House of Representatives
20 October 1927

10th Parliament · 1st Session

  1. House of Representatives
  2. 10th Parliament
  3. 1927

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

page 633

MODEL ABORIGINAL STATE

Petition

Mr. PARSONS presented a petition from 7,113 residents of Australia, praying for the establishment of a model aboriginal State.

Petition received.

page 633

QUESTION

FEDERAL CAPITAL COMMISSION

Works at Canberra.

Mr COOK:
INDI, VICTORIA

– Some time ago I asked the Minister for Home and Territories a series of questions regarding works being carried out at Canberra by the Federal Capital Commission. So far I have received no answer to them. As I have several other questions relating to the same subject to ask, I should liketo know from the Minister when he is likely to furnish roe with the information I seek.

Mr MARR:
Minister of Home and Territories · PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– I hope to be able to reply to the honorable member to-day.

page 633

QUESTION

CUSTOMS TAXATION

Mr.SCULLIN.- I ask the Minister for Trade and Customs whether his department has any analysis of Customs receipts, which willshow the amount of taxation obtained from purely revenue duties, and the amount yielded by protective duties?

Mr PRATTEN:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– From time to time the statistics have been analysed to give approximately the information which the honorable member seeks, and if he will place a question on the notice-paper I shall endeavour to furnish him with a reply.

page 633

QUESTION

MANUFACTURE OF HOSIERY

Mr MACKAY:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND

– Will the Minister for Trade and Customs say when the Tariff Board’s report on hosiery is likely to be discussed by the House?

Mr PRATTEN:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– I received the report onlythis week. It is long and complicated, and will require . careful consideration. As soon as it has been dealt with by the Cabinet and myself, I shall lay it upon the table of the House.

page 634

QUESTION

RETURNED SOLDIERS’ MILITARY TATTOO

Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– Is the Minister representing the Minister for Defence yet able to supply mc with any information regarding the difficulty which has arisen between the representatives of the United Returned Soldiers’ Fund and the Red Cross organization in connexion with the holding of a military tattoo ?

Mr MARR:
NAT

– I brought the honorable member’s remarks last week to the notice of the Minister for Defence, but as he has not yet returned from Melbourne,I am not in a position to make any statement on the subject.

page 634

QUESTION

NATIONAL INSURANCE

Mr FENTON:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

– Has the Prime Minister read the newspaper report of a speech delivered in Melbourne a few nights ago by Mr. T. Crosby, representing the Australian Natives Association, wherein he expressed the following opinion regarding the national insurance scheme : -

In my opinion the scheme is a master stroke on the part of the Federal Parliament to get rid of the old-age pensions and the maternity allowance. If the scheme comes into operation the Australian Natives Association, the Manchester Unity Independent Order of Oddfellows and the Rechabites, because of their strong financial position, will probably be able to carryon, but 1 am afraid that the weaker societies will be compelled to go to the wall.

Has the Prime Minister conferred with the representatives of the friendly societies regarding the proposed scheme of national insurance, and if so, is he able tot give to the House any information which may allay the fears of the friendly societies?

Mr BRUCE:
Minister for External Affairs · FLINDERS, VICTORIA · NAT

– For two or three months negotiations have proceeded between representatives of the friendly societies and Senator J. D. Millen, who was chairman of the royal commission upon national insurance. The Government authorized Senator Millen to conduct these negotiations as it was obvious that they would be protracted, and that it would be advantageous if the chairman of the commission, who already had a wide knowledge of the subject, were able to submit to the Government proposals that would be satisfactory to the friendly societies. The whole purpose is to formulate a scheme which will not interfere with or damage the friendly societies in any way. I am informed that the negotiations have been most successful, and that at the conference of friendly societies held in Melbourne towards the end. of September the proposals submitted by Senator Millen were generally accepted.. I have not yet received any formal report from Senator Millen on this subject.

page 634

QUESTION

OLD-AGE PENSIONS

Asiatics

Mr PERKINS:
EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Is the Treasurer prepared to introduce amending legislation to remove the injustice now suffered by Asiatics who, although they have become naturalized and have been taxpayers for many years, are disqualified from participating in the benefits of the Old-age Pensions Act?

Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– Last session this matter was before Parliament, which decided that the law should remain as at present.

page 634

QUESTION

WIRELESS COMMISSION

Mr BRENNAN:
BATMAN, VICTORIA

– Having regard to the very important interests involved and the litigation that is pending, will the Prime Minister indicate to the House the attitude of the Government towards the recent report of the royal commission on wireless?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– Negotations are still proceeding, but I think it will be possible in a few days to announce to the House the action which the Government proposes to take upon the report of the wireless commission.

page 635

QUESTION

EXPORTATION OF CHILLED BEEF

Dr NOTT:
HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

– Has the Minister for Markets and Migration received a report upon the recent shipment of chilled beef from Australia to Great Britain? If so, will he make it available to honorable members?

Mr PATERSON:
Minister for Markets and Migration · GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA · CP

– I have seen only what the honorable member has probably seen, the statement in to-day’s press*. When I receive a report, I shall be glad to make it available.

page 635

QUESTION

ABORIGINAL LABOUR

Mr NELSON:
NORTHERN TERRITORY, NORTHERN TERRITORY

– I have received the following telegram: -

Sleeper getters employing large number aborigines getting sleepers; many instances on task work. Intense exploitation of aborigines on Government contracts where white labour only should be employed. At present unemployment is rife. Belief work is being started, lumbers of workers strongly resent aborigines being exploited on Government work, while they have to seek relief work. Get Minister insist white labour getting sleepers.

I should like to know if the Minister for Home and Territories will take immediate action with a view to preventing the exploitation of aboriginal labour on government contracts in the Northern Territory?

Mr MARR:
NAT

– I have no information about the matter, but I shall make inquiries, and let the honorable member know the result.

page 635

QUESTION

FRUIT CROP

Damage from Frosts.

Mr PARSONS:
ANGAS, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Has the Minister for Markets and Migration any further information to give to honorable members as to the extent of the damage caused by the recent frosts in the Murray Valley districts and in Australia generally ?

Mr PATERSON:
CP

– I have received no information containing an accurate estimate of the amount of the damage, I but I am informed that it was

I very considerable at Mildura, although at Red Cliffs, which is near by, the settlers escaped with much less loss. The Murrumbidge area was fortunate, while in South Australia a number of districts were heavily hit. If at a later stage I receive detailed information, I shall be only too pleased to make it available to honorable members.

page 635

QUESTION

CENSORSHIP OF IMPORTED LITERATURE

Mr COLEMAN:
REID, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Will the Minister for Trade and Customs inform the House whether there is any one who exercises definite authority to peruse imported books and papers and, if necessary, bar their entry into Australia under the censorship regulations?

Mr PRATTEN:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– According to circumstances, what may be thought objectionable literature is submitted for the opinion of the Solicitor-General, the Chief Censor, and officials of the Customs Department. If the honorable member will give me a specific instance in’ regard to which there is complaint, I shall be pleased to give him a more definite answer.

page 635

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN COMMONWEALTH SHIPPING LINE

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

– As the Committee of Joint Public Accounts, in its inquiry into the operations of the Australian Commonwealth Shipping Line, had available only estimated figures, will the Prime Minister make available the actual figures showing the operations of the line for the last twelve or eighteen months, for comparison with those of the previous twelve or eighteen months!

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– The annual balancesheet has just been received and has been forwarded to the Auditor-General. As soon as he has finished with it, it will be laid on the table of the House. I shall endeavour to obtain the figures sought by the honorable member.

page 635

QUESTION

TYPEWRITERS

Mr FENTON:

– On the 29th September I asked a question with regard to the number of British and other typewriters in use by departments of the Commonwealth Government. The reply was that during the five years ended 30th June last year, 1,119 typewriters were imported from countries other than .Great Britain, while only 36 were imported from Great Britain. As this Government professes to believe in the principle of British preference, I ask the Prime Minister is he prepared to follow the lead of the New Zealand Government, which recently purchased British typewriters to the value of £54,000, and will he in future give preference to British over American and other foreign goods?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– The invariable practice in all Commonwealth departments is to give preference to British productions as against foreign productions. As for typewriters, it is necessary to have suitable and. efficient machines, and to determine whether such a. British article exists. That matter is one for the consideration of the Supply and Tender Board, which is composed of three permanent departmental heads. I shallrefer the honorable member’s question to them, and ask for a report.

page 636

QUESTION

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, CANBERRA

Mr SCULLIN:
YARRA, VICTORIA

– About a week ago I asked a question regarding the purchase of some addressograph machines for use at Canberra. In his reply the Minister stated, amongst other tilings, that a tender had been received from Messrs. Spicers and Detmold for £872 13s. 0d., plus package, freight, &c, £100, making a total of £972 13s. Od. Messrs. Spicers and Detmold now inform me that neither the sum of £100 nor any other figure, was quoted for package, freight, &c, and that such a figure would be ridiculous, as the probable cost would be about £35. They say that their quotation was £825, duty paid, or £760 15s. 0d., duty free, not £872 13s. as stated by the Minister. They state further that their tender was less than the price quoted for the German machines, theirs being an entirely British product. I am not accepting either statement, but I ask the Minister to place on the table of the house copies of all tenders received for these machines.

Mr MARR:
NAT

– If the honorable member will give me the letter he has received, I shall cause inquiries to be made into the allegations and supply him with the result.

page 636

QUESTION

CANBERRA

HousingConditions - Grazing Leases - Transport Service - Commission on Land Sales - Working Conditions.

Mr CHARLTON:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Home and Territories, upon notice -

  1. What is the number of houses that have been built by the Federal Capital Commission?
  2. Howmany more are to be built under existing contracts ?
  3. How many houses built by the commission are beingrented, how many have been purchased, and what number remain empty?
  4. Have contracts for the building of move than ten houses at a. time been entered into by the commission; if. so, how many, and for what number in each case?
Mr MARR:
NAT

– The information required by the honorable member is being obtained and he will be advised as soon as it is available.

Mr SCULLIN:

asked the Minister for Home and Territories, upon notice -

  1. With regard to the purchase by the Government of homes in Melbourne belonging to public servants transferred to Canberra, is it a fact that this money is held, and if at the end of twelve months the public servant does not purchase a home in Canberra, he receivesthe money without any interest, although during that period he has to pay rent?
  2. If so, will he give favorable consideration to the question of paying interest on the money whether the officer purchases a home in Canberra or not, or of paying’ the money due to the officer concerned immediately on his transfer to Canberra?
Mr MARR:

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

  1. Yes.
  2. Officers were supplied with copies of the conditions under which the Government was prepared to purchase their homes in Melbourne and such officers as accepted the Government’s valuations undertook to build or purchase and to reside in homes in Canberra within twelve months after the date of their arrival in Canberra. The honorable member’s suggestion cannot, in the circumstances, be complied with.
Mr ANSTEY:
BOURKE, VICTORIA

asked the Minister for Home and Territories, upon notice -

  1. In view of the desire of the Government to encourage officers to purchase their homes in Canberra., will he state whether the Government has considered the question of the position of an officer purchasing a home at Canberra, and being subsequently transferred to another place, or retiring from the service; if so, with what result ?
  2. If this aspecthas not yet been considered, will the Government give an undertaking to take over such property and allow the officer concerned the amount paid as principal in respect of the purchase, or an amount computed on an equitable basis?
Mr MARKS:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT; IND NAT from 1929

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

  1. No.
  2. It is not considered that such an undertaking could justifiably be given.

Mr.FENTON asked the Minister for Home and Territories, upon notice -

  1. How many grazing leases have been taken up in the Federal Territory, and what is the annual revenue from such leases ?
  2. How many people are paying ground rent for leases in the Federal city area, and what is the total annual revenue from same?
  3. What number of people are buying houses within the area, and what is the annual revenue from same?
  4. What number of people are renting houses, and what is the total annual revenue from same ?
  5. What is the annual revenue from all sources receivable by the commission?
Mr MARR:

– I regret that I am not in a position to furnish to-day replies to the honorable member’s questions, but the particulars required by him will be definitely made available to-morrow.

Mr CHARLTON:

asked the Minister for Home and Territories, upon notice -

  1. Willhe state the name of the company negotiating with the Federal Capital Commission for the transport service of the Federal Territory, and who are the shareholders ?
  2. What is the paid-up capital of this company, and the nature of the guarantees that the contract will be fulfilled?
Mr MARR:

– The information required by the honorable member is not at present available, but I am having inquiries made regarding the matter.

Mr CHARLTON:

asked the Minister for Home and Territories, upon notice -

What amount of commission has been paid by the Federal Capital Commission for the sale of land in the Federal Territory, and to whom ?

Mr MARR:

-An amount of £1,000 17s. 9d. has been paid to Richardson and Wrench Limited, and £3,679 18s. 3d. has been paidto Messrs. Woodger and Cal thorpe, making a total of £4,688 16s.

On the 6th October, the honorable member for Indi (Mr. Cook) asked me the following questions : -

  1. The total number of men engaged at the Federal Capital on earthworks such as roadmaking, streetforming, footpaths, levelling, &c. ?
  2. The hours of work and rates of pay per day?
  3. The number of horse-drawn vehicles employed in such work, and the cost of each vehicle per day?
  4. The number of motor lorries engaged in such work, and rate of pay per day of the drivers?
  5. The number of men engaged in supervising such works, and the rate of pay for each supervisor?
  6. The total cubic yards of earth shifted per week and cost per yard?
  7. The number of clerks employed by the Commission, and the cost per week of the total number?
  8. The amount paid in salary to the secretary of the Commission?
  9. What works, if any, exclusive of house-building, are let by contract?
  10. Are any houses being built under day-labour, conditions; if so, how many ?
  11. How many gardeners are engaged, and what is the rate of pay per week?
  12. The number of motor cars being run by the commission, and the cost of running each car per day; also the purpose for which such cars are being used?

I then informed him that the required information was being obtained, and that he would be advised as soon as it was available. The following particulars have now been received from the Federal Capital Commission: -

  2. As per attached schedule, which includes 209 gardeners and planters.

  3. 115;26s. 4d. per day, including driver.

    1. (i) 40 trucks of one and one-half cubic yards capacity; four trucks of two cubic yards capacity; five trucks of four cubic yards capacity.; four trucks of five cubic yards capacity.
    2. Work is done by lorries under contract and the payments covering the lorry and driver are as follow: - One mile and under, 2s. 9d. per cubic yard mile; over one mile and under two,1s. 9d. per cubic yard mile; over two miles and under three,1s. 6d. per cubic yard mile; three miles arid over,1s. 3d. per cubic yard mile.

  4. (i) Five.

    1. £520 per annum, chief foreman, sewerage; £500 per annum, chief foreman, roads; £459 per annum, chief foireman, bridges and concrete work; £416 per annum, foreman, concrete; £400 per annum, foreman, roads and maintenance.
    2. The Federal Capital Commission is adopting various methods for the carrying out of earthworks, involving the use of steam shovels, trenching machines, scoops, graders, as well as picks and shovels. The total amount of earth shifted varies considerably from week to week depending on the extent and class of work undertaken from time to time. The rates vary according to the method required to be adopted for the particular work, and also depend upon whether the excavation is shallow or deep, and other incidental circumstances. The average cost ranges from 3s. per cubic yard for steam-shovel work to 8s. per yard for pick and shovel work. If the honorable member would indicate more fully what particular kind of information he desires further particulars will be obtained.
    3. (i) 135. This number includes all officers whose work is classified as clerical in the commission’s offices and establishments, but does not include typists and stenographers, accounting machine and calculating machine operators, and messengers.
    4. £770 12s. 4d.
  5. £926 per annum.
  6. Part of engineering services accessory to building construction. Supply of furniture and equipment for public buildings and residential establishments. Part of kerbing and guttering. Part of concrete footpath construction. Part of bridge construction. Supply of electrical cable and transformers, static condensers, turbo alternators, and machinery of various kinds. Supply and erection of gravel screening plant. Supply and erection of sand washing plant. Large buildings such as offices, stores, schools, &c, where considered desirable.
  7. One: a two-story building of brick and timber.
  8. Three leading hand gardeners, £5 18s. per week; eight leading hand planters, £5 12s. per week; nine gardeners, £5 12s. per week; 189 labourers during the planting season, £56s. per week.

  9. (i) Forty-one cars.

