House of Representatives
25 November 1930

12^th Parliament · 1^st Session

QUESTION
- MALTING BARLEY
QUESTION
- CONVERSION LOAN
QUESTION
- PRIMARY CORRESPONDENCE SCHOOLS
QUESTION
- SYDNEY MEAT STRIKE
SUGAR INDUSTRY
QUESTION
- REPATRIATION QF COAL-MINERS
QUESTION
- WIRELESS BROADCASTING
QUESTION
- IMPORTS AND EXPORTS
QUESTION
- HUME RESERVOIR
QUESTION
- TRADE BALANCES
QUESTION
- GIPPSLAND OIL BORES
QUESTION
- WHEAT INDUSTRY
QUESTION
- GOLD RESERVES
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH BANKRUPTCY ACT
QUESTION
- WAR SERVICE HOMES
QUESTION
- OVERSEAS INVESTMENTS OF AUSTRALIAN COMPANIES
FRENCH’ COMPENSATION CHARGES
- Thence; Rents
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH NOTES
QUESTION
- RETURNED SOLDIER COUNSEL
QUESTION
- INTEREST ON LOANS
QUESTION
- AERIAL MAIL SERVICES
QUESTION
- TOBACCO INDUSTRY
QUESTION
- SYNTHETIC) SILK
PAPERS
REPRESENTATION BILL
SOUTH AUSTRALIA GRANT BILL
- Second Reading
INCOME TAX (SALARIES) ASSESSMENT BILL
ADJOURNMENT

Mr.Speaker (Hon. Norman Makin) took the chair at 3 p.m., and offered prayers.

page 630

QUESTION

MALTING BARLEY

Mr M CAMERON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP; NAT from 1925; UAP from 1931

– Because of the very low price of other cereals it is reported that there will probably be no market for malting barley. Will the Acting Minister for Markets and Transport communicate with the Minister for Markets (Mr. Parker Moloney), if he is still : in the United Kingdom, and suggest that he should explore every possible market for malting barley, and particularly inquire regarding the possibilities of opening upa trade with the Scottish distillers?

Mr FORDE:
Assistant Minister assisting the Minister for Customs · CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND · ALP

– I shall have an investigation made immediately, and let the honorable member know the result.

page 630

QUESTION

CONVERSION LOAN

Assistance of the Banks.

Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– In the Labor

Daily of to-day this statement appears -

BANKS HELP FEDERALGOVERNMENT LOAN.

Left Wing Win.

This ready bank co-operation is regarded in Labour circles as the direct fruit of the stand taken by the left wing in the party some weeks ago when Mr. Anstey led an effort to havetheloan deferred for twelve months. . . Thestand takenby the Labour left wing showed them that no funny tricks would be tolerated, and the banks are now rushing to be in first with their subscriptions.

I ask the Acting Treasurer if it is not true that the banks have willingly lent assistance to the Commonwealth Government in connexion with the floatationof every loan since the war began in 1914?

Mr LYONS:
Minister for Works and Railways · WILMOT, TASMANIA · ALP

– So far as I am aware the banks have assisted all Commonwealth loans, but I believe that they are doing a little more than usual to ensure the success of the £28,000,000 conversion loan.

Dr EARLE PAGE:

– With regard to the statement of the Acting Treasurer that the banks are doing more on this occasion than on previous occasions to bring theCommonwealth loan to a successful issue, is it not a fact that the banks, ever since the present conversion loan was mooted, have been ready to help the Government to the fullest extent of their capacity?

Mr SPEAKER:

– It is not in order to base a question on the answer to a previous question.

Dr EARLE PAGE:

-I ask the Acting Treasurer whether it is not a fact that, ever since the present conversionloan was mooted, the banks have been ready to assist the Government to the fullest extent of their capacity?

Mr LYONS:

– Yes.

page 630

QUESTION

PRIMARY CORRESPONDENCE SCHOOLS

Mr BAYLEY:
OXLEY, QUEENSLAND

-In a letter I have received the following passage occurs : -

Iam in receipt of a letter from the Supervisor of the Queensland Government Primary Correspondence School informing me that the comments on the workof the pupils willin future be absent owing to the postal authorities stating that the comments render the whole work liable to ordinary rates of postage. The practice has been permitted since the inception of the school eight years ago.

Will the Postmaster-General give serious consideration to this matter, and ascertain if it is possible to exempt from the postal regulations, the postal matter sent to and from primarycorrespondence schools in Queensland and other States?

Mr LYONS:
ALP

– I have on other occasions stated that the increased rates of postage are being reconsidered. The point raised by the honorable member will be investigated.

page 631

QUESTION

SYDNEY MEAT STRIKE

Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– The Assistant Minis*ter for Industry stated, last week that during the week-end he would investigate the meat strike in Sydney. I ask the honorable gentleman whether he negotiated’ with the parties, and if so, with what result ? Having regard to the grave injury that a continuance of the strike would do to thi! meat export trade> will- he make a special effort to protect the primary producers and others?

Mr BEASLEY:
Assistant Minister assisting the Minister for Industry · WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– The dispute in themeat industry in New South Wales, has been referred to a properly constituted authority; namely the Industrial Commission. The commission’s decision apparently does not suit the employers, and they have refused to accept it. There is a strong, suspicion in Sydney that the employers consider the time opportune to- unload upon the public meat that has accumulated in the cool stores for two years.

Mr MACKAY:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND

– Is the Acting Prime Minister aware of the heavy losses caused to the meat export trade by the continuation of the strike in New South “Wales? Does he know that a large shipment of meat under contract to the British War Office- has- been cancelled in- consequence- of it? Does that fact confirm the statement just made by- the- Assistant Minister for Industry?!

Mr FENTON:
Minister for Trade and Customs · MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA · ALP

– I shall have, inquiries made,, and furnish the honorable member with full particulars.

page 631

SUGAR INDUSTRY

Mi;. NAIRN- In view of the failure of the committee which is inquiring into the sugar industry to report on the 1st November, and the fact that the sugaragreement will not expire until August next, will the Government seriously consider the advisability of deferring any decision regarding the sugar embargo until this House has had an opportunity to discuss the committee’s report ?

Mi-. FENTON. - That matter is under consideration. Meanwhile the inquiry must proceed. The report will, I understand, be available early next year.

page 631

QUESTION

REPATRIATION QF COAL-MINERS

Shale Oil Deposits

Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– Is it correct that the Assistant- Minister for Industry was a member of a deputation which, during; the week end, waited, on the Minister, for Industry in New South Wales, and requested that two members, of theMiners Federation form a special committee to consider the amount that has been, or is likely to be, set aside for the repatriation of miners, and that the. possibilities of the shale oil deposits of Australia will be examined by these two gentlemen ?

Mr BEASLEY:
ALP

– The question of the honorable member is important, as- it is the desire of the Government to assist’ miners who lost their employment as. a result of the coal lockout. There was a meeting, no.t with the Minister, for Industry, but with the Minister for Mines in the Go,vernment of New South Wales, because we are- anxious to obtain the assistance- of that Government in regard to this matter.. It alone has power to deal with leases. We have conferred with the Minister for Mines on two or three occasions. The suggestion was made that, representatives of the State Government, the Commonwealth Government, and the Miners Federation might confer, with a view to arriving at a basis which would permit of the revival of this industry. But while it is true that we entered into negotiations with the Minister for Mines, no conclusion has yet been reached. It will be necessary finally to report to the Commonwealth Government before a definite decision can be reached.

page 631

QUESTION

WIRELESS BROADCASTING

Mr LONG:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

Is it a fact that the new statutory rules governing broadcasting stations tend to create a dictatorship over broadcasting?
If so, will lie give an assurance that the position will be rectified in the interests of the community?
Is it a fact that under Regulation 59 (‘1 ) and (2), the Government has the power to prohibit the use of any station for broadcasting Labour propaganda?

Mr LYONS:
ALP

– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow: - 1 and 2. The amended wireless regulations detail the manner in which the PostmasterGeneral exercises the powers he has always possessed under the Wireless Telegraphy Act to control the broadcasting services in the interests of the community.

Regulation 59 refers to the censorship which may be exercised by the PostmasterGeneral in connexion with the broadcasting of any matter which may be objectionable or undesirable in the interests of the community. The powers to be exercised under this regulation have been in existence for six years and have not been directed towards the prohibition of any Labour propaganda.

page 632

QUESTION

IMPORTS AND EXPORTS

Mr PRICE:
BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

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

What is the value of the imports and exports respectively for the financial year ended 30th June, 1930, to and from - (a) Great Britain, (b) other parts of the British Empire, (c) the United States of America, and (d) other foreign countries?

Mr FORDE:
ALP

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

page 632

QUESTION

HUME RESERVOIR

Mr JONES:
INDI, VICTORIA

asked the Minister for “Works and Railways, upon notice -

What is the total amount spent on the Hume Reservoir, including cost of works, administration and land resumption?
Is this regarded as a reproductive work?
Is a full complement of men engaged on the work at present?
Has any decision yet been reached as regards the completion of the reservoir to a 2,000,000 acre feet capacity?

Mr LYONS:
ALP

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

£4,173,000. This includes cost of administration by the constructing authorities but does not include any portion of the administrative expenses of the River Murray Commission which are paid from revenue.
Yes.
Yes, within the limits of the funds available. Approximately 550 men are engaged on the work at present apart from those employed on road and rail deviations under the supervision of the Country Roads Board, Victoria, and the Victorian Railways Commissioners.
No. It is anticipated that the investigations being conducted by the River Murray Commission will be completed this month. On receipt of the commission’s report the matter will be considered by the four contracting Governments.

page 632

QUESTION

TRADE BALANCES

Mr WATKINS:
NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Acting Prime Minister, upon notice -

With reference to the efforts of the Government to correct the trade balances between Australia and other countries, has the Government kept records showing the result; and, if so, what is the position to-day?

Mr FENTON:
ALP

– The present position in regard to this matter is indicated by the sub-joined comparative statement which shows the total imports and exports for the six monthly periods ending 30th September, 1929, and 30th September, 1930. It will be remembered that the reasons for the Government’s action in this connexion were contained in a statement made to this House by the Prime Minister on the introduction of Customs Tariff (No. 2) to operate on and after the 4th April, 1930. (Hansard, page 820).

page 632

QUESTION

GIPPSLAND OIL BORES

ReportbyAmiralSydenham.

Dr. MALONEY (through Mr. C.

Riley) asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

Is it a fact that Admiral Sydenham, of the British Navy, recently inspected the petroleum oil bores near Lakes Entrance, Gippsland?

If so, has he reported thereon to the Minister, and did he express his satisfaction with the prospect of producing petroleum in commercial quantities there?

Mr A GREEN:
KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

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

Yes.
The report has not yet been received by me but is expected shortly.

page 633

QUESTION

WHEAT INDUSTRY

Sales Tax on Flour.

Dr EARLE PAGE:

asked the Acting Prime Minister, upon notice -

Whether there is any fundamental difference between the primary products, wine and wheat, that permits wine to be assisted by means of excise taxes to provide bounties, and prevents wheat from being similarly assisted by a sales tax on locally-consumed flour?

Mr FENTON:
ALP

– It is pointed out by Government has been unable to see its way to adopt the recommendation for the imposition of a special sales tax on flour have already been fully explained to the House, and there is nothing that can usefully be added at present.

page 633

QUESTION

GOLD RESERVES

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

asked the Acting Treasurer, upon notice -

Has his department any data regarding the gold reserves held against the issue of notes by the banks of England, France, Germany and the Central National Banks of the United States ?
If so, will he give such information to the House?

Mr LYONS:
ALP

– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow : - 1 and 2. England - The Bank of England is permitted to issue bank notes to the amount of its holding of gold coin and gold bullion plus a fiduciary issue of £260,000,000. The Treasury may, on representations from the Bank of England, increase the fiduciary note issue to some specified amount above £260,000,000 for such period as is determined, not exceeding six months. The securities held against the fiduciary note issue may include silver coin to an amount not exceeding £5,500,000.

France - There is no regulation requiring any prescribed’ gold reserve to be held against note issue.

Germany - Reserve of 40 per cent, gold or “ devison “ to be held against note issue of which reserve not less than three-quarters shall bo held in gold. “ Devisen “ are defined as bank notes (of four banks whose rights to issue notes are preserved to them), bills of exchange having not more than fourteen days to run, and cheques and claims due from day to day payable in foreign currency by a bank of known solvency in foreign financial centres.

United States of America - Every Federal Reserve Bank is required to hold against notes in circulation not less than 40 per cent, in gold. The Federal Reserve Board may suspend any reserve requirements for a period not exceeding 30 days, and may renew same for periods not exceeding fifteen days, subject to the establishment of a graduated tax on the deficiency and subject to the following graduated tax in case of the deficiency of the note issue reserve: -

If gold reserve against federal reserve notes falls below 40 per cent., tax not exceeding 1 per cent, per annum if proportion is between 40 per cent, and 324 per cent. A tax of not less than 11/2 per cent, is payable for each 21/2 per cent, or part thereof by which reserve falls below 32-1/2 per cent.

According to the August, 1930, issue of Monthly Bulletin of Statistics (No. 8) of the League of Nations, the position in regard to notes and gold in the respective central banks is: -

page 633

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH BANKRUPTCY ACT

Mr ELDRIDGE:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Acting Prime Minister, upon notice -

Will he obtain a report from the Acting Solicitor-General as to whether proceedings under the Commonwealth Bankruptcy Act to make a debtor bankrupt would be possible notwithstanding a State Moratorium Act?
If such proceedings would be tenable, will he introduce legislation to deal with the position?

Mr FENTON:
ALP

– It is pointed out by the Commonwealth law authorities that, in the absence of information as to the actual terms of any such State Moratorium Act, it is not possible to express an opinion on the matter raised in this question. I might, however, refer the honorable member to a statement made by me in this House on the 18th November (Hansard, page 398) relating to the Bankruptcy Act.

page 633

QUESTION

WAR SERVICE HOMES

Mr CROUCH:
CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA

asked the Acting Minister for Markets and Transport, upon notice -

Is it a fact that many returned soldiers occupying war service homes have, under the stress of unemployment, been unable to keep up their repayments, which include part principal ?
Will he direct that where it is shown that inability to pay the full amount arises from unemployment, interest only on the balance of principal now due shall be charged until conditions improve?

Mr FORDE:
ALP

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

Yes.. 2’. In cases of genuine unemployment where the purchaser is unable to meet his obligations, both, principal’ and interest due to the War Service Homes Commission are held in abeyance.

page 634

QUESTION

OVERSEAS INVESTMENTS OF AUSTRALIAN COMPANIES

Mr LONG:

asked the Acting Treasurer, upon notice -

Have any steps been taken at any time to ascertain, the amount of funds transferred, out of Australia for investments abroad by insurance- societies, and other interests which depend upon the people of Australia for their business ; if not, will’ he consider the question of inquiring into the matter?
Will he obtain, and supply information as to the method’s adopted by the trading banks in, the marshalling: of their figures forthe sworn, published statements in’ quarterly balance-sheets ?.

