best type of man we have in Australia. We ought to honour him, and not desert him in his hour of need. We must pass this Ordinance at once. People are looking for it, they are waiting for it; they are losing rooney year after year, and they see in this proposal their only ray of hope. I was amazed when I heard that they had accepted it. There is one good piece of fortune of which I must remind the House. Some of us will remember the agitation for the establishment of freezing works in the Northern Territory. There was at that time a craze for the Government entering into the business; but, thank God, something happened to place Vestey’s instead of the Government in it. That firm has sunk there a million pounds which for years have not been earning interest. Goodness knows what would have happened if the meat works had been a Government undertaking. We should be thankful that the Commonwealth did not enter upon that enterprise. But in order to restore an industry which, if not flourishing, was fairly good a few years ago, we must help Vestey’s, not for their sakes, but for the sake of the Commonwealth. Unless we do that, there can be no hope of development in the Territory. When I speak of assisting Vestey’s, I mean that the Commonwealth should not charge railway freights that would be appropriate in a country that was in a position to pay its way. Railways and other facilities must be regarded as pioneering works, and in order to encourage settlement, we must charge encouraging rather than crushing rates. In many other ways we shall have to assist in the development of that great country, and the sooner we do so, the sooner will the Territory have a chance of paying its way. Without such assistance there is no possibility of its doing so. A couple of years ago a Sectional Committee of the Public Works Committee travelled through the Northern Territory at great cost, but the visit was very useful. Under existing conditions the Territory can be visited only at great cost.

Mr Yates:

– Did the Committee charge up to the Territory the cost of the visit to Java?

Mr FOSTER:

– The expenses were, no doubt, charged to the appropriate vote. The Sectional Committee rendered excellent service; its members worked throughout like tigers. They brought back an excellent account of the country. I wish to pay a well deserved compliment to the honorable member for Bass (Mr. Jackson), who was a member of the Sectional Committee, and whose enthusiasm and illustrated lectures have made the Northern Territory known to the people” of the Commonwealth to an extent that it was never known before. In many States his propaganda has converted to support of the north-south railway and the development of the Territory, people who were previous bitterly opposed to such a policy. The honorable member has not yet finished his good works, and I hope he will continue them until the object for which he is striving is accomplished. Generally speaking, the Ordinance contained in the Bill is good, although it is possible that in Committee some improvements may be suggested. I hope for the sake of the people in the Northern Territory that the honorable member representing, them will withdraw his amendment. Hundreds of ex-Territorians are living in South Australia, and they were distressed when they heard of the suggestion that there should be further delay, and that the facilities that have been promised for the last fifteen or twenty years should be further deferred.

Mr WEST:
East Sydney

.- It was hardly necessary for the honorable member for Wakefield to tell the House that he represents the interests of Sir Sidney Kidman, because the whole purpose of his speech was to uphold existing conditions in the Northern Territory. Members of this House have no graver problems to handle than those relating to the control and development of the land, and anybody who is acquainted with the history of land legislation in the various States will not hesitate to support the fullest inquiry into the proposals contained in this Bill. No State in the Commonwealth has been without some scandal in connexion with land. In New South Wales there have been numerous public inquiries affecting Ministers of the Crown, members of Parliament, and private citizens. Those investigations were conducted by the keenest judicial intellects that .’could be found, and they revealed that there is more trickery, chicanery, and rascality in connexion with land deals than in any other phase of our social and economic life. I visited the Northern Territory some years ago, and came away with ideas very different from those I had before my visit. I do not pretend to be an authority on land, but many years ago I travelled, extensively into the interior of New South Wales in connexion with the provision of water supplies on station properties, and thus gained- a fair knowledge of land. I saw in the Northern Territory land that was eminently suitable for grazing. This House is not as -well qualified to’ deal with the important problem of the land policy in the Northern Territory as it would be if it had before it the report of an expert Committee specially appointed to investigate the subject. The honorable member for Wakefield thought that a 42 years’ lease would not be excessive. Such an extended tenure might have been all right when Captain Cook first landed in Australia, and the honorable member’s ideas “seem to be appropriate to that date. Over 40 years ago, I travelled 500 miles inland from Sydney to install a water supply on a big station, and that land had been leased by Sir John Robertson at £1 per acre. To-day a railway runs within 2 miles of the land, which is being used for dairy farming, and is worth £50 per acre. The granting of leases in the Northern Territory for 42 years, at a rental of 6d. or 8d. per square mile, might prove very injurious to future generations.