    1. The cost per day depends upon the mileage run, which varies considerably. The average cost is just under 10d. per mile.
    2. Conveyance of Ministers, Members of Parliament, public servants, commission officers on duty, and distinguished visitors.
Return showing the number of workmen employed on the following works : - {: .page-start } page 639 {:#debate-16} ### QUESTION {:#subdebate-16-0} #### SUPERPHOSPHATES {: #subdebate-16-0-s0 .speaker-KZT} ##### Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917 asked the Prime Min ister, *upon notice -* >Have the Government or the Phosphate Commission received any intimation from the Australian Manure Manufacturers of any - and if so, what - reduction in prices of superphosphate for the next ensuing season? {: #subdebate-16-0-s1 .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr BRUCE:
NAT -- Prices, have been reduced from £5 7s. 6d. to £5 5s. per ton, and, inaddition, discounts are being offered for cash. {: .page-start } page 639 {:#debate-17} ### QUESTION {:#subdebate-17-0} #### TASMANIAN SHIPPING DISABILITIES {: #subdebate-17-0-s0 .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST:
EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES asked the Prime Minister, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is it a fact that a shipping conference took place in Hobart in July last, under the auspices of the State Government, which was attended by representatives of the maritime unions of Australia, who met in friendly consultation with representatives of the Chamber of Commerce, the City Council, the Tasmanian Shipping Committee, the Development League, the " Come to Tasmania " Organization, and the Marine Board? 1. If so,is it a fact that this conference decided to inform the Commonwealth Government that the true solution of Tasmanian shipping disabilities would be to place steamers of the Commonwealth Government Line in the Tasmanian service, and to make a request for such a service? 2. If such request were made, will the Prime Minister inform the House of what reply was made? {: #subdebate-17-0-s1 .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr BRUCE:
NAT -- The Commonwealth Government has received no advice that such a shipping conference was held in Hobart in July last, and no request has come to hand from that conference for the steamers of the Australian Commonwealth line to be placed in the Tasmanian service. {: .page-start } page 640 {:#debate-18} ### QUESTION {:#subdebate-18-0} #### DEFENCE SERVICES {: #subdebate-18-0-s0 .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr HUGHES:
NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. In view of the fact that the InspectorGeneral of the Commonwealth Military Forces in his last annual report states that the number under training in the Citizen Forces is only 42,000, will the Minister supply the following information : - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. What was the number of Citizen Force registrations for the three quotas in training? 1. What is the male population of the Commonwealth at Citizen Force age, i.e., 18 to 20 years, both inclusive? 1. In view of the fact that the InspectorGeneral complains that signs are not lacking that the organization may fail in its object of producing its own leaders, since the service offers few attractions - (a.) What steps does the Minister propose to take to remedy this ? {: type="a" start="b"} 0. Is it a fact, speaking of the higher formations, that senior officers have no opportunity of exercising their commands because of the short period of training which permits only of work in the lower formations, of the merest elementary character, being carried out? 1. If so, what is to be done for the training of leaders in the field, apart from exercises without troops? 2. Since the Inspector -General records that thu present nucleus has been found insufficient for the accomplishment of the approved policy of the army and that an increase in numbers is essential, what is it proposed to do to remedy this? 3. How long is it estimated it would take to put an infantry division with auxiliary troops into the field equipped and trained for active service ? 4. Are any steps being taken to decentralize the mobilization and equipment stores to facilitate rapid mobilization should the emergency arise? 5. When might it be expected that the forts guarding capital cities will be equipped with heavier and more up-to-date armament? {: #subdebate-18-0-s1 .speaker-KMW} ##### Mr MARR:
NAT -- The information is being obtained, and the honorable member will be informed as early as possible. {: #subdebate-18-0-s2 .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, *upon notice -* >What is the total amount that has been expended on - (a) Military; (b)Naval, and (c) Air Services, from 1909-10 to date? {: .speaker-KMW} ##### Mr MARR: -- The information is being obtained and will be made available to the honorable member as soon as possible. {: .page-start } page 640 {:#debate-19} ### QUESTION {:#subdebate-19-0} #### TRADE REPRESENTATIVES {: #subdebate-19-0-s0 .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: asked the Prime Minister, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. . Has he received a report from thu Minister for Trade and Customs on trade representation in Canada; if so, what actionin that direction is contemplated? 1. Has thu Board of Trade represented to the Government that there should be trade representation at Hull and Liverpool; if so, what has been done in the matter? {: #subdebate-19-0-s1 .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr BRUCE:
NAT -- The replies to the honorable member's questions are as follow : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. The Minister for Trade and Customs recently visited Canada, and is preparing a report for the Government upon the results of the Canadian reciprocal treaty for the first two years of its operation, which ended on 30th September last. I understand from my colleague that the final figures will shortly be ready. **Mr. Bell,** a member of the Dried Fruits Export Board, returned from Canada last week, and **Mr. Haynes,** of Adelaide, has prepared a. report for thu Dried Fruits Board as a result of his recent visit to Canada made at the instigation of that body. The Government is considering all the information from the various sources which is being placed at its disposal in connexion with trade representation in Canada. 1. No such representations have been made by the Board of Trade to the Government. {: .page-start } page 640 {:#debate-20} ### QUESTION {:#subdebate-20-0} #### PERTH, ADELAIDE, AND HOBART POST OFFICE BUSINESS {: #subdebate-20-0-s0 .speaker-KX9} ##### Mr WATKINS:
NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES asked the PostmasterGeneral, *upon notice -* >What is the revenue and expenditure of the following post offices: - Perth, Adelaide, and Hobart? {: #subdebate-20-0-s1 .speaker-KAY} ##### Mr GIBSON:
Postmaster-General · CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA · CP -- The offices referred to are General post offices, but the capital cities are also served by city sub-offices. The staff of a general post office is. employed not only in connexion with local traffic but in the administrative work of the department over the State. For these reasons, it is impracticable to keep accounts which would reveal the actual revenue of a general post office,or the actual expenditure in connexion with the local business of such offices, and I, therefore,regret that I am unable to supply the information desired by the honorable member. {: .page-start } page 641 {:#debate-21} ### QUESTION {:#subdebate-21-0} #### TARIFF BOARD Iron and Steel Duties {: #subdebate-21-0-s0 .speaker-KX9} ##### Mr WATKINS: asked the Minister for Trade find Customs, *upon notice -* 1.Hasthe report of the Tariff Board on the question of iron and steel duties been yet considered by the Government? {: type="1" start="2"} 0. When doeshe intend to circulate the report by laying it on the table of the House? {: #subdebate-21-0-s1 .speaker-K1J} ##### Mr PRATTEN:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT -- The replies to the honorable member's questions arc us follow : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. The reporthas not yet been fully considered by the Government. 1. When the report has been fully considered it willbelaid on the table of the House. {: .page-start } page 641 {:#debate-22} ### QUESTION {:#subdebate-22-0} #### MIGRATION Juveniles in Rural Employment. {: #subdebate-22-0-s0 .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES asked the Prime Minister, *upon notice -* >Does the agreement which juvenile migrants are required to enter into statu what wages they are to receive and the hours to be worked per week when provided with rural employment for twelve months? {: #subdebate-22-0-s1 .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr BRUCE:
NAT -- In cases where agreements are entered into by juvenile migrants for rural employment, such agreements set out the rates of wages to be paid, but do not specify the number of hours to be worked per week. {: .page-start } page 641 {:#debate-23} ### QUESTION {:#subdebate-23-0} #### EX-ENEMY VESSELS {: #subdebate-23-0-s0 .speaker-KYV} ##### Mr E RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP asked the Prime Minister, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. What profits were made by the ex- enemy vessels: -Boonah. *Baramftah,Bakara, Boorara,Barunga* andBulla, whilst engaged as transports ? 1. Does this profit include the passage money of troops and freight on horses carried by these vessels during the period they were engaged on transport work? 2. If not. how many troops and horses were transported by these vessels? 3. What were the rates of passage money paid to private lines carrying troops, and also the freight for horses? {: #subdebate-23-0-s1 .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr BRUCE:
NAT -- Inquiries are being made with a view to ascertaining if the information is available in the Navy Office. {: .page-start } page 641 {:#debate-24} ### QUESTION {:#subdebate-24-0} #### RIFLE CLUBS Free Ammunition {: #subdebate-24-0-s0 .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, *upon notice -* >How many rounds of ammunition have been issued free to rifle clubs by the Defence authorities in Now South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia, and Tasmania respectively, since 1st July last? {: #subdebate-24-0-s1 .speaker-KMW} ##### Mr MARR:
NAT -- The information will be obtained from the several States and furnished to the honorable member as soon as it is received. {: .page-start } page 641 {:#debate-25} ### QUESTION {:#subdebate-25-0} #### AVIATION {: #subdebate-25-0-s0 .speaker-KMW} ##### Mr MARR:
NAT -- Yesterday the honorable member for Wentworth **(Mr. Marks)** asked the following questions: - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. What subsidies or amounts have been paid each year, from 1921 to 1927, for Defence Department aviation, civil aviation, construction of planes, scientific investigation (air), training schools (air), aviation clubs, aviation press, ground organization, or for any other purposes in connexion with flying operations ? 1. What types of aeroplanes (separate as to plane and engine) existed in the different years in civil aviation? 2. What is the form of the following com. panics and their respective capital, viz.: - Western Australian Airways Limited, Queensland and Northern Territory Aerial Service, Lark in Aircraft Company? 3. What are the figures for each year from 1921. to 1927 for theR.A.A.F. and Civil Aviation Companies, regarding - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. *Percentage* of regularity in maintenance of services? 1. Accidents? 2. Persons hurt? 3. Persons killed? I am now in a position to inform the honorable member as follows : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Air force and civil aviation expenditure is recorded under the headings set out in the estimates and, except for the information given below, details of amounts spent on the other activities mentioned are not available. Total expenditure. - Amounts as under have been expended during the financial years as shown : - Construction of Planes - Expenditure on the construction of aircraft in Australia outside of Air Force workshops amounts to £13,000. Scientific Investigation - Apart from investigations carried out in departmental workshops and laboratories, the following amounts have been paid: - Aviation Clubs - First payments were made to aero clubs, Sydney and Melbourne, during 1926-27 when amounts paid as bonus for pilots trained totalled £600. These clubs have also received departmental assistance in the form of loaned equipment and free hangar, workshop, and aerodrome accommodation. Subsidies to Civil Aviation Companies - The following amounts were paid as subsidies tothe various companies: - Aircraft Press - Besides the amounts spent on advertising from time to time and of which no separate record was kept, an amount of £591 was paid as salary to a publicityofficer employed in the Civil Aviation Branch from 1st July, 1923, to 31st December, 1924. {: type="1" start="2"} 0. See schedules herewith. 1. The last published balance-sheets show: - 4. (a) The operations of the Royal Australian Air Force do not cover the maintenance of aerial services. The figures for Civil Aviation Companies are - {: type="a" start="b"} 0. Accidents involving casualties to occupants of aircraft - {: .page-start } page 644 {:#debate-26} ### QUESTION {:#subdebate-26-0} #### ROMA OIL BORE {: #subdebate-26-0-s0 .speaker-KMW} ##### Mr MARR:
NAT -- Yesterday the honorable, member for Macquarie **(Mr. Manning)** asked me a question about the Roma oil bore. I have no information regarding the quantity of oil taken from the company's bore, later than that which has already been published in the press. The arrangements to be observed in connexion with the future working of the bore have been the subject of correspondence between myself, the Queensland Minister for Mines and the chairman of the company. Acting on the advice of the Queensland. Oil Advisory Board, the company proposes : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. To carry out a surface geological investigation, with the aid of necessary excavations at places to be indicated by the Queensland Government Geologist, with the object of elucidating the geological strata in order that new boring operations may be conducted under the most suitable conditions for proving the existence or non-existence of oil; 1. To conserve, as far as possible, the gas now coming from the existing bore, and to prevent any more gas escaping than is absolutely necessary to ensure the safety of the bore ; 2. To otherwise, maintain the present position on the field, until such time as **Dr. Woolnough,** the Commonwealth Geological Adviser, returns to Australia from Papua, and can confer, on the field, with the Queensland Oil Advisory Board and tlie directors of the company ; and 3. To take such subsequent action as may bc recommended by tlie conference, after the consideration of all available geological data. 1 am in full agreement with these proposals, and I am accordingly arranging for **Dr. Woolnough** to visit the field as soon as possible and participate in the suggested conference. I may add that the chairman of the company has informed me that, although consideration had at one time been given to the question of either absorbing the petrol from the gas, or killing the gas and boring deeper in search for oil, the intrusion of oil into the bore has entirely changed the situation and the purchase of an absorbing plant is being no longer considered. {: .page-start } page 644 {:#debate-27} ### PAPERS The following papers were presented : - Public Service Act - Appointments - Department of Health - H. E. Downes, *K.* B. Hope {: .page-start } page 644 {:#debate-28} ### HOUSING- BILL {:#subdebate-28-0} #### Second Reading Debate resumed from 5th October *(vide* page 230) on motion by **Dr. Earle** Page- >That the bill be now read a second time. {: #subdebate-28-0-s0 .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra *.- Tha* Treasurer moved the motion for the second reading of this bill immediately after lie had moved a similar motion in respect to the Commonwealth Bank Savings Bank Bill. The two measures were said to be co-related, and it has happened that a good deal of the discussion which properly should have taken place on this motion occurred while the other bill was under consideration. As a matter of fact, a number of honorable members who support the Government found it so difficult to say anything in favour of the Commonwealth IBank Savings Bank Bill that they were glad to be able to discuss this measure- instead. It has been said that opposition to the severance of the savings bank branch from the other branches of the Commonwealth Bank is opposition to the Government housing scheme; but there is no truth in tlie assertion, for we have pointed out quite definitely that there is no need to alter the present constitution of the Commonwealth Bank in order to inaugurate a Commonwealth housing scheme. Even if the Government had proposed a good, comprehensive scheme under which it would shoulder the whole responsibility, there would not have been the slightest need to do anything further to disintegrate the Commonwealth BankBut when the bill before us is analyzed and dealt with in detail as well as in general terms, it becomes more than ever apparent that there is absolutely no justification for altering the constitution of the Commonwealth Bank in order to carry out this apology for a housing scheme. None realize the importance of housing more than honorable members on this side of the chamber. We have advocated housing schemes and the extension of them, and when Labour has been in power in the States it has put into operation the most successful housing schemes that have yet been evolved. Therefore, we cannot be accused of lacking interest in proposals for providing homes for the people. With what *tha* Treasurer said about the importance of providing homes for the people no one on this side of the House will disagree. We realize the importance of the matter. It goes to the roots of the home life of the community. Therefore, it will be impossible to find any one in opposition to a housing scheme who has the real interest of the- people at heart. But we have to examine the bill in the light of both the promises of the Government and the needs of the people of Australia. To-day there are housing schemes in every State of the Commonwealth. It may, therefore, be asked, is all that is possible or necessary being done?. The answer will probably be that everything possible is not being done. That being so, the question -confront ing this National Parliament is, can we assist the States in any way, or supplement their efforts in providing homes? I believe that we can. Then we must ask, what is the best means for setting about it? I agree with the Government, and with other honorable members who have spoken, that we should not duplicate the State machinery for house building. But that is not a declaration that we should not supplement it with a federal scheme, using the State authorities as our agents, as we do in some cases in regard to our War Service Homes scheme. As the Government claims to have a housing policy, and boasts of what it is going to do, Ministers ought to have a policy of their own, and shoulder responsibility for it. I do not mean that the Commonwealth must enter upon the actual, detailed work of building houses. It can use, other authorities as agents ; but it should shoulder the responsibility of the scheme. In this measure nothing of the kind is done. Not a stick nor a brick will the bill add to the homes of the people of Australia. I ask those who support the bill if there is anything in it which will tend towards the provision of more homes. The States will have to shoulder the scheme, not as agents or co-operators, but entirely and completely. They, are to increase their activities and their duties, to do the actual work, and to take full responsibility for . everything. The savings branch is. to be separated from the general branch of the Commonwealth Bank, and a board of commis sioners is to be given power to lend out certain funds of the savings branch. It is not mandatory that they should lend out those funds; that is. entirely at the discretion of the commissioners. Further, money is to be borrowed by the Federal Government and handed to the Savings Bank Commissioners, which must be used for housing purposes, if the State or other authorities can be got to use it. The Commonwealth Government will float a loan, with the assistance of the Commonwealth Bank. The money so raised will be paid to the Commonwealth Savings Bank Commissioners, and by them loaned to the State savings banks or any other building authority that will accept it. Therefore, the money goes from, the Commonwealth Government through the Commonwealth Bank to the Commonwealth Savings Bank, thence to the State savings banks, and is finally handed to the actual builders. And when payments are made the money will have to go back over the same winding track. It is as the song says - " A long, long, trail a-winding." And what is the advantage of all this circumlocution? Let the Treasurer tell the House what there is in the scheme that adds anything to what already exists. To-day the State or municipal authorities can borrow from the Commonwealth Bank, and the State Governments can raise loans through the. Loan Council for the purpose of building houses. As a matter of fact, the State Governments are now doing that, and the State savings banks have the power to borrow, and are exercising it. Why then should the Commonwealth Government float loans merely to lend out the money borrowed to the State savings banks, when those banks can borrow the money themselves on the same terms; or their governments can do it for them. All this adds to the cost of any scheme. There are the Savings Bank Commissioners and their staffs to be provided for. There will be bookkeeping arrangements between the Commonwealth Bank and the Commonwealth Savings Bank, because the Commonwealth Bank will float the loans and lend the money, to the savings bank, - the matter being, adjusted by bookkeeping entries. All these bookkeeping arrangements will pile up the costs of housing. The Commonwealth Sayings Bank will not be the home builder, but will merely make money available to the State or other building authority, which must repay it. The loan tothe Commonwealth Savings Bank will be at the cost of the money to the Commonwealth Government plus flotation expenses and discounts. Then the Commonwealth Savings Bank must add something further before it can hand over the money to a State institution. This will make the money very dear by the time it gets into the hands of the building authority, and will make very expensive the homes which will be built with it. The commissioners of the Commonwealth Savings Bank have power to advance up to one-half of the increase of their deposits, subject to existing agreements with State Governments which have amalgamated their savings banks with the Commonwealth Savings Bank. It was rightly pointed out by the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Theodore)** that half the deposits of the Commonwealth Savings Bank come from Queensland. Seventy per cent. of the new deposits must go to that State, and if we reckon that half the new money will come from Queensland, it means that only15 percent. of the new business will be available for building homes. A very small sum, therefore, is to be made available forhousing, even if the commissioners use every penny for that purpose; but it is not mandatory on them to do so. The other power given to the commissioners is to use one-fourth of the repayments to the Commonwealth Savings Bank. Again, that is not mandatory. If they choose, they need not use a penny of that money for the provision of homes. All that the commissioners are compelled to use for building purposes is the money to be borrowed by the Commonwealth Government for housing. The main fund will come from loans, and from that point of view only should this bill be considered. One of the reasons why the State housing schemes have been successful in enabling the poorer section of the community to obtain homes is that the States have secured comparatively cheap money, because the governments of the day have used the savings bank deposits, on which the rate of interest paid varies from3½ to4½ per cent. Under the proposed scheme, the great bulk of the fund will be derived from an ordinary loan flotation and, allowing for the charge of the Commonwealth Savings Bank for handling the fund, and the commission of the building authorities, it will be dear money. Moreover, no guarantee is given that one extra home will be built under the scheme. I invite honorable members to examine clause 9, under which no advance can be made to a State Government unless its regulations conform to certain specified conditions. It must extend the powers now enjoyed by its building authority. In Victoria, as in several other States, the State Savings Bank is the house-building authority, and before that State can obtain one penny under this scheme, it. must pass amending legislation extending the powers of the State Savings Bank. If a State has two schemes in operation, it must amend the legislation relating to both of them, as required by clause 9, which provides - >An advance shall not be made by the savings bank to an authority until the commission is satisfied - > >That since the passing of this act the [lowers of that authority in relation to housing have been increased so as to extend the existing facilities provided under the housing schemes of that authority in order to cover the matters hereunder specified (if the existing powers are not sufficient to cover those matters ) . {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- If the States amended their legislation, there is no guarantee that they would obtain money from the Commonwealth Bank at a lower rate than that at which they could raise it themselves. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- That is so. There is nothing to show that the Commonwealth Government can borrow through the Loan Council more cheaply than the States. What are the extended powers which the States arc compelled to give their building authorities before they may receiveone penny of this money? . In the first place, a State must at least give its authority power to advance up to 90 per cent., of the valuations, and up to £1,800 on each home. Itmust further give power to the authority to advance money to persons in receipt of incomes up to £624- per annum. If a State accepts the bill, an applicant will hare the right, on paying a deposit of £200 to a State Savings Bank, to obtain an advance of £1,800 on a dwelling valued at £2,000 if he is in receipt of a salary of £12 per week or less, lt is mandatory on the State . to empower its existing authority to make advances on those terms. The' honorable member for Wilmot **(Mr. Atkinson ) endeavoured to answer an argument raised, I think, by the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Gregory)** and the honorable member for Fawkner **(Mr. Maxwell).** He said that if a State Savings Bank advanced 90 per cent, of a valuation that was its business, and it would be responsible for the repayment of the loan to the Commonwealth. That may be so ; but, .if the honorable member had carefully considered the matter, it would have occurred to him that he was pointing out a weakness in the bill which will probably prevent any State from accepting a solitary penny under the proposal. I regret that the acceptance of national assistance in the important matter of home building will be discouraged by the bill. The States have their responsibilities to the people, and if they desire to extend their building schemes they have now the right and power to do it. They will naturally ask why they should he required to disturb their existing arrangements, and amend legislation which all six of them have passed in order to participate in the money to be disbursed under the Commonwealth proposal. They will surely ask, "What benefit shall, we derive by doing this ? " Upon examining the proposal they will realize that the great bulk of the money is to be lent to them on conditions not a whit more favorable than those on which they can borrow for themselves. If that is not a correct statement of the position, I shall be grateful to the Treasurer for correction. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr Fenton: -- They will all get the money from the Loan Council. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- They will all get it from the same source and upon the same credit, and they will naturally ask why they should widen the scope of their existing housing schemes for the building of £2,000 dwellings when they have yet been unable, in some instances, to meet the demand for houses costing £700. They will want to know why they should give benefits to persons with high salaries when they have been unable to meet the whole of - the needs of those on comparatively low salaries. They will also ask whether it is safe to advance up to 90 per cent, on a £2,000 house. Small properties when surrendered by the occupants are easily sold, but there is no ready sale for large properties. In Canberra, for instance, although there is a keen demand for homes, houses costing £2,000 remain unoccupied because the rent is too dear...... {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- And the accommodation is too small. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- The point, is whether this scheme is good or bad. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- It is a good bluff. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- It is. If this Parliament is serious in its desire to extend facilities for home building to people who have larger salaries than those for whom provision is already made, or require larger houses than are provided for by existing schemes, let it assume the responsibility and provide the money rather than ask the States to do the work. Under the scheme we have had placed before us the States which accept an advance from the Commonwealth will be expected, at the behest of the Commonwealth, to extend the facilities they already offer for thibuilding of homes, and the Commonwealth will not shoulder any of the responsibility. The whole' of it will be thrust upon the States, and 'they will get no return for it. If ever there was a case of a Government going to the- country with lavish promises of expenditure, and then- cheerfully transferring its responsibilities to the States, we have it in the present instance. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr Coleman: -- It amounts to a breach of promise. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- It is a breach of promise, despite the claim of the Treasurer that by this legislation the Government is honoring its promise. As a matter of fact, although the Commonwealth Government is placing on the .States' the whole responsibility for the building of bornes, it offers them no inducement for accepting that responsibility. In regard to the limitations of their housebuilding schemes, there has been wonderful unanimity among the States, whether controlled by Liberal, Labour, Nationalist, or Country party governments. Victoria has two schemes. Under its Credit Foncier scheme loans are made up to £1,000 on houses, and £2,000 on farms. Long terms of repayment are given, the interest charged is 6 per cent., and advances are made up to two-thirds of the value of the property. Under the Housing and Reclamation Act of Victoria, the advance must not exceed £850 on a wooden house, or £950 on a brick or stone house. In each case the value of the land is included. A minimum deposit of £50 is required, which represents a little more than 5 per cent. The maximum income of a person who can secure a home under the provisions of the Housing and Reclamation Act is £400. Repayments on an £850 house are made at the rate of £1 4s. 6d. a week. In South Australia, under the Advances for Homes Act, the maximum advance is £700, the deposit required is £25, the interest charged is 6½d per cent., and repayments extend over 20, 30, or 42 years, according to the class of building. In. Western Australia the maximum advance is £650. The land being on perpetual lease, its value is not included. There are two schemes operating in Queensland. The. Workers' Homes Act provides for a rental of 3 per cent. on land on perpetual lease. The maximum value of the house is £600, and the deposit required is 5 per cent. The borrower is charged interest at the rate of 5 per cent., and has 25 years in which to repay the amount of that advance. The income of the applicant must not exceed £400. The Workers' Dwelling Act of Queensland provides for a maximum advance of £800 up to 80 per cent. of the value of the property. The interest charged is 5 per cent., and the maximum income of the applicant must not be more than £415 a year.. But we have this anomaly, that while the Commonwealth Government is calling, on the States to liberalize their housing schemes, and shoulder the whole of the responsibility for so doing, it is making no attempt to liberalize the conditions under which it provides war service homes. In other words, is is not willing to extend to returned soldiers the conditions it is practically compelling the States to give. The War Service Homes Act provides for a maximum advance of £300, which, by the amending bill last year, may be increased to £950 undercertain conditions. In the last report of the War Service Homes Commission, dated the 30th June, 1926, is a photograph of a house built for a returned soldier, and costing £1,648. That soldier had to put up a deposit of £848 in order to get the maximum advance of £800. Yet, while the Commonwealth Government treats the returned soldiers in this way, it will not advance one penny to a State. under the terms of its Housing Bill unless the State makes advances to home builders on infinitely better terms than the Commonwealth will give to those who want to get homes under the war service homes scheme. If that is not a betrayal of the promise given to the electors, I want to know what it is. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- The conditions under which war service homes are obtained ure much better than the terms that will be imposed on those who secure homes under the provisions of this bill. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- When I suggest that the States are not likely to take up this scheme, that the Commonwealth will not have to spend any money under it, and that afterwards Ministers will say, " We provided £20,000,000 for the State Governments, nearly all of them Labour governments, but they would not take any of the money," I shall probably be told that eventually the States must come into the scheme as they had to come into the federal aid roads scheme. It is just as well for us to review what happened in that case. When the Commonwealth began to collect revenue from a duty on petrol, it drove out of that field of taxation two States, South Australia and Western Australia, which had been collecting taxes on petrol for the purpose of road construction, and it then offered to hand over to the States for the construction of main roads, the money it collected from the people of those States by the imposition of the duty on petrol. What could the States do? The revenue was accumulating; the Commonwealth had no interest to pay on it; it was easy revenue, and when it was made available to them the States would have been mad not to accept it. But the present proposal is entirely different. We tell the States that they can have certain money at what it costs us to borrow it, plus our expenses, but only so long as they conform to conditions which are very much more risky than those already existing, and, indeed, very much more liberal than those which the Commonwealth offers to returned soldiers. In moving the second reading of the bill the Treasurer said - >The only reason why the State schemes have not been liberalized is that there has been no money. That remark may apply to some States, but not to all. Victoria is advertising that it will build houses for those who want them. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- The difficulty in Victoria is not so much lack of funds as inability to obtain contractors and artisans. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- Let us assume that lack of money has prevented the States from extending their schemes. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- That is not the reason. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- The Treasurer said, " The only reason why the State schemes have not been liberalized isthat there has been no money." If that is the only reason why the States have notmade advances on larger houses, to more people, . and to persons with larger incomes, all that is now required is for money to be made available; the Commonwealth should lend it to the States. Indeed, that is all it will do under this legislation. Why call the Government's proposal a housing scheme when it is a money-raising and moneylending scheme? Why have the States not all the money they need? Surely they, like the Commonwealth Government, could go to the Loan Council and borrow the extra money needed to liberalize' their schemes! I suggest that the reason why the various , State schemes have not been extended is that those in charge pf the finances of the States feel that there is a limit to the amount they can spend in various direc tions each year, abd to the extent to which they can mortgage thecredit of their States. Let us consider, for example, the position of Western Australia, with its big developmental schemes. The Government of Western Australia, sympathetic with that State's housing scheme, and desirous of extending it, is yet unwillingtomortgage its credit for that purpose to the neglect of other developmental schemes which will also be for the benefit of the people. If this scheme would relieve. Western Australia, that would be something in its favour. It has been stated! that the Government won the election because of its promise to introduce a housing scheme. That may, or may not, be so, but the housing scheme before us will not relieve the States. They will still be forced to mortgage their credit as though they undertook the scheme themselves. It would be as easy for the States themselves to raise the money through the Loan Council as for the Commonwealth to raise it to lend to them. Yet we are told that this scheme is the result of the promise to "fill the gap." With great unction, honorable members opposite quoted the promise of the Prime Minister during the last election campaign, and referred to this measure as a fulfilment of that promise. {: .speaker-KMS} ##### Mr Manning: -- That is what hurts. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- The Prime Minister's promise is not being fulfilled in this bill; that is what hurts. We on this side are sincere in our desire that, the facilities for obtaining homes shall be extended, and it hurts us to see introduced into this House a scheme which is only a pretence. If the Government won the election because of a promise to introduce a housing scheme, it should have introduced a scheme which would benefit the people. The housing scheme before us is a humbug and a pretence. Of course it hurts! The Government is not honoring the Prime Minister's promise; instead, it is calling upon the States to do so.Why has there been a delay of two years in introducing this measure? A housing scheme such as is proposed in this bill could have been conceived and put into operation in a few days. Having taken two years to act, the Government has introduced abill which isonly a pretence. To refresh my memory I have read the speech which the Prime Minister made on tlie 5th October, 1925. The right honorable gentleman then said : - >In the past it has been the practice of the Prime Minister to make elaborate promises designed to attract different sections of elec- , tors by appeals to the cupidity of the people. ..... That course I refuse to follow.. Nevertheless, the remainder of his speech contained a number of promises. He said that, if returned to power, his Government would make available £30,000,000 for roads, and a similar sum for housing; he promised legislation to provide for child endowment, national insurance, national health, .and new States, and to ensure industrial peace. He even went so far as to promise that " agitators," including **Mr. "** Jock " Garden, would be deported. Yet the other day, when **Mr. Garden** wanted a passport, it was refused. The promise of a satisfactory housing scheme is not more likely to be fulfilled than his other promises have been. This bill can only be described as a hollow pretence. The scheme depends entirely on the State Governments for its success. If the States refuse to accept the conditions which this measure would impose upon them, the Government's housing scheme will collapse like a house of cards. If, on the other hand, the States accept the conditions set out in this, bill, and alter their legislation accordingly, any success which may attend the scheme will be to their credit and not to that of the Commonwealth Government. This scheme does no morn than provide the States with that which they could provide for themselves. I regret that the Government, having promised that £20,000,000 would be expended in a housing scheme, has not honoured that promise by introducing a bill which would, in fact, provide homes for the people of this country. I regret that this national Parliament has not before it a national house-building scheme, supplementing the efforts of the States, designed .to relieve the congestion in the cities, and to diminish slum conditions, which, if allowed to continue, will become not only a disgrace but also a menace to our people. The Government has " honoured " the promise of the Prime Minister by introducing a bill which is nothing but a sham. {: #subdebate-28-0-s1 .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr BRENNAN:
Batman -- I do not propose to say anything in oppo.sition to the general principles of a housing scheme; but I should 'not like this bill to become law without having: registered at every stage my emphatic protest against the tendency of this Government to encumber the Commonwealth with debt in respect of loan money. It is unfortunate that, before this bill and others of a similar nature came before us for consideration, we had not the opportunity to expose the Government's disastrous financial proposals in a debate on the budget. In common with every honorable member who has spoken from this side - of the House, I recognize that one of the f funda-. mental necessities of the people is proper,, wholesome, and sanitary housing. Realizing (hat decent housing conditionsare essential to secure peace, order, and good government, the Labour party has not only encouraged, but also promoted various housing schemes which honorable gentlemen opposite have described associalistic enterprises. My object' in rising is to call attention to the Government's intention to make available' in connexion with its housing scheme £20,000,000 of borrowed money. The essence of our savings bank housing schemes in the past has been the use of the money derived from thrift, and returned to. thrift. Money on deposit in our savings banks represents the small surplus secured and invested by provident and prudent workers, and it is reasonable that it should be reinvested for the purpose of securing necessary housing accommodation for people of the same class as the depositors. ' The position is totally different when a government, uninvited and without any proof of necessity, throws at the head of subordinate authorities an amount up to £20,000,000 which it has itself to exact from the people.' It is against this proposal that I -protest. It might be capable of demonstration that this housing need is being neglected or overlooked by State departments and other housing authorities. If that were so, I should be the first to join with the Commonwealth Government in a considered scheme for /meeting the necessities of the people. But this Government does not suggest, has not alleged, and much less attempted to prove, that the local authorities - principally, if not exclusively, the savings hanks of the several States - have failed in this regard. It has not proved that there is a demand made on the savings banks authorities in excess of what they are able to cope with. I have read in the press and elsewhere advertisements inviting the people to take advantage of existing housing schemes, and I have seen no indication that the demand for such money exceeds the supply. Even, if ' it did the loan would not be' justified, though the scheme might be. I wish to say something on the budget on this subject of our public debt. No honorable member who realizes his responsibility can fail to be impressed by the fact that we are drifting dangerously. When I say this I do not wish to associate myself with those who may be regarded as scare-mongers. But when I see our public commitments increasing; when I see the balance of trade hopelessly against us, our taxation burdens increasing and the cost of government in our various departments mounting alarmingly, I ask myself what is the excuse for this Government, whose business certainly is not house building: in the direct sense, raising an additional £20,000,000 as if it were meeting an urgent need, and finding some avenue of expenditure for its surplus funds. That is my one purpose in raising this question in the debate on this bill. The measure may pass its second reading, so far as. I am concerned, although I realize that it is largely makebelieve, and there cannot be the slightest doubt that the main, if not the only object of the Government, is to justify the specious promise contained in the policy speech of the Prime Minister **(Mr. Bruce).** The right honorable gentleman, when upon the hustings, put forward this proposal to spend £20,000,000 in housebuilding as a bait to the electors. Obviously the intention then was to convince the people, and especially the working people of Australia, that we were going to have through this expenditure, by some means which the ordinary citizen was not in a position to examine or analyze, a specially advantageous scheme of house construction. The proposal now to make £20,000,000 available for other authorities to spend is, as I have observed, merely a make-believe compliance with a promise given on the hustings. That being so, I protest, not at all against the general principle of house building, but against the methods that are being adopted by the Government. If the Ministry could show that it proposed to do something which other authorities were' not doing, or that it contemplated discharging such functions more satisfactorily, I should be prepared to go a long way with the Government. But because I find that it is proposed to borrow money, and to lend it to another authority, which in turn will advance it on certain terms and conditions - the only difference between the proposed 'advances and those already being made being that they will be made to persons iri an improved financial position - I think it is fair to offer a word of warning and of criticism. I do not propose to lose any opportunity that may present itself during this session to call attention to the fact that this. Government, in regard to its financial obligations, is not facing the facts, and that sooner or later Australia will have to f aoe them. : {: #subdebate-28-0-s2 .speaker-KFS} ##### Mr GULLETT:
Henty .- It is, indeed, refreshing to hear the honorable member for Batman **(Mr. Brennan)** lecture the Treasurer **(Dr. Earle Page)** upon the subject of national economy. . The strength of the Government's proposal is disclosed by the weakness in the arguments of the honorable member for Batman and the honorable member for Yarra **(Mr. Scullin).** It is difficult to get at the reason for the opposition of honorable members on the other side of the House to this measure, which surely has for its object the consummation of a definite scheme of social reform and the welfare of the people. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- I am not opposing it. I am merely sticking pins in it to show that there is nothing in it. {: .speaker-KFS} ##### Mr GULLETT: -- The honorable member has already stated his opposition to it. I cannot understand this opposition. Apparently had the Government proposed to create a new, overlapping; and extravagant department, with a groat staff of employees, to engage in housing, honorable members .opposite might have seen some virtue in it, but they have nothing good vo say of a plain, sane, economical scheme, which, while, adding nothing to the overhead cost of. housing, and very little, to the staffs already employed, is calculated to extend very largely the range of housing beneficence, and lead to the construction of thousands of new homes each year. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- Is the honorable member satisfied that the Government is justified in borrowing £20,000,000 for this purpose? {: .speaker-KFS} ##### Mr GULLETT: -- The Government does not propose to borrow £20,000,000 for this purpose. It proposes to utilize certain substantial sums already available in the Commonwealth Savings Bank, and only when those are exhausted to borrow from outside lenders. If the use of borrowed money can be justified for any purpose at all, it is for the housing of people of slender means. I was amazed to hear the honorable member for Batman smiting the bill, and practically denouncing the principle of housing the people. His attitude was the poorest party demonstration I have ever witnessed on his part. The honorable member for yarra also disclosed the destitution of li is case when ho endeavoured to show that the Commonwealth Government, by oxtending to £1,800 the amount to be loaned on a house costing £2,000, would give to ordinary citizens substantially better treatment than at present is being given to returned soldiers. That is not so. The, returned soldier is receiving, and will continue to receive, terms more generous than will be granted to the ordinary citizen under this bill. For example, ho receives money to-day for approximately 3 per cent, less than it can be obtained by private citizens from any State savings bank or will be obtainable under this measure. Moreover, he can get a house and land upon making a- deposit of only £10, whereas neither from the State savings banks nor under this scheme can the ordinary citizen obtain ' a house for a smaller deposit than lt) per cent. Honorable members opposite have argued that under this scheme the borrower will not obtain better terms than he can now get from the State .savings banks. That also is a misstatement. The borrower under this combined Commonwealth and State scheme will receive money at a cheaper rate than, 'it is now obtainable from ' any State Savings Bank. {: #subdebate-28-0-s3 .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE:
DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES -- Where does the honorable gentleman get that information It is not in the bill. {: .speaker-KFS} ##### Mr GULLETT: -- The State savings banks borrow independently of the Loan Council, and, therefore, have to pay substantially more for their accommodation. That increased rate of interest is passed on to the person who in turn borrows from them. Under the scheme now before us, the Commonwealth will hand over to the State authorities money borrowed at the Loan Council rate of interest, and funds from the Commonwealth Savings Bank will be made available at the rate of interest the bank pays to depositors, which is usually 3 per cent. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr BRENNAN: -- That is rotten finance anyhow. {: .speaker-KFS} ##### Mr GULLETT: -- Will it cost anybody anything? I estimate that moneys advanced under this scheme to the State savings banks will be cheaper by from *i* to 1 per cent, than the money now utilized by those institutions for housing. That point has been entirely ignored by those honorable members who .have spoken in opposition to the bill. Their hostility is a remarkable example of party opposition, because it is -aimed at such a measure as they have always advocated.' Whilst I approve of the bill in its present form, I should like to make two or three suggestions which might be acted upon at a later date. I trust that the Commonwealth Savings Bank Commissioners will at all times have authority at least to make suggestions- to the State Savings Bank Commissioners as to the principles which they think should be followed in connexion with housing. If the Commonwealth cannot impose absolute conditions upon the States it should at least he able by suggestion to influence housing policy. For instance, I hope that whenever possible a feature of the additional housing that will. result from, this bill will be the purchase of land in the largest areas available. The very beginning of sound housing and safe finance, when advances are to be made to the safe maximum, is the cheap acquisition of land on which to build, so that the purchaser of a home may get his block at something like a wholesale price, and immediately enjoy an unearned increment which, while enhancing his asset and making his position sounder, incidentally makes safer the .investment by the savings bank which has advanced the money. The returned soldiers who are best off materially are those who have been fortunate enough to be included in a group settlement. There is in my electorate a group of 300 soldiers' homes. A large area of land was bought at an average cost of about £3 10s. a foot. At the time of the purchase, individual blocks of similar " laud were selling for as much as £7 a foot. I doubt if any of the land in that locality could be purchased now for less than £9 a foot. Not only was that wholesale purchase a big advantage to the individual householder, but the advance by the Victorian State Savings Bank became at once a sounder investment. I doubt if one of those soldiers' houses could be purchased now at less than £200 above cost. When the laud is bought in individual blocks, there is usually little scope for unearned increment, and less advantage accrues to either the house purchaser or the authority that advances the money. I should like this housing scheme, in co-operation with kindred State enterprises, to operate in the older industrial suburbs. One fault I find in the housing schemes introduced in recent years is that they make no attempt to relieve the crowded, and sometimes slum conditions which exist in some of the older metropolitan centres. For instance, the inner ring of industrial suburbs about Melbourne is as grave a reproach to that city as are any of the slum areas of the European cities of which I have knowledge, especially having regard to the conditions which could and should prevail in Australia. It is obvious that this problem cannot be relieved by any mere individual cottage scheme. One sees three or four singlestorey, iron-roofed, weatherboard shanties, occupying, a-, space merely sufficient for one decent detached cottage. But to resume such an area for an individual house, and absorb an area from which the rent of three or four houses is now being collected, would be impossible. Nevertheless, I cannot resign myself to a continuance of the present conditions. Our efforts at social reform only partially succeed if, while pretending to solve the bousing problem, they leave these- areas unimproved. This objection applies to every State scheme as well as to that which will develop out of this bill. The only solution which I can suggest is the resumption of several acres of land, half of which could be devoted to tenements and the other half to gardens and playgrounds. I do not share the general objection to tenements. Workers and their families would be infinitely better off in well-designed tenements than they are i:n their present wretched environment, which is dangerous morally, socially, and physically. Therefore, I should like to see an experiment in tenement housing made on an extended scale by some municipality or State authority. It would have to be undertaken on a tenancy basis, but this measure might well include provision for money to be made available to any State authority which would experiment with a. housing scheme of that kind. {: #subdebate-28-0-s4 .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE:
Dalley .- The honorable member for Henty **(Mr. Gullett)** has frequently posed as the opponent of humbug. We all recall the occasion when the honorable member, with a striking gesture, abandoned a lucrative position by way of protest against the inaction of the Commonwealth Government of the day, and what he described as its policy of sham and humbug. Yet he has just concluded a most valiant speech in support of the hollowest of shams - the bill now before the House. Surely the honorable member has fallen from grace, and no longer merits the reputation for which he has prided himself ever since 1922. The honorable member set out to criticize the Deputy Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Scullin)** and the honorable member for Batman **(Mr. Brennan)** for their opposition to certain phases of the bill, and then proceeded himself to find fault with details of the measure. He suggested, in an obscure manner, amendments which he will propose when the committee stage is reached. "When asked to make clear how the bill will prove of definite advantage to people requiring homes, the honorable member said that he assumed that under this measure borrowers will be able to obtain advances at from -J to 1 per cent, less than now. I ask, how does he arrive at that conclusion. Although I have studied the bill, I cannot see that the honorable member can justify it. The various authorities in Australia which are now making advances to borrowers for the building of homes charge interest up to 5 per cent, per annum. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- The rate charged by the Savings Bank of Victoria varies between 6 and 6£ per cent." {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- The schemes adopted by the New South Wales and Queensland Governments make money available at 5 per cent. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · FSU; CP from 1920 -- The New South Wales Government charges the rate at which it borrows the money that is used. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- There is a Government housing scheme in New South Wales advancing money at 5 per cent. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- That is not so. I shall give the honorable member full details when I rise. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- At any rate Queensland and Western Australia have schemes which charge 5 per cent . for advances for the building of homes. Is the honorable member for Henty justified in assuming that borrowers "in those States will, if the bill is passed, get their homes at a cheaper rate? The Loan Council cannot borrow money at rates lower than those at which it can be obtained at present. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE Page: -- The State Savings Banks in New South Wales and Victoria borrow on the open market. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- The savings banks are able to advance the balances of their depositors, on which they pay only 3^ per cent. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE Page: -- None of them pay less than 4 per cent. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- In Queensland the savings bank gets its money for *'Si* per cent., and money is made available to the . State Government at 4^ per cent. Where 4 per cent, is paid to depositors, money can be advanced at 4 per cent., plus administrative charges, which would come to considerably less than a gross cost of 5 per cent. The honorable member for Henty assumes that the States cannot borrow more cheaply than the Commonwealth Loan Council. I do not contend that State Governments, as separate borrowing authorities, can borrow more cheaply than the Loan Council, but they can borrow just as cheaply, because they borrow through the Loan Council and as members of it. Recently the Commonwealth Treasurer convened a meeting of the Loan Council, at which he and the State 'Treasurers were present. Those gentlemen went into their loan programme for the ensuing year, no doubt with a view to settling their requirements over that period. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- But not the requirements of the State Savings Banks. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- In Queensland, the Workers' Dwellings and Workers' Homes Acts are administered as separate and apart from the savings bank administration, and the Queensland Treasurer would naturally embody in his works programme his requirements to meet advances for home building. Does the honorable member for Henty suggest that Queensland cannot at present secure funds on the same terms as will be made available under this bill? That is what the Loan Council is for. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Sir Elliot Johnson: -- I do not think it was ever intended that the Loan Council should take up activities of that sort. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- The Loan Council was formed for the purpose of borrowing the money required by the Commonwealth and the States. I was one of its original members, and acted in that capacity for three or four years. I heartily approve of it. But the council does not undertake the administration of the funds it raises; it simply raises money, and allots it to the authorities that need it. Now the operations of the council are being extended to cover oversea borrowing. The States are thus able to obtain their requirements at the same rate as the Commonwealth. I make the explanation, because it entirely knocks out the argument relied upon by the honorable member for Henty that, in some mysterious manner, the Commonwealth Government will provide, under this measure, cheaper money than the States are able to obtain at present. I assure the honorable gentleman that his is an erroneous idea. Will the Treasurer intimate whether the Commonwealth Government will accept any proportion of any loss that may accrue through advances made under this housing scheme? Honorable members opposite seem to scout the suggestion that the Commonwealth Government should bear a proportion of any loss, but unless it is prepared to do so, it is unfair to expect the States to accept the scheme, as losses will necessarily be incurred. The scheme seeks to impose additional obligations on the States. Before any State, or other authority described in the bill, can obtain funds from the Savings Bank Commissioners, certain precedent conditions have to be fulfilled, involving a reduction of the margin of security at present provided by State schemes. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Sir Elliot Johnson: -- The States have the security of their mortgages. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- With all the security they at present have, they sustain losses, and now the Treasurer proposes, under this bill, to force additional risks upon them, without sharing those risks. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- The bill gives the States power to lend, but they need not advance up to 90 per cent. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- I do not agree with that interpretation. Clause 9 signifies to me that no State authority can enjoy the advantages of this bill and obtain the funds it provides unless it agrees to extend the full benefits provided by the measure. The Queensland Workers' Homes Act provides for advances to people on small incomes, but the advance must not exceed £600. Special risks are taken by the State in that case. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- What is the deposit ? {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- Five per cent. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- And the honorable member objects to a 10 per cent. deposit as being unsafe! {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- I object to the Commonwealth insisting that a State shall advance 90 per cent. on loans up to £1,800. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- It is left to the discretion of the State. The legislation provides for a maximum advance of £1,800, but the State may advance only 60 per cent. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- Then why make the proviso that the maximum advance shall be £1,800 ? As I read the measure, before a State can take advantage of this scheme it must extend its existing facilities. The existing facilities in Queensland provide that up to 95 per cent. of the valuation may be advanced, with a maximum advance of £600. The bill requires that 90 per cent. shall be advanced, with a maximum of £1,800. A State authority might regard that provision as creating an undue risk. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr Thompson: -- It need not take the risk unless it wished to do so. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- That does not invalidate my objection that the bill only pretends to offer assistance to the State and other prescribed authorities, and, therefore, is a sham. Apparently, the States which are willing to advance certain sums on small security to persons with limited incomes are to be asked to advance much larger sums on equally small security to persons with large incomes. The honorable member for Henty **(Mr. Gullett)** stated this afternoon that cheap money would be available if the savings bank deposits were to be used for this purpose. But how much money will actually become available from that source? It is quite easy to talk about the millions of pounds that are deposited with the savings banks; but it is not so easy to lay hands on the money. Only a small proportion of the savings bank deposits will be available for this purpose. By far the larger proportion is already hypothecated under various agreements that have been made with the States. It is true that more than £22,000,000 has been deposited with the Commonwealth Savings Bank in Queensland, but it must be remembered that 70 percent. of the excess deposits in that State must be made available to the State Government under certain clearly stated conditions, andeven the remaining 30 per cent. must be disposed of in accordance with a method approved by the State Treasurer. I may be told that that money is disposed of in. accordance with the advice of an advisory board, which consists of the State Treasurer and a director of the Commonwealth Bank, That is quite true; but in practice the advice of the advisory board is invariably followed. It will be seen, therefore, that the whole 100 per' cent. of excess deposits in Queensland is already hypothecated. Certain agreements also exist in the other States respecting the disposal of excess deposits. Quite a number of claims will have a degree of priority over this claim on the funds of the savings bank. I am not prepared even to say that the authorities controlling the savings bank would be justified in using excess deposits in New South Wales to finance housing schemes in Western Australia, South Australia, or Victoria. It is a recognized practice that the funds of the savings banks shall be employed in the States where they are raised. If that policy were departed from I am quite sure that the depositors would object. I doubt, also, whether the Savings Bank Commissioners - if they be appointed would be justified in advancing their funds on specially favorable terms to State authorities for house building when they could get a better return by investing them in Commonwealth Government or State Government securities. The first duty of the custodians of these funds is to the depositors of them, and not to any house-building authority or agricultural society. The Treasurer, so far, has practically ignored the rights of the depositors. He has ridden roughshod over them in a most cavalier fashion. But, looking at the matter in a favorable light, it must be apparent to honorable members that not more than £500,000 of excess savings bank deposits can become available this year for the purposes of this scheme, and that the Treasurer will have to borrow money and make it available to the State authorities if anything prac tical is to be done. The scheme therefore resolves itself into a proposition that the Commonwealth shall continue to borrow to lend to the States. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr Charlton: -- And yet the Treasurer has a lot to say about curtailing borrowing. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- The question arises therefore whether it will be economical for the States to use this borrowed money. The proposed savings bank commissioners will be highly paid officials and will set up their own staff. The Commonwealth has recently floated two loans in Australia at an average net cost of £5 7s. per cent. It cannot expect to obtain money for the States at a lower rate than that. As a matter of fact it will have to add to that figure the extra costs incurred by the savings bank commissioners in handling the money needed for this scheme. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr Charlton: -- The cost to the States will be nearer 6 per cent. than 5 per cent. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- In the face these facts I am obliged to ask how this scheme can possibly help the States, for they can already borrow through the Loan Council as economically as the Commonwealth. The setting up of an artificial scheme of this kind must necessarily be expensive. Most of the States are already borrowing a large amount of money by sales over the counter, and provided that the interest rate is not too high, that is the cheapest way in which they can augment their funds. In most cases the bonds issued in this way are sold at par rate. I am obliged therefore to come to the conclusion that this bill does not provide a scheme for house building. It is merely a moneylending measure. It does not even provide for the lending of money to home builders; the money will be lent to some other authority, which, in turn will provide the machinery for making advances to the actual builders. The scheme is nothing more than a hollow sham. If one had sufficient industry to turn up the newspaper files which contain reports of the speeches that the Treasurer made during the last federal election campaign after the Prime Minister had delivered his policy speech at Dandenong - I confess that I have not lately had sufficient industry to do so - he would find many references to the intention of the Commonwealth Government to provide a housing scheme for the people. I have a clear recollection of many statements of that character that were attributed to the Treasurer. "What is happening is that the Government is seeking to set up a < glorified pawnbroking shop. It is prepared to lend money to other authorities, which in turn will lend it to house builders, provided that certain conditions are observed. The people were led to believe that a scheme would be evolved which would directly assist them to purchase homes. This scheme does not do that. For that reason it deserves severe criticism. It may be possible, when the bill is at the committee stage, to evolve an entirely new scheme; but I doubt whether even that will be practicable, for the Standing Orders drastically limit the power to remodel a bill iri committee. Unless the bill is remodelled, the House will be thoroughly justified iu flinging it into oblivion, for it is only a sham and a pretence. It cannot cause a single additional house to be built, nor in any way whatever relieve the acute housing shortage which we are facing. It is altogether without substance. {: #subdebate-28-0-s5 .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON:
New England -- I listened with great attention and respect to the speech of the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Theodore)** for if there is one honorable member in this chamber more qualified than another to offer constructive criticism of a scheme of this, character it is he. But I regret to say that to me his speech appeared to be a mass of inconsistencies. Its logic was altogether astray. In his concluding blaze of oratory the honorable member repeated the parrot cries which other honorable members have used to kill the hill. He said that it was humbug and sham. If this is so, I am at a loss to understand why the honorable member is so full pf alarm lest the scheme should become operative. If it were humbug and sham he should not be afraid of it. He should be quite willing to wait quietly for its inevitable failure. {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr Lazzarini: -- .One must expose hypocrisy. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- If honorable members opposite are so satisfied that the scheme has been still-born and is without brains, arms or legs, they should not be so fearful about its future. The speech of the honorable member for Dalley indicated to me that he had not carefully studied, the bill. He argued that as the Commonwealth cannot borrow on any better terms than the States themselves can obtain, it would be better to allow the States to raise whatever money they require by direct dealing. I must point out to the honorable member a thing that he, as well as other honorable members of his party, should, already thoroughly understand. I would like to point out that the States do not worry themselves about borrowing money to build houses. Fully 90 per cent, of what they borrow is spent on public works. As a matter of fact, none of the States to-day can borrow nearly sufficient to cover current works programmes. Whether Labour Governments or Nationalist Governments, they are all afflicted with the same disease., " squandermania," ' and they will borrow not for housing, but for railways, tramways, and .various works, most of which are not to develop the country, but merely to carry out political promises made to get them into power. We know from the actual position in the States to-day that the main result of their borrowing is to drag the population from the country into the big capital cities. That is happening in Queensland - this heaven on earth we hear so much about - the most backward country iri the Commonwealth so far as development is concerned. The States will continue i;o do this unless some outside authority like the Commonwealth steps in to clip their wings. When it is so certain that the States will not increase the scope of their housing schemes by borrowing, is it not a merit in this scheme that the Commonwealth Government comes to their rescue and makes them borrow? This scheme gives to the States £20,000,000 which the honorable gentleman says will be largely borrowed, and this, money they would not otherwise have to enlarge the scope of their housing schemes. All that I have heard from the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Theodore),** and the honorable member for Yarra **(Mr. Scullin),** merely convinces me that the States, instead of being antagonistic to this scheme, should be grateful for it. What are the States housing schemes to-day ? They are shams and humbugs. There is not one State housing scheme in Australia to-day that has made any serious impression on the housing problem. We find that in every State in the Commonwealth, both in the capital cities and in the country, there is the same complaint regarding a shortage of houses. I do not know what the conditions are in South Australia, but if South Australia is in any better position so far as its housing problem is concerned, than New South Wales and Victoria, then it is a fortunate State. But I doubt it very much, and I challenge these gentlemen to say that there is no housing shortage in South Australia. If they admit that there is a shortage, then they admit the necessity for this bill. We have had much boosting of the housing scheme in New South Wales, the work of various Labour governments, but there is no city in Australia suffering more from the house shortage than Sydney is. It is a landlord's paradise. The great bulk of the money borrowed by New South Wales during the past ten or fifteen years has been poured into that city. Land that could be bought for £5 or £6 a foot is now selling at £20 a foot. There are people in Sydney to-day paying £12 and £16 a foot for land, and building houses on it costing £900 or £1,000. That is an absolute negation of every principle of sound economy - putting cheap houses on dear land. Even if we give the States, credit for everything they have done in the way of housing, it is time the people of Australia had something bigger and better. If honorable gentlemen opposite take up the cry that they do not want this scheme of housing because it does not conform to their policy, they are taking a great risk, because here we have a scheme that will appeal to the people. If they have a scheme themselves, why do they not put it forward ? Have we ever heard of a Federal Labour party's housing scheme, This Government, which is supposed to be the mainstay of capitalism and toryismcomes forward with a scheme which the Labour party itself has never seriously advocated. If honorable members opposite desire to give us any credit, tories as we are, they should approach this bill, not in a spirit of nasty, cantankerous criticism, but in a spirit of generosity, and say, " Well, it is not what Ave want, but it is a start, and it is what we would like to do ourselves if we had the opportunity." It is well to make a start, and these gentlemen ought to admit it, as they themselves made a start with the Commonwealth Bank in the face of much bitter opposition. To be consistent with their own democratic logic, they should say that bad as the bill is, -it is still a pretty good thing; that the principle is good as it means more housing for the people. We have heard a good deal about the foolishneSs of the Treasurer in not establishing a separate Commonwealth scheme. Personally, I would like to see a separate Commonwealth scheme, because I take the view that if this Parliament puts measures through which are beneficial to the people, we, as federal members, should get the credit for them. But as far as I can see, we, the authors of this scheme, are not going to get any credit for this, because the Government in its modesty is going to hand it to the States. As with the federal roads scheme, we will find that the States will take all the credit. They have monopolized the credit for that scheme, and the majority of people no longer look upon it as a federal matter at all. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr Theodore: -- The States build the roads. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- -What is the difference between building roads and advancing the money for them ? Whenever the Commonwealth Government comes down with a scheme like this, supposed not to be within the strict limits of its federal functions, we hear a cry about encroaching on State rights. The same cry was raised over the main roads scheme and the petrol tax, but they are now accepted throughout the Commonwealth. When all this criticism is proved to be unfounded, and when the real benefits of the scheme become clear to the community, it will become an integral part of the national policy. Whether this party or some other is in power after the next election, this housing scheme will be then a settled part of the policy of Parliament. It will not be for one year or three years, but for every year. The Federal Treasurer will have to budget each year to provide for the contributions to this scheme. Loan commitments will, in future, include some provision for contributing to the housing schemes of the States. . And the States themselves, as in the case of the main roads, will realize that they have a financial ally that is there with good hard cash to help to carry out a job that they could not do before. The States will " buck up " and improve their housing schemes, and although eventually the Commonwealth will be forgotten as having initiated the scheme, this measure will be admitted to be one of the finest ever passed by Parliament, and the people will derive immense benefits from it. There is not to be any duplication. We have heard criticisms about encroachment on the States. The Government is not going to take any risks in that direction, and will not set up any costly departments. We have heard a lot from the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Theodore)** about the cost of raising the money required, but is there any comparison between that cost and the cost of creating another expensive federal department? We are told every day tha/ the Commonwealth is creating an army of civil servants. That is one of the grievances against federation. Therefore, the Government has said, " We will not run that risk here; we are designing this scheme on the most economical lines with a view to cutting out all superfluous cost." {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr Coleman: -- Yet it is proposed to appoint two superfluous commissioners? {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- The Commonwealth must know where its" money is going, and as we find that the States are so erratic and so untrustworthy in the way they carry out their works and social experiments, it is necessary that the Commonwealth Government should not hand over money without ensuring that it shall be expended on the lines laid down by this Parliament. No one, either inside the House or outside it, can seriously criticize the motive of the Federal Government in launching this scheme. We are not to have the cost of employing a further batch of public servants thrust upon the taxpayers. That is one of the great merits of the scheme. We are told that it will complicate the States' housing arrangements. Four out of the six States have Labour Governments; but that fact has no bearing upon the present proposal. To my mind :it is very deceitful on the part of honorable members opposite to pretend to see no good in the hill, and to make the sinister suggestion that it is designed to put the State Labour Governments in financial difficulties. If their arguments were sound, those Governments should be pleased to accept the scheme, because it is admitted that the State authorities have been unable to provide sufficient homes for those requiring them. The honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Theodore)** objected to the provisions of the bill being made applicable to persons earning high salaries; but does he think that £12 a week is a large wage? I should call it merely a moderate wage. A great many persons eai-n that amount, although a few years ago they received only £6 or £8 a week. Arbitration award rates have increased all round, and if the Commonwealth is to enter the field of social amelioration, it should not confine these benefits to those with low wages. Persons in receipt ®f £400 a year, and having no other source of income, are not in a position to purchase homes of their own, and a man earning £600 a year is very little better off, because he is generally expected to live up to his salary. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr Theodore: -- A man with £12 a week should not find it as difficult to purchase a house as he would if his salary amounted to only £6 a week. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- But the first requirement is a deposit. Housebuilding is becoming dearer every day. The cost in New South Wales went up 3 "per cent, as the result of child endowment; and I was informed recently that in the last three years it has increased by fully 25 per cent. A point honorable members opposite do not emphasize is that the great bugbear of the house seeker to-day is the second mortgage. It is comparatively easy to secure a home if a man is prepared to spend his life in paying for it. But unless he can furnish a substantial deposit, two mortgages are required. Even the Commonwealth Bank will not advance more than 60 per cent, of the valuation it places upon a property. If only because it will eliminate the need for second mortgages, the bill will do incalculable good. Money lenders charge 10, and even 12 per cent., on these mortgages, and a few refuse to make advances on them unless they are paid 15 per cent. For a first mortgage 7 per cent, is usually demanded. Owing to the difficulty in obtaining cheap money, a 90 per cent, advance is imperative, if genuine home seekers are to benefit. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr Theodore: -- In some cases the margin of security is so small that losses are bound to occur. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- In any case, the houses will remain, and they generally increase in value. Dwellings erected 20 years ago in Sydney at a cost of £1,000 or £1,200, are being sold to-day for £2,000, simply because of the enhanced value of the land. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr Theodore: -- Many of the warserservice homes had to be written down before tenants could be found. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- Yes. The Government, being a benevolent authority, relieved those men, deserving as they were, of too burdensome a load; but private enterprise adopts a different attitude. The great majority of those who buy time-payment houses, which are a delusion and a snare, take them on any terms available, merely to place themselves under a roof. Only, when they realize what the second mortgage involves, do they know the unfortunate predicament in which they are placed. The bill -offers a means of escape from such harsh treatment as .that to which many home seekers are forced to submit. A person would have to be deserving of no consideration whatever before he would be deprived of the home that could be made available to him under the bill. In isolated cases, of course, losses mayoccur; but they would be small in proportion to the total gain. House property affords the best security obtainable. The State housing schemes have failed to correct the shortage of homes, largely because the local authorities have not advanced up to 90 per cent, of the valuation, even where good security was offered. Under this scheme the States will be forced to do this. {: #subdebate-28-0-s6 .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- They will not. It is optional with them to do it. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- With the Commonwealth scheme in operation they will be forced to use their discretionary power and to enlarge their own schemes. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr Charlton: -- Only when they borrow from the Commonwealth. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- Yes. If they borrow they will have discretionary power to advance up to 90 per cent. The Commonwealth makes that a condition. The States will 'be obliged to enlarge their operations, and to advance up to the 90 per cent, provided for in the Commonwealth scheme, otherwise their housing schemes will become unpopular, and there will be such a rush for assistance under the Commonwealth scheme that £20,000,000 will prove insufficient and we shall be obliged to make further money available. The Commonwealth will run ' no risk in making advances up to 90 per cent., because it can fall back upon the experience of the State authorities. They will not advance up to 90 per cent, where they consider the security is not good enough. In fact, there would be no risk in advancing up to 100 per cent, where the security was good enough. At the present cost of building a man cannot get a decent home on a. small advance. All that he can get is a house containing three or four rooms and a kitchen, with very poor conveniences. He cannot get sufficient room for a garden, a decent back yard, or a motor entrance. To-day many workers on small wages are buying motor cars. They prefer to do so, because they cannot afford to put up the deposit required for a house, and because they do not feel inclined to spend a lifetime in paying instalments on the purchase of a home. Lured by the glamour of motoring, they put their small savings into a car. I believe that many workers, when they get their homes, will subsequently be in a position to afford motor cars, and I look forward to a boom in the motor industry which will enable the Commonwealth to derive* from the demand for the new model Ford sufficient revenue to cover any loss or depreciation involved in carrying out its housing scheme. I should like to know more about the authority referred to by the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Theodore).** The honorable member put his finger on a weak spot in the bill, and I expect the Treasurer to clear up the point. If he does not do so satisfactorily when he replies on the second reading, I hope the Government will amend the bill in committee to make the matter quite clear. My main concern is not for the people in the cities. They can look after themselves. Experience shows that existing housing schemes have proved beneficial mostly to the people in the cities. They are close to the seat of administration. At the cost of a tram fare they can go to the central office and have their applications dealt with quickly. My concern is for the man who lives in the country. I appeal to the Government to keep him in mind. He has not had a fair deal under existing housing schemes, and if he does not get a fair deal under the Commonwealth scheme, he will be the most disappointed person in Australia. Located 300 or 400 miles from the central office, he finds it difficult to get his application dealt with. Sometimes it is held up so that he has to enlist the services of his representative in the Federal Parliament to wake up the department. On many occasions applicants for war service homes have not even received an acknowledgment of their communications. On occasions, as the result of urgent telegrams sent to the War Services Homes Commission, I have found that owing to the fault of some clerk, so it is said, matters have been overlooked. I know of cases in which two or three letters have been forwarded without replies being received. We do not want that sort of thing to occur under the Commonwealth housing scheme. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr Charlton: -- The Commonwealth will have nothing to do with that branch of the business. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- That is the weak point iri the Commonwealth scheme, but we could get over it by charging one of the commissioners with the special task' of dealing with country applicants. If something of the kind is not done, there will be such a rush from people in the big cities to enjoy the benefits conferred by the scheme, and the enlarged State schemes, that the man in the bush will once more be pushed out. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- Does the honorable member expect a rush of applicants for assistance? {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- Yes. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- What effect will that have on land values? {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- It will certainly have an effect on them. Land values- are already high, enough because of the existing house shortage. For a time the popularity of the Commonwealth housing scheme may lead to an increase in land values, but when there is nolonger a shortage of houses, thedifficulty caused by the inflation of values will adjust itself. Under their existing machinery the State Commissioners prevent land speculators and crooks from taking advantage of applicants for advances, and from obtaining money under false pretences. I presume that they will also take steps to protect Commonwealth; interests. But the Treasurer should seriously consider the advisability of making one of the commissioners responsible for country applications. Otherwise, for every house obtained by a man in the country, a dozen will be secured by people in the cities. The Treasurer could make it a condition that in every State at least one officer should be detailed to facilitate: the handling pf applications from country districts. I strongly support the bill'.. The criticism levelled at it from both* sides of the House has been weak. The political sense of honorable members should tell them that it would' be verydangerous to deprive the people of thechance they will have under this bill of getting more homes. {: #subdebate-28-0-s7 .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter .- I realize that most of what can be said in regard to the bill has already been said; but, at the same time, some honorable members still seem to misunderstand it. For instance, the honorable member who has just resumed his seat thinks that the Commonwealth will have some control over the States. The Commonwealth will have no control over them. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr Thompson: -- I did not assume that the Commonwealth would have control over the States. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- At the commencement of the honorable member's speech he said that he was glad the Commonwealth Government was taking some action to clip the wings of the States. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr Thompson: -- I refer red to the financial wings of the States. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- Immediately afterwards he said that he was glad the Commonwealth was coming to the rescue of the States. As a matter of fact, if the Commonwealth is coming to the rescue of the States, it is doing so only by providing further borrowed money for them. That is all that the bill does. At the outset of his remarks the honorable member complained about our heavy national debt, and heavy public expenditure, and in respect to borrowing he wants tq see the power of the States curtailed. All honorable members are in agreement with him that there is too much borrowing, and that Ave are paying too heavy an interest bill. I am under the impression that this bill does not come within the scope of the arrangement recently entered into whereby all borrowing, Commonwealth and State, is to be done by, and with the authority of, the Australian Loan Council.' The Treasurer has told us that by having one borrowing authority in Australia, our interest charges will be reduced. Yet the measure before us now does not recognize the authority of the Australian Loan Coun-cil. It gives the Commonwealth Treasurer power to borrow £20,000,000, which he may lend to the States that comply with the conditions of the bill. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE Page: -- No loan can be raised under this bill without reference to the Australian Loan Council. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- The bill does not say so. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE Page: -- No loan bill passed by this House has provided that the money proposed to be raised must be authorized by the Australian Loan Council. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- Clause 10 provides - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. The Treasurer may, from time to time, under the provisions of the Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Act 1911-1918, or under the provisions of any act authorizing the issue of Treasury bills, borrow moneys which it is necessary to borrow in order to grant to the Savings Bank a sum such that Avith other funds available to the Savings Bank a total sum of twenty million pounds (including the moneys already advanced and not yet repaid) will be available for the purposes of paragraph c of section thirty-four aa of the Commonwealth Bank Act 1911-1927. 1. The amount borrowed shall be issued and applied only for the expenses of borrowing and for making advances to the Savings Bank for the purposes of paragraph c of section thirty-four aa of the Commonwealth Bank Act 1911-1927. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE Page: -- That is the usual loan authorization provision. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- I could understand the clause if it included the words " subject to the approval of the Australian Loan Council." Otherwise, the provision seems to override the Loan Council. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE Page: -- The honorable member misunderstands the position of the Australian Loan Council. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- The bill authorizes the borrowing of £20,000,000, and that is practically the full extent to which it goes, except, of course, that it lays down certain conditions which the States must observe if they wish to make use of the money bor- rowed. We practically tell the States how they shall conduct the business of providing houses for their citizens. I doubt if we are justified in passing a measure which lays down certain conditions to be observed by the States, until we know whether the States are willing to comply Avith those conditions. The proper thing to do is to approach the States and ask them what conditions they are prepared to accept. If they were not prepared to accept the conditions offered by the Commonwealth, there would be no need to take up the time of this House in passing a bill such as this. If, on the other hand the States were willing to comply with the conditions laid down in the bill, the Government would have a concrete proposition to put before the House. 