Mr LYONS:
ALP

– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow : - 1’. It is impracticable to ascertain the amount of funds so transferred abroad, as transfers may be arranged through many sources and in various ways.

The methods which the banks are required to adopt are set out in section:60ad of, the Commonwealth Bank Act 1911-1927.

page 634

FRENCH’ COMPENSATION CHARGES

Thence; Rents

Mr CROUCH:

asked the Minister for

Defence, upon notice -

Whether any trench rent or charge was paid by the British Government to the French Government or to French land-owners in the 1914-19 war? 2; Did the French land-owners charge compensation’ for damages, known as “ degats,” to land, by war trenches?
Did the British Government in its settlement of war charges with the Australian Government charge for “ accommodation “ of the Australian troops in France?
Did part of this “ accommodation “ consist of the use of trenches?
If not, what “ accommodation “ in France was charged for?

Mr A GREEN:
KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow : - 1 and 2. No information is available as to whether the British Government was charged with or paid “trench rent,” compensation for damages to land, &c., to either the French Government or French land-owners.

No,
See reply to No. 3.
No “ accommodation “ whatever used by the Australian Imperial Force in France was charged against the. Commonwealth Government.

page 634

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH NOTES

Mr FENTON:
ALP

– Oh the 5th November the honorable- member for Newcastle (Mr; Watkins) asked me a- question, without notice, regarding a. newspaper report that Mr. Jacoby, a Perth citizen, had presented Commonwealth notes at the London branch of the Commonwealth Bank and was. unable to get cash or English notes for them. The matter was. taken up with the Commonwealth Bank, which has furnished the following advice : -

In order to meet the requirements of the Governments in London, it was necessary to restrict and ration exchange, An agreement for mobilization of exchange was arranged with the concurrence of the Federal Treasurer. As it became evident that people were taking or sending notes abroad to defeat the exchange restrictions, the facilities for encashment outside of Australia were withdrawn. Notes are, payable at Sydney only, and facilities for encashment abroad were only given at any time as a convenience, not as a right.

page 634

QUESTION

RETURNED SOLDIER COUNSEL

GovernmentBriefs.

Mr FENTON:
ALP

– On the 18th November the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Latham) asked, the following question, upon notice -

Since the present Government took office, how many briefs have been given on behalf of the Commonwealth in Victoria to - (a), returned soldiers;
1. of military age at the end of of the war,
2. under military age at the end of the war?
Will the Government make available the names of counsel briefed in the cases, above referred to?
Is it the case that returned soldier junior barristers who qualified after the war, in some cases after a course of study extending over four or five years, are now placed upon thesame basis with respect to briefs as other junior barristers who qualified after the war: if not, what distinction is made?

I am now in a position to furnish the honorable member with the following answers to his question: -

Since the 22nd October 1929, 83: briefs have been given by the Commonwealth in Victoria to returned soldiers and- 44 (thirteen of which were given to King’s Counsel) to nonreturned soldiers.
1. The names of counsel briefed are as follows :- Sir B. Mitchell, K.C.; H. I. Cohen, K..C; W. L. Ham, K.C.; X . C. Brennan, K.C.; E. Gorman, K.C.; R. G. Menzies, K.C.; Sir Harrison Moore; Hon. J. H. Keating; D. Hearder; W. Ah Ket; R. H. Gregory; C. G. Duffy; R. Martin; C. H. A. Eager; W. Shelton; E. R. Reynolds; N. O’Bryan; A. Dean; J. H. Moore; J. Tait; A. jj. Read; W. K. Fullagar; E. P. Herring; A. M. Fraser; L. Little; P. D. Phillips; A. D. Ellis; C. Stafford; E. G. Coppel; W. A. Fazio; J. G. Morris; G. L. Mayman; N. F. Mitchell; J. V. Barry; I. Maxwell; W. M. Irvine; H. J. A. Campton; G. L. Dethridge; S. H. Z. Woinarski; N. Burbank; R. M. Warner; and A. j. Rice.
No. As previously pointed out by the Attorney-General, in reply to a question by the honorable member, the only modification in the policy of previous Governments in the allocation of briefs is that, in minor cases, barristers who at the termination of the war were under military age are not excluded from consideration.

page 635

QUESTION

INTEREST ON LOANS

Mr LYONS:
ALP

– On the 25th June the right honorable member for Cowper (Dr. Earle Page) asked the following questions, upon notice -

What was the interest payable on 30th June, 1928, and 30th June, 1929 (a) for the Commonwealth, and (b) for the States?
What was the amount available from revenue-producing assets, in the years 1927-28 and 1928-29?
What were the balances covered by taxation in those years?

The following return sets out the information desired: -

page 635

QUESTION

AERIAL MAIL SERVICES

Darwin to Great Britain

Mr FENTON:
ALP

– On the 19th November the honorable member for Balaclava (Mr. White) ‘asked me a ‘question, without notice, regarding proposals, which it was reported had been submitted to the Prime Minister (Mr. Scullin) -in

London, having in view the extension of an aerial mail service to Australia. The Prime Minister has advised ‘by cablegram that he lias ‘had interviews with Imperial Airways and the Dutch line, but that final consideration of the matter is being deferred pending an examination OI (the proposals on his return to Australia.

page 636

QUESTION

TOBACCO INDUSTRY

Imposts

Mr FORDE:
ALP

– On the 14th November the honorable member for Indi (Mr. Jones) asked the following question, upon notice -

For the years 1928-29 and 1929-30, will the Minister supply the following information: -

The quantity and value of manufactured tobacco imported?

The quantity and value of manufactured cigarettes imported?

The quantity and value of unmannfactured leaf imported?

The quantity of unmanufactured imported leaf manufactured into (a) tobacco, and (6) cigarettes?

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

1928-29-1,070,251 lb., value £ 159,788; 1929-30-882,008 lb., value £ 139,1 18.
1928-29-1,019,514 lb.; value £516,006: 1929-30-879,112 lb., value £417,527.
1928-29-212,137,672 lb., value £1,905,194: 1929-30-20,283,813 lb., value £1,768,686. 4. (a) 1928-29-13,884,513 lb.; 1929-30- 13,673,546 lb. (6) 1928-29-5,191,936 lb.; 1929-30-5,236,720 lb.

The figures relating to imports during the year 1929-30 are advanced, and are subject to revision.

page 636

QUESTION

SYNTHETIC) SILK

Mr FORDE:
ALP

– On the 13th November the honorable member for Barton (Mr. Tully) asked the following questions, upon notice -

Is it a fact that synthetic silk, imported from Germany, is being used by Bonds’ Limited ?
Is it a fact that this silk is imported already wound on cones?
Is it a fact that this silk costs 2id. per lb.?
Is it a fact that there is a flaw in the Customs Act that allows this particular silk to be imported at 2-Jd. per lb.?
Is it a fact that this firm has dismissed a number of girls who were silk-winders?

I am now able to furnish the honorable member with the following information : - 1, 2, 3, and 5. The manager of the company - concerned states that the answer to these questions is emphatically “ No.”

I am not aware of any such flaw; but if the honorable member will furnish me with further particulars I shall have the matter reconsidered.

page 636

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Air Force Act - Regulations amended -

Statutory Rules 1930, No. 135. Vew Guinea Act - Ordinance of 1930 -

No. 21.- Supply (No. 4) 1930-31. Railways Act - Report on Commonwealth

Railways Operations, for year ended 30th lune, 1930.

page 636

REPRESENTATION BILL

Motion (by Mr. Blakeley) agreed to-

That he have leave to bring in a bill lor an act relating to the appointment of an enumeration day for the purposes of the Representation Act 1905.

page 636

SOUTH AUSTRALIA GRANT BILL

Second Reading

Mr LYONS:
Acting Treasurer · Wilmot · ALP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

During the last three years particularly, the State of South Australia has been in a very difficult financial position. In common with some of the other States it has suffered from-

Mr GREGORY:
SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Federation.

Mr LYONS:

– Bad seasons and low prices. From those causes she has suffered probably to a greater extent than any of the other States. I believe, also, that while all the States are suffering fro’m over-borrowing in the past, the greatest sufferer is South Australia. In addition, it is claimed that she has suffered certain disabilities under federation. Following upon that claim, a royal commission investigated the situation of the State, and recommended that the Commonwealth should grant her assistance to the extent of £1,000,000 over a period of two years. The last Government adopted that recommendation, with the variation that the grant should be over a period of three years, and that it should include an amount of £60,000 by way of relief on account of the handing over to the Commonwealth of the Red Hill to Salisbury railway. Soon after the present Government came into office, it carried out, generally, the undertaking of thi; previous Government, by making provision for the granting of £1,000.000 in throe years, as follows: -

Notwithstanding that special assistance, the position in South Australia, since it was given, has become Infinitely worse. Honorable members will have some indication of the situation when I say that the deficits of that State have been’ £275,000 in 1927-28; £931,000 in 1928-29; and £1,625,000 in 1929-30. The increasing difficulty of the situation impelled the Premier of South Australia, Mr. Hill, recently to request, further assistance fi-om the Commonwealth.

As honorable members are aware, a resolution was carried at the August conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers held in Melbourne, under which the Commonwealth -and each State with the exception of South Australia, undertook to do everything possible to balance their budgets for this particular year. Mr. Hill gave convincing evidence of his determination to make every effort to do so, but proved that the task was utterly beyond the capacity of his State. The Commonwealth could do no more directly than it had already done; but the States agreed to forgo, and thus make available to South Australia, certain grants that the Commonwealth had proposed to pay this year chiefly to assist in relieving unemployment. The total amount involved was £850,000. The balance of £150,000 that Mr. Hill said he would require to balance his budget, has not yet been provided. This bill seeks to give effect to the resolution carried by the representatives of the States. It will be of interest to honorable members to hear the terms of that resolution -

That the claims of South Australia for further financial assistance from the Commonwealth be inquired into by the Federal Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee.

That pending the result of such inquiry, the Governments of the respective States have agreed to forgo certain grants which the Commonwealth proposed to make to them during the present financial year; and the Commonwealth has agreed to pay to the State of South Australia the moneys which the

States have so agreed to forgo, referred to are: -

The grants

That the Government of the Commonwealth and South Australia shall confer as to the balance of £150,000 which shall be made good., if possible, by South Australia or, alternatively, by South Australia and the Com- monwealth acting conjointly.

The bill before the House gives effect to the resolution. The representatives of the States recognized that, if South Australia was to balance its budget, or even to do it approximately, it would be necessary for the rest of Australia to help it over its difficulties. Having considered the matter amongst themselves, the conference agreed to the granting by the Commonwealth of special assistance to South Australia, and undertook to give effect to the resolution. Regarding the balance of £150,000 required to complete the £1,000,000 needed by South Australia, it was agreed that the Commonwealth and South Australia should confer. Of course, it was intended that, if possible, South Australia should raise that money, but, failing that, the matter was to be one of arrangement between that State and the Commonwealth. It has not been practicable for the Government to go definitely into South Australia’s proposals to see if it is possible for that State to provide the balance of £150,000, and, therefore, that matter is still in abeyance. Apart from that, as honorable members know, the Commonwealth is not in a position this year to balance its own budget. A real effort to do so has been made; but we should scarcely be justified in increasing our own deficit merely to balance the budget of South Australia. A further recommendation made bv the conference between representatives of the States and the Commonwealth was that the claims of South Australia should be referred to the Public Accounts Committee, for inquiry as to the amount of assistance necessary to enable that State to carry on in future. To that recommendation, as honorable members are aware, effect has been given.

Without entering into the merits of the claims of South Australia upon the Commonwealth for financial assistance - honorable members have discussed that matter on previous occasions - I think that it is well to consider, to some extent, at any rate, what the Premier and Treasurer of South Australia is himself doing in order to overcome his difficulties. Honorable members will recognize that he is doing all that possibly can be done in the circumstances, and I submit, therefore, that this Parliament should help him over his immediate troubles. The first review of the South Australian budget showed a deficit of approximately £3,000,000. The Premier, Mr. Hill, and the members of his Cabinet, took certain action to meet that situation. The following are among the measures adopted by South Australia for the purpose of helping itself: -

I have pointed out that while Mr. Hill has budgeted for a Commonwealth grant of £1,000,000, the grant now proposed is £850,000. The Commonwealth Government, as I have already indicated, is to confer . with him regarding the balance. The following reductions, of salaries and allowances have been inside in South Australia: -

Ministers - 15 per cent. Members of Parliament - 5 per cent. Sundry salaries under special acts - Various reductions up to 20 per cent.

Public Service - Approximately 10 per cent. up to £1,000, rising to 16 per cent, on £1,250 and over.

Teachers - 10 per cent., and certain bonuses struck off.

Those reductions, of course, only operate for part of this financial year.

Mr Thompson:

– Next year, too.

Mr LYONS:

–That remains to be seen. The representatives of the various States having considered their own difficulties, made ‘ up their minds’ to overcome them as far as they could with their own resource-‘, and they recognized the strong case presented by the Premier of South Australia for further assistance for that State. Realizing that South Australia was suffering greater disabilities than the other States, they arrived at the conclusions which I have mentioned, and made it possible for the Commonwealth to give this grant to South Australia. I feel . sure that this Parliament will recognize the disabilities of that State, and the necessity to help it over its immediate trouble by passing the present bill which gives authority for the payment to be made.

Debate (on motion by Dr. Earle Page) adjourned.

page 638

INCOME TAX (SALARIES) ASSESSMENT BILL

Debate resumed from the 6th November (vide page 96) on motion by Mr. Lyons -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Mr LATHAM:
Kooyong

.- This is one of the most remarkable pieces of legislation ever introduced into this or any other Parliament.

Mr Lacey:

– The honorable member has said that frequently of late.

Mr LATHAM:

– The last occasion on which I made a similar observation was when I was discussing the financial statement in pursuance of which this bill has been introduced. Some remarkable legislation is being placed before us at present. This is a bill to provide for a reduction of the allowances and salaries of Ministers, members of Parliament, and certain, officers of the Commonwealth Public Service. But as this Government has so often said, and so many of its supporters have so often asservated, that they would “ never, never reduce salaries,” the HH is described as an Income Tax Salaries Assessment Bill, and it is pretended that it is not in effect a . bill for the reduction of salaries. The bill, in its title, and in the whole: of its drafting, is a piece of hypocrisy.

Mr SPEAKER (Hon Norman Makin:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– The honorable member is not in order in using that expression.

Mr LATHAM:

– I withdraw the expression as my own opinion, and will say that if the bill were described outside this House by persons who were not bound by the rules of parliamentary procedure, it would not be at all surprising if such a term were used in respect to it. The bill is covered by a thinly veiled pretence that deceives no one. lt is an. attempt to hide realities behind a screen of words, but it obviously fails to do so. It is called a taxation measure, but it is really a measure for the reduction of salaries and allowances. It pretends to observe what I understand is the policy of the Labour party when it suits it, but not in other cases, that there shall not be any reduction in the emolument paid to any person. This policy is of course, subject to convenient exemptions. Such exemptions are carefully made so as to avoid, as far as possible, doing anything that may incur unpopularity, or involve the responsibility of looking directly at the financial situation, not only of the Commonwealth as a whole, but of its individual citizens. The Labour party during the last election campaign, said that wages would be maintained, and that there would be no reductions at all. The party has been unable to carry out that promise in any particular. Wages are coming down. Award rates are being reduced all over the Commonwealth, and the Government has done, is doing, and can do nothing to stop it. Labour candidates at the last election, who were sufficiently well informed, knew quite well that the Government could do nothing to stop this, because they knew that this Parliament has no power to legislate in respect to wages. For this reason, these promises,’ which were made by so many Labour candidates, were false promises, and many candidates who made them knew that this was so. What are the miners and shearers saying to-day about the value of the promises made to them by the Labour candidates at the last election? At the time of the making of these promises, it was obvious that they could not be fulfilled; but, like many other promises made during that campaign by Labour candidates, they were made in order to win the election which the party is so proud of having won. The promises were made to win’ votes, and they won them; but now that the party is being called upon to honour its promissory notes it cannot do so, nor is it going to try to do it. How is it meeting the existing situation ? ‘With a cynical indifference and contempt. It is perfectly satisfied at having won the election. These promises were made with the object of achieving this end, and they achieved it. According to many honorable members opposite the end has entirely justified the means.

– That is quite consistent with what was said during the general elections, and because the last Government took a stand on this principle, it was sacrificed to the opportunism and false promises of the Labour party. The inevitable result of these related measures - the Income Tax Assessment Bill and the Income Tax Salaries Assessment Bill - will be increased unemployment. If we brought about a real reduction of salaries, in accordance with the undertaking given by the Commonwealth Government itself to the Premiers’ Conference in Melbourne, there would be no increase of unemployment in the general community as a result of special taxation, and there would be a chance of avoiding some of the dismissals which are at present being made from the Commonwealth Service. It would be out of order for any private member to move that taxation should begin to be imposed on a lower figure than £725, and it is, therefore, impossible for the Opposition to propose, as an amendment, an alternative scale of reductions which would spread the burden more evenly and fairly in the Public Service itself, as between the members of the Public Service, and as between the Public Service and the community. We are unable to move an amendment of that kind’ to a taxing measure, because to do so would increase taxation upon the persons to be charged. Therefore, all that can be done is to submit to the Government arguments - some of which I have used, and others will be used by other honorable members - seeking to persuade it that the reduction of salaries should be spread over a wider area, should be graded more fairly, and should be greater in total; that the Government would be acting wisely in following these suggestions and reducing the taxation which it proposes to impose upon incomes, which will inevitably have the effect of increasing unemployment. To indicate definitely the views of the Opposition, I move the following amendment to the motion for the second reading of the bill: -

That all the words after “ That “ be omitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the following words: - “in the opinion of this House the amount of over £11.000,000 now paid as salaries, wages and allowances by the Commonwealth to Ministers, members of Parliament, public servants and others should be reduced by an amount greater than that proposed by the Government in order to make it possible to reduce the further taxation proposed by the Government.”

Mr NAIRN:
Perth

.- I second the amendment. I shall confine my remarks entirely to the principle which has been attacked by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Latham) - the drawing of a line in relation to taxation at the sum of £725 in the case of members of the Commonwealth Public Service. It has been stated over and over again, both inside and outside this House, that in these times of stress sacrifices are necessary on the part of all sections of the community, and it is agreed that those sacrifices should be shared according to the ability to pay. In these circumstances the drawing of the line at £725, thus applying this special taxation to one section of the people,, is utterly indefensible. There is no ground whatever for contending that persons who receive salaries of from £400 to £725 should be entirely exempt from the special taxation which is necessary in order to balance the accounts of the Commonwealth. Let us compare the position of the members of the Commonwealth Public Service with that of persons in corresponding positions outside, because, after all, we should endeavour to apply the tax equitably, quite irrespective of any class or its vote.

The average salary paid to adult members of the Commonwealth Public- Service is £297; but a better comparison can be obtained by taking the basic wage paid in the Public Service and in the six chief capital cities. The Public Service report, issued this month, shows that the basic wage in the Public Service is £216, plus Child endowment. The nominal basic wage outside the Public Service, even including child endowment, is slightly lower than that; but the actual wage is much less. The basic wage for the six capital cities, assessed on the Harvester award of 42s. in 1907, and varied in proportion to the increase or decrease in the cost of living from time to time, is as follows: -

The weighted average for the six capital cities is £4 a week, or £208 per annum. If we add to that Mr. Justice Powers’ award of 3s., the basic wage is brought to £215 16s. per annum, including child allowance. The basic wage for Commonwealth employees is £216 per annum, plus child allowance. At the end of the financial period ending 30th June, 1930/ the advantage to the Public Service, in respect of child allowance, was £263,043. In addition, the Public Service enjoys the great advantage of permanency of occupation. The latest figures of unemployment among the trade unions show that the percentage has reached 20.5, but. it is probable that actually it is greater. Those figures do not take rationing into consideration. The actual figure of unemployment is believed to be between 20 and 30 per cent. Therefore, to strike a fair average on the ability to pay, we must take into consideration, not merely the nominal basic wage, but also the actual earnings of the people. Commonwealth employees who are on the basic wage receive £216 per annum, plus child allowance. Outside employees receive about £156 per annum.

Mr Keane:

– That is wrong.

Mr NAIRN:

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

– I am not surprised at the attitude that has been adopted by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Latham). He has consistently advocated the reduction of wages, and upon that consistency I congratulate him. I have yet to learn, however, that such a policy would increase the opportunities for the employment of our people. On the contrary, the purchasing power of the wage-earners would be lessened, and thus fewer people could be employed. Therefore, it is wrong to advocate the reduction of wages as a cure for our unemployment problem.

This is a question that affects, not only this Parliament and the Parliaments of the States, but the whole of the civilized world. We are living to-day in a mechanical age. With each succeeding year newer machinery is introduced for the more rapid production pf goods.’ Any man who understands social and economic questions realizes that there has been built up a machine which is crushing the workers and putting them out of employment. The facts stare us in the face. Wherever machinery has been introduced it has displaced human labour, and as, concurrently, the population has increased, the number of unemployed has steadily become larger. The problem cannot be solved by methods that have previously been adopted.

Mr Archdale Parkhill:

– Does the honorable member believe that we should be better off without the steam engine?

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

– We believe in taking . advantage of machinery that will lighten manual labour ; but, at the same time, we should adapt ourselves to the different circumstances. I am proud to belong to a race that has sufficient inventive faculty to produce mechanical appliances. But while science has been responsible for development in that direction, we have not made nearly so much progress in advancing the welfare of the human race. If the use of machinery makes possible the production of goods in one-half the time formerly occupied, the hours of labour should be so adjusted that the altered conditions would not add to the ranks of the unemployed. Our existing system will break down unless we tackle the problem from a scientific stand-point. No nation can afford to have large armies of unemployed. Men will not submit quietly to being underfed and underclothed. The reduction of wages would merely intensify our difficulties. Neither will the problem be solved by increasing production. “We should look at this matter, not through the eyes of party, but from the stand-point of what is best for the nation. The problem has not arisen since the present Government came into power; it caused considerable uneasiness to the last Government, yet that Government, took no steps to solve it. Now, because the Labour party happens to be in control of the affairs of this country, every opportunity is taken by our opponents to stress the seriousness of the position, and to allege that no action is being taken to deal with it. When it was suggested that there should be an extension of our currency for the provision of funds to give employment to our people, it was characterized as repudiation.

Mr Archdale Parkhill:

– You cannot give employment to people by issuing paper that is not worth anything.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr McGrath:
BALLAARAT, VICTORIA

– I ask the honorable member for Warringah to cease interjecting.

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

– At the last federal elections the Labour party gave a definite pledge that it would not stand for a reduction of wages. Do honorable members opposite wish us to go back on that pledge ? I shall not do so.

Mr MORGAN:
DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · NAT

– Labour members also said at the last election that work would be found for the unemployed.

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

– Before long the Government will bring down proposals that will help to solve the problem; but I suppose that they will be opposed by honorable members opposite. We shall do our utmost to fulfil our promises to give employment fo the people. Those honorable members who advocate more production should study with greater exactotude the conditions that now obtain. During the last State election campaign in New South Wales I travelled over a considerable area of country, and on every hand I saw an abundance of food. Australia, this year, has grown sufficient wheat to feed 30,000,000 people, and enough wool to cover, probably, 100,000,000 people. Everywhere, stock are fat; only man is starving. That is the problem that we have to face; shall we do so by reducing the standard of living in the Public Service?

Mr M CAMERON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP; NAT from 1925; UAP from 1931

– Is the Government doing it by increasing taxation?

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

– I do not believe in taxation, and would, if I could, reduce it. Unfortunately, however, old-age, invalid and soldiers’ pensions have to be paid, and, rather than default in that respect, I am prepared to support additional taxation to enable the Government to discharge its liability. If honorable members opposite had the courage, they would move an amendment that the salaries of public servants be reduced to, say, £4 a week all round. The amende ment that has been moved side-steps the issue; they are afraid to say what they are prepared to do. Do they realize that 82 per cent, of the public servants of this Commonwealth are postal employees who are almost on the basic wage, and that many of these are returned soldiers? Do they want to reduce their wages?

Mr Bayley:

– No such suggestion was made; the honorable member for Perth (Mr. Nairn) said that nothing below £400 should be touched.

Mr Morgan:

– Why is the Government sacking returned soldiers? It has sacked a greater number than any other government.

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

– Because the previous Government left it a legacy of debt that it cannot meet. The cancellation of 20,000 telephone installations has caused a tremendous loss of revenue. There is not now the demand that formerly existed for telephonic extensions; therefore, those who were engaged on that work cannot be given employment. Is it the desire of honorable members opposite that the Government should continue in employment men for whom there is no work? We on this side do not stand for such a policy. The late Government adopted that practice; instead of facing the position that it knew existed, it secured overdrafts and issued short-dated loans to obtain funds to pay the salary bill. Largeamounts were spent on all sorts . ofschemes. To-day, we . are feeling ‘the effects of its bad administration. I am confident that this Government twill bring down practical proposals to deal with the unemployment problem.

Dr Earle Page:

– When?

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

– The ‘right honorable member for Cowper (Dr. . Page) entered this Parliament fired with the ambition to establish new States, yet not one was established during the time that be was in power. This Government will actmuch more quickly than that. A bounty should be paid on the production of gold and oil.

Mr DEPUTY:

-SPEAKER. - I remind the honorable member that the bill makes no reference to gold.

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

– This Government will endeavour , to solve the unemployment problem, not by decreasing wages or increasing hours, but by enlarging the currency of this country and thus providing facilities for both private and public operations to be carried on.

Mr PROWSE:
Forrest

– I am surprised that, at a time like the present, the Government should limit this tax to those who are receiving over £725 a year. There could have been an all round reduction of 10 per cent, without affecting the purchasing power of the salaries that public servants receive. According to the Commonwealth Statistician, the cost of living has decreased by 11 per cent. How has that reduction been made possible? lit has been brought about at the expense of the primary producer, who has had to supply his product at an unprofitable rate. It is the primary producer who establishes the financial credit of this country, and who finds the money for the payment of salaries. This year he is short to the extent of £80,000,000; yet there are . those who claim that existing salaries in the Public Service should be continued, just as though there was no depression ! If there were a 10 per cent, reduction, public servants would still be 1 per cent,better off than they were beforethe cost of living fell. I do not believe in this diiferentiation . between sections of the people. I defy any man to find in the ranks of the wheat-growers one person who this year will have a taxable income of£725. Approximately 75 per cent, . of them have practically been . made bankrupt; yet they are to be called upon ; to : findthe money -to maintain and pay the salaries at rates that their servants received in the. past. It is not sporting.; it is not . cricket; it is ‘not business. Have not all -citizens of the Commonwealth equal rights? Yet we are “told that there must be no reduction ‘of the wages . of public servants in receipt of £7.25 per annum or less. What of the men in the back country, who are earning nothing? What of the 400,000, who are unemployed? Are public servants to remain intheir sheltered positions and receive : the same wages as were awarded to them at a time of buoyant revenues’? The honorable member for South Sydney (Mr. E. Riley) reminds us that there is an abundance of food in this country. I point out to him that I see an abundance of labour, even 400,000unemployed. He seemed to imply that, because food was plentiful, it should be obtainable at a low price. Since there is an ample supply of labour, should not that also be cheap? Would not cheap food involve the further sweating of the farmers? Would the honorable member have his constituents live cheaply at the expense of the primary producers ? If I never enter this Parliament again, I say emphatically that at a time of depression like this, every citizen should put his shoulder to the wheel. No honorable member should be a party to sheltering one section of the community at the expense of another. The general desire of honorable members opposite seems to be to put special taxation on particular sections of the community. Taxation, to be equitable, should be imposed in accordance with the ability of the people to pay it. Discrimination has been shown by the Government between property taxation and the taxation of income derived from personal exertion. On that subject I shall have something to say in connexion with another measure.

The reduction in the cost of living has been made possible by the sacrifices of the primary producers, and the present Government will not be taking a broad view if it does not reduce, toy at least a flat rate of 10 per cent., the salariesof all members of the Public Service. As I have already pointed out, this reduction would inflict no hardship upon the members of the Service, because a corresponding reduction of the cost of living has already occurred. The Government needs additional money to carry on the business of the country, and the Public Service could make a contribution to the national funds by accepting an all-round salary reduction. By continuing to shelter a large section of the Public Service, and at the same time imposing a primage duty on wheat sacks and embargoes on the importation of agricultural machinery, the Government is taking a one-eyed view of the situation. I fear that conditions in Australia will become worse than they now are if statesmanlike action is not taken immediately.

Mr M CAMERON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP; NAT from 1925; UAP from 1931

.- If this bill had been introduced twelve months ago, soon after the present Government came into office, one could have understood its action. It had made a distinct promise not to reduce wages, but to find employment for all. Regarding the latter part of the promise, the Ministry has completely failed. When honorable members opposite were on this side of the House, they contended that it was the first duty of the Government of the day to find employment for those in need of it ; but when they got into power, those who had most strongly advocated the provision of work for all, sat silent; they no longer stressed the need for a solution of the problem of unemployment. Over 20 per cent, of the trade unionists of this country are now out of work, and, therefore, the total percentage who are unemployed may be taken to be much greater than that. It is unfortunate that reductions of the salaries of public servants are necessary, but the Government and its supporters must surely realize that present conditions are entirely different from those of, say, ten years ago.

Mr Prowse:

– Or when the salaries were fixed.

Mr M CAMERON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP; NAT from 1925; UAP from 1931

Br. Earle Page. - The honorable member should visit Macquarie-street.

Mr KEANE:

– I notice that honorable members opposite are not saying, in plain English, that they want the wages of the Public Service reduced; on the other hand, we are saying quite, plainly that we do not want them reduced.

Mr Latham:

– But this Government is reducing them, in part.

Mr KEANE:

– When we go before the people again we shall be able to say that we did our best to resist the reduction of wages.’ Honorable gentlemen opposite, however, have the supreme satisfaction of knowing that, despite the decision of the electors in October of last year that wages should not be reduced, three judges of the Federal Arbitration Court are reducing them in an atrocious fashion.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order ! .

Mr Latham:

– I rise to a point of order. I submit that the honorable member is out of order in suggesting that it is the duty of judges to decide oases in accordance with .the result of an election:

Mr SPEAKER:

-I point out to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Latham) that I had called the honorable member to order before he rose. The honorable member for Bendigo is not in order in making such remarks about the judiciary.

Mr KEANE:

– I was merely saying, quite frankly, what I thought of the actions of a certain ‘section of this community. I will content myself with observing that, despite the fact that the electors of Australia said definitely that wages were not to be reduced, reductions are being effected through certain channels. The Labour party is not responsible for ‘this.

Apparently, the Leader of the Opposition and his supporters desire to assist the Commonwealth to the extent of £1,000,000, at the expense of a section of the community whose average rate of wages is only £5 per week. They would reduce these wages by an average of lis. per week, to £4 9s. per week. Every honorable member of this Parliament knows What his salary is, and what his living costs are. He also knows that the Public Service is not extravagantly paid. I admit that the members of the Public Service enjoy some advantages over other sections of the people. They have, for, instance, continuity of work ; but they also have to spend long years in the Service before receiving much promotion, and ate denied the right to engage in other occupations. As an ex-member of the Public Service, I say quite frankly that these men, whose fates of wages are fixed by arbitration, should be left in the enjoyment of their meagre pay. To rob them of a part of their spending power would result in additional deflation, and this would have a further depressing effect upon the community.

Mr GREGORY:
Swan

Mr ARCHDALE PARKHILL:

– The Railway Officers Association comes under arbitration, and the honorable member, because of his connexion with the railways, should be the last to deny that. The secretary of the Railway Officers Association resides in my electorate,” and he is now before the court. This Government, which came into office to maintain arbitration, has adopted this indirect means of destroying the federal- arbitration system so far as the public servants are concerned. It has been stated by honorable members behind the Government that, if this reduction of incomes were extended to the lower grades, it would bring about a reduction in the purchasing power of the people. But do they not’ realize that this method of taking money out of the pockets of the people is still further reducing the purchasing power of their wages. Do they not realize that, because of high taxation, business people and other employers are to-day unable to employ the number of men that they previously employed, and that men are, in consequence, being thrown out of work and receiving no wages or salaries at all. The purchasing power of the people is being reduced to a minimum. The object of the amendment moved by the Leader of the Opposition is not to put anybody out of work, but to apply the principles of equity and justice by spreading this special taxation throughout the Public Service. If it be correct to say that the purchasing power of the Commonwealth public servants, if we went below a salary of £725, would be reduced to such an extent as to interfere with the rehabilitation of this country, why has the Premier of South Australia, Mr. Hill, reduced all salaries, from £208 a year upwards? Surely his is as good a Labour Government as this ? Why, too, has the Labour Government of Victoria adopted a similar expedient? Do not the principles of the great Labour movement apply to State Labour Governments as well as to a Labour Government in the federal sphere? Apparently, this Government is a law unto itself.

Mr Bayley:

– The Australian Labour party is a law unto this Government.

Mr. ARCHDALE PARKHILL.Probably that is a more accurate description of the position. It would seem that this Government is prepared rather to tax the community unjustly and unfair!/ than to do what would be the fair thin«, by federal public servants. No honorable member can justify a proposal that imposes taxation on only 441 of the 44,000 odd members of the Commonwealth Public Service. It is always claimed that the Labour party favours equality of opportunity and of sacrifice, and the imposition of taxation in such a way that it falls impartially upon every section of the community. Where do those principles find expression in this measure ? No member of the Government has attempted to justify this proposal, for the simple reason that there is no justification for it. It is unpopular to advocate the reduction of any person’s salary, and no one cares to do so; but the honest course, even though it involve unpopularity, must be taken. That course is being taken by State Labour Premiers, but is being avoided by this Government because of the fear that it will lose them votes in the constituencies. Commonwealth public servants realize that they must make some sacrifice. I do not believe that any resentment would be aroused at the reductions if they had general effect. The general body of public servants will not thank the Government for this discrimination. If they do, all that I can say is that public opinion is in a very sorry condition. Realizing, as they must, that their confreres in the State Public Services are bearing their share of the universal burden, surely they cannot advance any reason for their exemption? I honestly believe that if this Government were to introduce a graduated scale of reductions, commencing lightly on the lower grades, it would be accepted without demur or resentment, and a higher opinion would be held of the Government.

I have said that this proposal is un* fair to the responsible officers in our departments. They are the people who bear the heat and burden of the day. Ministries come and go, but they continue to administer the affairs of this country, often under incompetent Ministers, and frequently without ministerial direction. They are entitled to remuneration commensurate with the responsibilities that they shoulder, and it is both unfair and unjust to discriminate against them in this fashion.

It has to be realized that the alternative to a more general reduction of salaries is excessive taxation. If the Government were to put into effect a scheme of salary reduction that would realize £1,000,000, there would be no need for the crushing taxation that the Government proposes to impose. In a country where 80 per cent, of the workers obtain employment from private enterprise, can the Government not see that the constant withdrawal of money from industry, not only prevents the expansion of employment, but has a restrictive effect; that the one is complementary of the other? Apparently this Government is prepared to favour one section of the Public Service and to inflict hardship on the community generally. By this time it ought to know that it is unable to tax people into prosperity. This country will never rehabilitate itself while these heavy exactions continue.

I have no hesitation in expressing the strongest condemnation possible of the Government’s proposal. I do not think I shall be misunderstood in regard to my attitude towards the taxation of public servants. I always express sentiments that I believe to be fair and just. I repeat that, if the Government had taken the clear, definite and courageous course that is being followed by its Labour confreres in Victoria and South Australia, it would have earned the respect, if not the admiration, of its own supporters. At the present time no other government is thought so little of by its supporters.

Mr PRICE:
Boothby

.- During the time that I have been in this House I have not listened to a more irresponsible speech than that just delivered by the honorable member for Warringah (Mr. Parkhill). He did not express one constructive idea. From time to time the appeal is made by honorable members opposite for all honorable members to co-operate in an endeavour to straighten out the finances of this country; yet whenever this Government proposes any action, they avail themselves of every opportunity to belittle it. This bill, has my support.

Dr Earle ‘ Page:

– Does the honorable member intend to support the amendment ?

Mr PRICE:

– I do not; the Opposi-tion are not sincere in bringing it forward.

Mr SPEAKER (Hon Norman Makin:

– Order ! I require the honorable member to withdraw the imputation of insincerity.

Mr PRICE:

– I withdraw it. It appears to me, however, that honorable members opposite are not really genuine in this matter.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honorable gentleman must realize that he has aggravated his offence. I ask him not to make any imputation of insincerity or of want of genuineness on the part of honorable members.

Mr PRICE:

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order ! The right honorable gentleman is not justified in offering such comment, which is a reflection upon the House.

Dr EARLE PAGE:

– I bow to your ruling, Mr. Speaker, and will substitute any words you care to suggest for those which are objectionable. This bill is simply another device to camouflage the failure of the Government to fulfil its promises, and to enable it to do what it has been doing ever since it assumed office, namely, reduce the real value of the wages of the workers. The Government was elected on the definite promise that it would increase employment and maintain wages; but it has. actually increased unemployment and ‘reduced wages, especially real wages. I hope that the Acting Treasurer will accept the amendment of the Leader of the Opposition, take the bold course, and fulfil at least some of the promises that he and other members of the Government have made during the last few months. If that is done, the Commonwealth will be able once again to take the lead in. the present critical financial position, and will not be obliged to drag along at the tail of the States.

No one who looks at the general situation to-day can deny that there has been a real decline in the standard of living, although the cost of living has been maintained. In some instances the Government has rationed the work of its employees, as in the Defence Department. Can anybody say that the wages of the employees affected by this rationing have teen maintained? According to the last report of the Public Service Board, 1,700 men were discharged between the 30th June, 1929, and the 30th June, 1930, and more have been discharged since then. Despite all the protestations of honorable members opposite, these employees have had their wages reduced by 100 per cent. In addition, the wages of practically every person in the community have been decreased by the imposition of additional taxation. No one can deny that the tax of 4d. per lb. on tea has adversely affected every household. The remuneration of wage-earners, salaried workers, and all other people has been reduced by this tax. The primage duty of 4 per cent., or lOd. in the £1, on all imports, and the sales tax of 2£ per cent., have also seriously diminished the purchasing power of our people. The primage duty alone has involved our farmers in an additional expenditure of £185,000 in- respect of cornsacks and manures. To that extent their incomes have been definitely reduced. All these imposts have tended to increase the cost of living. Those who are on the same standard of pay as formerly have actually less purchasing power, while those who are on the reduced standard are suffering severe hardship. Even though the prices of some goods are falling, the cost of living is not being reduced because others are piled up by these means. The people, as a matter of fact, are caught like rats in a trap. The cost of living is being maintained because of the extra taxation levied on the people, while their incomes are being reduced. Surely it is time that the Government took its courage in both hands, and acted upon its declarations of July and August of this year. At that time it was said definitely that governmental expenditure would be reduced. Let me remind honorable members of a few things that were said during that period by members of the Government. On the 8th September the Acting Treasurer (Mr. Lyons) said -

The most ruthless course is being taken; the position is almost desperate.

On the 15th September the same honorable gentleman, in defending the Government’s policy at the conference of the Victorian Labour party, said -

We are faced with three things: Firstly, Australia’s good name and credit abroad; secondly, economies and cuts in expenditure; and thirdly, the duty to find employment.

Asked whether this was consistent with the party policy, the honorable gentleman said -

It is consistent with the needs of the day, and it is preferable to develop private enterprise than to carry an overstaffed public service.

On the 15th September the Acting Treasurer spoke about “ an over-staffed public service,” and in November he introduced a measure to provide for a total reduction in the expenditure of the Public Service by only £60,000 out of £11,000,000 expended. Later in September the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Fenton), following upon Cabinet meetings, said -

Economies have formed the greater part of the investigations of the Cabinet subcommittee. Even with all our reductions, there must be further taxation. We are not going to impose more than we can help. We are not going to put any further burden on industry.

On the Srd October the Acting Prime Minister declared, in an official statement after a Cabinet meeting -

Proposals to balance the budget were approved. It was agreed that the expenditure must be reduced at the rate of approximately £4,000,000 a year. The recent decline in market prices of government stocks shows that nervous holders ure selling securities through fears that are quite unwarranted, and the Government fully recognizes that these fears must he reduced at once. The Government, therefore, takes this opportunity of notifying the public that the proposals will include reductions and economies in expenditure- a.t the rate of £4,000.000 a year.

In spite of these statements, we are now faced with proposals which provide for a net reduction in expenditure of £430,000 instead of £4,000,000. The total gross reduction in expenditure is £1,230,000, but against this there are increases amounting to £800,000. This means that there has been a definite breach of faith, not only with the State Governments, but with all the people of Australia.

All the State Governments, irrespective of their political colour, have given effect to the proposals made at the August conference of Premiers. It was felt that if all acted this could be done without any fear of party recriminations. In New South Wales, public service salaries have been reduced by 8^ per cent., and parliamentary salaries by 15 per cent. In Queensland, public service salaries have been reduced by 10 per cent. The reductions in public service salaries, in Victoria, range from 5 per cent, to 20 per cent.; the Premier’s salary has been reduced by 18 per cent.; Ministers’ salaries by 14£ per cent., and parliamentary salaries by li per cent, in respect to the Legislative Assembly, and 5 per cent, in respect to the Legislative Council. In South Australia, public service salaries have been reduced by 10 per cent.; Ministers’ salaries by 15 per cent., and members’ salaries by 5 per cent. In addition, the school teachers have voluntarily agreed to a 10 per cent, reduction in their salaries. In Tasmania, public service salaries have been reduced by from 2$ to 7^ per cent. It will be seen, therefore, that the States have made a determined effort to give effect to the conference decisions. But the Commonwealth Government’s endeavours to honour its undertakings have been generally condemned throughout Australia, and it is felt that the Government has broken faith with the States. In this connexion, a press report, published on the 20th November, stated -

The proposals of the Government have been greeted throughout the Australian press as a breach nf faith with the Government’s undertakings at the Melbourne conference, and as a breach of faith with the States upon whose income tax field further heavy inroads are being made.

The reductions proposed in this bill will amount to less than a half of- 1 per cent. of the £11,000,000 spent annually on salaries to 44,000 public servants. While every other class in the community has been obliged to suffer total loss of employment, or actual reductions of wages, or the rationing of work, or increases in the cost of living, because of additional taxation, the Government will not do the simple thing that it should do to give effect to its own undertakings. It has merely set another vicious circle revolving by increasing the cost of living.

I urge the Acting Treasurer (Mr. Lyons), even now, to accept the amendment of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Latham) and undertake a definite reduction of Commonwealth expenditure immediately. If the Government would remove some of the direct and indirect imposts that are at present reducing the value of the wages of the workers, it would, at once, make more money available for industry, and this would lead to additional employment. The adoption of this policy would instil some hope in the community, and prevent it from sinking deeper and deeper into the bog of despair.

I totally repudiate the suggestion made by some honorable members opposite, that the parties on this side of the chamber desire to reduce the salaries and wages of the lower-paid public servant* by, 10. per cent. That was never in our minds. If honorable members would examine the facts, they would find that considerable expenditure could, be reduced on extraneous payments, without touching salaries. The payments to. which. I refer totalled £870,000 last year. There is no need whatever to make wild and savage cuts in the remuneration of the lower paid public servants. But there could be a very small reduction in salaries beginning at a certain figure, and increasing gradually, say 1 per cent., with every £100 of salary. If the Government would adopt a policy of this; kind it could materially reduce its expenditure, and this would enable the country to get out of its present dangerous position. It would also reduce the cost of living, enable employment to become more general, and stimulate and encourage private enterprise more than anything else that we could do.

It is useless, for honorable members opposite to say that the standard of living of those outside the Public Service has; not fallen. Every one knows that thevalue of our stocks and shares is in many cases only half what it was twelve months ago. Many works have, had to, be closed; many cases of bankruptcy have occurred, and many voluntary liquidations have taken place. These have all involved the dismissal . of thousands of employees.

It is equally futile for honorable members opposite to say that the greatest reduction’ that can be made in payments totalling £11,000,000 to the Public Service is a miserable £60,000. Reductions could be made, as I have said, in many directions without touching salaries. Since 1925. the cost of the service has increased roughly by £1,700,000. lastyear we paid the following amounts in allowances of one kind and another : -

I suggest that economies could be effected in respect of these items without any very great hardship to any one. Most people at the present time are glad enough to- have a permanent job without extras. I urge the Government to reconsider this whole subject. It should, at once revise its revised budget. If it does not voluntarily do so now, it will be. forced to do it within the next two. or three months., If it. does so now, it will enable us to set our face in the right direction, and prevent us from heading further and further into the bog of despair. I trust, therefore,, that the Government will see its way to. adopt the suggestion of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Latham) as a first step towards that most desirable end.

Mr MACKAY:
Lilley

.- The. honorable member for Boothby (Mr. Price) said that the bill before the House was an innocent little measure designed to tax the members of this Parliament, and the Public Service. My complaint is that the measure is altogether too innocent to be effective. Several honorable members on that side of the House attempted to distort the real object of the amendment of the Leader of the Opposition. The position taken up by the honorable members on this- side of’ the House is a perfectly logical one. We say that in these times of severe financial depression every section of the people should be prepared to make some sacrifice. My objection to the bill is that it does not go far- enough. The honorable member for Denison (Mr. Culley), in reply to an interjection of myown, admitted that, this special tax amounted to a reduction of salaries. The honorable member for Bendigo (Mr. Keane) disclaimed any such interpretation. It must be admitted by any one who considers the matter fairly, that a special tax on a man’s salary really amounts to the reduction of his salary. It seems extraordinary to me that the Government, having an annual salary bill of £11,000,000, should be content, when the need for economy so patently exists, to bring in a measure designed to save a paltry £60,000. Such action will get us nowhere. I am convinced that something further is. required. There are 44,000 men and women employed in the. Commonwealth Public Serviceand under this bill only 441 of that number will be required to sacrifice anything. Honorable members on the other side of the House are continually talking of their desire to maintain the standard of living. Evidently they were not much concerned, about the standard of living of those aged and infirm persons who draw an income of £100 a year from investments in property. The Acting Treasurer proposes to tax them to the extent of 1 per cent, of their incomes. It was thought when the Acting Prime Minister and his chief attended the Melbourne conference, and put their signatures to the agreement arrived at there, that an honest attempt was to be made to right the financial position. The bill before us represents a sorry attempt to achieve that end. If every one in Australia will do his duty, and make some sacrifice to meet the present crisis, our difficulties can be overcome, but the Government is not facing the position squarely. I am glad to observe that not one member of this House has complained about the proposed reduction of our own salaries, but it is a fact that members of the Public Service, who are exempted from sacrifice, because their salaries are less than £725 a year, will be in a better position than members of thin Parliament. My suggestion to the Acting-Treasurer is that he should revise his proposal. He should start with a tax of 2jj- per cent, on salaries of £250, increase it to 5 per cent, on salaries over £500, and from then on follow the scale adopted by the Acting Treasurer in the bill before the House. Every State Government ha3 demanded some sacrifice of its employees, and the Commonwealth is setting a very bad example. It is not too late for the Government to revise its proposal. The Public Service will not have a great deal to complain of if the measures I have suggested are adopted, and something worth while will be done to meet the huge deficiency which the Government is sure to have in its finances in the present year.

Mr PATERSON:
Gippsland

– I shall support the amendment of the Leader of the Opposition. I am sure that no one in the House, no matter what party he supports, is satisfied with the bill as drawn. I am satisfied also, that the best minds in the Public Service are ashamed of this measure. It will create* anomalies as between the Commonwealth and State Public Services, and within the Commonwealth Public Service itself. State public servants will be suffering a reduction of their incomes, while employees of the Commonwealth, working side by side with them, will escape. Surely no one will deny that it is substantially the same taxpayers who provide the incomes of the civil servants, whether State or Commonwealth. If dire necessity compels a reduction in the case of one, surely the same thing must apply in the case of another. Moreover, can any one say that there is any justice in a system which provides for practically no gradation whatever, but will reduce the income of the men now receiving £805 a year, to that of the man on £725 a year. The public servant receiving £805 a year will suffer a reduction of £S0, and will come down to £725. The man on £725 a ‘ year will suffer no reduction whatever, and the difference between £725 and £805 will disappear with one stroke of the pen. There is no fairness in that.

Mr Archdale Parkhill:

– And no justice.

Mr PATERSON:

– No, nor is there any justice. In view of the fact that our national income is so enormously reduced - and some people do not seem yet to realize the extent of that reduction - - every member of the community should be prepared to make some sacrifice. It should be as small as possible in the case of the lower paid public servants, and heavier in the case of those who are better paid. Some honorable members opposite have said that any reduction of salaries, either in the Public Service or outside it, would intensify the difficulties which Australia is now facing. The honorable member for South Sydney (Mr. E. Riley), and, later on, the honorable member for Denison (Mr. Culley), said that a reduction of .wages and salaries. would reduce the purchasing power of the people, and aggravate our present trouble. It is evident that this argument is employed by men who have not troubled to look below the surface. Surely they must realize that Australia’s former purchasing power is gone now. It cannot be affected by reductions in the Public Service salaries. The position to-day is that 20.5 per cent, of Australia’s wage-earners have no purchasing power whatever, while of the other 79i per cent, a great many retain less than 50 per cent, of their former purchasing power. Only a very few who are fortunate enough to be in sheltered positions have as much to spend as formerly. If, instead of only 79£ per cent., we could get practically all our people usefully employed at the best wages possible within the compass of our greatly reduced national income, there would be more free spending than there is to-day. There would be a greater circulation of money, because money would be spent by a greater number of persons on the necessaries of life. Our external income, which is what we receive for exports, is 50 per cent, lower than it was a few years ago, so great has been the drop in the value of wool, wheat, meat, butter, fruit and metals. While everybody expects that values must recover to some extent, he would be a most optimistic individual who would predict that, within a reasonably short time, they will get back to more than twothirds, or at best, three-quarters, of what they were before. Therefore, it is inevitable that prices for manufactured goods, and services generally throughout Australia, must conform to the new standard of lower values created by the drop in the value of our exports. It is impossible to have one section of the community on one level, and another section on an entirely different level. Australia is confronted with a tremendous drop in the value of its exportable production, and a cessation of borrowing for developmental works, resulting in a diminution of the fund from which wages are drawn of at least £100,000,000 a year. That being so, it is inevitable that each and all of us must be prepared to accept something less in order to allow every one to have some part of the greatly reduced wages fund. Australia cannot carry the load which the Government is attempting to make it carry. It has been truly said by speakers on this side of the House that taxation at any time tends to reduce employment. It makes industry less profitable, and consequently decreases the capacity of those controlling industry to employ labour. By further increasing taxation at this time the Government is doing its best to increase the volume of unemployment. If we can reduce taxation by making reasonable savings in the cost of government, we shall be doing a service to industry and> taking the first step to improve the employment figures. Some honorable members opposite have said that the Government could not make a general reduction in the remuneration of civil servants because of the promises given to the electors by the Labour party. They say there is some kind of principle involved.

Mr Keane:

– Hear, hear!

Mr PATERSON:

– The honorable member for Bendigo says, “ Hear, hear “. Evidently his principles stretch as far as the civil servant receiving £725 a year, but fail to cover those in receipt of a little more. With principles there can be no gradation. They must be consistent. But evidently the principles of the honorable member for Bendigo are so elastic that they need not apply to men receiving upwards of £725. The honorable member for Denison (Mr. Culley) this afternoon seemed to be thinking along different lines; he contended that that there was no difference between the dismissal of 200 men by the last Government and the dismissal of thousands by the present Government. The honorable member for Bendigo, however, sees a very real difference between the big and the small. When the Government is breaking a promise, or departing from what it calls a principle, as it undoubtedly is in relation to Public Service salaries exceeding £725, it might as well do so thoroughly and to some purpose; it will then be neither more nor less guilty than it is now. The proposal to save £60,000 out of a total salaries and wages bill of £11,000,000 is surely the greatest financial burlesque ever perpetrated in this Parliament, and a great many have been perpetrated in the last twelve months. The saving will amount to about $ per cent, of the total, and will apply to about 1 per cent, of the Public Service. The nonsensical statement has been repeatedly made that a reduction of the remuneration of the Public Service would be a class tax. Unfortunately, almost every other section of the community has had to suffer some deprivation during the present depression. The basic wage has been lowered, the award rates for shearers have been greatly reduced, and business men and their employees are suffering a substantial diminution of their incomes and salaries.

I know of many commercial travellers who are gladly accepting a 25 per cent, reduction of salary; they know that their employers cannot afford to pay them more, and they prefer a lower income to the alternative of unemployment. In regard to the primary producers, the wool-growers and wheatfarmers particularly are suffering a reduction infinitely greater. Their purchasing power is at least 50 per cent, lower than it formerly was, and the greater proportion of those growing wool and wheat on land which they do not own entirely would have to walk off their holdings with practically no assets if the banks pressed them to meet their liabilities. The contention that a small and reasonable reduction of Public Service salaries with a view to making expenditure conform more nearly to the reduced national income would amount to a special class tax is almost incredibly foolish. With much more reason the Government’s avoidance of this course may be said to amount to special class shelter. One section of the community is to receive special protection, from the forces and influences which have been adversely affecting almost every other section. Quite recently the Commonwealth Statistician stated that the cost of living has dropped by 11 per cent. In those circumstances, a small reduction of Public Service salaries would not impose any hardship; it would merely bring the Government employees into line with the outside public, and enable them to bear their share of the sacrifices necessary to place their country on a better footing.

The Government makes some extraordinary choices when selecting fields of taxation. I realize that because of its financial difficulties it must raise additional income, but recently it imposed a 4 per cent, primage tax on the essentials of primary production. By this means it expects to collect £185,000 to £200,000 from men who to-day have practically no standard of living. A reduction of Public Service salaries by a trifling 1) per cent, would yield that amount, but the Government prefers further to hurden men who are threatened with having to abandon their holdings. It is scandalous.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! It is not permissible for the honorable member to employ that expression in regard to any action in this House.

Mr PATERSON:
GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA · CP from 1922; ST CP from 1937; LCP from 1940

– In deference to your ruling, sir, I withdraw the word “scandalous” and substitute the word “shocking.” The Government pretends to have at heart the interests of all sections of the community, including those engaged in primary production. As a ministerial member remarked a few minutes ago, “ Actions speak louder than words,” and a Government which is prepared to impose this last straw of taxation in the form of 4 per cent, primage dues on the constituents of superphosphate and on cornsacks and wool packs for export - an impost which must inevitably be paid by men whose products have slumped in value by more than 50 per cent. - rather than make a paltry reduction of lj per cent, in the remuneration of the Public Service - an organized body whose votes it fears to lose - is deserving of the strongest condemnation.

Mr BAYLEY:
Oxley

Mr Keane:

– We have not heard one word from them about that.

Mr RIORDAN:

– They have said nothing about the action of the banks. AH that they advocate is an increase of taxation in respect of the workers generally. We cannot tax a country to prosperity. It is a nice thing to be a taxpayer. My experience as such has been this: When I was in receipt of £300 a year in Queensland, I paid no tax. When I received £500 I paid a tax of £5. I was £200 better off, and for that advantage I paid £5. When I received £750, my tax was increased by £10. It was a pretty decent investment. Now I enjoy a salary of £1,000, and even with a reduction of £100 I shall still be better off than when I received £750. The man who is to be taxed under this bill will not be much affected. This Government should immediately introduce a workers’* unemployment insurance scheme, under which every person in the community would contribute so much per week. Those who say that taxes are high in Australia should make a study of lowtaxed countries. Is the position any better in India, in which country a person receives ls. for a working day of twelve hours? Do honorable members believe that by reducing public servants’ salaries by £1,000,000 unemployment will in any way be relieved? The honorable member for Gippsland (Mr. Paterson), when speaking to-night, said that the public servants were ashamed of the position into which they had been forced by this Government. We have seen no evidence of that ; we have not seen any members of the Public Service, for instance, hurrying to contribute a portion of their salaries to the Consolidated Revenue. Yet there is nothing to prevent their doing that. The names of those who, according to the honorable member for Gippsland (Mr. Paterson), are ashamed, do not appear on unemployed appeal lists. I do not admit that the honorable member for Gippsland speaks for the public servants; they do not recognize him as their mouthpiece. He says that principle must apply throughout; so do I; hence this is a taxation instead of a wage reduction proposal. When prosperity returns, this special tax can be removed: but if there were any wage induction the workers would have to fight their way, as they have always been obliged to do, step by step, to regain the lost ground.

During the course of my speech on the financial statement the other night, the honorable member for Darling Downs (Mr. Morgan), by interjection, stated that the unions had killed Mount Morgan. In that mine men worked a couple of thousand feet below ground, in conditions that in a few years developed in them miners’ phthisis, and to-day many of them are in the Diamantina Hospital for Incurables in Brisbane. What was their reward ? When copper was realizing £112 a ton the shareholders in the Mount

Morgan Gold Mining Company Limited received millions of pounds by way of dividends, while thousands of the soldiers of industry walked off the fields and gradually faded away, leaving their widows and children a burden on the taxpayer. Every wage increase that the miners received cost their organization thousands of pounds. “When there was a rising market, did those who always ask the worker to make sacrifices say, “We are reaping big dividends; up go your wages accordingly”? Were the bank clerks more highly remunerated during the prosperous periods of banking? I remember only one occasion when that branch of industry failed, and it was propped up by the very people who to-day are being destroyed by the banks. Honorable members opposite cry “Repudiation “ when there is any mention of bond - holders being asked to accept a lower rate of interest; yet, according to them, it is not repudiation to take 5s. a week from the man who is receiving £4 or £4 53., or to starve the women and children of this nation. They brag about their advocacy of such a proposal in this House, and when they go home they probably say, “ Thank God, we have done our duty by the nation “. Their conception of doing their duty by the nation is to starve those receiving low wages, and to allow those who have reaped profits out of these individuals during prosperous times to “get away with it”. The business of Ministers is to do the job they were sent here to do; if they do not, they will find themselves the victims of the wheel-scraping industry when next they appear before the people.

Mr BELL:
Darwin

.- Those who sit on this side can afford to pass over the speech of the honorable member for Kennedy “(Mr. Riordan), because it would appear to be a denunciation of the Government. He has his own reason no doubt for denouncing the occupants of the treasury bench, and though I do not wish to stand shoulder to shoulder with him in condemning any proposal brought forward, I am bound to say that I differ widely from the Government with respect to the measure we are now discussing, because of the inequity of its incidence and the unjustness of its effect.

The honorable member for Gippsland said that this’ proposal has not the support of any honorable member. It is evident that the honorable member for Kennedy does not support it; and I noticed particularly that the Acting Treasurer, when introducing it, did not advance any argument in support of it. Those who know that honorable gentleman well, and have either heard or read his utterances upon the introduction of proposals that have emanated from his own mind, are aware that he does not lack argument to justify them. In this case, however, he knows, as does every honorable member, that this is not the considered opinion of any party, and that it is not supported by any section of the people of this country. I consider that it places the Public Service itself in ii false position; because the public generally are asking why those who occupy these sheltered positions should be be exempt from taxation while others who do the hard work of the nation for a wage of £3 a week are taxed by every State. The Acting Treasurer knows only too well that in Tasmania every wageearner, including girls and boys who work for 10s. a week, is taxed at the rate of 3d. in the £1. Why? Because that Government in common with all other State Governments, wishes to honour the agreement entered into with the Commonwealth Government to balance its budget, in the interest of the credit of this country. The Commonwealth Government alone has failed to honour the agreement entered into that all Governments should balance their respective budgets this year. The Acting Treasurer, in his introduction of another measure, commended the Premiers of the States for the efforts they had made to balance their budgets, and quoted the reductions that had taken place in the salaries of State public servants. Surely not one honorable member of this House will say that there is any justice in a proposal to exempt from taxation members of the Commonwealth Public Service who are receiving less than £725, while the salaries of all State public servants are being reduced, although in many of the States they are not receiving nearly as much as Commonwealth public servants. It is not necessary to use any further argument in condemnation of this proposal. The plea of honorable members opposite, that the raising of wages increases the purchasing power of the community, furnishes proof tha,1j they are destitute of argument to support this, measure. It is merely humbug to style this a taxation measure; in reality its object, is to reduce salaries. Labour members went to the country pledged to resist any, reduction of wages or salaries,; but because, it has been found, necessary to obtain more. revenue, and as. every other, channel has been exhausted, some- of the higher salaried; public servants, as well a3: Ministers and members of; Parliament^, are to have their salaries reduced. But w,hy not call? the bill, by its right name? It is: essential, to-day to reduce, substantially the cost? o£ government and) of parliament. The. w,hole.’ community, as has been, pointed out over and over again, during this and other debates, is suffering from a loss, of income, and it is- absolute folly to. suggest that the maintenance of wages at their present figure will increase the purchasing power of the community. It is, perfectly obvious that there is- a wagefund, and that’ from that alone can wagesbe. paid; Over- 20 per cent, of formerwageearners are now unemployed; what purchasing power* have they? It is foolish to suggest the taxation of wages as>an alternative to- the lowering of wages; that’ would not assist- industry to provide employment for one person. Every one. knows that- the reason for the existence of ‘unemployment to-day is that men- cannot be employed profitably. If wageswere to be- reduced all round by 10 per cent., there- would- be every prospect- of ‘‘a large- number of1 those who are out of work being profitably employed-.

The objection to this measure is. that it does not deal fairly and equitably with, different sections of, the taxpayers’. We on this side claim,, as we did throughout the debate upon the, budget proposals, that there, must be a further reduction of ‘costs, if vol.k is. to be found for the unemployed.’ If we do- not reduce, the cos.t of parlia-ment and of government, we must raise additional revenue, and. that can b.e done only by increasing the. taxation imposed’ upon, individuals and’ industries. If” we tax industry we reduce its capacity toprovide employment; that is a simple truth’ which no one can. dispute. Every intelligent person regrets the necessity for reducing wages J. but it is obvious that they must be earned or they cannot be paid. Surely it is not the wish of any person that 20 per cent, or 25 per cent, of the, community should be without any means of livelihood, and be compelled to exist upon a dole, because of the desire of a political party to maintain wages at a high rate. It would- appear that many honorable members opposite do not understand what, is the real position of theworker in this country., Honorable members, opposite say that the. public servant has never, been well paid, and that a mam cannot, maintain ai wife and’ family on less than the basic wage-. As I have already pointed out; the man on the basic wage has, been taxed heavily by theStates. There’ is a- tremendous number of workers- in all. *he, States,, certainly mk those, that. I know a-, good deal, about, who, have, never- had, the basic wage-; menwho have done the- hard work of the nation for not more- than 10s. a day. They have reared families’ on- that, wage;and they arc being taxed, at the rate of 3d-, in the £1 in order to keep in. good jobs these sheltered individuals! who. receive- up. to . £725- a-, year.;. That is the. position, in- a nutshell! The wages off Commonwealth- public- servants. have> increased; progressively since 1925.-26’.. The seventh, annual report of the PublicService Board- states that the average: wage of ( all officers - which, includes boys and! girls in the post offices,’ and other) occupations who. receive a very low wage- - -has been as follows since that year -

Since the 30th March, of this year,, the average wage has been £297.. 35* The majority of those officers* will! beexempt from the taxation to be, imposed under this bill, while the man. who is-, thrown out of his job, because’ an industry cannot afford Ito employ him, is called, upon to bear great, hardship. . What., isthe use of ‘the basic .wage to the man who-, suffers all’ the privations of , life in the - hills, and .forests? in. fossicking, for. a* few pounds of ‘tin. a. week, rather than - live on » the dole?

This hill does not satisfy any individual; we know that it does not satisfy the Treasurer, and it does not satisfy the community at large. It is unjust to the great body of public servants, because by it they are placed in a false position in the eyes of the community. I support the amendment submitted by the Leader of the Opposition. There is great scope still for a reduction of parliamentary and governmental costs in every direction, and surely we should exhaust every possibility of reducing expenditure in a time of stress before we tax hard-working individuals, who have struggled all their lives to maintain themselves and their families in decency, and have thus’ assisted to preserve the solvency of this country. This proposal is unjust. I repeat that the overwhelming majority of the public servants themselves will not wish to be placed in a position in which they will be specially selected for exemption from a burden which, according to the Prime Minister (Mr. Scullin) himself, should be spread over the whole community.

Mr MORGAN:
Darling Downs

– We have not heard one responsible member on the other side of the House attempt to defend this bill. Those honorable members who have dared to support it are entirely irresponsible. The honorable member for Kennedy (Mr. Riordan) took me to task for having had the temerity last week to refer to the reason for the cessation of work at the Mount Morgan mine. In a sort of ad misericordiam appeal to the chamber and to the galleries, he talked of the men employed there suffering from miners’ phthisis. I have every sympathy for men afflicted with that terrible complaint, but I should like the honorable member for Kennedy to state the number of miners working on the big open cut at Mount Morgan, who suffered from that disease. I submit that the proportion was absolutely infinitesimal. Last week I pointed out that the mining industry at Mount Morgan had been brought to nought by a series of Arbitration Court awards that made mining unprofitable at a time when metal prices were on the down grade, and when, ore to the value of £12,000,000 awaited development. The Arbitration Court, by fixing wages at a level that made it unprofitable to work that field, brought, disaster to the industry, ruin to the town, and drove thousands of miners from the district.

Mr SPEAKER (Hon Norman Makin:

– Will the honorable member connect his remarks with the bill?

Mr MORGAN:

– To be quite frank. Mr. Speaker, I cannot do so.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Then, the honorable gentleman will not be in order in pursuing that matter further.

Mr MORGAN:

– I should like to say, in extenuation, that the honorable member for Kennedy pursued this subject to a considerable extent less than half an hour ago.

The honorable member for Bendigo (Mr. Keane), one of the irresponsible members to whom I have already alluded, in attempting to defend the bill, urged with a good deal of unctuous righteousness, that he would not reduce the salaries of public servants, because his party had given an election pledge not to do so. A very short time previously the same honorable member talked of the compact entered into at the Melbourne conference, and tried to justify the smashing of that contract on the ground that it was expedient to do it. In fact, he said that it was impossible to balance the budget. Is there any consistency at all in the attitude of an honorable member who supports the breaking of an agreement and yet contends that a pledge said to have been given in an election contest should be honoured?

What 1 particularly object to in this bill is the utterly vicious principle that it sets up of differentiation between sections of the Public Service. Not only does it differentiate within the Commonwealth Public Service itself, by taxing a body of persons who are drawing £725 per annum and upwards, while utterly excluding from taxation those who draw less than that sum; but it also differentiates between persons employed in the Commonwealth Public Service and those engaged in the State Public Services. That is a most invidious, disturbing, and disastrous differentiation, which is calculated to produce in the various Public Services of the Commonwealth something of that disturbing element that we see operating to-day in the overlapping and conflict of awards in the arbitration sphere. That, in itself, constitutes a defect in this measure for which no government, with any sense of what is right and just towards its employees and to the people, would be responsible for a moment. That, I think, is one of the reasons why responsible members on the Government side have refused to attempt to justify this shocking and damaging piece of legislation.

Mr Bayley:

– Not one Minister has supported it.

Mr MORGAN:

Mr GARDNER:
Robertson

.- I had no intention of taking part in this debate until the honorable member for Fremantle (Mr. Curtin) spoke. I was not impressed by the logic of the honorable member’s remarks, although that quality is not generally foreign to his speeches. The honorable gentleman cast aspersions upon the honesty of honorable members on this side of the chamber in criticizing this bill ; but I am quite satisfied that the general public will place their true value upon the motives which have led to the introduction of the measure. The honorable member’s remarks would probably have been more effective had he not overlooked certain outstanding facts in the present situation. In the first place, the public is aware that the Prime Minister, prior to leaving Australia, and the Acting Prime Minister and Acting Treasurer, at the Premiers Conference in August, promised that the Commonwealth would balance its budget. The public are also aware that the Government postponed all action in order that Jack Lang might get a chance in the New South Wales elections. The people knew that . the Acting Prime Minister and the Acting Treasurer were themselves desirous of making a cut in government expenditure to the tune of £4,000,000, as suggested by the Leader of the Opposition, and that they proposed to reduce the salaries, not of one section only of the Public Service, but of all sections. Therefore, it was simply political moonshine for the honorable member for Fremantle (Mr. Curtin) to say that it was necessary to deal with certain sections of the Service because the salaries of members of Parliament were being reduced. The Acting Prime Minister and the Acting Treasurer would have carried out their original intention but for the unfortunate stand taken by the Labour caucus. Had they had their way, £500,000 would have been saved on civil service salaries, instead of a paltry £60,000. Unfortunately, the class to which Australia must look for a solution of its troubles, namely, the primary producers, has not been exempt from sacrifice. These are not in receipt of £725 a year. In many instances their incomes have disappeared altogether. As the honorable member for Gippsland (Mr. Paterson) pointed out, many primary producers would simply have to walk out of their homes if the banks to which they owe money exercised their right to demand it. The only income they would then have would be God’s free, fresh air. The honorable member for Fremantle did not impress me very much to-night. He is evidently more successful in caucus than in the House, where at least a little logic is demanded. If a reasonable sacrifice had been required of every one, the Acting Treasurer’s original proposal could have been given effect, and we should have had a chance of solving our problems instead of merely tinkering with them.

Question - That the words proposed to be omitted (Mr. Latham’s amendment) stand part of the question - put. The House divided. (Mr. Speaker - Hon. Norman Makin.)

AYES: 32

NOES: 0

AYES

NOES

Foes . . . . . . 17

Majority….. 15

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment negatived.

Original question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2 -

In this act, unless the contrary intention appears - “Salary,” in respect of an officer or employee of the Commonwealth or of an authority under the Commonwealth, means the annual remuneration, paid to the officer or employee in respect of the office occupied by him and includes any annual allowance paid in respect of any duties performed in addition to those of that office. “ Taxpayer “ means a person who is -

a senator or member of the House of Representatives, whether or not he holds any of the following offices, namely, Minister of State for the Commonwealth, or Presiding Officer, Chairman of Committees or Leader of the Opposition in either “House of the Parliament; or

a person employed by the Commonwealth or the North Australia Commission whose annual salary as defined in the Income Tax (Salaries) Act 1930 exceeds Seven hundred and twenty-five pounds and is paid from the Commonwealth Public Account or the North Australia Commission Fund but does not include a person employed by the Commonwealth in any Territory not being part of the Commonwealth.

Mr CROUCH:
Corangamite

– I had intended to raise some of the points that have been mentioned by the Leader of the Opposition. I have in mind officers who are under agreement. Last year Parliament reduced the salaries of the members of the Development and Migration Commission. Mr. Gepp’s contract was terminated, but his services were retained in a consultative capacity, and Messrs. Gunn and Mulvaney were reappointed at lower salaries. Are these to be covered by this bill ?

M:r. Archdale Parkhill. - Decidedly.

Mr CROUCH:

– I think they should be. The clause refers to annual allowances. Naval regulations prescribe daily rates, which, however, continue throughout the year, and in some cases aggregate much more than £725 per annum. I suggest that consideration should be given to the meaning of the word “ annual “ in order to ensure that it does not give immunity to men whose allowances are on a daily basis but exceed in the year the minimum mentioned in the bill.

Dr EARLE PAGE:
Cowper

– I associate myself with the remarks of the Leader of the Opposition in regard to the Auditor-General. We should provide beyond doubt that he has the same protection as the judges against any interference with his salary to secure his independence of the Government of the day. Will the Treasurer explain to the committee what is meant by the word “paid to the officer or employee in respect of the office occupied by him “ ? The teachers at the various schools in Canberra, although paid with Commonwealth money, are the employees of the New South Wales Education Department. Will a teacher who receives £725 a year be subject to this ,tax, if there is any such? The House decided by a vote on the amendment submitted by the Leader of the Opposition, that the tax shall not apply to salaries below £725. Although the teachers are servants of the Commonwealth, except in actual name, they are subject to a State reduction of 3d. in the £1 for unemployment relief, in addition to the S-J per cent, reduction of salary. Surely we should not make fish of one and flesh of another. These men and women are to all intents and purposes Commonwealth servants, and live in Canberra, under the same conditions as other Commonwealth employees, and I hope that Government supporters who voted against any interference with the salaries of the lowerpaid servants will see that these teachers also are given a fair deal. The Commonwealth is the only government that can benefit from these various taxes on the teachers stationed in Canberra. I understand that representations have already been made to the Treasurer, but, so far, no action has been taken. I hope that honorable members supporting the Ministry will see the justice of my contention, and will support my request that there shall be no discrimination.

Mr GREGORY:
Swan

.- I wish to emphasize my objection to the bill ; but since the second reading has been carried I should like to see an amendment inserted to abolish all exemptions of public servants. Every person who is in receipt of a salary from the Commonwealth should bc called upon to make some contribution.

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

– The honorable member is consistent.

Mr GREGORY:

– I recognize that, in the case of members of the judiciary, it is not. possible to reduce their emoluments ; but at a time like this they would exhibit good taste if they agreed to come within the scheme. Only the other day the Government introduced a bill providing for increased primage dues of 4 per cent. This tax will fall heavily upon primary producers requiring superphosphate, wheat sacks, and wool packs, and will increase the cost of these articles this year by over £200,000. These people will be expected to make heavy contributions to the Treasury, and yet in a measure ostensibly designed to provide for an increase of revenue to -meet a difficult financial situation, the Government does not contemplate a reduction in the salaries of public servants below a certain .level. I have no doubt that in the near future another effort will have to be made to secure increased revenue, and possibly we shall have further income tax proposals. The people of Australia are taxed more highly than the people of any other country. What is needed is economy in administration. It is idle for the honorable member for Fremantle (Mr. Curtin) to suggest tha’t-the action of honorable members on this side is a political dodge. The fact is that for political purposes, and for fear of offending Government supporters, the caucus refused to allow the Government, to do its duty and carry out its obligations. We realize fully that we %hal have a great many public servants against us, because we are urging that, for the time being, they should be called upon to suffer a reduction in salary. But we believe that, if they were appealed to in a proper manner, they would be quite prepared to bear their share of the burden that is pressing so heavily on the people of Australia. What justification is there for exempting salaries under £725?

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

– Why not submit an amendment ?

Mr GREGORY:

– The honorable member knows very well that it is not competent for a private member to move to increase taxation. But I am satisfied that, if the Government had not consulted its supporters prior to the introduction of the bill, it would have acted more in keeping with the pledge given by the Prime Minister (Mr. Scullin) that the Government would balance its budget. Only by the production of wealth is it possible to provide for more employment. The Government’s taxation proposals are having the opposite effect. I believe that the Treasurer realizes the danger we are in, and he has my fullest sympathy in his present difficult position. We know that it is not possible now to balance the budget this year, but we should like to “see a genuine effort made in that direction. We shall have to find £37,000,000 in London before March next. The position would not be so serious if the Government gave evidence of a genuine desire to make ends meet. I fear, however, that if we Continue along our present path we shall be in grave trouble. The Treasurer’s statement discloses the “unpleasant fact that the finances of the Commonwealth and the States have gone to the bad to the extent of £16,000,000 in the first four months of the financial year. This shows the urgent need for economy in administration. I hope that honorable members supporting the Government will realize the position, and make a genuine effort to ensure economy.

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

– Would I be in order, Mr. Chairman, in moving an amendment to bring the exemption below £725 ?

Mr Latham:

– It would be useless for the honorable member to do so unless the rates bill-

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

– I am putting my question, not to the Leader of the Opposition, but to the Chairman.

– I do not know what set of conditions attaches to the teaching profession in Canberra, but that is not affected by this bill. If they do not receive the Canberra allowance now, they did not receive it when the right honorable gentleman was Treasurer. We cannot help what is done with the 8-j per cent. - we cannot deal with it - but the teachers are excluded from the tax imposed by the bill - the main point so far as they are concerned. There is a very clear distinction between the AuditorGeneral and the judges, who are protected by the Constitution, whereas the AuditorGeneral is not, although his salary is fixed by appropriation. I feel that none should be excluded, and I hope that the judges will follow the example set by the members of the Tariff Board who, because they were excluded, voluntarily offered to make the deduction themselves. The officer:? still with the Development and Migration Department will be subject to this bill. I think it will be found that there is a distinction between the daily allowances made in the Navy, and an annual allowance. The daily allowances are not for extra service rendered, but are really expenditures that are met specially. Therefore, they would be excluded by and not taxed under this bill.

Mr THOMPSON:
New England

– On the general proposal presented by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Latham) I did not think it necessary to say anything, because it was merely a proposal to leave to the Government practically a re-adjustment of the whole scheme for reducing the salaries of members and the civil servants. But the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Gregory) has come forward with something which is very much more definite. 1 think he has made his minimum a little too low, and I suggest to the Government, if it contemplates accepting the suggestion, that it would meet out evenhanded justice to all sections of the lowerpaid members of the civil service by making the minimum £300 instead of £250. The majority of men on £6 a week in the civil service are mostly married men with families, and they are, I think, entitled, for the present at all events, to whatever consideration this Parliament can extend to them. A salary of £6 a week is not excessive for a married man in the Civil Service. We have heard a good deal about an alleged reduction in the cost of living. It is largely mythical, I think, up to the present. I have no doubt it will come, but those who are putting it forward as an argument for a reduction of salaries are really counting their chickens before they are hatched; I want to see some of it. I have been looking very anxiously, and, I think, intelligently, for some sign of any reduction in the cost of living, but I must confess it has not been very conspicuous up to the present, except in. a few slight instances. I do not think that we can take it into serious consideration at this moment without acting harshly towards the lower-paid members of the civil service.

I have changed my views about the salary question since it came before this chamber last July. I then made it clear that I thought it was the duty of the Government and not of the Opposition to deal with the matter, and I indicated that, if the Government took action on the lines suggested, I would support it. The Government has now, in view of the changed circumstances, come to Parliament saying that it has decided to take the responsibility of reducing the salaries of members and Ministers practically to the extent suggested by members of the Opposition last July, and I support that proposal. In fact, if it had said that it would reduce salaries of members and Ministers to a greater extent I should have been one of those to cheerfully accept it, because I realize that the responsibility rests with the Government. It is not for honorable members to dictate what allowances shall be paid to members, because the Government has the responsibility of finding the money. When, however, we come to a proposal to tax salaries paid in the civil service, we open up a very big question indeed. I sympathize with the civil servants, and I totally disagree with that section of the public which is very fond of kicking them. My experience of civil servants, particularly the higher paid, is that they are very valuable assets to the country. The more highly paid they are the more valuable and the more responsible they become. I am grieved indeed that the Government has adopted a policy totally at variance with justice so far as the higher-paid civil servants are concerned. Many of these men have given their lives to training for the particular service they are performing. They are now being sacrificed on the altar of class consciousness. I do not think that that is desirable, and I am sorry indeed that the Government is making what is really a very cruel gesture so far as these higher-paid civil servants are concerned. That is plainly indicated by the monstrous proposal that the exemption mark shall be £725 per annum. I do not think that such clearcut evidence of class consciousness has ever been shown before in a British Parliament. I sympathize with all the members of the Public Service; they are doing their job well. But I particularly sympathize with the higher-paid men, who are really carrying on their shoulders the government of this country, as Ministers and members well know. They cannot very well be done without.

Mr Riordan:

– When a public servant dies his position is filled.

Mr THOMPSON:

– There is always another officer in training to fill a vacancy; but men cannot be taken from the street and placed in the positions that are filled by these higher-paid officers. Therefore, I do not think that any of them, not even the much maligned director of Posts and Telegraphs, Mr. H. P. Brown, is over-paid. That gentleman is administering one of the biggest businesses, probably, in the world, certainly in Australia. The latterday objection of members of the Labour party to the payment of high salaries is strange, in view of their former advocacy of proper remuneration for those who give their services to this country. As a matter of fact, Australia is not a high-wage country if we except the lower paid workers, because the remuneration of our highly skilled public servants and captains of industry is insignificant compared with that of persons occupying similar positions in Great Britain, the United States of America, and on the Continent of Europe.

I sincerely trust that, before the Government pushes this matter to an issue, it will give further consideration to it. It is preposterous that men who are receiving £10 or £12 a week should be exempt from this salary cut. I can hardly realize that the Government and its supporters should wish to push the proposal in its present form. I appeal to them, even at this late stage, to reconsider the whole matter.

Amendment negatived.

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

– I should like the Acting Treasurer (Mr. Lyons) to inform me whether Common wealth officials who are employed at Australia House, such as the official secretary and the financial adviser, will be subject to the provisions of this clause. If it is not intended that they shall be the clause ought to be amended to make them liable to the tax.

Mr LYONS:
Acting Treasurer · Wilmot · ALP

– There appears to be a slight doubt as to whether the officials mentioned by the honorable member for Cook (Mr. C. Riley) will be affected by the measure, although the intention is to include them.

Mr Latham:

– It will be a completely new principle of taxation.

Mr LYONS:

– The whole principle is new, Surely it is not desired that one section of the Public Service should be excluded because they happen to be filling positions elsewhere than in Australia

Mr Latham:

– Do they not pay taxes in the country where they live?

Mr LYONS:

– The intention is to include them. The matter will be reconsidered, and if there should be any serious doubt, the clause can be recommitted and amended accordingly.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 3 -

Subject to, and in accordance with, the previsions of this act, the income tax imposed by the Income Tax (Salaries) Act 1930 shall be levied and paid in respect of each payment of salary to every taxpayer on or after the first day of November, One thousand nine hundred, and thirty.

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

.- I regret that, owing to the manner in which the Opposition unduly prolonged the discussion on the financial proposals of the Govern ment-

Mr Latham:

– On a point of order, I submit that the Government Whip is imputing improper motives to the Opposition, and that the Chair should rule that he is not in order- in doing so. We are all anxious to adjourn; but if the imputation of the honorable member be not withdrawn the debate may be prolonged.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr McGrath:
BALLAARAT, VICTORIA

– 1 ask the honorable member for Cook (Mr. C. Riley) to withdraw the imputation.

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

– I withdraw it. I did not think that any honorable member could take exception to the statement that the Opposition unduly prolonged the discussion on the Government’s financial proposals, thereby necessitating the consideration of this measure three or more weeks later than the date on which it should have been considered. This clause provides for the deduction of the salary tax as from the 1st November last. Some time must elapse before the measure is finally disposed of. Therefore, the next pay-day of the public servants will have passed before the Treasury will have statutory authority to deduct the tax, and the first deduction will be made on a pay-day in the middle of December. To my mind that will inflict a great deal of hardship upon our public servants, because three deductions will then be made from the one pay. As only a small amour.t is involved - probably £5,000, or less, I suggest that, rather than be a party to retrospective taxation, the committee should alter the date of the commencement of the tax from the 1st November to the 1st December. A few years ago, when the present Opposition was in power, I opposed a taxation proposal which it was intended should operate retrospectively, and I am still opposed to making taxation of any kind or its remission retrospective. Our public servants are a fine, public-spirited body of men, and have subscribed hundreds of pounds monthly in Canberra for the relief of the unemployed. The amount involved is very small, but if an amendment is not made in the direction I have suggested, members of the Public Service will have to submit to a deduction covering three pay periods On a pay day falling within a short time before Christmas. In order to test the feeling of the committee, I move -

That the word “ November “ be omitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the word “ December “.

Mr LYONS:
Acting Treasurer · Wilmot · ALP

– When this measure was drafted it was anticipated that it would be passed earlier. .From inquiries made I find,’ as the honorable member for Cook (Mr. G. Riley) states, that by the time the bill, has passed another place it will be necessary to make deductions covering three pay days. As the amount involved will not be large, I accept the amendment.

Mr GREGORY:
Swan

.- I oppose the amendment. It is most extraordinary to find the honorable member for Cook objecting to retrospective legislation when the Government of which he is a supporter has introduced numerous tariff schedules imposing rates of duty which become operative from the date on which they were tabled, and which the representatives of the people have not yet had an opportunity to discuss. Taxation in the form of additional customs duties has been in operation for many months.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. McGrath).I ask the honorable member to confine his remarks to the clause.

Mr GREGORY:

– The taxation to be collected under this measure should amount to much more’ than the amount proposed, and in view of the necessity to reduce the cost of government in this country, particularly that of the Commonwealth Government, such an amendment should not be accepted. Parliament was not summoned early enough to discuss this and other important proposals. Delay occurred because the New South Wales elections were pending, and because of the dissension in caucus. The honorable member for Cook now objects to the discussion on this measure being unduly prolonged. I oppose the amendment.

Mr PROWSE:
Forrest

.-If the honorable member for Cook realized the position which will be confronting many of our primary producers during the approaching festive season, he would not put in a plea for public servants in receipt of regular incomes. In view of the necessity to raise all the revenue possible, the request is unreasonable. It is the duty of this committee to dispose of the bill as quickly as possible and to send it on to another place. The difficulty confronting a large section of the people is that they have not any money with which to pay their taxes, and in many cases are faced with bankruptcy. This is due to an absence of political vision and true statesmanship. I oppose the amendment.

Mr CROUCH:
Corangamite

– It is unreasonable to suggest that persons in receipt of over £60 a month cannot pay a tax of £9. Parliament should have been summoned earlier so that revenue from this source would now be coming in. Surely the honorable member for Cook does not suggest that persons in receipt of the salary I mentioned are not sufficiently thrifty to enable them to make payment of the amount due.

Dr EARLE PAGE:
Cowper

– If this amendment is carried honorable members will be regarded with contempt by the people of Australia. We should give a lead to the people of Australia, instead of standing shivering on the brink, afraid to put our feet into the cold water of reduction of our own salaries It is easy to say that this amendment has boon submitted in the interests of the public servants; but honorable members should remember that, if adopted, it will also benefit them.

Question - That the amendment (Mr. C. Riley’s) be agreed to - put. The committee divided. (Chairman - Mr. McGrath . )

AYES: 26

NOES: 19

Majority . . 7

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 4 -

This . Act shall not apply to -

b ) the salary, in any financial year com mencing on or after the first day of July, One thousand nine hundred and thirty, of any person who, in pursuance of an arrangement made for the purposes of economy, is, in that year, required to take leave without pay.

page 685

ADJOURNMENT

order of Business. - Postal Rates on School Exercises. - Queensland Sheep Entering New South Wales.

Motion (by Mr. Fenton) proposed -

That the House do now adjourn.

Mr LATHAM:
Kooyong

– I rise to inquire what business the Government proposes to transact to-morrow. We have been anticipating a discussion on the Income Tax Assessment Bill. On Friday last we had the announcement that either that the bill or the Income Tax Rates Bill is to be materially amended. The speech made by the Acting Treasurer (Mr. Lyons), in introducing the assessment bill, dealt rather with the rates than with the bill which he was introducing. There was, indeed, little in the Acting Treasurer’s speech which related to the bill before the House. If the Government proposes to introduce amendments, I ask that they be circulated well in advance of the discussion. At best, an income tax bill is difficult to understand. I also suggest that the Acting Treasurer should introduce the rates resolution at once, in order that we may have it before us when the hill is under discussion. The proposal to increase property rates by 71/2 per cent, already outlined by the Acting Treasurer, does not find a place in the bill we have before us. I suggest that the House should have before it the whole of the material prior to being asked to embark on a discussion involving an alteration of income taxation. 1 hope that the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Fenton) will indicate the nature of the business to be transacted to-morrow.

Mr RIORDAN:
Kennedy

.- I wish to bring before the House a matter of great importance to the people of Queensland - I refer to the increased postage rates on the tuition of children belonging to correspondence classes. In reply to a question to-day in regard to this subject, the Acting Treasurer said he would have inquiries made. It is not a matter which should occasion much delay in arriving at a decision. I should like to know who was responsible for imposing increased rates of postage on these lessons. I remind the House that the children affected are the children of parents who cannot afford to send them to centres where schools exist, or to engage tutors for them. The system of correspondence lessons, which was inaugurated in Queensland in 1922, enables children in the remotest parts of the Gulf and western, north-western, and central districts of Queensland to receive an education which otherwise they could not obtain. The classes started with an enrolment of 129 children; to-day more than 4,500 children are enrolled. The exercises are worked out by the children at home and sent to the department in Brisbane, where the examiners correct them, afterwards returning them with comments and advice. Because these comments are made, the Postal Department has recently decided to charge full letter rates on the exercises. Dealing with this matter the Brisbane Courier of the 20th November stated -

For the past seven or eight years the Correspondence School of the Department of Education, when returning corrected exercises to the children of the distant part of the State where schools are not available, have written useful remarks for the guidance of scholars. About a fortnight ago the Postal Department notified the Correspondence School authorities that such remarks must be paid for under the letter rate, as the department was losing revenue under the present arrangement. Since the notification was received the exercise has been returned corrected, but not annotated, pending a reconsideration of the matter by the Postal Department.

Surely there are other ways of effecting economies and balancing the budget than by placing additional handicaps on the education of these outback children. Already country residents suffer considerable inconvenience because of their distance from the centres of population. For instance, they are the people who will suffer most from the new additional duties on tea. They are unable to follow the advice to eat more fruit, or to drink more lemon squash; their only beverage is tea. It is time that there was a reorganization of the Postal Department. All its reforms appear to be directed against the outback dwellers. In many instances their mails have been cut down from a weekly to a fortnightly service. The correspondence classes to which I refer include children in the following districts : -

The system has been in operation for eight years, and has proved most successful. Many children who have not seen, the inside of a school have qualified through this correspondence course for entrance to secondary schools. This legislation was placed on the statutes of Queensland by a Labour government. It remained for the Commonwealth Labour Government to increase the postage rates on the mail matter despatched in connexion with the scheme. A large. number of teachers is employed in dealing with this correspondence. I wish to know who was responsible for increasing these rates, and why the matter was decided without reference to Parliament. The number of children affected by this decision exceeds 4,500, but the additional revenue received from this increase would be an inconsiderable factor in the finances of the department, and ^ should not be collected. The parents of many of these children could not possibly afford to send them to school. According to the latest report of the Queensland Department of Public Instruction, the children who receive this instruction are those of selectors, stockmen, boundary riders, grooms, fencers, carriers, timber-getters, fossickers, and, in fact, of all people who go out into the far outback away from even wireless communication, and certainly far from telegraphic and telephonic facilities. The Queensland Government is endeavouring to provide medical as well as educational facilities for these people, and I deeply resent the action of the Postal Department in increasing these postage rates. I feel so strongly on the matter that I intend to raise it every night on the motion for the adjournment of the House until the complaint has been remedied. To-day I received a telegram from the Winton Chamber of Commerce requesting me to ask the Government to remove the disability under which these children have been placed. I hope the Postmaster-General will be able to say to-morrow morning, at the latest, that the rates which ruled a fortnight ago will be restored.

Dr EARLE PAGE:
Cowper

– I associate myself with the protest made this afternoon by the honorable member for Oxley (Mr. Bayley), and repeated to-night by the honorable member for Kennedy (Mr. Riordan) against the increase in the postal rates on mail matter in connexion with the correspondence schools of Queensland. In view of the fact that every effort is being made by the State authorities to enable these children to obtain, at least, some education, it ill becomes the Commonwealth Government to place this obstacle in the way of the achievement of that laudable object. The policy of Australia is free and compulsory education, and the Commonwealth Parliament should not cause any departure from it. Enough money will be obtained, I might even say, robbed, from the teachers in Canberra, under the provisions of the bill we have been discussing this evening, to more than make up the difference in revenue between the old and new rates on’ this mail matter. I trust that the Postmaster-General will take immediate steps to remedy this complaint.

I understand that the Income Tax Assessment Bill is to be discussed tomorrow. I urge the Acting Treasurer to introduce the taxation rates motion immediately the House meets, and then allow the debate to be adjourned for at least 24 hours so that we may have an opportunity to understand the Government’s proposal. If such an adjournment is granted it might enable us to deal with this whole subject in one debate, whereas, if the introduction of the rates motion is delayed, it will, undoubtedly, cause two debates, and so occupy a great deal more of the time of Parliament than would otherwise be the case. The subject is difficult enough to deal with in any circumstances, and I, therefore, trust that the Government will give my suggestion favorable consideration.

Mr MARTENS:
Herbert

.- 1 associate myself with the protest of other honorable members against the increase in the postage rates on correspondence school mail matter. The children of the people who live on some of the islands on the Queensland coast are members of the correspondence school and they, in common with the children of the people far outback, will be seriously handicapped if the new rates remain in force. ‘ It is possible for some parents in these remote places to send their older children to a boarding school ; but unless children have already had the rudiments’ of education, they must be greatly handicapped. The itinerant system - of teaching in Queensland has done a great deal of good, but some places are so far removed from the centres of population that an itinerant teacher cannot visit them even twice a year. In such cases the correspondence school is of immense benefit to the children. As the honorable member for Kennedy (Mr. Riordan) has stated, the parents of most of the children affected are far from wealthy, and if it were not for this correspondence school their education would be limited to what their mothers could teach them, and there would be a great deal more illiteracy than at present. The Queensland Government has taken commendable steps to fit these children for the duties of life, and I hope that the Postmaster-General will not allow Mr. H. P. Brown, or any other postal official, to rob them of the meagre advantages that they may at present enjoy.

Mr MORGAN:
Darling Downs

– I also hope that the Government will remove the injustice that has been inflicted upon the children who live in the distant parts of a far-flung State like Queensland, by the increase in postal rates on correspondence school mail matter. This grievance should be remedied immediately.

I wish to bring another important matter under the notice of the Government. On the 18th November I asked the Minister for Health the following question : -

To what extent is the action of the New South Wales authorities, in imposing restrictions upon the entry of Queensland sheep into Kew South Wales, via Kyogle, for consumption in the northern river districts, an infringement of interstate free-trade and in violation of section 92 of the Constitution.

His reply was as follows : -

As sheep are recognized carriers of cattle tick, the movement into New South Wales of sheep from Queensland likely to carry red water tick is fraught with danger. The movement of such sheep has been subject to restrictions for many years. lt has been held by the Full Court that a State has the power to restrict the movement of stock likely to carry disease from another State. The restrictions in question are, therefore, not’ in contravention of the Constitution.

That was the official reply to my question. I do not think that the matter ought to be allowed to remain there. While the answer of the Minister was substantially correct, I desire to point out that sheep grown in Queensland rarely carry cattle tick, because they are born and bred far outside the tick infested areas of the State. Furthermore, the ticks carried are not pathogenic, and the eggs usually are infertile. Sheep could be procured from Queensland sale yards, or from the runs, without any risk. Having come from clean western stations to clean sheep yards, they could be accepted for immediate slaughter, or, as an alternative, dipping could be carried out, so that there would be no need to impose this restiction on trade. It seems to me that an attempt is being made to hold up this valuable interstate trade by means of what I can only describe as a wretched subterfuge. On the case as presented by the Minister it would appear that the quarantine laws are being used to defeat section 92 of the Constitution, which specifically provides for free and unrestricted trade between the States. I ask the Acting Prime Minister to see that the quarantine laws are not used to defeat this section.

M:r. BAYLEY (Oxley) [11.53]. - I am glad that I raised this matter of postage rates on school correspondence lessons, and I hope that, now that other members have spoken, the Minister will realize the seriousness of the position. These postal lessons mean a great deal to the children in outback districts. In the letter from which I quoted this morning the writer, referring to the comments which the teacher attached to lessons, said that he could not make such comments himself, as he had not had sufficient education, yet without them the lessons would be of little use. I realize that the increased charges have been imposed without the knowledge of the Postmaster-General, and I ask him to leave no stone .unturned - to see that the children of the far northern and western districts of Queensland are not denied the boon which has been enjoyed by the children of those districts for the last seven or eight years.

Mr LYONS:
Acting Treasurer · Wilmot · ALP

– The amendments to the Income Tax Salaries Bill have been circulated, as requested by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. La than). I have also promised the right honorable member for Cowper (Dr.. Page) that copies of the resolutions will be made available to honorable members opposite. I cannot bring them forward formally in the House, because they cannot be presented until the bills have been dealt with. It has also been arranged that the extra time asked for to consider these bills will be granted, and to enable this to be done the South Australian Bank Sill will be taken before the second taxation bill. la regard to the postal charges on correspondence lessons, it is not clear whether the difficulty has arisen through a wrong interpretation of regulations and the law, or whether the regulations and the law compel the increased charges. I have every sympathy with the representations of honorable members, and I know the good work, which is being done by the correspondence schools. As Minister for Education in Tasmania, I was associated with their work, and I would be the last one to hamper it in any way. If the trouble is due to misinterpretation of the regulations by some official it will be corrected, and if it is due to something inherent in the regulations, that also will be corrected as soon as it can be done. I think, however, that some honorable members who have been very vehement on this subject, might have given me a little time to make the necessary inquiries. I gave an assurance this morning that inquiries would be made, and I am in the habit of honoring the assurances I give. They might have extended me a little more consideration, especially as they must realize the amount of work which a Minister has to do.

Mr FENTON:
Acting Prime Minister · Maribyrnong · ALP

– The representations of the honorable member for Darling Downs (Mr. Morgan), regarding quarantine restrictions as they apply to sheep, will be brought under the notice of the Minister for Health, who will make inquiries.

Mr Latham:

– Will the Acting Prime Minister inform honorable members what the Government’s programme is for to-morrow i Are we to go on with the South Australian Grant Bill?

Mr FENTON:

– Yes.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned nt U.SS p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 25 November 1930, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1930/19301125_reps_12_127/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives25 November 1930

QUESTION

MALTING BARLEY

Mr M CAMERON:BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP; NAT from 1925; UAP from 1931

Mr FORDE:Assistant Minister assisting the Minister for Customs · CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND · ALP

QUESTION

CONVERSION LOAN

Dr EARLE PAGE:COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LYONS:Minister for Works and Railways · WILMOT, TASMANIA · ALP

Dr EARLE PAGE:

Mr SPEAKER:

Dr EARLE PAGE:

Mr LYONS:

QUESTION

PRIMARY CORRESPONDENCE SCHOOLS

Mr BAYLEY:OXLEY, QUEENSLAND

Mr LYONS:ALP

QUESTION

SYDNEY MEAT STRIKE

Mr R GREEN:RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr BEASLEY:Assistant Minister assisting the Minister for Industry · WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr MACKAY:LILLEY, QUEENSLAND

Mr FENTON:Minister for Trade and Customs · MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA · ALP

SUGAR INDUSTRY

QUESTION

REPATRIATION QF COAL-MINERS

Mr R GREEN:RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr BEASLEY:ALP

QUESTION

WIRELESS BROADCASTING

Mr LONG:LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LYONS:ALP

QUESTION

IMPORTS AND EXPORTS

Mr PRICE:BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr FORDE:ALP

QUESTION

HUME RESERVOIR

Mr JONES:INDI, VICTORIA

Mr LYONS:ALP

QUESTION

TRADE BALANCES

Mr WATKINS:NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr FENTON:ALP

QUESTION

GIPPSLAND OIL BORES

Mr A GREEN:KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

QUESTION

WHEAT INDUSTRY

Dr EARLE PAGE:

Mr FENTON:ALP

QUESTION

GOLD RESERVES

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

Mr LYONS:ALP

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH BANKRUPTCY ACT

Mr ELDRIDGE:MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr FENTON:ALP

QUESTION

WAR SERVICE HOMES

Mr CROUCH:CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA

Mr FORDE:ALP

QUESTION

OVERSEAS INVESTMENTS OF AUSTRALIAN COMPANIES

Mr LONG:

Mr LYONS:ALP

FRENCH’ COMPENSATION CHARGES

Thence; Rents

Mr CROUCH:

Mr A GREEN:KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH NOTES

Mr FENTON:ALP

QUESTION

RETURNED SOLDIER COUNSEL

Mr FENTON:ALP

QUESTION

INTEREST ON LOANS

Mr LYONS:ALP

House of Representatives
25 November 1930

Mr M CAMERON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP; NAT from 1925; UAP from 1931

Mr FORDE:
Assistant Minister assisting the Minister for Customs · CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND · ALP

Dr EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LYONS:
Minister for Works and Railways · WILMOT, TASMANIA · ALP

Mr BAYLEY:
OXLEY, QUEENSLAND

Mr LYONS:
ALP

Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr BEASLEY:
Assistant Minister assisting the Minister for Industry · WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr MACKAY:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND

Mr FENTON:
Minister for Trade and Customs · MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA · ALP

Mr R GREEN:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr BEASLEY:
ALP

Mr LONG:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LYONS:
ALP

Mr PRICE:
BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr FORDE:
ALP

Mr JONES:
INDI, VICTORIA

Mr LYONS:
ALP

Mr WATKINS:
NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr FENTON:
ALP

Mr A GREEN:
KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

Mr FENTON:
ALP

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

Mr LYONS:
ALP

Mr ELDRIDGE:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr FENTON:
ALP

Mr CROUCH:
CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA

Mr FORDE:
ALP

Mr LYONS:
ALP

Mr A GREEN:
KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

Mr FENTON:
ALP

Mr FENTON:
ALP

Mr LYONS:
ALP

Mr FENTON:
ALP

Mr FORDE:
ALP

Mr FORDE:
ALP

Mr LYONS:
Acting Treasurer · Wilmot · ALP

Mr GREGORY:
SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr LATHAM:
Kooyong

Mr SPEAKER (Hon Norman Makin:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

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

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

Mr NAIRN:
Perth

Mr MORGAN:
DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · NAT

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

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

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

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr McGrath:
BALLAARAT, VICTORIA

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

Mr MORGAN:
DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · NAT

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

Mr M CAMERON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP; NAT from 1925; UAP from 1931

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

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

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

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