Mr Pratten:

– Land at Bathurst was sold 100 years ago for ls. per acre.

Mr WEST:

– The honorable member’s interjection provides an excellent illustration in support of my argument. When I visited the Northern Territory, I encountered a great number of men connected with the pastoral industry. Their minds seem to be poisoned with the idea that nothing should, be done to develop the cattle runs in the Northern Territory, lost the prices of cattle and sheep in the southern States should fall and the community get the benefit of cheap meat. I believe that that idea still permeates the minds of the pastoralists. The honorable member for the Northern Territory (Mr. Nelson)’ has told us that this Bill was submitted to men who believe that any progress in the stock-raising industry in the Northern Territory would be injurious to their interests. I ask honorable members to ponder carefully before they agree to surrender control of the soil to a few people. In Ireland, Russia, Germany, France - in fact, all over the world - the greatest economic curse has been the possession of large areas of land by a few people. Many of us had to struggle in our early years, and the least we can do for those who are to follow us is to leave the land accessible to them. Think of the wrongs of Ireland in connexion with the land system ! In my boyhood, nearly 60 years ago, I heard addresses in London on the cruel land conditions in Ireland. Yet, despite the lessons taught by history, this House is asked to give to a few private persons absolute control for 42 years over vast tracts of country. Such a proposal will not stand a moment’s investigation. With development in the mining and pastoral industries, prosperity will come to the Northern “ Territory. Unfortunately, in.: connexion with mining’, there has been moore robbery from British capitalists . in> the Northern Territory than in any. other part of. Australia. We- had ample evidence of. this on the occasion of our visit some.- time ago. On one mineral lease we saw rusting away wire roper long enough almost to put. a cable round the coast of Australia. There were also three Cornish boilers 45 feet long and 7 feet in diameter lying in the ground half rusted away, poppet heads 100 feet high fitted with windlass and wheel, a. manager’s residence, and. half a. dozen half-finished cottages foi- workmen, and with it all not 10 feet of soil had been disturbed. That was not an isolated instance. I was informed by Mr. Matthews-, a South Australian mining manager, that at one time his company worked on a goldmining lease at Pine Creek,, with a number of Chinese and. Javanese who had to be accommodated in. separate houses. He told me that after paying all debts and cleaning up, the company, made a. profit of £17,000, but, so disgusted, were they with the prospective: expenditure that they closed down. We saw several of these abandoned mining ventures. -No wonder British capitalists hesitate to further invest in Northern Territory mining propositions under existing conditions. The Treasurer (Dr. Earle Page) to-day endeavoured to belittle what the honorable member for the Northern Territory had said. That is not the kind of treatment W6 might expect from, a responsible. Minister: The honorable member for the Northern Territory, I have noi doubt, had in mind the interests of future settlers, and in his own forcible manner he emphasized the need for a system of group settlement in order to secure permanency in occupation and progress in development. I hope the time will never come when immigrants will be introduced and placed on land 10 or 12 miles distant from the nearest neighbour, with none of the conveniences of civilization. The honorable member for Wakefield (Mr. Foster) spoke of the establishment of ice works in Darwin. On the occasion of our visit the days were very hot, so if; was easy to realize what an essential commodity ice is in a climate like that of the Northern Territory. Conveniences of the kind should be established there. Much real work was done by the Labour Administration for the development of the Territory. The Batchelor Experimental Farm ^demonstrated that, anything grown in New South Wales can be produced in the Northern Territory. When we visited the farm-, we partook of foodstuffs, such as one gets in Melbourne or Sydney, all grown on the farm. I hope that the remarks of the honorable member for the Northern Territory will not be entirely ignored by the Government. There is sound reason for the appointment of a Committee to inquire into, the land settlement conditions of the Territory. Although I have been, there, I would be loth to arrogate, to myself the right of determining whether this Bill is designed to meet the needs of the Northern Territory in the best possible way. I want further information. An inquiry hy a Committee extending over a few months would equip honorable members with that knowledge so essential to the proper framing of a land Ordinance for the development of the Northern Territory. Without well-considered legislation on this subject there is- no possibility of progress in the Territory. We do not want to make this a party question. In Committee I shall vote on the various clauses of the Ordinance as I think fit, and I hope other honorable members will adopt the same attitude in order to improve the Bill. If a committee of inquiry were appointed^, and reported to the House, honorable members would be better informed as to the conditions of land settlement, and, therefore, would be in a better position to deal with this important measure. The Treasurer has told us that legal opinion has been obtained. We know that legal authorities differ. I think the course outlined by the honorable member for the Northern Territory is the best one to take. The history of land scandals in Australia up to the present ought to be sufficient to make honorable members insist on further information before passing this Bill.

Mr. KILLEN (Riverina) [9.281- Honable members on both sides of the House will agree that this is one of the most important measures that has come before them. It deals with an immense territory, which is almost wholly undeveloped, and it seems1 to me that one of the principal duties of this. Parliament should be to try to -develop and populate it in the shortest possible time. We on this side of the House differ from honorable members opposite as to the right course to take. To my mind, this is a pioneering proposition. I think I am qualified to speak of pioneering, since I was one of the pioneers of that tract of country, then 250 to 300 miles from the nearest railway, about which the honorable member- for Darling (Mr. Blakeley) said something to-night. It was then unoccupied, and had never been stocked. A number of us went out to occupy it. We lived like blackfellows for several years, and after working hard and enduring all the hardships inseparable from pioneering, came back poorer than when we went there. There ave three stages of settlement. There is, first of all, the pioneering, which has yet to be done in the Northern Territory. After the pioneers go out, most of them ruined, other men come in and make the land fit for closer settlement. This, takes a good number of years. Only about one-third of the Northern Territory is occupied, and it is proposed under the Bill to grant leases up to 42 years of portion of the runs. Some honorable members opposite, who have spoken during this debate, appear to think that if this measure becomes law large areas will be locked up, and that it will be impossible for those desiring small holdings to acquire land. This is not so, because we are informed that approximately 7,000,000 acres which have gone out of occupation within the last two years are available for any one who desires to take up land there. Itis safe to say that a ‘ larger area is being surrendered than that for which leases are required. The honorable member for the Northern Territory (Mr. Nelson) is in a more favorable position than other honorable members to discuss this question, inasmuch as he lives in the Northern Territory, and has travelled over a good portion of it; but it does not follow that because he is so circumstanced he can suggest the best way of developing the Territory. Personally, I differ from him as to the best method to adopt. Unless the Government provide the easiest possible conditions, and grant long leases to those who are doing the pioneering work, a very large area will remain unoccupied. I do not understand why those who have- opposed the Bill fail to realize that under it instead of locking up the land for a long period, a much larger area will be thrown open for settlement than would otherwise be possible. Of the land held under leases granted by’ the South Australian Government, 3,758 square miles will revert to the Crown in 1935 if the Bill is not passed, whereas if the measure becomes law 24,260 square miles, an area approximately seven times as large, will revert to the Crown during the same yeal*. Of the balance of the Northern Territory held under lease 950 square mile3 will revert to the Crown in 1935, if the position remains as at present, whereas if the Bill is passed, and the pastoralists agree to bring their holdings under its provisions, 20,500 square miles will be available for settlement, or twenty-one times the area that would be available under the existing conditions. A combined area of 4,708 square miles would be available in 1935 under existing conditions, whereas if the Bill is passed, and all leases are brought under its provisions, 44,760 square miles, or nine and a half times as much, will be available. These figures prove that the arguments of honorable members opposite will not stand investigation.

Mr Yates:

– Why should there be any hurry if the leases do not expire until 1935?

Mr KILLEN:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I once worked in a factory. It was . hard work, from 7 o’clock in the morning until 5.30 in the evening. I received 39s. a week, and it was seventeen years before I was shifted into the warehouse. Is that case parallel with that of the squatter who formerly lived at Yarralumla 1 Did I expect, at the beginning, that I would get into the warehouse, that I would be a traveller, and that I would eventually be a member of the Federal Parliament? It brings to my mind the following lines: -

You may run a swift race and be counted the victor,

And yet you but get there a step at a time;

And np the steep ladder, where fame keeps her glories,

If you want to get one you must certainly climb.

One would not expect a squatter to just fall into a Yarralumla. Is the Bill intended to ensure that in 1945 Yarralumlas shall, so to speak, fall upon these people like manna from Heaven? Honorable members know very well that the proposal is to tie up Australia so that posterity will find that it is being prevented from progressing by the dead hand of the. past. 1! object most strongly to it. The House will be well advised to accept the amendment moved by the honorable member for the Northern Territory. Before the Bill is passed, we should finalize our policy regarding the Northern Territory railway. Do we intend to construct a railway to Alice Springs ? Arewe going to take it from Daly Waters to a point opposite the Pellew Islands, or to Camooweal? Let us know what we are going to do with the Territory before we appoint a Board to watch the people to whom the Bill will give security of tenure, and who will be able to snap their fingers at any Board. We all know what is the state of affairs in the Territory to-day. We know that methods of transit prevent development. The progress of the Territory is not all involved in the question of land tenure. It is governed, also, by transport facilities. An opportunity should be provided for the people in the south to know the north. I suggest to the Government that that is a sane, and in fact the best, method of development. The railway should be built first, whether it is built from Oodnadatta or some other place. I shall certainly endeavour to induce the House to honour the compact made with South Australia, not because we are under an obligation to do so, but because the building of the railway from Oodnadatta would be in the best interests of Australia. The squatters have been cute in their selection of land. I do not put myself forward as an expert judge of land, but between Sydney and Albury I have passed through many miles of country which is better than any I saw in seven day’s travel through Italy and France. This land, right on the railway line, is locked up. Who has locked it up ? Some more of those “ hoboes.” On my first visit from Adelaide to the Mr Gambier district, I went through miles of lovely country on which hardly a tree had been felled, and in spite of this we are talking of sending soldiers out back. Who holds this land? Have they been starved off it? The same thing can be seen between Launceston and Hobart, where the railway goes through beautiful, undeveloped country. One cannot see it in Italy. In that country every foot of the land is cultivated, and the same statement is true in most parts of France.

Mr Hill:

– It would be true here if we had the population.

Mr YATES:

– Without any additional population, if we were to compel certain people to let go the strangle hold they have on the land, the people of the cities would swarm into the country like flies. Instead of tying up land as we do to-day, we ought to have a sound policy of development. In the Northern Territorythe railway should be provided first, and land settlement afterwards.

Question - That the words proposed to be inserted (Mr. Nelson’s amendment) be so inserted - put. The House divided.

AYES: 23

NOES: 0

Majority … 12

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Mr ATKINSON:
Honorary Minister · Wilmot · CP

– I do not desire to delay the House, but some of the statements that have been made by honorable members opposite require correction, and with these, by leave of the House, I shall deal to-morrow. I ask leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

page 963

NAVAL CONSTRUCTION BILL

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:
Attorney-General · Darling Downs · NAT

. - I move -

That Order of the Day No. 2, “Naval Construction Bill- Consideration, in Committee, of the Governor-General’s message No. 30,” be discharged from the business-paper.

The desire is to bring down another message.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 963

DEFENCE EQUIPMENT BILL

Message recommending appropriation reported.

page 963

ADJOURNMENT

Soldiers Committee - Japan and U.S.A. : “ Herald “ Cartoon

Motion (by Sir Littleton Groom) proposed -

That the House do now adjourn.

Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · Cowper · CP

..- - A majority of the members or the. Soldiers Committee, which deals with the medical history of returned soldiers, met last week, and thoroughly discussed the position with me.. An arrangement was, come to whereby, if honorable members- will first submit to me the cases they wish, to have investigated, I shall have them dealt with by the Committee. To-morrow the Committee will be sitting at 4 o’clock.

Mr.FENTON (Maribyrnong) [10.20]. - I do not know whether the Prime Minister or the Government has power to deal with the matter I intend to bring forward, but those who read to-night’s Herald, no doubt have seen a sketch published by it.

Sir Littleton Groom:

– Written or drawn ?

Mr FENTON:

– Partly written and partly drawn-. The words underneath the cartoon are - “ Some one- is feeling nervy.” Then there is a door,, branded “ U.S.A.,” with the words, “ No admittance to Japanese.” Japan is shown struggling at this particular door, and overlooking the fence or the enclosure is a man labelled “ Australia,” with the words, “ Now, will he try to get in here? “ As every one knows, this cartoon has reference to the exclusion law recently sanctioned by Congress, and endorsed by the President of the United States of America. Cartoons of this character concerning a nation living in friendly relationship with Australia, and an ally of the British Empire, are, to say the least, insulting, and totally unwarranted. Has the Prime Minister power to stop this kind of thing? It was mentioned by the honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. Marks), in an address delivered’ by him in Sydney last week, that on a recent visit to Japan a prominent Japanese official, if not a Japanese Minister, showed him a drawer full of cuttings from Australian papers containing insulting references to Japan. As a true supporter of the White Australia policy, I object to this type of cartoon appearing in the public press of this country. Nothing is more calculated to bring about International complications than humbugging and_ slanderous representations of this kind. This sketch does not represent Australian feeling, and the Prime Minister should repudiate it and any others that appear from time to’ time, in. certain sections of the Australian, press. Everything possible should bedone to stop this practice.

Mr BRUCE:
Prime Minister · Flinders · NAT

– I have not seen the cartoon, referred to by the, honorable member, but I need hardly say that I and. theGovernment entirely repudiate any cartoon in any paper dealing with delicate international relationships^ and tending to- foster ill-feeling between Australia and other nations, or any hostilitytowardsr Australia. I regret that anything of the sort should have appeared:. I shall look: into the- matter,, and see whether ‘steps can be taken to prevent the publication of cartoons calculated in any sense to engender ill-feeling between. Australia and other nations.

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

– I feel certain that, the artist who. has drawn this cartoon has done so from lack of thought.

Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– The cartoon is true.

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

– It is not true, and is- very unjust. I- suppose that I am the only member of Parliament whom tha merchants of Sydney, when I made my first visit to Japan, wished to prevent from landing there. I have to thank the Consul-General for Japan for not listening; to the representations of the Sydney merchants. Had he done so, I should have considered it only fair and in keepmg with his position. While the Prime Minister is making his inquiries, I ask him to consider whether it will not be worth while to publish throughout the length and breadth of Australia the wonderful letter that was written by our then greatest philosopher, Herbert Spencer, at the request of the Japanese Government. There is no better argument for a White Australia, or for the American view, than what Japan did in following the advice of our great philosopher. There should be nothing to prevent Australia from approaching Japan, and in the name of reciprocity saying,, “ If any Australian owns one acre of land in Japan, then by all means let Japan own thirteen times that quantity of land in Australia, with its wider spaces,” or “ If one Australian has become a citizen of Japan and is living there, then by all means let thirteen times as many Japanese come here.” But Japan cannot complain of the United States of America. It is said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. If we follow Japan, which instituted laws based upon the advice of Herbert Spencer, then wo can say, ‘ In the name of reciprocity you cannot blame us if we follow your splendid example.” But for goodness sake do not let us insult a brave nation, older in civilization than , we are, whose navy, at all events, defended our soldiers when they were being transported overseas, and did a most chivalrous act when it stood aside and let H.M.A.S. Sydney destroy the Emden. Any one of the Japanese war vessels thatwere convoying our troops at the time could have destroyed the Emden.

Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– If that is the honorable member’s version of the incident he ought to write a new history book.

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

– If the honorable member will help me to write it, and will take the pen which my older fingers find difficult to use, I may then make the attempt with his good advice. I feel certain that if the position were put to the artist responsible for the cartoon, he, as a true lover of Australia, would cease to use his talents in a way much regretted by honorable members.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned at 10.27 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 28 May 1924, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1924/19240528_reps_9_106/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives28 May 1924

CANNED FRUIT BOUNTY BILL

LOAN BILL

BANKRUPTCY BILL

MINISTER FOR TRADE AND CUSTOMS

Resignation of Mr. Austin Chapman

Mr BRUCE:Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT

Mr BRUCE:

Mr BRUCE:

QUESTION

NAMING OF SHIPS

Mr MARKS:WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr MARKS:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr MARKS:

Mr BRUCE:NAT

QUESTION

HOUSEHOLD LETTER-BOXES

Mr E RILEY:SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:Attorney-General · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · NAT

QUESTION

NEW GUINEA

Mr FORDE:CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

Mr BRUCE:NAT

QUESTION

MINISTER FOR HEALTH

Mr BLAKELEY:DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr BRUCE:NAT

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN BAND

Mr F MCDONALD:BARTON, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr BRUCE:NAT

QUESTION

SENATOR WILSON

Mr YATES:ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr BRUCE:NAT

LOAN FLOTATION

Dr EARLE PAGE:Treasurer · Cowper · CP

Mr CHARLTON:HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Dr EARLE PAGE:

Dr EARLE PAGE:

QUESTION

NATIVES IN NEW GUINEA

Mr COLEMAN:REID, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr BRUCE:NAT

QUESTION

PUBLICITY OFFICER

Mr FENTON:MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

Mr BRUCE:NAT

QUESTION

MILITARY TRAINING CAMPS

Mr E RILEY:SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr BOWDEN:Minister for Defence · PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

QUESTION

MELBOURNE-HOBART STEAMSHIP SERVICE

Mr O’KEEFE:DENISON, TASMANIA

Mr BRUCE:NAT

QUESTION

COCKATOO ISLAND DOCKYARD

Mr MAHONY:DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr BRUCE:NAT

QUESTION

WIRE NETTING

Mr FENTON:for Dr. Maloney

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:NAT

QUESTION

JUTE GOODS

Mr HILL:ECHUCA, VICTORIA

Mr BRUCE:NAT

QUESTION

OIL EXPLORATION IN NEW GUINEA

Mr BLAKELEY:

Mr BRUCE:NAT

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN MARBLE

Mr FORDE:

Mr STEWART:Minister for Works and Railways · WIMMERA, VICTORIA · CP

QUESTION

CONSTRUCTION OF SUBMAKINES

House of Representatives
28 May 1924

Mr BRUCE:
Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT

Mr MARKS:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr E RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:
Attorney-General · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · NAT

Mr FORDE:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr BLAKELEY:
DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr F MCDONALD:
BARTON, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr YATES:
ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · Cowper · CP

Mr CHARLTON:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr COLEMAN:
REID, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr FENTON:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr E RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr BOWDEN:
Minister for Defence · PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Mr O’KEEFE:
DENISON, TASMANIA

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr MAHONY:
DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr FENTON:
for Dr. Maloney

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:
NAT

Mr HILL:
ECHUCA, VICTORIA

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr STEWART:
Minister for Works and Railways · WIMMERA, VICTORIA · CP

Mr C RILEY:
COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP; FLP from 1931

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr GABB:
ANGAS, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr STEWART:
CP

Mr FENTON:
for Mr. A. Green

Dr EARLE PAGE:
CP

Mr FENTON:
for Dr. Maloney

Dr EARLE PAGE:
CP

Dr EARLE PAGE:
CP

Mr FENTON:
for Dr. Maloney

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:
NAT

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Dr EARLE PAGE:
CP

Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt:
BALACLAVA, VICTORIA

Mr NELSON:
Northern Territory

Mr SPEAKER (Et Hon, W A Watt:
BALACLAVA, VICTORIA

Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · Cowper · CP