1 should like to know what position we occupy to-day - whether the States have acquiesced in the Commonwealth's proposals. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- There is nothing to indicate that the States are in need of money for their housing schemes. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- I agree with the honorable member. I am coming to that point. But, in the meantime, I contend that' any one in charge of a measure like this should be in a position to say that the States are willing to comply Avith the conditions laid down in it. Had the Government introduced a proper housing scheme whereby the people of this country could obtain homes cheaply, Ave on this side should have raised no opposition to it. We believe that it is in the best interests of any country that its people should own the homes in which they dwell. In New South Wales the savings banks deposits of the people are returned to them as advances for homes. Under the housing scheme of the States, homes can be obtained at a lower rate of interest than will be demanded from them under this bill. The Treasurer is now inviting applications for a conversion loan at per cent; but as it is being floated at £98 10s. the interest is practically 5^ per cent. It will not be possible to obtain money for the purposes of this bill at a lower rate. In addition, certain charges will have to be paid by those to whom advances are made. If the States had agreed to the proposal before us, there would be some justification for the bill; but they have not done so. It is possible that they will not accept the conditions set out in this measure. The Treasurer seems to have forgotten that, whereas during the war period it was necessary to borrow many millions of pounds, this country has returned to more normal conditions. Although the day of reckoning is fast approaching, he proposes to continue to borrow money overseas, thus adding to our already heavy interest bill. {: .speaker-KXT} ##### Mr Paterson: -- It is possible that a large proportion of this money will not be borrowed. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- That may be so. But the knowledge that a sum of £20,000,000- has been set apart for a specific purpose may induce the States to agree to the Government's proposals' in order to obtain ready money. I am not opposed to the building of homes for the people, but I am strongly of the opinion that the time is ripe for calling a halt in connexion with borrowing. We cannot for ever continue to increase our interest bill. Before this measure was introduced the Loan Council should have been consulted. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- If, as the Minister for Markets and Migration has suggested, a large proportion of this money may not be borrowed, it would appear that there will be no houses built. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- That is so. Under this legislation the Commonwealth is not committed to the building of even one home. All the bill provides is that money shall be offered to the States on certain conditions. During the recent election campaign in New South Wales, the Treasurer made a great deal of the necessity of all borrowing being done through the Australian Loan Council. Yet this bill contains no provision that the Loan Council must be consulted as to the raising of the money. The Treasurer, in an attempt to explain that defect in the bill, said that it was understood that the Loan Council would be consulted. The fact remains that, in its present form, the bill authorizes the Treasurer to borrow £20,000,000, and he is not required to consult the Loan Council about it. The passing of this measure would vest him with the authority of Parliament to borrow the money. Armed with that authority he could disregard the Loan Council. This .measure, while adding to our interest bill, will do nothing to provide homes for our people. The scheme before us is not a fulfilment of the Prime Minister's promise at the last election. The electors of the Commonwealth believed that the Prime Minister's promise bound him to introduce a housing scheme by which the Commonwealth would find the money and accept the responsibility for providing homes at a reasonable cost. Instead of that, this measure, which will make money available to the States at higher rates of interest than they now pay, has been introduced. Honorable members who support the Government should endeavour to place themselves in the position of a man earning £4 10s. or £5 per week, out of which he has to maintain his family and provide a home. They would then realize the necessity for making available, as cheaply as possible, money for the building of homes. This Bill, instead of assisting home-seekers, will add to their burden. Should it become law we shall probably have a repetition of our experience in connexion with soldier settlements and war service homes: the Commonwealth will probably be required to write off a considerable proportion of the money which will be" advanced. Already £10,000,000 has been written off in connexion with soldier settlements. Heavy losses were sustained, because, instead' of doing its own work, the Commonwealth entrusted it to other authorities. And that is not all - a further sum will undoubtedly have to be written off. Whatever losses may be incurred by either the States or the Commonwealth the burden will still fall upon the taxpayers of Australia. The Commonwealth should either undertake its own scheme or not engage in any housing scheme. If the States undertake the work, they should approach the Loan. Council - for the necessary funds, and accept the responsibility for what they do. But should they incur losses because of conditions forced upon them by the Commonwealth it would be only fair that the Commonwealth should accept its share of those losses. The time has arrived for the Treasurer to follow his own advice, and curtail borrowing. Instead of doing that, however, he proposes to borrow £20,000,000 to be lent to the States. The way in which Commonwealth and State finances are interwoven, because of advances made by the Commonwealth to the States, is confusing. When mention is made of our gross debt or our net debt people do not know whether the term covers the debt of the States or refers merely to that of the Commonwealth. This and similar measures should not have been brought before us until after the termination of the debate on the Budget. Before we undertake further heavy commitments we should have the opportunity to discuss the Government's financial proposals, so that the people may know our true position. It is not sufficient for -the Treasurer to say that Australia is in a satisfactory financial position. Our indebtedness is continually increasing, and this bill will further increase it. We on this side do not object to a housing scheme, but we do object to the introduction of legislation involving heavy expenditure over which this Parliament has no control. Especially do we object to money being borrowed for other authorities to spend, with the risk that, later, the Commonwealth may be called upon to make good the losses incurred. This bill is not what was promised to the people, and we think that the measure will not be effective. We believe also that it will increase costs to the people who borrow money under it, and that their interest burden will be heavier. We are convinced that, in operation, the Government's housing proposals will not improve the present position. However, we do not intend to force the Treasurer to a division on the bill. The Government must accept full responsibility for it. Up to the present we have had no assurance from the Treasurer that the States will accept it. I should like to know how it will be regarded by both Queensland and Tasmania, States which have entered into an agreement with the Commonwealth Government with regard to their savings bank business. They may regard this measure as a breach of that agreement. That, in itself, would be a sufficient reason for urging delay in the consideration of the bill. The Treasurer should make a statement as to the position with regard to those States. If he is not in a position to do that, he is not justified in going on with the bill, because those States may regard it as a breach of faith. Honorable members are entitled to know what is the true position. This Parliament should not be asked to pass legislation which might be regarded with suspicion by the States. If the housing authorities in the different States believe that the adoption of the Commonwealth scheme is likely to add to the costs of home building, it is possible that they / will not accept it, because if borrowers have to pay more for money the additional burden must be placed upon the shoulders of the people. The Treasurer should postpone the further consideration of the bill until after the budget debate. Honorable members are entitled to have a full opportunity to discuss the whole of the Government's budget proposals. Though the financial year closed at the end of June last, we are now nearing Christmas without having had a reasonable chance to consider the budget, which should be the first business to engage the attention of this House. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- We wish to pass legislation so as to provide work for the other chamber. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- I have heard that cry ever since I have been a member of this House. It is our duty to digest thoroughly all legislation presented to this House, and deal with it in' a proper manner before sending it to the Senate. If we are unable to provide that branch of the legislature with sufficient measures to keep it fully occupied the Senate should remain in recess until there is work for it to do. Actually we know nothing of the Government's financial proposals. » {: #subdebate-28-0-s8 .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- All honorable members have seen the budget statement. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- Surely the honorable member for Swan admits that we should have an opportunity to criticize the budget. "We are entitled to warn the people if taxation per head of the population is increasing as a result of this Government's policy. The business of the country should not be done in this slipshod fashion. The Treasurer should, without delay, give honorable members an assurance that the bill will not be proceeded with until the House has had an opportunity to debate the budget. {: #subdebate-28-0-s9 .speaker-KMS} ##### Mr MANNING:
Macquarie .- It is with genuine pleasure that I rise to support the bill which honours the promise made by the Prime Minister **(Mr. Bruce)** in his policy speech prior to the last general election. During the whole of that election campaign I never addressed a major meeting in my division without emphasizing that, if returned, the Government would give effect to its housebuilding scheme. The Prime Minister, in his policy speech, stressed that the Government's proposal would not come into competition with schemes at present being carried out by the various State authorities; but that it would supplement the good work that was being done by those authorities, though necessarily in a limited way. The main objection to the bill on the part of honorable members opposite appears to be due to the fact that the Government does not propose to establish a new department, and thus cause considerable additional expenditure; because if such a department were established it would necessarily be a competitor of the various State housing authorities. This bill will give an opportunity to existing authorities to extend their spheres of usefulness. Honorable members opposite have complained that the Government will be forced to raise the necessary money by means of loans, and they suggest that the States, which will have the spending of that money;, should raise it themselves. But we know that the various state schemes are somewhat limited. I do not wish to disparagethe very good work which they are doing,, but I should like to point out that housebuilding schemes under the direction of* state authorities apply only to- personain receipt of limited incomes. Forinstance, in one State, the maximum income of an applicant for assistance tobuild a home must be only £200 a year. In another state it is £450 a year. The Commonwealth scheme will be available to persons in receipt of £12 per week.. Honorable members opposite have commented on that fact. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- Has any one objected to it on that account? {: .speaker-KMS} ##### Mr MANNING: -- The only inference that could be drawn from the speeches of some honorable members is that they consider 'the income too high. But I remind them that £12 a week now is but the equivalent of a very much lower income a few years ago. Figures furnished by the Commonwealth Statistician show that between 1911 and 1925 the basic wage increased by 86 per cent., " although the effective wage during the same period increased by only 3.3 per cent. It follows then that although the Commonwealth house-building scheme which we are now considering may be taken advantage of by persons in receipt of an income of £12 a week, that sum is the equal of only a little' over £6 a week in 1911. {: .speaker-KEQ} ##### Mr Killen: -- If the figures are brought up to date it will be found that there is very little difference between the basic wage of to-day and the effective wage of 1911. {: .speaker-KMS} ##### Mr MANNING: -- The honorable member for Riverina is correct. The honorable member for Yarra **(Mr. Scullin)** claimed that the Commonwealth housing proposals will not benefit any persons who cannot make application under existing State, schemes. Intentionally or otherwise, the honorable member overlooked the fact that the Common- " wealth scheme provides for assistance in the purchase of homes already in existence. I understand that a similar provision is not contained in any of the State schemes. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr Scullin: -- The honorable member is wrong. {: .speaker-KMS} ##### Mr MANNING: -- In some of the other States it may he passible under local housing schemes to arrange finance for the purchase of homes, but there is no such provision *iv* the New South Wales law. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr Coleman: -- What has this. Government done in regard to returned soldiers ? {: .speaker-KMS} ##### Mr MANNING: -- I shall deal with that matter shortly. With the limited amount of money at their disposal, the State housing authorities are probably right in requiring that it should be used, not for the purchase but for the building of new homes, though very often a man might be able to bring off an excellent deal if he could raise money under a State scheme for the purchase of a home already built. When this measure is placed on the statute-book it will be possible for an applicant to obtain Commonwealth money for that, purpose, through the State authorities. " The amount of the advance under the Commonwealth scheme also "will obviate the raising of money on second mortgage, which is often necessary at present. The rate of interest charged on such advances is, as honorable members know, considerably higher than will be charged for money under this scheme. It is lamentable that only 40 per cent, of the people in Australia own the houses they occupy, whilst 12 per cent, are in occupation of houses which they are buying on the rent-purchase system, and 48 per cent, live in rented houses. Rents have been excessively high in Sydney for some years. The liberal terms offered under this proposal should result in the building of a considerable number of houses there, and it is possible that rents will be reduced because of the competition to supply the needs of the market. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- Coming from such a quarter,, the honorable member's remarks are a good argument in favour of State enterprises. {: .speaker-KMS} ##### Mr MANNING: -- The honorable member for Batman should he the last to object, because, so far as we are able to judge from, his utterances, he believes in the State controlling all "such activities. The trouble is, honorable members opposite know that the scheme is good, hut they do not wish to see it adopted because it is put forward by this Government. One particularly pleasing feature of the scheme is that it is to be extended to country towns, in many of which the shortage of houses is very acute. If practicable, a scheme should be evolved which would give assistance to not only the people in country towns, hut also residents in country districts. One of our biggest problems is the drift of population from the country to the cities, and I have no hesitation in saying that a scheme which would provide comfortable homes in the country would do more than anything else to stay that tendency. When young people from the country visit the cities and see the comparative luxury in which people of no better means than their own live there, it is natural for them to become discontented with rural life. I am quite sure that if we could extend this scheme to country building the effect would be most beneficial. Honorable members opposite have complained that this bill does nothing to provide homes for the poor man. The people living on the basic wage are a small minority. That has been exemplified in connexion with the child endowment scheme in New South Wales, where, in large establishments employing very many hands, none were entitled to draw that allowance, because they were receiving more than the basic wage. Those who are in receipt of incomes above the bread line have often greater difficulty to make ends meet than have those who are not required to maintain the same appearance and social standing. These people are deserving of all the help we can give to them. The Government is wise in making provision to help people of moderate incomes to acquire homes. One criticism directed against the measure is that the Commonwealth takes no responsibility for the repayment of the money which is to he advanced to the States. Surely the Government should be applauded for putting forward a- scheme so financially sound that help will be afforded to the people without the Commonwealth having to accept any responsibility. There is, however, very little danger of the houses involving the State authorities in. a loss. Provision is made for a deposit of at least 10 per cent., and persons who are able to pay a deposit of £200 upon a house costing £2,000 may usually be relied upon to complete their contract. They would not lightly enter into an agreement to purchase a house, and shortly afterwards break the contract and forfeit their deposit. As I understand the bill, the terms upon which the advances will be made will bc controlled entirely by the State authorities. The maximum advance is to be 90 per cent, of the value of the property, with a limit of £1,800. The commissioners of the New South "Wales State Savings Bank have done valuable work in connexion with both house building and closer settlement. Until recently they were advancing to settlers up to £3,000 on the security of their properties to assist in promoting closer settlement,- but their funds now are so limited that they have had to limit the advances to £2,000. The lower maximum reduces the value of that scheme as a means of promoting new settlement. This is evidence that the State institution has not sufficient money at its disposal to assist the people as much as it was doing some time ago, and as may be desirable in the future. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- Does the honorable member think that it would be safe to advance up to 90 per cent, of the value of the security? {: .speaker-KMS} ##### Mr MANNING: -- The Savings Bank Commissioners have been advancing on rural properties up to 85 per cent, of the valuation, and have made practically no losses I am confident that if home building is controlled by such a body »f men the losses will be negligible. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr Theodore: -- If the advances are * made to selected persons. {: .speaker-KMS} ##### Mr MANNING: -- It is for the constructing authority to select the persons. Applications for loans will not be granted indiscriminately. Speaking on the Savings Bank Bill, the honorable member for Eden-Monaro **(Mr. Perkins)** said that in these cases personal security is an important factor, and I know that the Savings Bank Commissioners in New South Wales, and presumably in other States also, being shrewd, level-headed, business men, do give very careful consideration to the personal security. The Leader of the Opposition contended that the Government should have gone cap in hand to the States and asked whether, if this' Parliament agreed to a bill such as this, they would consent to accept assist ance from the Commonwealth. That was not clone in connexion with the grants for wire netting and main roads, and although some States at first refused to avail themselves of that assistance it was not long before all were glad to share in the money that the Commonwealth offered. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr Theodore: -- The wire netting and roads grants were discussed at a Premiers' Conference before any legislation was introduced. {: .speaker-KMS} ##### Mr MANNING: -- However that may be, those States which at first refused to participate were very glad eventually to do so. If the Commonwealth Governmenhad waited to get the approval of all the State Governments before introducing any legislation those two measures which have given great relief in their respective spheres would not have been passed. The contention of the Leader of the Opposition that this bill should have been delayed until the approval of the State Governments had been obtained is ridiculous. 1 am glad the measure ha3 been brought forward, and I am confident that it will give relief where relief is very much needed. {: #subdebate-28-0-s10 .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN:
Reid .- I am surprised at the attitude of the honorable member for Macquarie **(Mr. Manning).** The criticism that has emanated from this side of the House has related chiefly to the absence of consultation with the States. The fact has been stressed that there was consultation in regard to the main roads and wire netting grants ; and surely, in respect of a measure of national importance, involving the whole structure of credit for the financing of a housing scheme, there should have been conference with the State authorities. {: .speaker-KXT} ##### Mr Paterson: -- There has been. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- If the honorable member had read my speech he would have seen that. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN: -- I understood that there had been no discussion of this matter at the Premiers' Conference. {: .speaker-KXT} ##### Mr Paterson: -- Not at the Premiers' Conference, but with the State authorities. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN: -- The biggest opposition to this proposal will come from certain anti-Labour State Governments. Prominent Nationalists in New South Wales have criticized the proposal to advance up to 90 per cent, of the valuation. I do not object to extending the advance to £1,80*0, or increasing the classes which will participate, or the extent of the advance, but I maintain that there should have been the fullest consultation between the Commonwealth and State Governments. The extension of the maximum advance to 90 per cent, may create serious difficulties for the States. The honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Theodore)** pointed out that a maximum advance of £1,800, which would enable an applicant to acquire a dwelling worth £2,000, will probably lead to greater losses, owing to the difficulty of selling properties of that class, than are likely under the existing State schemes, which limit the advances to £800. Some Ministerial members have derived ' a lot of satisfaction from the fact that the measure provides that advances may be made for the purchase of existing dwellings. The Government's past experi<ence in that regard was rather disastrous. Under the wai- service homes scheme the original practice was to make advances *on* existing property, but such heavy losses were sustained through the acquisition of jerry-built houses by the Com.monwealth Bank, which was the purchasing authority, and so many properties had to be written down, that the com.mission advised the suspension of that practice. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr Thompson: -- One reason was that many of the houses were built too cheaply. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN: -- Some of the more expensive properties are equally badly built and the risk in respect of them - will be much greater. The Government is inconsistent, for although advances to soldiers are generally limited to new properties, it is now attempting to force upon "the States a scheme which will invovle advances for the acquisition of existing properties. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr Thompson: -- The States need not accept the money. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN: -- That interjection illustrates the futility and hypocrisy of this measure. Two years ago this Government promised to bring in a scheme for advancing money for housing purposes But there was no suggestion that it would be through another authority. Now the honorable member for New England **(Mr.** Thompson) adopts the attitude that the States need not take the advances unless they so desire. Probably the States will discover that many difficulties' exist which may preclude their taking advantage of the advances, so enabling the Bruce-Page Government to say, " We have redeemed our pre-election promises. The responsibility is now on the State Governments." {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr Thompson: -- But not that of finding the money. Mi-. COOLEMAN.- The point has been effectively made by honorable members on this side that, whilst this Government is prepared to advance money under certain conditions, it declines to share in any losses that may accrue from the transaction. The States are asked to extend the proportion of their advances from 75 per cent, to 90 per ce:.c, and the amount of their* advances from £700 or £800 to £1,800, which is a drastic alteration of existing housing schemes. The question warrants the exhaustive consideration, not only of the authority advancing the money, but also of the authorities that will be expending it. Honorable members opposite have referred to the alleged inadequacy of existing State housing schemes. It is interesting to read, from statistics, that the New South Wales Government last year advanced the amount of £.1,619,000 to applicants for homes, the number affected being 2,724. The *Commonwealth YearBooh* indicates that the Commonwealth Savings Bank deposits represent less than one-third of the total Savings Banks deposits of Australia. The money at the disposal of the States Savings Banks is made available to those .desiring to build homes at a low rate of interest. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr Thompson: -- In New South Wales they have £16,000,000 of Savings Bank deposits untouched. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN: -- The expenditure of £1,619,000 in one year on advances for the purchase and building of homes is by no means a miserly accomplishment. It is something that redounds to the credit of Labour government, and indicates that the housing problem was effectively grappled with in New South Wales. At present the Commonwealth War Service Homes Act specifies that an advance of £800 may be made to a returned soldier to build his home. Although the cost of material has increased by from 20 per cent, to 25 per cent, since the scheme was initiated, the maximum of £800 has remained. Certainly the act was amended last, year, providing, in special circumstances, that the amount might be increased to £950; but actually the maximum remains at £800, as the additional £150 is available only to those men whose families have so increased as to necessitate the provision of additional housing accommodation. We have the spectacle of a government proposing to advance £1,800 to other persons desiring to build a home, yet limiting the advances tq returned soldiers under the War Service Homes Act to £300. " {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr Thompson: -- I should think returned soldiers will be able to obtain finance under this scheme should they so desire. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN: -- The War Service Homes Act was introduced specifically to grant easy conditions to returned soldiers, the rate of interest, for instance, being 5 per cent. The last report of the War Service Homes Commission indicates that the £S00 maximum is totally inadequate, and I hope that the Government, now that it is introducing a bill of this nature, will seriously consider the desirability of increasing the maximum under the War Service Homes Act. Honorable members on this side of the House do not. object to the extension under this bill of the scope of advances to prospective home-builders not catered for by State legislation; but they do object to the manner in which the bill is introduced, and to the fact that the State authorities have not been properly consulted. We also object to the fact that the bill is not in conformity with the promises made by the Prime Minister and his colleagues prior to the last election. {: #subdebate-28-0-s11 .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr MAKIN:
Hindmarsh .- The parties in this House meet on common ground in their desire to foster a beneficial sociological effort -such as the building of homes, and the desire of honorable members of the Opposition to advance the welfare of the people is no whit less than that of honorable members on the Government benches. It is our contention that the Government has failed to cope adequately with the situation by this bill. Honorable members opposite have sought to demonstrate that members of the Labour party do not desire to extend the privileges of the housing scheme. That I label as a gross misrepresentation, amply disproved by the policy of this party. *Sitting suspended from 6.15 to S p.m.* {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr MAKIN: -- The Labour party has always ardently advocated improved housing conditions for the people, and it has done a great deal to give practical expression to its ideals in that regard. Many schemes have been inaugurated by various State Labour Governments to enable the people to own their own homes. It is felt by the representatives of this great movement that better citizenship may confidently be looked for from those who have been released from the grasping greed of landlords. Home ownership generally means better home life, and better home life must unquestionably be reflected in better citizenship. Not only have State Labour governments done a great deal to encourage the workers to purchase homes for themselves, but various trade unions have also pursued that policy. The Amalgamated Society of Engineers, with which I have the honour to be associated, has rendered considerable assistance to its members to purchase their own homes, and that may also be truthfully said of many other trade unions. Friendly societies, the membership of which is made up very largely of working people, have also made a liberal use of their funds to enable their members to purchase their own homes. The membership of Starr-Bowkett and other classes of building societies is also composed largely of working people. I am relating these facts in order to show that the leaders of the working class have, over a long period of years, encouraged the rank and file to purchase homes for themselves; and also to reply to the disparaging comments that the honorable member for Henty **(Mr. Gullett)** made this afternoon on various housing schemes inaugurated under the auspices of organized Labour. The honorable member saw fit to question the sincerity on this subject of honorable members on this side of the chamber. To hear him speaking, one might have imagined that we were on the eve of an election. His criticism of the honorable member for Batman **(Mr. Brennan)** was uncalled for and unjust, and I should dearly love to hear the honorable member for Batman make a five-minutes' reply to the charges that were made against him. I have no desire to misrepresent the views of the honorable member for Henty. I have always had an admiration for him, for I have felt that he belonged to the more advanced section of the Nationalist party, which might be compared with the Liberal party of the days of Deakin, Holder and Kingston. I even thought that the honorable member might become a leader of that section within his own party. But his speeches in this chamber during the last week or two, and particularly the speech that he delivered before the Women's National Federation in Melbourne recently, have shown me that I was expecting too much of him. I was greatly disappointed to find that he desired to see the Government dissociate itself from many of the public enterprises Avith which it has been connected, notably the Australian Commonwealth Shipping Line and the Commonwealth Oil Refineries. {: .speaker-KFS} ##### Mr Gullett: -- Hear, hear. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr MAKIN: -- It is evident that I am not misrepresenting the views of the honorable member. A great many electors in the division of Henty will regret this as much as I do. I have no doubt that the honorable member recollects that when he first stood as a candidate for Henty some years ago, the Labourites in his division supported him in reference to another Nationalist candidate, because they believed that he was something of an advanced democrat. They will keenly regret that he has proved to he a reactionary. The honorable member also saw fit to criticize the attitude which the honorable member for Yarra **(Mr. Scullin)** has adopted on this bill. It will be remembered that the Deputy Leader of this party suggested that before introducing this bill the Government should have liberalized the conditions under which war service homes are being made available to our ex-service men. The honorable member for Henty submitted that our ex-service men are already receiving more favorable treatment than the Government proposes to give to those who expect to benefit under the provisions of this measure. The facts do not bear that out, and the criticism of the honorable member for Yarra and the honorable member for Batman on this point was fully justified. I regret that some honorable members who have discussed this bill and the Commonwealth Bank Savings Bank Bill, which is alleged to be a companion measure, have seen fit to devote so much of their time to a misrepresentation of the efforts of various State Labour governments to improve the housing conditions of our people. The honorable member for New England **(Mr. Thompson)** was a notable offender. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr Thompson: -- Not in regard to housing. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr MAKIN: -- In regard to expenditure generally. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr Thompson: -- That is so. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr MAKIN: -- The honorable member must realize that the provision of housing has been responsible for a considerable expenditure on the part of various Labour governments. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr Thompson: -- I was referring to State governments, not to Labour governments. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr MAKIN: -- The majority of the States are being governed by Labour to-day, therefore, the honorable member cannot in that way escape from the criticism of his unworthy statements. He made a speech that proved to me that he was not quite himself this afternoon. He spoke of the great necessity of clipping the wings of the State authorities, and then he said how desirable it was for the Government to be very generous in making advances. It was a most inconsistent utterance, and I say that if any State was erratic and untrustworthy, he should be very careful and cautious about giving that State additional opportunities to injure the financial position of the country. I put it to the honorable member for New England that if he knew a nian was erratic and untrustworthy, would he pass over his purse to that man in order to execute a commission for him? The honorable member has proved how unprepared he was for the defence of the Government's proposal in respect to housing. I would like to say that as far as this housing scheme is concerned, I find that it has not been received in a manner either agreeable or favorable in circles with which honorable gentlemen opposite happen to associate. During the last election campaign and subsequently, when this scheme was under discussion, and especially when Cabinet was giving attention to the der tails of the scheme, very strong protests were made by certain bodies that in ordinary circumstances supported the political interests of the Government. I desire to quote a statement issued by the Chamber of Commerce of Victoria on the 9th December, 1926, and reprinted in the *Argus* on the 10th December. That statement expresses their opinion on this scheme, and it was one of protest and condemnation. The resolution concluded with the following words : - >Apart from the grave fears the council entertains as to the successful administration of the scheme, it is of the opinion that such a venture is wholly uncalled for in view Of the ample facilities already existing for the financing of home building. Not only was this protest advanced in Victoria, but I find that the South Australian Taxpayers' Association, with which the Lord Mayor of Adelaide is closely associated - and the cause of Nationalism has never had a better advocate than the Lord Mayor of Adelaide - also passed a resolution condemning the scheme. It was reported in the *Argus* of the 27th November, 1926, and is as follows : - >That in view of Australia's rapidly increasing indebtedness and the heavy loss which occurred from the building of war service homes, with the resultant burden on the taxpayers, the Federal Ministry be urged to abandon its project for borrowing £20,000,000 for housing, which is not, in the opinion of this body, a desirable activity. In both of these resolutions there is clear evidence that these associations had in mind a very definite idea that the Government was going in actively for building homes for the people. It mentions also the unfortunate position of the Government in respect to the administration of war service homes. Therefore, the protest they made was one of fear that there should be a repetition of the position which arose in connexion with those homes. The resolution of the Victorian Chamber of Commerce mentioned that the various housing schemes of the States were meeting the necessities of the case, thus proving that they did not desire the Commonwealth to accept the added responsibility of a housing scheme. While it may have been the in ten tion of the Government when it first gave expression to its desire to institute the housing scheme as part of its public policy, to embark actively upon that scheme itself, it appears to me that since the scheme was first drawn up pressure was brought to bear on the Government by those closely associated with its political activities, and that as a result of this pressure they watered the scheme down until it will not now serve the purpose for which it was originally intended. It is now a housing scheme only in name, and is brought forward to appease the desire of the people to whom the Government made promises, and to give them the impression that it is adhering to its promises. The Government is endeavouring to serve two masters, but whether the people will in future he prepared to accept this scheme as the fulfilment of the promises which were made, I cannot say, and we can only await the result. Nevertheless, I am confident that the Treasurer and those supporting him will not receive the approval or approbation of the people, but that the Government will be condemned for not proceeding with a real housing scheme. If this Government actually had a desire to house the people of the Commonwealth in the way they profess, and if they regarded it as a matter of such urgency as they have endeavoured to "make out, then, the Treasurer must explain to the people why the scheme is so belated and why, although the proposals were formulated in September last, over twelve months have been allowed to elapse before it was brought before the House. During the session last year the Government was more concerned with endeavouring to placate the hysteria it had worked up by tales of lawlessness and threats to the Constitution, than it was with providing homes for the people. They passed the Crimes Act and the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act, but the question of housing could, of course, be left to the future. There was no hurry about that, but the Government wanted to get rid of persons like Jock Garden, Walsh, and Johnson. Yet after this parade and display in an endeavour to ensure stability and to uphold law and order, we find that all these gentlemen are still in the country, free and unmolested. Those associated with the Government were more concerned with this sham and this false display of strength than they were with freeing the people from the exorbitant demands of the heartless landlord. It is a remarkable thing that the honorable gentlemen on the other side have no desire now to rid the country of Walsh and those associated with him. Only a few months ago one of these men asked for a passport to go out of the country and the Government was not prepared to give him one. But I want to come back to the Treasurer. The honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Coleman)** made a suggestion that the States have a right to be consulted before we give effect to any legislation of this kind. Surely it is only a matter of courtesy to consult their wishes, and see that they are prepared to co-operate with the Commonwealth authorities in this scheme. The Treasurer said in reply - " Why, that has been done." The honorable member for Reid said that that was news to him. The Treasurer replied that he should read his (the Treasurer's) speech. The only inference that could be drawn was that the Treasurer had consulted the State authorities, that he had made himself familiar with the wishes of the State Governments, and that he had said so in his speech. Now I call the bluff of the honorable gentleman. I have heard his speech, and I read the speech twice. The only reference that the honorable member has made as to his consultation with anybody, was in the following words - I have discussed this subject with many authorities, and I have found that the only reason why the various State schemes have not been liberalized, is that there is no money with which to liberalize them." There is nothing whatever there about consulting with the States, or securing their approval, and it does not do the honorable gentleman credit when he makes an interjection the import of which is that' he has done a certain thing, when actually he has done nothing of thp kind. I hope that when the Treasurer replies he will give the House the exact terms of his remarks in his secondreading speech, which indicate that he had discussed the matter with the State authorities, and had received their assurance that they would participate in the scheme. I challenge him to do that. If he can do so, I shall be one of the first to apologize for misrepresenting him ; but I have carefully read his speech, and I claim that he cannot prove what was to be inferred from his interjection to the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Coleman).** Last Eriday afternoon the honorable member for Barker **(Mr. M. Cameron)** suggested that Liberal administration in South Australia had ledto greater progress in housing that had been accomplished under Labour governments. He said that, in the last year of the Barwell Government's term of office, 1,182 homes were provided. He then pointed out that, when a Labour government was returned, it launched the " Thousand Homes " scheme, and completed not more than 100 houses in the first year. I have telegraphed to South Australia for the facts. **Mr. Commissioner** Mitchell, who was appointed to investigate the " Thousand Homes " scheme, reported, according to the Adelaide *Advertiser* of the 7th October, 1925, that on the 30th September of that year - practically twelve months after a Labour government gave effect to the " Thousand Homes " scheme, the number of homes allocated by it was 965, and that 355 houses had been completed and delivered to applicants, and 569 were under course of construction. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Foster: -- I think that those figures are wrong. I prefer to be guided by *Hansard* rather than by any newspaper report. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr MAKIN: -- I have quoted figures supplied by Mr.Commissioner Mitchell, who was appointed by the South Australian Government, and I think that the honorable member for Wakefield will admit that that gentleman could not be fairly accused of political partizanship. But those 355 constructed and completed houses do not represent the whole of the Government's housing scheme. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Foster: -- It undertook to build 1,000 homes a year. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr MAKIN: -- And it actually constructed more than 1,000 in the first twelve months. The honorable member stated last Friday that, if his memory served him right, about 100 homes have been completed ; but, on the figures of **Mr. Commissioner** Mitchell, 355 were actually delivered to applicants, and 41 other homes were completed hut not delivered, making a total of 396 built under the scheme. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Foster: -If I have been led astray, I apologize. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr MAKIN: -- I am sure that the honorable member would not knowingly misrepresent the position. The honorable member for Barker said that, during the last year of the Barwell Government's period of office, 1,182 houses were built. According to the records of the Stata Bank authorities, however, the number erected during the financial year ended 30th June, 1924, was 972. That Government is to be commended for having given effect to the housing policy; but, when comparisons are made, Labour should be given full credit for the part it has played. In the first year of the Gunn Government's administration 1,432 homes were built, or 416 more than were constructed during the preceding year when the Barwell Government was in power. From 1921 to 1924 the Barwell administration expended £1,300,000 on housing, and made it possible for 2,300 persons to secure advances for homes. From 1924 to 1927, the Gunn and Hill Labour Governments made available £2,700,000, or £1,400,000 more than the Barwell Government had provided in the previous three years. The number of persons who received advances was 4,100, or 1,800 more than the number assisted under the scheme during the Nationalist Government's regime. I hope that in future the honorable member for Wakefield and those associated with him will make it clear that the representatives of Labour are not opposed to better housing facilities. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Sir Elliot Johnson: -- Why not give this Government credit for good inten tions ? {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr MAKIN: -- If its proposal possessed the merits claimed for it, I should be one of the first to applaud it. As one who has not always had an easy path in life, I realize how difficult it is for the average wage-earner to acquire a home of his own, and if this measure would make it possible for one person to obtain a dwelling more easily thanhe can at the present time, I would warmly support it. I have been found supporting this Government even when the honorable member for Lang **(Sir Elliot Johnson)** has voted against it; that was when it proposed measures for the assistance of certain industries in Australia. Lord Burnham, a gentleman of high standing in Great Britain, who visited Australia toward the end of 1925, was enamoured of the " Thousand Homes " scheme in South Australia. He congratulated the Labour Government of South Australia on what it had achieved. In the Adelaide *Advertiser* of the 22nd October, 1925, he was reported as saying - >He congratulated the Government on having taken so bold and independent a view of social conditions, and on their decision in attempting to solve the housing problem, to provide facilities whereby the occupiers could purchase their homes. He did not know of any other housing scheme where so much was given at so low a cost. The Government were getting better value than in any similar scheme he knew of in England. This was a genuine contribution to social progress, and he strongly recommended it as an example, which they might wish to follow, to those Ministers at Home who were striving to solve similar problems. I think that we can accept these words of commendation of a scheme which the honorable member for Barker, and incidentally the honorable member for Wakefield, endeavoured to make the House believe had not achieved the great success that honorable members of the Labour party claim for it. As a matter of fact, it was left to a Labour Government to show how housing could be carried out in a practical way and to the great advantage of the people of Australia. I hope, therefore, that from now onwards honorable members opposite will not endeavour *to* belittle the efforts of Labour Governments, and that they will realize that a sincere effort has been made to find a solution for the housing of an ever-increasing population. I hope that the Treasurer will give credit to Labour for its practical housing schemes, and if in carrying out his policy he will follow the lines of the South Australian effort he will be doing something for the good of the people, and will give honorable members every reason for affording wholehearted support to a proper housing scheme, and not to a mere pious demonstration. {: #subdebate-28-0-s12 .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · Cowper · CP -- Before dealing with the criticism of honorable members of the Opposition, I should like to rebut a statement - that of the honorable member for Hindmarsh **(Mr. Makin)** - with regard to my interjection to the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Coleman).** With your permission, **Mr. Speaker,** I shall read from *Hansard* my remarks on the second reading. I said - >I have discussed this subject with many authorities, and I have found that the only reason why the various State schemes have not been liberalized is that there is no money to liberalize them. If that does not show that I discussed the matter with the various State authorities I should like to know what it does mean. As a result of these discussions I said - >All the money available under the existing schemes is eagerly applied for by home-seekers. The persons administering tlie different State schemes have not urged upon their Ministers the liberalizing of the schemes, for they have realized that no money was available from present sources for the purpose. It is evident that I gleaned that information as the result of discussions with these gentlemen. I went on to say - >I find that in Victoria the authorities are not only using ordinary deposits to provide money for housing purposes, but have frequently floated loans at a higher rate of interest than they pay to their ordinary depositors, simply to obtain money for applicants seeking advances. If that statement of mine does not disclose that the bill is the result of discussions I have had with State authorities I do not know how I could state the position more plainly. I shall not merely state definitely now what authority is meant in the bill, but during the committee stage I shall move to insert an amendment suggested by one of the authorities affected, the State Savings Bank of New South Wales. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr Makin: -- That is not a State Government. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- In the course" of my speech I said, as honorable members will recollect, that I had discussed the Government's proposals in an informal way with many authorities. I could not very well discuss a bill with State Governments, but I sought the advice and opinion of State authorities as to the course the Commonwealth should follow, and in committee I shall move an amendment suggested by the State Savings Bank of New South Wales. The purpose of that amendment is to enable the Commonwealth scheme to operate to the best advantage of the people of Australia. The amendment itself, is being printed, and will be circulated. Now >let me examine the various laboured criticisms of the bill. Every one recognizes how difficult it must have been for honorable members of the Opposition to advance valid criticism. How difficult their task was, the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Charlton)** made evident when he declared that it was not his intention to vote against the bill. The whole criticism of the Opposition had missed the main principle of this bill. In his policy speech delivered at Dandenong in 1925, the Prime Minister said that the Commonwealth's housing scheme would supply the definiency in regard to the amount of money available for housing purposes in Australia. The Commonwealth's idea was, as I said in moving the second reading, to cover an area not at present touched by existing housing schemes. When one looks at what has already been done in Australia to provide homes for the people, one must appreciate the magnitude of the Commonwealth Government's gesture in this regard. At present, of the £228,000,000 on deposit in the various savings banks of Australia, Commonwealth and State, there has been used for home building the sum of £25,990,000, representing 11.38 of the total amount available. The Commonwealth's offer to provide a further £20,000,000 for this purpose is almost equivalent to the total amount already provided by the States. Yet honorable members opposite have the audacity to suggest that the Commonwealth's offer ought to be regarded as a sham or imposture. We find most extraordinary contradictions in the speeches of honorable members opposite. During the debate on another measure, when an honorable member on the Ministerial side was speaking, the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Theodore)** interjected that he could not understand any outcry against the provision of money for such a useful purpose as the building of homes, and that an outcry could more easily be raised against extravagances in many other directions. We have heard the honorable member for Adelaide **(Mr. Yates)** telling us of the wonderful resources of the Commonwealth, and showing us how easy it should be to raise money for the purpose of building homes'; and yet while the honorable member for Batman **(Mr. Brennan)** has declared that it is wrong for us to borrow money at the present time for housing purposes, we have just listened to the honorable member for Hindmarsh **(Mr. Makin)** boasting about the immense amount of loan money used for this purpose in South Australia. We have heard before of Labour's two voices, but on thisbill we have heard Labour speak with a thousand voices, and all in a different tongue. After listening to honorable members opposite talking about finding the money for a housing scheme, and voicing their lately discovered detestation of the use of loan money for the purpose, we wonder how they can explain the terrific borrowing they have indulged in for State ventures. To-day they condemn a proposal to borrow money for building houses. To-morrow we shall learn what they will have to say when it comes to a question of borrowing money to build ships. The Government proposes to contribute definite assistance to house building in the States, and I am satisfied it will be acceptable to them. The suggestion has been made that what has been provided for in the bill cannot be done. It is true that some limitations will- be placed on the State authorities with regard to the manner in which the money provided by the Commonwealth must be invested, but those limitations are already recognized in some degree. Extraordinary reasons have been advanced by honorable members opposite to show what an unsound proposition the Government has brought forward. As a matter of fact, the Government does not propose to supersede the State housing schemes. Its proposition is to supple ment them. Both the honorable member for Yarra **(Mr. Scullin)** and the Leader of the Opposition" **(Mr. Charlton)** have said that they would support a Commonwealth, housing scheme if the Commonwealth, undertook the whole of the work, although they admit that that would lead to duplication of effort and more cost to the home builder than under the suggested scheme. Both honorable members have raised opposition to the bill because they think there may he a slight increase in the rate of interest owing to a little circumlocution. But when a similar arrangement was made in Queensland, as I shall presently explain, the cost was as low as it has ever been in Australia. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Foster: -- How was that brought about? {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- The Queensland rate is 5 per cent., but I shall explain in a few minutes why that is possible. I shall also contrast the attitude of the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Theodore)** towards that arrangement with his attitude towards this bill, and shall ask him how he can square the two. We have no intention of duplicating State activities ; we intend to supplement them. The suggestion is made that the States will not accept the Commonwealth's scheme, because of the insecurity attaching to it, and because . we are asking them to advance up to 90 per cent, of the value of the houses. It is provided in the bill that the maximum advance shall be £1,800, and that the States may advance up to 90 per cent, of the valuation. It is imperative that the States shall not exceed the maximum, but at their discretion they may advance up to 90 per cent., and they will probably do so. It has been suggested that it will be impossible to get the States to agree to the scheme. In South Australia advances equal to six-sevenths, or about 85 per cent, of the value of a home are made to ordinary homeseekers. That advance is increased to 96.5 per cent, in the case of a man with two children. It will, therefore, be seen that in that State the greater advance is made to the man with the heavier financial responsibility. In Queensland advances equal- to 80 per cent, of the value of a property are made in ordinary circumstances, but from workers whose earnings are less than £260 per annum a deposit of only 5 per cent. is required. The honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Theodore)** said that certain losses were incurred in connexion with that scheme. Is it not extraordinary that the scheme has continued for so long if those losses have been considerable? If it is possible for Queensland to make advances on those terms to men on the basic wage and others whose livelihood is precarious, it should be possible to extend the scheme to others with greater incomes. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr Theodore: -- There would be more risk by increasing the limit. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- Yes, if at the same time the salary were reduced; but there is less risk with the wider range of" salary. In Victoria, 90 per cent. of the value of the home is advanced. In Western Australia advances are made om a deposit of only £10. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr Scullin: -- The honorable gentleman is ignoring the main argument. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- It has been said that the money which will be made available by the Commonwealth under this legislation will cost more than that already available to the States, and also that a portion of the money required will have to be raised by means of a loan. The various States savings banks pay differing rates of interest on deposits. In South Australia the rate is4¾ per cent. ; in New South Wales itis 4 per cent., and in Victoria from 4 per cent. to4½ per cent. The only savings bank in Australia which pays its depositors at per cent. is the Commonwealth Savings Bank. The savings banks of the States which make advances for the purchase of homes, with perhaps one exception, do not get their money from the State Government or through the Loan Council but by going on the market themselves. Those institutions pay about ¼ to½ per cent. more for their money than the rates paid by the Commonwealth or State Governments. It will, therefore, be seen that those institutions not only pay to their depositors higher rates of interest than the Commonwealth Savings Bank, butalso pay higher rates on the money they borrow. The money that will be made available under this scheme will be that on which low rates of interest are paid to depositors or which is borrowed on the best terms. That should enable more liberal conditions to be offered under this scheme than is possible under any of the existing schemes. The honorable member for Dalley also said that to use the money of depositors in the way suggested by the bill would be a scandalous thing ; that it was wrong to limit the interest the depositors could earn. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr Theodore: -- The honorable gentleman misrepresents me. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- What did the honorable member for Dalley do when he was Premier of Queensland? The State Savings Bank of Queensland lent money to the Queensland Government on long terms at 3 per cent. When an arrangement was made with the governor of the Commonwealth Bank to take over the Queensland Savings Bank, **Mr. Theodore** insisted on a clause being inserted in the agreement to provide that the Government would be entitled to the use of up to 70 per cent. of the new deposits at not more than 1 per cent. above the ruling rate of interest. Thestate Treasurer practically was given the power to say whether the rate of interest to depositors should be raised or kept down. Yet the honorable member who in that way infringed the rights of savings bank depositors in Queensland, now says that it would be wrong to do what the Government proposes. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr Theodore: -- I did not confiscate the profits as is proposed in this measure. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- It is possible now to purchase a home in Queensland by paying interest at 5 per cent. on the balance owing. In New South Wales the interest required is about 6 per cent.; in Victoria the rate is from 6 to6¼ per. cent.; in South Australia, 6 per cent. ; in Western Australia,5½ per cent. ; and in Tasmania,7½ per cent., with a rebate of½ per cent. if payments are made within a certain specified time. The lowest rate is in Queensland, where the Commonwealth Savings Bank, which lends money to the Queensland Go vernment, has control of the savings bank business, and pays to depositors a lower rate of interest than is paid in the other States. The position will be the same in regard to this money. The Opposition has also objected to this bill for the extraordinary reason that the Commonwealth will not be involved in any losses which may occur. Surely thac is a strange reason for honorable members of this Parliament opposing a housing scheme? The first duty of honorable members should be to prevent losses. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr Theodore: -- But not to transfer those losses to the States. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- It is reasonable to throw the onus on the State savings bank authorities if they undertake the whole work. Moreover, they are willing to take it. I have no hesitation in commending the bill to the House. I hope that the second reading will be agreed to, and that the bill will pass through the committee without delay. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. *In committee:* Clause 1 (Short title). {: #subdebate-28-0-s13 .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr BRENNAN:
Batman .- I suggest that the title of the bill should be altered. The rules of debate prevent me from referring to the speeches on the second reading as I should desire, particularly in the direction of drawing attention to the fact that much of the speech of the Treasurer **(Dr. Earle Page)** was irrelevant to the bill. It would not be permissible for me to inform the committee in the way that I should like that the honorable gentleman's most destructive arguments were directed against things which were not said by honorable members on this side. However, as to develop in greater detail the points that I have indicated would be to infringe the strict rules of debate in this chamber, I shall confine myself to a matter which is distinctly relevant, namely, the short title of the bill, which reads- >This act may be cited as the Commonwealth Housing Act 1927. That is not a proper title for this measure, seeing that it has nothing to do with Commonwealth housing. The bill before us provides for the lending of money and the increasing of the national debt. Money is to be borrowed for the purpose of lending it to others who have not stated that they have any need for it. I had thought of proposing an amendment to the title of the bill, but I shall not do so. It should be sufficient to draw public attention to its inappropriateness. The Treasurer must have been greatly relieved when, having concluded his long and spirited address, the purpose of which was to overcome the opposition of honorable members on this side, he found that there was no opposition, but only trenchant criticism Should we call this measure the Commonwealth Housing Bill? That is the question. I should be sorry to think that one of the few addresses which I have been privileged to make in the salubrious and exhilarating atmosphere of the new Capital should be devoted to anything which might be suspected even by the most suspicious as in the nature of a stonewall! But I do resent strongly the use, by the Government, of the forms of Parliament in an elaborate pretence that it is concerning itself with the problem of providing homes for tha Australian people when, as a matter of fact, it is trying to dress up an illconceived election promise which it had no intention of fulfilling in substance. I am much interested in Commonwealth housing. I advocated such a scheme for many years, and at a time when honorable gentlemen opposite poured ridicule on our efforts, which they described as ill-digested socialistic schemes. The interest of the Labour party in the wage earner in regard to his housing conditions is not a thing of today or yesterday, and I should feel privileged to be associated with any genuine proposal, irrespective of the government that sponsored it, to utilize Commonwealth funds, if the Government had such funds to spare, for the erection of homes for the people. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- And establish a principle of private ownership of real property. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr BRENNAN: -- Establish a principle of private ownership if you like through State enterprises. That is being done to-day through the various State agencies, and I remind the honorable member for Fawkner that it is being done not because, but in spite of, honorable members who so unitedly, but for the most part so silently, support the Government in connexion with this scheme. When the Government went to the country about two years ago the Prime Minister **(Mr. Bruce)** tickled the ears of his supporters and succeeded in persuading the people that the conversion of the Government was complete and that it proposed to take a leaf out of the book of the Labour party by utilizing in the last resort, the resources of the Commonwealth to carry out a house building scheme. As a matter of fact the Government does not intend to do that. All it proposes to do is to lend to existing authorities a substantial sum of borrowed money. I have not said one word, as the Treasurer suggested, even against the borrowing of money in certain circumstances for the erection of houses. I can conceive of conditions under which the Government might even do that, if existing local authorities failed to supply the need of the people for houses. I do not even suggest that the need is by any * means completely met. What I said, in the short speech which I made for the edification of the Treasurer, was that the Government had shown no good reason for adding £20,000,000 to the public debt merely for the purpose of raising *money and handing it over to other authorities to spend. The authorities mentioned are really doing this class of work, and doing it well. We have had no proof that they have asked for this measure, or that they have agreed to the conditions under which the money may be made available to them. Indeed, we have had no proof that there will be co-operation between the Commonwealth and the existing housing authorities in the various- States. I now challenge the" Treasurer, as I challenged him before, to prove that, in the present state of the Commonwealth finances, he is justified in going on with the bill. Honorable members may call it what they like. Certainly it is not a Commonwealth housing bill. Clause agreed to. Clauses 2 and 3 agreed to. Clause 4. In this Act, unless the contrary intention appears - " Authority " means a prescribed Commonwealth, Territorial, State or Municipal Authority which administers a scheme for providing or assisting in providing dwelling houses. {: #subdebate-28-0-s14 .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter .- This clause deals with definitions. The only authority which we can recognize is the Parliament or Government of a State. During the debate the Treasurer was asked by several honorable members on this side of the chamber if he had consulted the State Governments, and particularly the Governments of Queensland and Tasmania, which have made an agreement with the Commonwealth in regard to their savings bank business. In his reply the Treasurer quoted the remarks which he made during his second reading speech; but did not give us the information we had asked for. He did not say that any of the authorities mentioned had agreed to the scheme, nor did he state definitely that they had been consulted.. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr Coleman: -- He admitted that they had not been. ' {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- The Treasurer said that he had talked the proposal over with different authorities. We may presume from that admission that he had some conversation with savings bank officials in one or two of the States; but I remind him that the authorities who should have been consulted are the Governments of the respective States. Unless they have agreed to this scheme, the Treasurer is not justified in proceeding with it. He has not answered the objections that were directed against the bill from honorable members on this side. The State authorities are carrying on this class of work now. If, after examining the Commonwealth scheme, they consider it to be not quite satisfactory, and will not accept it, this Parliament will be placed in a most ridiculous position. Since the Treasurer cannot assure us that the States will accept the scheme, it appears to me that we are wasting valuable time in discussing it. Actually the Treasurer is putting the cart before the horse. He should first be sure that the scheme will be acceptable to the States. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr Coleman: -- The passage of the bill will relieve the Treasurer of his promise. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- That is about the only thing that can be said in favour of t-he measure. The Government, having pledged itself to bring in a housing bill, feels that it must make this attempt to save its face, notwithstanding that it has allowed two years to go by since the last election without doing anything. There may be another election within twelve months, so, probably Ministers wish to be able to say to the people - " We kept faith with you ; we did bring in a housing bill, but for some reason unknown to us the States refused to accept it." Neither the Prime Minister nor any of his supporters during the election campaign said anything to suggest that the Commonwealth housing scheme would be subject to acceptance by the State Governments, or that it would take the form of a bill authorizing the lending of money to existing authorities. On the contrary, it was definitely stated that the Commonwealth Government intended to bring forward a house building scheme. Some honorable members supporting the Government appeared to be surprised that we did not call for a division on the second reading of the bill. We did not wish to appear ridiculous by dividing the House on a measure that really contains nothing of value to the people. We believe in a genuine housing scheme; but we do not approve of the present proposal, because money borrowed under it will probably cost *i* per cent, more than is paid for money provided by the State Savings Bank. They can make it available at 5 per cent. The Commonwealth cannot borrow money under per cent., to which must be added the expenses of flotation and other charges, amounting roughly to about 30s. per cent. In the circumstances it is ridiculous to try to make people believe that this scheme will be of assistance to the States, or that it will reduce the cost of housing. Before proceeding with this legislation we should know whether the States approve of it. Of late the tendency of this Parliament has been to pass legislation, and then tell the States that they can take advantage of it or not, as they please. That is not the proper way in which to deal with these matters, and the time of Parliament should not be thus wasted. Many more important problems require immediate attention. Soon Christmas will be upon us, and nothing will have been accomplished. The Government will claim that it has passed certain measures, but they will be of no benefit if they are not approved by the States. The first duty of the Government is to reach an understanding with the States in regard to this legislation. If the States want it, the Government will have a good case to present to Parliament and the country. I repeat that this bill is brought forward merely as a subterfuge ; it pretends to give effect to an electioneering promise. Ministers know that nothing will come of it. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- If it is a subterfuge the honorable member and his party should have voted against it. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- No; we believe in a housing scheme, and we desire to see whether the bill can be amended in accordance with our principles. The honorable member expressed his opposition to the Savings Bank Bill, which makes financial provision for the operation of the housing scheme, and he promised to vote against the -second reading. Unfortunately, he was not present when the division was taken. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- I could not help that. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- I know that; but the honorable member will have the opportunity to record his vote in committee. His views are similar to those of honorable members on this side of the chamber. If he is opposed to the Savings Bank Bill he cannot believe that it is possible to give effect to the housing scheme by the measure now before us without doing injury to the Commonwealth. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- The issue boils down to this : If the Commonwealth can supply money at a cheaper rate than that at which the States can borrow for themselves, this scheme may be of some advantage ; if not, it will be absolutely inoperative. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- I have already said that the Commonwealth cannot offer to the States cheaper money than they can get from their own savings banks. {: .speaker-KNP} ##### Mr Maxwell: -- The Treasurer says that the Commonwealth can. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- The Treasurer admitted that the State savings banks pay from 3£ to 4^ per cent, on deposits. The Commonwealth loans cost from & to *5$* per cent., so the States are able to get money cheaper than the Commonwealth can. Therefore, I am justified in saying that the bill is a subterfuge to enable the Government to say that it has endeavoured to comply with its electioneering promises. No advantage can be gained by prolonging this discussion. I believe that time will show that our opposition to the bill was justified. After all, the saying is true, that one can deceive all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but not all the people all the time. {: #subdebate-28-0-s15 .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN:
Reid .- Is it intended that possible benefits under this scheme shall be extended to the "War Service Homes Commission ? The definition of authority in this bill is " a prescribed Commonwealth, Territorial, State or municipal authority which administers a scheme for providing or assisting in providing dwelling houses." The maximum advance for housing under the war service homes scheme is totally inadequate. Building costs have, increased by 20 per cent, since 1921, and the maximum advance, to be of the same value to-day as it was then, should be, not £800, but £960. Any advantages offered by this bill to ordinary citizens should be extended to the soldiers under the War Service Homes Act. Another question that arises is, whether there is not a constitutional obstacle to the granting of assistance to municipal authorities. I understand that this Parliament cannot give financial assistance to those bodies. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- That is not intended; but the Commonwealth Bank can make advances to municipal authorities. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN: -- If this bill is passed, will the Treasurer consult with the State Governments regarding the operation of the scheme? If so, how much time will elapse before the scheme operates? The alteration of existing State machinery to enable effect to be given to this plan will occupy from six to nine months, so that it is improbable that more than a few houses will be erected under the 'provisions of this bill before the next federal elections. {: #subdebate-28-0-s16 .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · ;Cowper · CP -- The remarks of the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Charlton)** and the honorable member for Reid (Mr." Coleman) were based upon a misconception of this scheme. Advances will not be made by the Commonwealth Government to other governments or State authorities; it will only raise certain moneys when requested by the Commonwealth Savings Bank so to do. The Commonwealth Savings Bank will make arrangements with the various authorities detailed in the bill. The Commonwealth Savings Bank, on the one hand, and the State savings bank or other prescribed authority on the other hand, will come to an agreement in regard to the lending of money, subject to the limitations imposed in this bill. If the liberalization of - existing State schemes should be necessary to permit effect to be given to the conditions set out in clause 9, the States Savings Banks' Commissioners will require to approach their governments with a request that the necessary legislation be submitted to their Parliament. I have already discussed the matter of alteration of the Commonwealth Bank with the Treasurers of Tasmania and Queensland, and, provided that the agreement made by them with the Commonwealth Bank is adhered to, they will be quite satisfied with the proposals now before the committee. The liberalization of existing State laws relating to housing has been discussed by the Commonwealth with the authorities that control the State savings banks in New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia; in fact, the maximum of £1,800 was suggested by the Victorian Savings Bank Commissioners. They have found that the present limit to advances leaves a big field unprovided for, with resultant hardship. They have not the funds with which to extend the area over which they now operate; but, if this legislation is passed, they will represent to their Minister the need for an amendment of the State act. The -commissioners of the New South Wales Savings Bank interviewed me about ten days ago, after I had made my second-reading speech, and they had seen the bill, and they suggested certain amendments, which later *1* shall move, to safeguard the utilization of the funds to secure the greatest relief where most needed. They said that if the suggested amendment were made, they would be able to operate the scheme much more easily. It is impossible further to discuss with State governments and authorities the operation of this scheme until we know the temper of Parliament and what basic principles it desires incorporated in the bill. In reply to the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Coleman),** I draw attention to the fact that the proposals in the hill are not nearly as liberal as the war service homes scheme, under which money is advanced at 5 per cent. Moreover, the whole cost of administration of war service homes is borne, not by the commission, but by the Consolidated Revenue of the Commonwealth, and that is why the commission is able to operate so economically so far as charges to soldiers are concerned. This savings bank scheme, however, will itself have to bear the cost of administration, and that cost will ultimately be passed on to the house purchaser. Any soldiers who desire to benefit by this legislation may do so. If they want a home costing up to £1,800 they can get it- {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr Makin: -- Upon the same favorable terms as are given under the War Service Homes Act? {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- No; upon the conditions set out in this bill. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr Makin: -- Why not liberalize the War Service Homes Act? {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- This is a selfcontained scheme, and we cannot ask the Commonwealth Savings Bank to bear certain losses which we know result from the exemption of the war service homes scheme from administrative costs. If that concession were to be extended to soldiers under this measure the Treasury would require to recoup the bank from general revenue. {: #subdebate-28-0-s17 .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra .- The honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Coleman)** was not under any misapprehension when he put his question to the Treasurer, and the Treasurer had no right to make such a charge. The honorable member asked whether this definition was to be interpreted in such a way as to provide for a liberalization of the operations of the War Service Homes Act. ' Clause 4 of the bill defines " Authority " as meaning : - ...... a prescribed Commonwealth, Territorial, State, or Municipal Authority which administers a scheme for providing or- assisting in providing dwelling houses. The War Service Homes Commission might well be regarded as such a prescribed authority, and the honorable member for Reid sought to ascertain whether the Commonwealth Government intended to take a dose of its own medicine and specify that the commission, as one of the authorities prescribed in this clause. When replying to criticism during the second reading of the bill, the Treasurer evaded the main issue - the combination of a 90 per cent, proportion with a maximum advance of £1,800. We have a right to ask whether the Government is in earnest with this scheme or is merely putting before the States something which they cannot accept. If it is a sound scheme, and acceptable to the States, I ask this Government to take its own gruel, and definitely specify the War Service Homes Commission as one of the authorities prescribed in Clause 4. The Government proposes to ask the States to burden themselves with an additional risk, while it evades all risk. We could obtain nothing more definite from the Treasurer than a vague statement that the War Service Homes Act provides returned soldiers with terms more generous than are provided in this measure. The act does not provide terms any more generous than those made available by the Queensland Government to all workers wishing to build homes, yet that government will be called upon to alter its legislation and to apply that generous treatment to those seeking to purchase homes up to the value of £1,800. The gravamen of our charge is that the conditions will prevent the States from accepting the burden, and we shall then be without any housing scheme. Our complaint is that the Commonwealth seeks to evade all risks and refuses to share the burden. The taxpayers are cheerfully shouldering the upkeep of the War Service Homes Act because they agreed to give returned soldiers more than a mere business deal. Why, therefore, should the Government deny those returned soldiers the further benefits that should, be available under this scheme. {: .speaker-KXT} ##### Mr Paterson: -- They may take advantage of it if they desire. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- Only if they forfeit the advantages they are at present enjoying. In what other way can they secure the benefit offered by this housing bill? {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- They may keep their war service homes, having already secured advances. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- And how are they to secure an £1,800 house? {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- By selling their present homes, if they so wish. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- Of course. They may forfeit the advantages granted to them as returned soldiers, and come under this scheme like any other civilian. The State governments have taken a risk on behalf of the man on the basic wage and given him liberal treatment, but it does not follow that they will be prepared to take a similar risk for persons belonging to a higher and more prosperous stratum. And who will contend that they would not be justified in such an attitude. If the Government wishes to prove its sincerity, let it take a dose of its own medicine and apply to itself that to which it asks the States to conform. {: #subdebate-28-0-s18 .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa -- The Treasurerhas been asked repeatedly whether he has consulted the State Governments, and whether they have signified their intention to adopt this housing bill. The honorable gentleman evades the issue by saying that the matter has been referred to the authorities and to the State savings banks. He knows that, although State housing schemes are financed through the State savings banks, the State Governments shoulder the responsibility ; that the business is arranged by them, and not by the savings banks. To say that he has consulted the State savings banks is to say nothing, because those institutions can give no guarantee to the Commonwealth Government that the States will support this measure. I want the honorable gentleman to state specifically which State governments he has consulted. He mentioned Queensland and Tasmania, one a very important, and the other a minor State of the Commonwealth. I desire to know the opinions of the other important States. The honorable gentleman asks what is the use of consulting the State governments before the legislation is passed ? That is a one-sided argument. I might ask in reply, what is the use of this Government wasting time and passing legislation when it has no guarantee that it will be accepted by the State governments? I urge the Treasurer to make a definite declaration as to which State governments he has consulted, and as to what guarantees they have given that they will take advantage of this legisla tion, if it is passed. If the honorable gentleman has not secured those guarantees he might as well abandon this measure because, in that event, no houses will be built by the States. {: #subdebate-28-0-s19 .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN:
Reid .- To test the sincerity of the Government and its supporters, I move - >That after the word " houses ", the words " and shall include the authority controlling VVar Service Homes," be added. I am unable to understand the attitude of the Treasurer on this question. The honorable gentleman is prepared to advance up to £1,800 to State authorities for the building and purchase of homes, yet the Commonwealth War Service Homes Act limits advances to soldiers to £800. There should be no differential treatment. One is compelled to ask the question whether the treatment to returned soldiers may be described as liberal. They receive advances up to £800, at 5 per cent. interest. The Queensland Government makes advances to ordinary civilians at a similar rate of interest. If the Government wishes to be fair to returned men it should make available to them liberal advances, at a rate not appreciably exceeding 5 per cent., and if the Housing Bill is to confer any benefits on ordinary applicants the rate of interest must not materially exceed 5 per cent. {: #subdebate-28-0-s20 .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr BRUCE:
Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT -- As a question of policy has been raised, it is desirable that I should say a word upon it. The Government cannot accept the amendment. I must remind the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Coleman)** of certain circumstances affecting returned soldiers which he appears to have overlooked. These men rendered special service to Australia, and after their return from the war, proposals were submitted to and passed by Parliament under which special assistance was given to them to purchase homes for themselves. About 30,000 of them have already availed themselves of these exceptionally easy terms, and a large number of them still expect to do so. In the circumstances it would be unwise for us to alter the existing conditions. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr Coleman: -- Building costs have increased by more than 20 per cent. during the last five years, and an advance of £800 is totally inadequate to provide these men with homes. {: .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr BRUCE: -- The object of this bill is to enable another class of citizen to secure homes for themselves, but it is intended that the scheme shall be debited with the administrative costs involved in giving effect to it. The administrative costs of our war service home? policy are borne by the Consolidated Revenue. It may be necessary at some time to amend the "War Service Homes Act, but under present conditions it is most undesirable to take away from our ex-soldiers the special benefits which they enjoy, and to place them under the provisions of this measure, which is intended to have a general application. If it were suggested that the War Service Homes Act should be amended, that would he an entirely different question; but it would certainly be of no benefit to our ex-service men to take from them the good conditions that are now available to them under that legislation and oblige them to purchase their home;; under the conditions of this scheme. That would put them in the position of ordinary citizens, whereas at present they enjoy far greater privileges. I trust that the honorable member for Reid will see the wisdom of withdrawing his amendment. I am quite certain that the returned soldiers would be put in a disadvantageous position if it were adopted. **Mr.** CHARLTON (Hunter) [10.41- I cannot understand why the Prime Minister should refuse to accept the amend ment. When the War Service Homes Act was passed, an endeavour was made to treat our returned men liberally; but experience has taught us that the amount which was then considered reasonable for the purchase of a home is now altogether inadequate for the purpose. Under the existing war service homes legislation advances are limited to £800, although in special circumstances £950 may he advanced. Why should our returned men, who took great risks for the sake of their country, be placed in a less favorable position than Ordinary citizens? {: .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr Bruce: -- They can take advantage of the provisions of this measure if they desire to do so. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- But only by sell- ing the homes that they already occupy. Before they may do even that, they must obtain the approval of the War Service Homes Commission. Many returned men would sell their homes to-morrow if the War Service Homes Commission would permit them to do so. No genuine reason has been advanced to justify the Government in making this distinction between returned men and ordinary civilians. {: .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr Bruce: -- The distinction that is being made is that the returned men are being accorded the more generous treatment. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr CHARLTON: -- Advances to them are limited to £800, or £950 in special circumstances, whereas under this measure advances of £1,800 may be granted to ordinary civilians. That is a distinction which our returned . men will ' not appreciate. If an exsoldier desires to purchase a home at a cost of £1,600 he is obliged to provide a deposit of about £700 to become entitled to the benefits of the War Service Homes Act. I suggest that before we request the State authorities to liberalize their housing legislation we should liberalize our treatment of returned soldiers. We should set an example for the States to follow. The Treasurer has told us that various State authorities have informed him that the maximum amounts available under their different schemes to-day are insufficient to enable people to buy or build houses, and for that reason the Government is- taking this step to make available advances up to a maxi. mum of £1,800. In the circumstances there is no justification whatever for refusing to make a similar advance to returned soldiers. {: #subdebate-28-0-s21 .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY:
Swan. .- I am. quite satisfied that the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Coleman)** has no desire to do the returned soldiers any injury, but I think that, if this amendment is carried, it will have a tendency to do an injury to those whom he desires to help. He is seeking to bring the returned soldiers' housing scheme within the province of this bill. I have no time for this bill at all myself; but if it is passed it will be quite competent for any returned soldier who desires to come within its provisions to obtain a mortgage under tlie act for the purpose of paying off the war service homes commission, and coming within the scope of this scheme. I agree with the Prime Minister that we gave special conditions to the soldiers under the act passed some years ago, and now the Government has come forward with a proposal to extend similar provisions to other citizens of the Commonwealth. The Government might consider a revision of the returned soldiers' scheme so far as to give them the right to obtain larger advances. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr Theodore: -- The honorable gentleman says the returned soldier can get an advance if he comes under this scheme. To whom will he apply? {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- Any returned soldier can make application in the same way as a private citizen, and obtain all the advantages of the act. {: #subdebate-28-0-s22 .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- To what authority will he apply? {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- There is nothing in this bill to prevent a returned soldier from coming to the State Savings Bank and asking for an advance for the purpose of building a house up to the specified maximum value. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- But why should the scheme not apply also to war service homes ? {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- Because special provisions are provided under the War Service " Homes Act, and these advantages would be lost if the re-> turned soldier came under this act. What we want for the returned soldiers now that the Government has shown that the cost of housing is so much greater than it was, is an amendment of the returned soldiers' scheme. Under .this bill there is nothing to prevent a returned soldier, even if he had got his house already erected, from coming under the scheme. {: .speaker-JXA} ##### Mr Charlton: -- An amendment that the honorable gentleman has not seen will make it most difficult for a returned soldier to obtain assistance. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- I know nothing about any amendment to be moved by the Treasurer. I cannot understand how he can suggest any amendment that would prevent a returned soldier from coming under the scheme if he desires. I know the desire of the honorable member for Reid, 'and I would ask him not to press his amendment. If these words are included in the clause, it will be more likely to injure the returned soldier than to give him an advantage. {: #subdebate-28-0-s23 .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr MCGRATH:
Ballarat .- I hope the honorable member for Reid will not withdraw his amendment. I cannot conceive injury being done to the returned soldiers, but I can see the possibility of the amendment doing much good. Furthermore, it will give the Commonwealth Government an opportunity of shouldering some of the liabilities of this bill. As the bill now stands, if none of the prescribed authorities take advantage of it, if none of the States say they will operate under it, then, no person desiring a home can get one. If this amendment is carried, however, the war service authorities can apply to the savings banks and take advantage of the act. It will be a test of the Commonwealth Government's sincerity, and show whether Ministers desire to build homes or not. It is all nonsense for the honorable member for Swan **(Mr. Gregory)** to come here and say that it will injure the soldiers. The soldiers at present are limited as to the amount they can get . for homes, and the cost of building has gone up 20 per cent, during the past five years. Many soldiers have not yet got homes. In this bill you give to ordinary citizens an opportunity of borrowing up to £1,800, and now we ask you to deal justly with the returned soldiers, and ask the Treasurer to take some of the responsibility of this measure. But we hear all kinds of objections when the responsibility has got to be shouldered by the Commonwealth authorities. They are very generous when the responsibility is to be taken by the States; but when the honorable member for Reid puts the acid on the Government, and those who boast they are prepared to spend the last shilling on the soldiers, it is a different, matter. We ask you to support this scheme, and to allow the returned soldiers to enjoy the benefits of this bill, whether the States agree to come under it or not. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- What is to prevent the soldiers from coming under it now? {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGRATH: -- The War Service Homes Commission is not a prescribed authority, but the purpose of this amendment is to make it such, and to enable soldiers to borrow up to £1,800. I see no chance of injuring the returned soldiers. It is purely optional whether they come under the bill or not. If the soldiers do not want to borrow under this act, they can go along in the old groove under the War Service Homes Act; but if they desire to have better homes - and who deserve good homes more than they? - then £1,S00 or £2,000 is not too much to advance to them. When we ask you to give the soldiers a chance to get decent homes, you say this is not the proper time. I trust the honorable member for Reid will persevere with hia amendment. Those, who desire to see the returned soldiers placed on an equality with other citizens will vote for this amendment. {: #subdebate-28-0-s24 .speaker-JOS} ##### Mr BELL:
Darwin .- I do not think it would be wise to complicate the two schemes by bringing the War Service Homes scheme into that now before the committee. If the returned soldiers desire that the amount of money provided for building war service homes bc increased, I shall be one of those who will support them. But I think it is necessary and proper that it should be done by an amendment to the War Service Homes Act. I suggest that those who represent the returned soldiers would oppose the present proposal if it were put before them. The straightforward and practical way, if it is desired to increase the building advance to returned soldiers, is obviously to amend the War Service Homes Act. If that is necessary, I am certain this Government will support the proposal, but this amendment is neither desirable nor necessary. {: #subdebate-28-0-s25 .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE:
Dalley .- I cannot understand the attitude of the honorable member who has just resumed his seat. He appears to favour the amendment if it can be shown that it would be of value to the returned soldiers. Surely those returned men who are in need of homes or wish to extend their dwellings, would be glad to take advantage of the measure. It is true that the War Service Homes Act makes certain provision for them; but the amendment before the committee would enable the benefits of that act to be made available under the Government's housing scheme. Earlier' in the evening I called attention to the fact that, before this scheme can be applied to the scheme under the Workers' Homes Act in Queensland, the powers of the State authority would have to be extended in accordance with clause 9, which provides that an advance shall not be made by the Commonwealth Savings Bank until the commission is satisfied that the powers of the authority in relation to housing have been increased so as to extend the existing facilities in order to cover matters specified in the bill. The honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Coleman)** desires the existing facilities under the War Service Homes Act to be extended to returned soldiers *under the* provisions of this bill. If it is logical to grant the concession to private individuals, surely it is only fair to place the returned men on a similar footing. No member of the committee will deny that if advantages are to be given under a housing scheme the returned men should participate in them. {: .speaker-JOS} ##### Mr BELL:
DARWIN, TASMANIA · NAT; UAP from 1931 -- They have greater advantages already than would be conferred by this measure. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- If they could take full advantage of this proposal, they would be able to obtain an advance of as much as £1,800 on a £2,000 house. The honorable member for Yarra **(Mr. Scullin)** mentioned the case of a returned soldier, who required an advance, for a dwelling costing £1,648, and all he could obtain under the War Service Horner Act was £SO0. For the remaining £848 he had to make the best arrangements he could privately. That places a returned, man at a serious disadvantage compared with an ordinary civilian, if the State housing schemes are brought within the scope of this bill. The Prime Minister **(Mr. Bruce),** in asking the honorable member for Reid not to persist in the amendment, said that, after all, the returned soldier could secure the benefit of the measure by disposing of his war service home and coming in as an ordinary borrower. I submit that he would have no opportunity of having an individual application granted, because those controlling the money provided under the bill have no power to grant requests by individuals. A soldier could, of course, sell his house and make application to a State authority, provided that that body came within the purview of this measure. Certain classes of borrowers, such as those taking advantage of the "Workers' Homes Act in Queensland, obtain houses on a small deposit, and pay interest at the rate of 5.. per cent.; but those benefits are reserved for persons whose income does not exceed £260 a year. Those persons cannot have the advantages of this bill unless the State Government is. prepared to extend the limit of the advance to £1,800, and reduce the margin of security to 10 per cent. That condition would probably prevent the Queensland Government from taking advantage of the bill, because the alteration would involve too great a risk. The Treasurer ridiculed my suggestion, but when the same argument was advanced by the honorable member for Reid, the Prime Minister remarked that the risk was not one that the Commonwealth should carry. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- He said nothing of the sort. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- If I have misinterpreted his remark, I shall be glad to be corrected. I understood him to say that special advantages are given to the soldiers under the war service homes legislation. For instance, they are advanced money at 5 per cent. The borrowers under the Workers' Homes Act in Queensland also receive money at that rate of interest. The Prime Minister further said that the returned men are not required to pay large deposits. Nor are the home seekers under the Queensland legislation. What are the advantages of the war service homes scheme beyond those I have mentioned? The returned soldier is now limited to a loan of £800, and, in special cricumstances, £950; but should he not enjoy the advantages provided for civilians under the bill by being granted a loan up to £1,800? The honorable member for Reid, by his amendment, asks that " authority " shall be taken to mean not only the prescribed Commonwealth, territorial, State or municipal authority which administers a scheme for providing or assisting to provide dwelling houses, but also the authority controlling the war service homes scheme. If the amendment were accepted by the committee, it would involve consequential amendments which would have the effect of amending the War Service Homes Act. These amendments could be drafted in half an hour, and embodied in the present bill. {: #subdebate-28-0-s26 .speaker-K4Y} ##### Dr NOTT:
-Herbert .- I hope I am not presuming when I say that my interest in the welfare of the returned soldier is not second to that of any other honorable member, but my views do not coincide with those* of the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Coleman)** and the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Theodore)** in regard to the amendment proposed by the former. If returned soldiers are to be accorded the benefits to be conferred by this bill on the civilian population, that can be best achieved, as has been suggested by the honorable member for Darwin **(Mr. Bell),** by amending the' War Service Homes Act. It is extraordinary that honorable members, who, in the early stages of the bill, could see nothing in it of advantage to anyone, should suddenly discover that wonderful benefits may be conferred by it on returned soldiers by accepting the honorable member for Reid's amendment. I cannot get away from the idea that honorable members opposite, having reviewed the position, are now somewhat regretful about their opposition to a social measure which is bound to confer considerable relief, and seek a chance of rehabilitating themselves by hanging their hats on the peg of the claims of returned soldiers. I oppose the amendment because I do not think that there is any sincerity in it. I think that it has been moved solely for the sake of any political kudos that might arise from it. I appeal to honorable members to take into consideration the fact that if greater facilities are to be given to returned soldiers to acquire homes, which I hope will be done, they can better be given by an amendment of the War Service Homes Act. {: #subdebate-28-0-s27 .speaker-L1T} ##### Mr YATES:
Adelaide -- I shall support the amendment. I am surprised to hear the honorable member for Herbert **(Dr. Nott)** say that honorable members of the Opposition are using the returned soldiers as a peg. If any political party has made use of the returned soldiers for political purposes it is the party opposite, and yet when any appeal is made to confer some practical advantage upon the soldier it is harder than drawing their teeth to get honorable members opposite to do something for him. {: .speaker-KFP} ##### Mr Foster: -- That cannot be said of the honorable member for Calare **(Sir Neville Howse).** {: .speaker-L1T} ##### Mr YATES: -- Does the honorable member wish to spur me on to say that the honorable member for Calare is the exception that proves the rule? But I do not want to have only one man prepared to extend to the soldiers the treatment they were promised when they went away to fight. I want every soldier sitting on the opposite side of the chamber to be prepared to do that; because, as I have previously said, if it had not been for the war hardly one of them would now be sitting in this chamber. Why should not returned soldiers have the benefits, negligible though they may be, that are conferred by this bill. In my opinion the measure is not a bona fide effort to fulfill the promises made by the Government on the hustings. All that the Ministry is prepared to do is to supplement what is already being done by the States. I hold no brief for the returned soldier who is fit and well, and would give him nothing beyond the gratuity already paid to him; but I want a fair deal for the digger "who is maimed and injured, and suffering unto death. {: .speaker-JOS} ##### Mr Bell: -- Does this amendment deal with that class of man ? {: .speaker-L1T} ##### Mr YATES: -- No. {: .speaker-JOS} ##### Mr Bell: -- Then why bring him in now? {: .speaker-L1T} ##### Mr YATES: -- Why should there be any objection to giving the returned soldier the benefit of the provisions of this bill? . {: .speaker-JOS} ##### Mr Bell: -- Because we say that the hill will not help him, and that he can be best helped by an amendment of the War Service Homes Act. ;>-.; {: .speaker-L1T} ##### Mr YATES: -- That is a matter for the soldier to decide. There should he no opposition to the honorable member for Reid's amendment. I want to see more sincerity in regard to what was promised when our men went away from Australia to fight. {: .speaker-JOS} ##### Mr Bell: -- The honorable member should display a little sincerity before he preaches to others. {: .speaker-L1T} ##### Mr YATES: -- Let the honorable member point out in what manner I have been insincere in my desire to give everything to the sick and maimed soldier? {: .speaker-JOS} ##### Mr Bell: -- Why does not the honorable member deal with the amendment? {: .speaker-L1T} ##### Mr YATES: -- Perhaps the honorable member for Darwin, who was a soldier, may feel that his corns are being trodden on, and that he has not done all that he should have done for the returned soldier. The honorable member for Reid's amendment will afford him an opportunity to give expression to his sympathy with returned soldiers. {: .speaker-JOS} ##### Mr Bell: -- The honorable member should deal with the' amendment. In any case he says that the bill is only a sham. {: .speaker-L1T} ##### Mr YATES: -That is true, but on the off-chance that it may be a genuine effort on the part of the Government, we want to make its scope greater than the Government proposes ? No reasonable argument has been advanced against the amendment. The honorable member for Reid by his amendment is putting the acid, test on the Government's attitude towards the soldier." The efforts of the different governments, Commonwealth and State, to help the soldiers when they returned from the war may have been genuine enough, but to-day we find many of these soldiers clamouring to be relieved of the burden of indebtedness placed upon them. They cannot stand up under the strain. The story of the treatment of the repatriated soldier is the most awful page in the history of Australia. If this bill will as has been claimed, apply to an area not already covered, why does the Government not accept the amendment moved by the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Coleman)** ? I challenge the sincerity of the Government in this matter. Every honorable member who votes against the amendment will show how little he appreciates the work performed by our soldiers in Egypt, Mesopotamia and France. {: #subdebate-28-0-s28 .speaker-KFA} ##### Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP .- Honorable members who suggest that those returned soldiers who have obtained homes, or desire to obtain them, from the War Service Homes Commission, should be covered by this bill have not given the measure proper consideration. The War Service Homes Commission is an "authority" in terms of this bill. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr Coleman: -- The Treasurer definitely declared that that was not intended. {: #subdebate-28-0-s29 .speaker-KFA} ##### Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP -- I appreciate the motives of honorable members opposite. Under the War Service Homes Act a returned soldier may obtain a home on payment of a deposit of £10. This bill provides that the minimum deposit for the purchase of a home shall be 10 per cent, of its value. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr Scullin: -- Where does the bill provide that? {: .speaker-KFA} ##### Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP -- It provides that the maximum advance shall be 90 per cent, of the value of the home. That means that the balance of 10 per cent, must be found by the applicant. Sub-paragraph (ii) of paragraph *a* of clause 9 provides that the maximum amount which may be lent by the authority to any one person shall be £1,800, and shall not exceed 90 per cent, of the valuation of the property in respect of which the loan is made. That advance cannot be exceeded ; but it is left to the discretion of the authority whether less than 90 per cent, shall be advanced. {: #subdebate-28-0-s30 .speaker-KX9} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Watkins:
NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES -- The committee is now dealing with clause 4. The honorable member may make passing reference to other clauses, but he may not discuss them in detail. {: #subdebate-28-0-s31 .speaker-KFA} ##### Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP -- The maximum amount which may be lent is 90 per cent, of the valuation of the property. The balance of 10 per cent, must, therefore, be found by the applicant. Under the War Service Homes Act a home, irrespective of its value, may be procured by an approved applicant on payment of a deposit of £10. Under that act a property valued at £800 could be purchased on a deposit of £10, whereas under this bill the deposit necessary to purchase it would be £80. Moreover, the rates of interest charged by the various State savings banks differ from the amount charged by the War Service Homes Commission. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr Coleman: -- In Queensland the rate is only 5 per cent. {: .speaker-KFA} ##### Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP -- The whole of the administration costs in connexion with war service homes is borne by the Commonwealth, whereas the overhead expenses in connexion with this scheme would be a charge against the applicants. A soldier taking advantage of this legislation would be in a worse position than one who came under the provisions of the War Service Homes Act, unless he desired to purchase a house costing more than £950. There is no necessity for the amendment unless the soldier is precluded under this legislation from obtaining assistance to purchase a home. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr Scullin: -- Can he get assistance if the Government of the State in which he resides does not accept the scheme? {: .speaker-KFA} ##### Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP -- That objection applies universally. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- The amendment would give him a chance. {: .speaker-KFA} ##### Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP -- While appreciating the motives of honorable members opposite, I cannot understand their reasoning. So far as I can see, no returned soldier is precluded from benefiting from this legislation. If it can be shown that he is so precluded, I shall support the amendment. A person who wants to purchase a house valued at -£1,800 must, under this bill, find a deposit of £1S0. A soldier who can do that is in no worse position than is any other citizen who desires to take advantage of this legislation. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- If this amendment were agreed to, a soldier who owed money on a house obtained under the War Service Homes Act would be able to obtain a further advance up to 90 per cent, of its value. {: .speaker-KFA} ##### Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP -- He can get that advance without the amendment. There is power in the bill for mortgages to be taken over. Seeing that the returned soldier under this bill will be worse off than under the War Service Homes Act, I cannot support the amendment. {: #subdebate-28-0-s32 .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr MCGRATH:
Ballarat -- I shall endeavour to show the honorable member for Richmond **(Mr. R. Green)** why returned soldiers should be brought within the scope of this legislation, and thus to secure his support for the amendment. In my opinion, the bill is a sham: I do not believe that the Government intends that it shall come into operation. The States will not lake advantage of it, for the reason that they can do as well under their existing legislation. If, for instance, the Government of Victoria refuse^ to co-operate with the Commonwealth Savings Bank, no Victorian returned soldier could participate in any of the benefits to he derived from this legislation. If the amendment be carried, it does not matter whether the Victorian Government comes within the scope of the bill, because it will apply to the War Service Homes Commission as the Commonwealth building authority, and the financial responsibility will be upon the Commonwealth. {: .speaker-JOS} ##### Mr Bell: -- Would it not be better to amend the War Service Homes Act? {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGRATH: -- We have not the opportunity to do that. We are considering a housing bill, and our desire is to extend its benefits to returned soldiers, irrespective of whether the States accept the scheme or not. {: #subdebate-28-0-s33 .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · Cowper · CP -- There appears to be a great deal of confusion in the minds of honorable members as to the true position. At present returned soldiers obtain advances through the War Service Homes Commission at a special rate, and the commission gets its money direct from the Commonwealth Government. All that the amendment will do is to provide for advances to be made by a roundabout method, through the Commonwealth Savings Bank instead of through the commission, and the amount available for house building under, this bill will be reduced to the extent of the advances made to returned soldiers through the savings bank. Honorable members appear to ignore the fact that the bill provides for advances to be made through the savings bank; they appear, also, to ignore the fact that State savings banks in Victoria and South Australia are constructing authorities under the War Service Homes Act. In other' words, they are the agents of the War Service Homes Commission. I. agree with the honorable member for Darwin **(Mr. Bell)** that it would, be better, if it is the desire of honorable members to extend the provisions of this bill as regards increased advances to returned soldiers, to amend the War Service Homes Act as that will preserve their existing advantages. {: #subdebate-28-0-s34 .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra .- The honorable the Treasurer **(Dr. Earle Page)** has missed the point which we have been trying to impress upon him throughout the debate, namely, that the bill insists that the States shall provide . very liberal terms for the purpose of building houses if the States will alter their laws, or if the Commonwealth itself will accept the financial responsibility. The point we are stressing is that no State is likely to agree to an extension of its advances unless the Commonwealth itself is prepared to do so. There are seven building authorities in the Commonwealth. The Government, in this bill, proposes to make available £20,000,000 for the building of homes, and to authorize advances up to £1,800 if the States will alter their existing laws. All we are asking now is that the Commonwealth Government itself will allow its building authority to advance up to £1,800 so that returned soldiers may take advantage of this scheme. We believe that the Government's scheme is a sham, because it is not disposed to accept its full measure of responsibility in connexion with it. The War Service Homes Commission is the only building authority under the direction of the Commonwealth. It is a " territorial " authority, and, therefore, should be included. Before we submitted the amendment, I spoke to the Treasurer about it across the table with the object of inducing him to agree to the suggestion that the commission should be recognized as one of the prescribed authorities. The whole housing scheme falls down unless existing building authorities are allowed to extend their powers and provide fo" advances up to £1,800. This is a condition which the Government is imposing on the States, and it is a condition which we believe they will not accept. The honorable member for Richmond **(Mr. R. Green),** and the honorable member for Darwin **(Mr. Bell)** have suggested that returned soldiers will suffer if they are brought under this measure, because at present they enjoy certain privileges in respect of interest payments that are not provided for in the bill. Is there anything in the measure that will take away their existing privileges? What is the position in Queensland? In that State applicants get advances at 5 per cent. If the Queensland Government accepts the proposal and provides for advances up to £1,800, the interest charge will not be more than 5 per cent. If there is anything in the argument of honorable members that returned soldiers will suffer, it necessarily follows that the workers in Queensland will suffer, also. Honorable members cannot have it both ways. The sincerity of the Government will he proved if it accepts the conditions which it seeks to impose upon State governments. {: #subdebate-28-0-s35 .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE:
Dalley .- Those honorable members who say, no doubt sincerely, that they desire the benefits of this scheme to be extended to war service homes borrowers, but do not think that this bill is the proper place in which to make such a provision, fail to realize that the measure can be made to apply as they desire by a very simple amendment. The honorable member for Reid has proposed to amend the definition of " authority " *to* include the War Service Homes Commission. If that is accepted and the principle of extending the privileges of this legislation to soldier borrowers is affirmed, the intention of the committee can be made fully operative by inserting after clause 10 a provision to the following effect - >Notwithstanding any limitation in the existing provisions of the War Service Homes Act, the War Service Homes Commission shall have authority to provide that the maximum amount which may be lent by that authority *to* any one person shall be £1,800, and shall be 90 per cent. of the valuation of the property in respect of which the loan is made. That would, in effect, amend the War Service Homes Act, and it would not be inconsistent or improper for the committee to make such an amendment in thisway. The order of leave for the introduction of this bill is very wide, being " for an act relating to housing." That does not restrict this bill to an amendment of any specific statute. {: .speaker-KYI} ##### Mr Prowse: -- Under that amendment the returned soldier would require to put down a 10 per cent. deposit. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- It would enable him to get an advance up to 90 percent, of the valuation with a limit of £1,800. Under existing legislation, if he desires a house costing £1,800 he has to put down £1,000. I do not suggest that more than 90 per cent, of the valuation should be advanced to the soldiers, but such an advance would be a tremendous improvement upon what they arc entitled to now. No sound or rational objection can be offered to the amendment now before us, and the consequential new clause that I have suggested. . I hope that the Treasurer will not persist in his opposition to the granting of this concession to returned soldiers. {: #subdebate-28-0-s36 .speaker-JOS} ##### Mr BELL:
Darwin .- It is not worth while to dispute with the honorable member for Dalley as to whether it is possible by an amendment of this bill to liberalize the War Service Homes Act in the manner he has suggested, but that would be a roundabout way of achieving that object. I still maintain that the direct and proper procedure is to amend the War Service Homes Act. The honorable member for Yarra **(Mr. Scullin)** has repeated the statement that this bill is a sham, and will be of no assistance to the authorities now building homes in the various States. The test of the Government's sincerity, he said, would be to make the provisions of the bill extend to the war service homes authority. He overlooks the fact that the only purpose of this legislation is to supplement the funds available to those State authorities that are now building homes. Obviously, there is no need to supplement the funds of the War Service Homes Commission, which can get from the Commonwealth Government as much moneyas it requires. If honorable members regard this bill as a sham, I question their sincerity in attempting to apply it to the War Service Homes Commission. The act that relates specifically to the housing of soldiers can be amended if necessary, but to do it in the way suggested by honorablemembers opposite would be absurd. Mr.COLEMAN (Reid) [11.8].- The answer to the honorablemember for Darwin **(Mr. Bell)** is that the acceptance of the amendment would show beyond doubt that. the Government is sincere in regard to the application of these concessions to returned soldiers. After the war, the Commonwealth accepted responsibility for the housing of them, and the simple issue before honorable members now is, " Are you in favour of giving to returned soldiers the benefit of this housing scheme?" If this measure is amended as I have proposed, the War Service Homes Act will be consequentially liberalized; but if we wait for a specific amendment of that act a necessary measure of relief will be delayed for a long time. Adequate safeguards are provided in connexion with advances up to £1,800, and this amendment merely seeks to put the returned soldier upon the same level as the civilian. In New South Wales, the War Service Homes Commission is functioning satisfactorily, but I give thehe direct to the statement made during this debate that untold benefits have been showered upon the returned soldiers by the War Service Homes Act. The only benefits, if they can be called such, are the limitation of the interest rate to 5 per cent., and a concession in regard to the amount of deposit. It is quite unfair to suggest that the War Service Homes Act has been unprofitable, owing to the liberality of its advances. Any losses that may have been incurred under the scheme are attributable to the maladministration which characterized its early activities. The report dealing with its activities, dated the 30th September of this year, which has not yet been made available to honorable members, shows that a profit of £23,000 was made during the last twelve months of its operations, and an amount of £831,561 was paid to the National Debt Sinking Fund, the capital expenditure amounting, in round figures, to £1,500,000. There is no reason why the benefits of that measure should not be extended, and the Commonwealth Government is not likely to lose anything by the passing of the amendment. Question - That the words proposed to be added (Mr. Coleman's amendment) be so added - put. The committee divided. AYES: 16 NOES: 34 Majority . . . . 18 AYES NOES Question so resolved in the negative. Amendment negatived. Progress reported. House adjourned at 11.22 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 20 October 1927, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1927/19271020_reps_10_116/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant