House of Representatives
19 November 1935

14^th Parliament · 1^st Session

PRIVILEGE
HOUR OF MEETING
QUESTION
- AUSTRALIAN MEAT SHIPMENTS
QUESTION
- AUDITOR-GENERAL’S REPORT
QUESTION
- WHEAT INDUSTRY
SIR CHARLES KINGSFORD SMITH
QUESTION
- REPATRIATION
QUESTION
- DAIRYING INDUSTRY
QUESTION
- TRADE TREATIES
QUESTION
- ITALO-ABYSSINIAN DISPUTE
QUESTION
- S T AND ARDIZATION OF RAILWAY GAUGES
QUESTION
- MONETARY AND BANKING COMMISSION
PAPERS
ORANGE BOUNTY BILL 1935
- Third Reading
MEAT EXPORT CONTROL BILL 1935
INCOME TAX BILL 1935
WAR SERVICE HOMES BILL 1935
- Second Reading
ADJOURNMENT
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

Mr. Speaker (Hon. G. J. Bell)took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 1733

PRIVILEGE

Mr BRENNAN:
Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Commerce · Batman · UAP

– I vise to a question of privilege in connexion with a matter which I conceive to be an invasion of the privileges of Parliament. In order that the business of the House may be delayed as little as possible, I shall state it as succinctly as Ican. I propose to conclude by submitting a motion founded on the provisions of the Standing Orders of this House, and more specifically in the terms employed in the eleventh edition of Sir Erskine May’s Parliamentary Practice, particularly at pages 71 and 72, and generally elsewhere.

The matter arises out of two incidents which occurred in committee, one on the 7th November and theother on the 14thNovember last. It refers to the fiction of the Chairman ofCommittees (Mr. Prowse) in reflecting uponan honorable member improperly, in terms that are notin accordance with the facts, and in violation of the privileges of Parliament.

The short history of the matter is, thatlast Thursday evening the Chairman of Committees took certain disciplinary measures against an honorable member of this House. That honorable member in due course apologized. The Chairman of Committers then said-

I named an honorable member fromthis choir last week. He offered a humble apology, and its acceptance wasrecommended by the Chair, but that honorable member proceeded to impede the progress of business after his apology had been accepted.

Mr.Nairn. -Soyou did.

Mr.BRENNAN.- The latter part of that statement, referring as it does to me, is absolutely without even a scintilla of foundation.

Mr BRENNAN:

-I am aware, sir, of the popular fallacy well known to lawyers, that it is always safe to slander a person by innuendo so long as the name of that person is not mentioned. The words complained of could refer only to me. Having had the misfortune to be named in circumstances, as I think - well, I shall not refer to the circumstances having had the misfortune to bc named, a happening that rarely occurs to mo - twice only, I think, in a parliamentary experience of 25 years, I apologized, and the apology was accepted. In accordance with the practice, if not the settled rules and regulations of the House, and certainly in accordance with the good taste generally displayed by honorable members, the matter should never have been referred to again. I have said that there was not a scintilla of foundation or justification for the statement that I attempted to impede the progress of business after I had apologized. I may add, sir, that” the record bears me out in that assertion; nothing will be found in it to indicate the slightest disorder on my part. It is true, sir - and this is a very important point to be observed ‘by the uninitiated who interject, possibly by reason of want of knowledge and lack of experience in these matters - that I moved a motion, that motion being that the honorable member who was then addressing the Chair “ be not further heard “. I acted within my rights, I suggest, in moving that motion. I submitted it without any sign of disorder, and without employing any words other than were actually necessary. After I had apologized, until I submitted that motion I said and did nothing whatever. I submit that I was obviously within my rights, and that I acted in compliance with the Standing Orders, lt is worthy of mention, sir, that the Chairman of Committees, who has made this unfounded charge against me, accepted the motion without demur, and put it to the committee. It was divided upon, and I am happy to state that every member of the Opposition then in the chamber, including my leader, supported it. T am always prepared, as one must be, to submit to the discipline of this House, even though in my judgment, at any particular time, it may be arbitrarily or vindictively enforced. I am not alleging that it, has been, but am merely stating that I feel myself bound in any circumstances . to sui,mit to it. But I am not prepared to submit without protest to aspersions on my character which are unsupported by fact. I am not habitually, or even frequently, disorderly; and I am just as jealous of my reputation in this House, of which I have been a member for a much longer period than has the Chairman of Committees, as that honorable gentleman is of’ his; perhaps more. I; suggest that the revival of the matter at all was in bad taste, and against the practice of the House; but possibly that is a question for the Chairman to decide for himself. The real importance of the matter, sir, as it affects the House as a whole, is that the Chairman of Committees, having made a foundation of his unfounded charge against me, proceeded to lay it down as a canon of practice that in the future he would exercise greater discipline upon honorable members because of what I was .incorrectly alleged to have done. In that way the Chairman of Committees threatened to set up a stricter standard of conduct for honorable members generally. I now move -

That in tho opinion of this House, the Chairman of Committees, Mr. J. H. Prowse, on the 14th instant, offended against the privileges of the Parliament by reflecting from his place, as Chairman of Committees, on the conduct in Parliament of an honorable member in terms which were not in accordance with the facts nor on other grounds justifiable. 1 have to add -that, keenly as I feel this matter, if the honorable gentleman, who occupies a responsible position which requires him to maintain order in committee, will even now show such respect for order and for my good name as to rise in his place aud express regret and apologize to me - even though this motion will no longer bo within my disposal, but will be in the hands of the House - I shall be prepared to accept his apology with better grace than ‘he displayed when he accepted mine. Having said that, I leave the matter with the House, conscious that if 1 abuse my position by formulating a charge against the Chairman of Committees, I am answerable to this House, just as the honorable member is answerable. I have no fear, and I ask no favour in this matter.

Mr. BAKER (Griffith) [3.13.J.- I second tho mot-ion, which I hope will bo carried in the interests, not only of the

Opposition, but also of the Parliament as a whole, and for the protection of the rights of members. An examination of the Ilansard report of the proceedings of Parliament on the day to which reference has been made will show that the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) merely raised a number of points of order under the Standing Orders of this House. The honorable member has had many years of experience in this Parliament, and even those opposed to him politically must admit that during those years the honorable member has rendered valuable service to Australia and has always conducted himself decorously. Because of his long experience, and also of his legal knowledge, the honorable member for Batman is probably the best authority on the Standing Orders sitting on. this side of the House. It would be no exaggeration to say that he is more conversant with the Standing Orders than axe most of the members supporting the Government. A most unfortunate state of affairs will arise if members are to be castigated for having taken action which they believed to be in the best interests of the House. The incident to which reference was made by the Chairman of Committees, in the absence of the lion oracle member for Batman, was thought to he closed. Hansard records that the speech of the honorable member for Batman was largely a series of extracts from various standing orders, and I am as yet unaware of any standing order which provides that the reading of a standing order is out of order. Standing Order 262bc reads -

A motion without notice may be made that a member who is speaking “be not further heard “ and such question shall he put forthwith and decided without amendment or debate.

I submit that any honorable member may, at any time while the House is sitting, move that motion, irrespective of whether or not he has previously been admonished by the Chair. In the interests of the Parliament, which is the highest court in the land, in order to safeguard the privileges of its members, all honorable members, irrespective of their party political differences, Should support the motion.

Mr PROWSE:
Forrest

.- In speaking to this motion, I am somewhat at a disadvantage, inasmuch as the honorable member far Batman (Mr. Brennan) did not intimate to me that he intended to raise a matter of privilege.

Mr Brennan:

– I did not wait until the honorable member had left Canberra.

Mr. PROWSE. Honorable members who were present in the committee when the incident, to which reference has been made, took place will realize that the mover of the motion now before the House has not stated the position correctly. There was nothing splenetic in my reference to a previous incident. I had’ named another honorable member, who thereupon sought to offer an apology and escape the censure of the committee. In accepting .his apology, I informed the committee that it would not be wise to make a practice of allowing a member to escape punishment when he had gone to such lengths as to justify his -being named. I also intimated that the immediate past Speaker of this House had made it clear that, w’hen he named a member, there could be no escape from the consequences. I did not wish it to be understood that the Chair could exercise leniency to the extent of sacrificing the dignity of the committee. I did not mention the honorable member for Batman, and I do not think that I said more than was within the knowledge of all members who had been present in the committee and had seen what really happened on the earlier occasion. In order to give strength to my remarks, I referred to “ an honorable member “ who had been named the previous week. The honorable member for Batman now says that he merely moved “ That the -honorable member for Barker (Mr. Archie Cameron) be not further heard.” The Chair, as well as those honorable members who were present at the time, know that that was not all the honorable member did. I suggest that, had I acted strictly in accordance with the Standing Orders, I could have named the honorable member again. I shall say no more at the moment except that I was very sincere in what I said at the time. My only object was to carry out my duty as Chairman of Committees, an honour which this House has conferred upon me, and to maintain the dignity of the Chair. The honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) knows, as all other honorable members know, that, according to the

Standing Orders, all interjections are disorderly. In fact, on that particular occasion, he drew attention to Standing Order 58, which sets out, in effect, ‘that all interjections are disorderly, yet proceeded to castigate the Chair along the lines indicated and to make disorderly interjections; I thereupon named him under the very Standing Order to which he himself drew my attention. I am quite content to leave my position in this matter rest in the hands of honorable members.

Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra

.- I do not propose to say much on this matter; indeed, I will not touch at all on the incident which occurred prior to the naming of the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan), in respect of the conduct of either the honorable member or the Chairman of Committees. However, I emphasize that it is not correct to say that the honorable member for Batman, after apologizing to the Chair, did anything disorderly in committee. In this respect I think the memory of the Chairman of Committees is at fault. I pride myself on having an accurate memory. I was present at that particular time, and I challenge the Chairman of Committees, or any one, to indicate a single sentence which the honorable member for Batman uttered at that stage of the proceedings, that would justly bring down upon his head the charge which has been made. I say nothing whatever regarding the incident that occurred before the honorable member was named. I say that after his apology was accepted >the honorable member for Batman uttered no words beyond those contained in the motion which he moved: “That the member for Barker be not further heard”. I am prepared to stake my reputation that what I have said is the truth.

Mr LYONS:
Prime Minister · Wilmot · UAP

– Like most honorable members I was not aware that this matter was to be raised. A short time before the House met I was given to understand that some question of privilege would be raised, but had no knowledge whatever of its nature. “We cannot settle this matter on party lines. It should be considered on its merits. I feel sure, however, that debate at this juncture ‘would not bring out the actual facts, because a number of honorable members now present were, like myself, absent at the time the incident occurred. I suggest that this debate should be adjourned. Such a course would give honorable members more time for reflection and to examine the actual facts associated with this matter, and would not prevent this discussion being continued at a later date. I move -

That the debate be now adjourned.

Mr SPEAKER:

– The relevant standing orders are -

Speaking “ To Order “ or Privilege. 283. Any Member may rise to speak “ to order or upon a matter of Privilege suddenly arising.

Precedence to Question of Order or Privilege. 284. All questions of Order and matters of Privilege at any time arising shall, until decided, suspend the consideration and decision of every other question.

On previous occasions the question has been raised in this House whether a debate on a motion of privilege can be adjourned, and there have been instances where such debates have been adjourned. However, in view of the Standing Orders which I have just read, and which cannot very well be misunderstood, I am of the opinion that leave of the House should be given to submit the motion.

Leave granted; motion agreed to, debated adjourned.

page 1736

HOUR OF MEETING

Motion (by Mr. Lyons) agreed to -

That the House at its rising, adjourn until 2.30 p.m. to-morrow.

page 1736

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN MEAT SHIPMENTS

Mr E F HARRISON:
BENDIGO, VICTORIA · UAP

– Has the attention of the Minister for Commerce been drawn to statements of the honorable member for Indi (Mr. Hutchinson), to the effect that methods of marketing Australian meat in England urgently need to be improved, that it was a depressing experience for him to see Australian meat alongside Argentine meat in the Smithfield market, that some Australian chilled meat was far below the standard quality, and that complaints were received from buyers concerning the variation of quality of Australian mutton and lamb? If so, Joes the Assistant Minister consider that these remarks con- firm the statement of Sir Stanley Argyle on the same matter, or the Minister’s own recent observations in England? If necessary will the department take steps to rectify this position?

Mr THORBY:
Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Commerce · CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– In the absence of the Minister my attention was directed to the statement of the honorable member for Indi as reported in the press. I am not in a position to say whether or not the honorable member has been correctly reported, but his remarks do not agree with my opinion on the matters referred to following my observations of methods of marketing of Australian meat in the United Kingdom. Criticism may be justified in isolated cases, but speaking generally it cannot be applied to conditions in the Smithfield market as a whole.

Mr CLARK:
DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the Minister seen the reported statement of Mr. A. Gray, a retired grazier of central Queensland, on his return from England yesterday than ‘’ On delivery at one of the biggestmarkets wc saw meat dumped on the pavement outside”? Has the Minister’s attention also been drawn to a statement by Mr. Gray that lie was disgusted at the way Australian mutton was unloaded at Southhampton? Will the Minister inquire into the truth of these statements?

Mr THORBY:

– My attention has been directed to Mr. Gray’s statement, but I cannot say whether or not his remarks were correctly reported. The statement which appears in the press is, in my opinion, not correct. I saw Australian mutton unloaded at various ports of England and went to some trouble to inquire into the methods in vogue. On more than one occasion I complimented the shipping authorities upon the manner in which they handled Australian produce upon its arrival in England.

page 1737

QUESTION

AUDITOR-GENERAL’S REPORT

Statement Regarding Pensioners

Mr HAWKER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– I ask the Treasurer whether the Government has specifically considered the allegations in the AuditorGeneral’s report reflecting upon the worthiness of certain people in receipt of invalid and old-age pensions, and whether it, is the intention of the Government .to institute an inquiry of any kind in order to ascertain whether the administration of the Pensions Act, or the act itself, needs overhaul ting to prevent abuses of our pensions system?

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · CORIO, VICTORIA · UAP

– I have read nothing in the report of the Auditor-General in the way of evidence to lead me to believe that any special inquiry is necessary into our pensions system. The existing methods of inquiry, investigation and checking are quite adequate to protect the revenue.

page 1737

QUESTION

WHEAT INDUSTRY

Mr LAZZARINI:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Minister representing the Minister for CoInmerce whether the plan agreed to at the recent conference to bring into effect a home-consumption price for wheat will be implemented in time to apply to the coming wheat harvest? If not, will the honorable member indicate what means, if any, will be adopted to assist the wheat-growers in connexion with the approaching harvest?

Mr THORBY:
CP

– A full reply to a similar question has already been furnished to the Leader of the Opposition.

Mr GREGORY:
SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– In view of the fact that I received a reply to a telegram I sent to a member of the Parliament of Western Australia urging the need for expedition in connexion with the introduction of legislation to deal with thecoming wheat harvest, to the effect that no action was being taken in Western Australia pending a decision by the Commonwealth, I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Commerce, whether he is aware of any hesitation on the part of the Government of Western Australia to introduce legislation to implement the plan agreed to at the recent conference, or of any decision required by the Commonwealth, before legislation can be dealt with by the State Parliaments?

Mr THORBY:

– The Department of Commerce has no definite information from Western Australia on this subject. Legislation has already been introduced in the Parliaments of Queensland and New South Wales to implement the plan agreed upon, and an assurance has been received that similar legislation will be introduced, in the Victorian Parliament without delay. The Commonwealth Government has already submitted its measure to this House.

page 1738

SIR CHARLES KINGSFORD SMITH

Mr LYONS:
Prime Minister · Wilmot · UAP

– by leave - I desire to inform honorable members that a wireless message was received last night from Air-Commodore Sydney Smith, Air Officer Commanding at Singapore, expressing the opinion that further air search for Sir Charles Kingsford Smith and Mr. Pethybridge is not likely to be of value. Two Royal Air Force flying bouts and nine bomber aircraft have been employed continuously during the past ten days on this duty, and Qantas aircraft and an aeroplane piloted by Mr. Melrose have also assisted on various days. All possible courses between Rangoon and Singapore, including all islands off the west coast of Malaya, have been thoroughly searched many times, and many nights have been made over the jungle areas. In these circumstances, the Government has regretfully been forced to agree with Air-Commodore Smith that no useful object would now be served in sending any special aircraft from Australia to take part in the search. Air-Commodore Smith has informed the Government that hs proposes to continue the ground search organization in the difficult country for a further period as he considers that this method is more likely to yield results. The Qantas reserve aircraft at Singapore will be placed at his disposal to aid ground parties or to perform any other special duty on which it would usefully be employed.

The following message is being despatched to-day to Air-Commodore Smith : -

On behalf of people of Australia, Commonwealth Government desire to express their grateful thanks for the magnificent work carried out under difficult conditions by members of the Boya I Air Force under your command, in search for Sir Charles Kingsford Smith and Mr. Pethybridge, and for the sympathetic interest yon personally have shown in meeting the Government’s wishes and in organizing tho comprehensive air and ground searches that have been undertaken in the past ten days. As all likely areas and possible courses have now been covered so thoroughly, the Commonwealth Government with great regret, agree your view that further searches by Royal Air Force aircraft would serve no useful purpose. They are grateful, however, .that you propose continuing ground search organization for a further period and trust that your efforts will meet with success. Qantas reserve aircraft will be available you for any special duty on which it could usefully be employed.

page 1739

QUESTION

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Defence Act - Regulations Amended - Statutory Rules 1935, No. 109.

Naval Defence Act - Regulations Amended - Statutory Rules 1935, No. 110.

Navigation Act - Regulations Amended, &c. -Statutory Rules 1935, Nos. 107, 108.

page 1739

ORANGE BOUNTY BILL 1935

Third Reading

Motion (by Mr. Thorby) proposed -

That the bill be now read a third time.

Mr CURTIN:
Fremantle

.- In all probability this bill would have been disposed of on Friday afternoon but for what I can only describe as an unfortunate proceeding on the part of the Minister for Defence (Mr. Parkhill) at the moment in charge of the House. Across the table he gave me the definite assurance that, after the honorable member for Hunter (Mr. James), who had been discussing a proposed amendment which, from the viewpoint of the Opposition, involved a matter of principle, had resumed his seat he would immediately report progress. But, instead of doing so, he did not rise at all. The Chairman immediately put the proposed amendment, and I was the only member present who supported it. The honorable member for Hunter on concluding his remarks had left the chamber. As there was only one “Aye “ there was no division, although honorable members on this side desired that the amendment should be divided upon. Had it not been for the definite statement of the Minister for Defence that he would report progress immediately the honorable member for Hunter resumed his seat, I would have directed the attention of the Chairman to the state of the committee, the committee would ha’ve been counted out, and the bill wouldhave lapsed.

Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. G. J. Bell).The honorable member is not in order in saying that the committee would have been counted out.

Mr CURTIN:

– I amend my remarks by saying that it may have been. It was to avoid that possibility that the Minister for Defence had agreed to report progress. Subsequently after the House had ad journed, ho made an explanation to me. which I had hoped he would have made in the House to-day. I express great regret that, owing to the failure of the Minister to honour his undertaking, my party was deprived of an opportunity to divide the committee on the amendment moved by the honorable member for Hunter.

Mr LYONS:
Prime Minister · WILMOT, TASMANIA · ALP; UAP from 1931

– I regret that there has been any misunderstanding in regard to the matter. I was not present in the Committee at the time, and the Minister for Defence (Mr. Parkhill) was in charge. But there must have been some misunderstanding of the situation on his part, because honorable members on both sides recognize that whenever that Minister gives an undertaking he invariably carries it out. I shall bring the remarks of the Loader of the Opposition under the notice of the Minister for Defence who, no doubt, will explain the position from his point of view.

Mr JAMES:
Hunter

– I also wish to enter a protest against the procedure followed by the Minister for Defence (Mr. Parkhill), more particularly because it was my amendment that was under discussion at the time. Immediately I had finished speaking to the amendment I was called out of the House. It is difficult to escape the conclusion that something was put over the Opposition by the Minister, and it has placed me in an unfortunate position.

Mr Lyons:

– I rise to a point of order. The honorable member has suggested that the Minister for Defence, who is not even here to reply, “ put something over “ the Opposition. I ask that the honorable member be requested to withdraw those words.

Mr SPEAKER:

– The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Curtin) has told the House the reasons why he objected to the third reading of the bill being taken on the last day of the sitting, and he was in order in his remarks. The honorable member for Hunter (Mr. James) has gone much further, and has stated that the Minister who was in charge of the House at the time his amendment was discussed, “ put something over “ the Opposition. That remark was out of order, and the Prime Minister (Mr. Lyons) has asked that it be withdrawn. I must request the honorable member to withdraw it.

Mr JAMES:

– I withdraw the statement. I did not intend to convey the impression that the Minister for Defence had deliberately put something over the Opposition, but I could not help thinking, having regard to the general laughter from Government supporters

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order !

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a third time.

page 1740

MEAT EXPORT CONTROL BILL 1935

Bill returned from the Senate with amendments.

In committee (Consideration of Senate’s amendments) :

Clause 5 -

1 ) For the purposes of this act, there shall be an Australian Meat Board.

The members appointed to represent publicly-owned abattoirs and freezing works which deal with meat for export shall be the persons for the time being holding the following positions: -

The Metropolitan Meat Industry Commissioner in the State of New South Wales;

The Chairman, Queensland Meat Industry Board ;

The General Manager, Government Produce Department, State of South Australia;

The General Manager, Western Australian Government Meat Works, Wyndham.

Senate’s amendment -

Omit sub-clause 10, insert the following new sub-clause : - “ (10) The members appointed to represent publicly-owned abattoirs and freezing works which deal with meat for export shall be -

General Manager, Government Produce Department, State of South Australia, or in the event of that person ceasing to hold that position or ceasing in pursuance of this section to hold office as a member of the board, such person as is appointed by the Governor-General on the nomination of the Metropolitan and Export Abattoirs Board, in the State of South Australia;

Each member shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor-General.”

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

– I move -

That the amendment be agreed to.

The amendment will not have the effect of providing any additional representation on the hoard. Its effect is that the person at present holding the position of manager of the Government Produce Department in South Australia will represent that State on the board, but, in the event of his resigning or ceasing to hold the position, his successor shall bo the person nominated by the Metropolitan and Export Abattoirs Board in the State of South Australia.

Mr Rosevear:

– In the event of tha Governor-General dismissing a member of theboard nominated in the manner provided in this sub-clause, how will his place be filled? Although he may be dismissed from the board, he may still occupy his former position underthe State authority.

Mr THORBY:

– The bill provides that the Minister may appoint a person to fill any vacancy.

Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley

.- Instead of making the position more definite, the Senate’s amendment, in certain circumstances, makes it more difficult. Sub-clause 10 ofthe bill clearly states that the members appointed to represent publicly-owned abattoirs and freezing works on the Commonwealth Meat Export Control Board “ shall be the persons for the time being holding the following positions : “. Then follows the list of specified positions which entitle certain persons to membership of theboard. The sub-clause, as worded when it left the House of Representatives, is open to the same difficulties as I can foresee in. the amendment. Each of the specified persons is to he the nominee and the appointee of the various bodies mentioned. Sub-clause 15 of clause 5 reads -

Members of the board, other than the Goverment representative, may be removed from office by the Governor-General on the recommendation of the board.

If, in exercise of that authority, the Governor-General decided to dispense with the services on the board of say, the Metropolitan Meat Industry Commissioner in New South Wales and the Government of New South Wales failed to make a change in the occupancy of the position of its meat commissioner, the State of New South Wales would remain unrepresented on the board. It means that there are “two conflicting authorities. In the first place, the meat commissioner is the servant of the State Government, but the periodof his office as a member of the Meat Board will also be subject to the determination of the GovernorGeneral. In one sub-clause, the bill gives power of dismissal to the GovernorGeneral, but another sub-clause limits the personnel of the board to specific persons. There is no power to appoint a successor to any State representative discharged from the service of the Meat Export Control Board.

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

– The honorable member has directed attention to something that possibly could happen but it is very improbable that it would. The question that has been raised is what would be done to replace a representative of an institution who might happen to be dismissed from the board, but I do not doubt that, if such a thing happened, reference would be made back to the State authorities of the offence or neglect which was considered sufficient to justify his removal from the board. In all probability, the offence or neglect would be sufficient to justify his removal from his position in the State Service. Unless, however, there were very sound reasons for removing a representative of the description cited, no action would be taken to declare a seat vacant. If it did happen, however, under sub-clause 16 of clause 5, the Governor-General has power to nominate some one else to fill the position for the balance of the terra for which the discharged officer had been appointed. That sub-clause provides -

On tho occurrence of any vacancy in the membership of the board by reason of the death, resignation or removal from office of any member (other than a member holding one of the positions specified in sub-section (10.) of this section) the Governor-General may appoint a person to fill the vacancy, and any parson so appointed (other .than the Government Representative) shall hold office for the residue of the term of the member whose place became vacant:

Provided that where the member whose place became vacant was appointed upon the nomination of any body of persons or any association, the person appointed to fill the vacancy shall, subject to sub-section (13.) of this section, be appointed upon the nomination of that body of persons or that association.

Mr RIORDAN:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP; FLP from 1931

– Some persons may consider that he is the best authority in the Commonwealth on beef export, but I differ from thorn. Associated with the Ministers who attended the meat conference in London was the chairman of the Queensland Meat Industry Board, and he was prominent throughout the negotiations regarding chilled meat. He established the organization provided in Queensland for the control of the industry, and has directed his attention to the improvement of the lot of stockproducers in that State. Therefore, the majority of the meat producers in Queensland would hold a different view from that ofthose in South Australia as to the highest meat authority in the Commonwealth. In the event of Mr. Pope ceasing to be a member of the board, why should the nomination to fill the vacancy be made by a body in South Australia? There appears to bo a set of special circumstances in South Australia which the Minister has not explained to the committee, but with which, I am sure, the honorable member for Wakefield (Mr. Hawker), who moved the amendment, is familiar. I should therefore like to hear the opinion of that honorable member on the amendment made by the Senate.

Mr HAWKER:
Wakefield

.- Until quite recently the freezing works at Port Adelaide was a section of the Government Produce Department, of which Mr. Pope is the general manager. The Government Produce Department not only bought livestock on its own account and had them slaughtered and exported, but also slaughtered stock on behalf of a number of private exporters. Recently, however, the constitution of Municipal Abattoirs was altered by act of Parliament and they were combined with the freezing works under one management. Mr. Pope then ceased to be the manager of the export freezing works at Port Adelaide, which handles the bulk of the slaughtering and freezing of meat for export, but his department still retained control of the much smaller government freezing works at Port Lincoln. In my opinion he is the most acceptable man to represent the slaughtering and export interests of South Australia on the Australian Meat Export Control Board, but his department, although it has some interest in the control and supervision of meat for export wherever it is slaughtered, no longer has the management of the big freezing plant atPort Adelaide. I do not know who will be. the successor of Mr. Pope. Actually, it is now more directly concerned with dairy produce and fruit than with meat. In view of these circumstances I moved an amendment to provide that after Mr. Pope ceased to be manager of the Government Produce Department his successor to that office should not automatically replace him on the Australian Meat Export Control Board, but that the representative of the slaughtering and freezing interests in South Australia on that board should be nominated by the Abattoirs and Export Board. The chairman of this concern is appointed by the State Government, while half of the representatives are elected by the producers, butchers, and other sections of the export and local meat trade, and the other half by the consumers. A person chosen by that board would better represent the killing interests of South Australia than would the manager of the Government Produce Department, whoever he might be at that time. The amendment inserted by the Senate is intended to clarify that position. The provision for the GovernorGeneral to remove members of the Export Control Board on the recommendation of the board is designed to safeguard the position that the board will be absolutely controlled by British and Australian interests. Although the phrasing might not be particularly plain, it is just as well to retain the provision providing for an alteration of the membership of the board on the recommendation of the board by the action of the GovernorGeneral.

Mr BERNARD CORSER:
.Wide Bay

– I supported the amendment when it was previously considered by the committee. It has not altered the intention of the act in any way; nor has the amendment to that amendment, suggested by the Senate, which is merely a verbal one to make the position clearer. The original intention of the measure was to give the processing industry in each State a representative. Thus, the meat-works of Queensland are represented by the chairman of the Meat Industry Board; the commissioner controlling the metropolitan meat industry is the representative of the Government of New South Wales; and the general manager of the Wyndham meat-works becomes a member of the board on behalf of the Government of Western Australia. The Senate has not amended that representation. But the circumstances in South Australia are peculiar. The representative provided for in the bill happens to be the general manager of the Government Produce Department. I agree with the reason which actuated the honorable member for Wakefield (Mr. Hawker) in moving his amendment. Mr. Pope is an authority with regard to meatnegotiations and is generally recognized by the industry as being an outstanding man in the trade; but the honorable member for Wakefield, foreseeing the apparent danger of a future general manager of the Produce Department knowing nothing about the subject of the export of beef, suggested that, after the retirement of Mr. Pope, the Metropolitan and Export Abattoirs Board, as in the other States, should have the right to nominate a person to the vacancy. The effect of the Senate’s amendment is to make the provision more elastic as regards the choice of a representative after Mr. Pope relinquishes the office. The honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear) lias raised an interesting matter, which the Senate might have been much better employed in endeavouring to clarify instead of devoting its attention to the amendment of the honorable member for Wakefield, inasmuch as no provision is made for the appointment to the board of any person appointed to fill one of the positions mentioned in sub-clause 10, who has been removed from office by the Governor-General. The Minister has suggested that the difficulty may be covered by sub-clause 13 of clause 5, which gives the Governor-General power to make an appointment when no nomination has been received. Clause 6 provides that the board shall be a body corporate with perpetual succession, but it will not have perpetual succession if a member of the Meat Export Control Board does not represent one of the State meat exporting interests. There does not appear to be anything in the bill to ensure that continuity of State representation of meat exporting industries which is contemplated in clause 6.

Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley

.- I think that tlie difficulty can be overcome by amending the clause on similar lines to that suggested in the case of South Australia.

Mr THORBY:

– An amendment has been drafted which, I think, will overcome the difficulty mentioned by the honorable member.

Mr ROSEVEAR:

– I suggest the in- <sertion of a further paragraph c, to read -

In the event of any of the foregoing representatives being removed from the board and still retaining their position with any boards or freezing works, those in charge of such boards or freezing works shall have the right to nominate a successor for the remainder of the term.

In the case of South Australia, it is provided that the person holding a certain position at the commencement of this act, shall be a member of the board, but when he ceases to occupy that position another body shall have the power to nominate his successor. South Australia is the only State to have that privilege. The wording of the clause is clear. Persons holding certain specified positions within a State are to be appointed as members of the board, but if removed from office by the Governor-General on the recommendation of the board, they may still retain their respective positions in the States, and there is no machinery whereby they can be replaced. The Meat Export Control Board may recommend the removal from the board of the representative of New South Wales, but the Government of New South Wales may say that it still proposes to retain him as the Metropolitan Meat Industry Commissioner in New South Wales. There would thus be conflict of opinion between the two authorities. If the bill is allowed to pass in its present form, and provision similar to that made in respect of South Australia is not made in connexion with the other States, one State may be entirely disfranchised, because of difference of opinion between the Export Board and the authority employing a particular commissioner. The Minister suggested that the position could be overcome by some other person being appointed by the Governor-General. But, according to the bill, nobody can represent New South Wales on the Meat Export Control Board who is not the person who for the time being holds the position of Metropolitan Meat Industry Commissioner in New South Wales. No other person would have any more right to sit on the board than I would have, because only specified individuals are to have the right to represent specified State instrumentalities. I do not know whether the amendment proposed to be moved by the Assistant Minister (Mr. Thorby) is preferable to mine, but I do not wish a position to arise whereby a representative of a. certain State may be removed from the board and there is no power under the act to replace him.

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

– As I misread the clause, the explanation which I firstgave was inaccurate. The possibility of a. position arising such as that mentioned by the honorable member for Dalley (Mr.Rosevear) is very remote, but at the same time it could arise. The member representing the Metropolitan Meat Industry of New South Wales could be removed from the Meat Export Control Board, and there is no provision in the bill, as it is framed at present, to appoint a successor. In order to overcome that difficulty, I propose to move that at the end of para graphs a, b and d the following words be added : -

At the end of paragraph a, “ or in the event of that person ceasing in pursuance of this section to holdoffice as amember of the board, such person as is appointed by the Governor-General on the nomination of the Governor in Council of that State.

At the end of paragraphb - “ or in the event of that person ceasing in pursuance of this section to hold office as a member of the board, such person as is appointed by the GovernorGeneral on the nomination of the Governor in Council of the State of Queensland “.

At the end of paragraph d - “ or in the event of that person ceasing in pursuance of this section to holdoffice as a. member of the board such person as is appointed by the Governor-General on the nomination ofthe Governor in Council of the State of Western Australia “.

Paragraph c, referring to the position in South Australia, is already provided for. This amendment of the Senate’s amendment would overcome the possibility of any doubt arising as to the appointment of successors.

Mr.Blackburn. - Is it not necessary to omit the words, “each member shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor-General ?

Mr THORBY:

– Offhand , I should say that that is unnecessary.

Mr Baker:

– Sub-clause 15 deals with that point.

Mr THORBY:

Mr.Rosevear. - Suppose that the State government nominated a man who hadbeen removed from the board ?

Mr THORBY:

– That would be its responsibility. In all probability, such a nomination would not be accepted, and the vacancy would continue until a person acceptable to the Governor-General had been nominated. Such a vacancy would not affect the validity of any action taken by the board.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Prowse).So that the matter may be placed in proper form, I suggest that the Minister obtain leave to withdraw his motion “ That the Senate’s amendment be agreed to “ and then move his amendment.

Motion - by leave - withdrawn.

Mr THORBY:

– I now move-

That the Senate’s amendment be amended by adding at the end of paragraph (re) the following words: - “or in the event of that person ceasing, in pursuance of this section, to hold office as a member of the board, such person as is appointed by the Governor-General on the nomination of the Governor-in-Council of that State.”

Mr BAKER:
Griffith

.- It would seem that at last the position is being clarified. The point raised by the honorable member for Dalley (Mr.Rosevear) relates to a (matter that obviously was in need of correction, and it is remarkable that it passed unnoticed both in this chamber and in the Senate. But for the amendments made by the Senate, the matter would not have come again before honorable members. It would appear on the surface that the action now being taken by the Minister will meet the position. I point out, however, that there is a great deal of verbiage, of the meaning of which it is obviously impossible for honorable members to have a correct appreciation. Therefore, in order to make sure that we shall not become more involved, I suggest that the Minister have typewritten copies of the amendments placed in the hands of honorable members, or at least present those amendments in such a way that we may properly understand them. I revert to a point that I raised by way of interjection. The proposal of the Senate provides that each member appointed to represent publicly-owned abattoirs and freezing works dealing with meat for export shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor-General. That is similar to the provision which relates to the representative of the Commonwealth Government. But sub-clause 15 of clause 5 provides that members other than the government representative may be removed from office by the Governor-General, on the recommendation of the board. It would seem to me that the provision that each member shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor-General could, with wisdom, be deleted, and that sub-clause 15 should be altered to read “ Members of the board other than the government representative, may be removed from office by the Governor-General on the recommendation of theboard, or for any other reason.” The provision for the easy removal of publicly-appointed individuals, while other members can be removed only on the recommendation of the board, is inexplicable. As the board is being appointed for the benefit of the community as a whole, and not for the particular benefit of any institution, I suggest that full power be given for the removal of any member of it by the Govern or-General .

Mr CLARK:
Darling

.- I draw attention to the position that is now being created. The suggestions of the honorable member for Dalley (Mr.Rosevear) are more in keeping with the principles ofthe bill. As the honorable member for Ballarat (Mr. Fisken) has pointed out, the intention was that this board should represent primarily the producers in the industry, and that the members appointed under the provisions of sub-clause 10 should represent publiclyowned abattoirs and freezing works. If an amendment similar to that now before the committee is proposed in relation to South Australia, the Governor in Council of that State would be given the right to nominate a representative to the Governor-General in Council. That State might adopt a collective policy of marketing, and because of conflict ‘between the State and Commonwealth Governments, the Commonwealth authorities might see fit to remove the State representative from the ‘board. Thus, instead of having true representatives of publicly-owned companies, who would watch the interests of the producers, the men appointed might represent the exporters. I foresee the possibility of the meatexporting trade being controlled by big interests such as Vestey’s or Swift’s. If we make provision whereby the persons to be appointed to the board may be other than the nominees of the producers, there will be a danger that men representing the big exporting and exploiting companies will be appointed to the board.

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister · Calare · CP

– My amendment provides that, in the event of the person mentioned in the paragraph being removed from office, his successor shall be nominated by the Government of the State of New South Wales. It makes provision for a most unlikely happening and is almost identical with the proposal of the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear). As my amendment has been drafted by the parliamentary draftsman to conform to the provisions of the bill no anomaly should arise. I therefore urge honorable members to accept it.

Mr BERNARD CORSER:
Wide Bay

– The amendment of the Assistant Minister (Mr. Thorby), although, overcoming one anomaly, alters the mode of selection in that it gives to each State Government the right to nominate two members to the board. I do not feel disposed to support it. I suggest that provision be made for each of the bodies referred to in the proposed new subclause (10) to nominate the successor to its representative should he be removed from office. In paragraph a I suggest that the words “ or a nominee of the commission “ be added, with a similar suitable addition to paragraphs b, c and ti, so that in each case the person to be appointed shall be a nominee of the body mentioned therein. My suggestion would overcome the difficulty which has arisen and provide for continuity of control.

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister · Calare · CP

– The honorable member for Wide Bay (Mr. Corser) seeks to retain the right of the various bodies mentioned in the proposed new sub-clause to direct representation on the board. The provision will come into operation only in the event of any of the persons mentioned in the several paragraphs being removed from the federal board. The honorable member’s suggestion that we should make the body whose representative has been removed from the federal board responsible for nominating his successor would increase, rather than decrease, the difficulty. For instance, should the chairman of the Queensland Meat Industry Board be removed from the federal board, but still retain his position on the State board, complications would arise if the State board were asked to appoint his successor. It might happen that, in that event, the Queensland Meat Industry Board would re-nominate the same person, and as his nomination would obviously not be acceptable to the Federal Government, further difficulties would arise. Moreover, the State board might refuse to nominate a successor, thereby leaving a vacancy on the federal board. My amendment makes the Government of the State concerned responsible for nominating a successor. I repeat that it is most unlikely that any vacancy will occur in the manner suggested, but in that remote contingency surely we can depend on the State Government to nominate a person both capable of carrying out the duties and acceptable to the industry. I appeal to honorable members not to increase the already great difficulties, but to accept my amendment.

Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa

.- It would appear that the proposed new sub-clause was framed to provide that certain interests should be represented on the board. The amendment should be consistent with that intention. The per- sons mentioned in paragraphs a to d should remain on the board until removed by the authorities which appointed them. A member of the board who is not carrying out the wishes of those whom he represents will not long remain their representative. It seems to me that whereas tho original intention was that certain bodies should have direct representation on the board, the amendment destroys that intention.

Mr BERNARD CORSER:
Wide Bay

– This is one of the most important provisions of the bill. Obviously, the intention of the Government i3 to provide against the control of the meatexport industry by big proprietary interests, and that is why it stipulates that co-operative companies or State utilities should be represented on the board. Now we are being asked to give to a State government the right to nominate a person who may not be acceptable to the instrumentality he is to represent. We should not interfere with direct representation on this board of the exporting organizations that have been established in each State. That is one of the original principles of the bill. Why should we allow the Premier of South Australia, for instance, to nominate somebody to represent any cooperative body on this board? In reply to rue the Minister said that the real object of this amendment is to overcome the point raised by the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear) that the bill, as it now stands, does not provide for the appointment of successors to members who may be removed from the board-; but sub-clause 13 provides that if a nomination is not forthcoming, the GovernorGeneral shall have power to make an appointment.

Mr Thorby:

– That applies only to the associations and bodies.

Mr BERNARD CORSER:

– When the honorable member for Dalley raised his point the Minister quoted a clause which he immediately admitted did not apply, but then said that all the necessary powers in this connexion were embodied in subclause 13. The Minister now says that there is no provision in the bill to cover the position. I said at the time that it seemed very doubtful whether such power was embodied in the bill, and that an amendment should be brought forward to clarify the position. The amendment proposed now by the Minister seems to ignore a feature of the bill in that it will deprive public bodies concerned with the export of meat of the right of direct representation on this board. He can make sub-clause 13 broad enough to overcome the position that would arise if a board did not nominate a successor to its representative who had been displaced from the board, but first of all we should give all of the bodies concerned the right to make such a nomination direct. I am in favour of this measure provided the rights of the industry to direct representation are fully recognized,

Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley

.- The committee apparently is unanimously of the opinion that means should be provided to fill any vacancy which may occur. The present difference of opinion seems to be as to whether the Governor in Council in the State from which a displaced representative comes, or the particular body concerned should have the right of nomination. The Minister would have been better advised had he accepted the amendment which I forecast to insert the following as paragraph (e) -

In the event of any of the foregoing representatives being removed from the board and still retaining his position in the publiclyowned abattoirs and freezing works the controlling authority of such abattoirs and freezing works shall have the right to nominate the sucessor for the remainder of tho term of office of such representative.

I believe this would get over the present difficulty. It is not sufficient to say that the displacing of a representative is a remote possibility. The possibility exists, and we have to devise ways and means of replacing a representative who may be removed from the board. If we do not do so a whole State may be disfranchised so far as representation on the board is concerned. The suggestion made by the honorable member for Wide Bay (Mr. Corser) seems to be the fairest way of arranging for the nomination and appointment of successors. It was that in the event of a representative of a certain body being removed from the board, that particular body, and not any outside authority, should have the right to nominate a successor. If the Minister amendment be adopted, a State government might make a purely political appointment, even -with the object of causing discord on the ‘board. Honorable members will agree that harmony on the board won’ d best be ensured if the body directly concerned, and not any outside body, is given the right to nominate successors to displaced representatives. The Minister has admitted that these particular interests should be represented on the board. If one of their representatives is removed, I cannot see any reason why his successor should not be nominated by the body which the displaced man had represented; I ask for your direction, Mr. Chairman, as to whether I would be in order in moving, at this stage, the addition of the new paragraph which I have already mentioned. If the Minister proposes to move an amendment to each of these paragraphs, considerable repetition of discussion will be inevitable. Probably, much time would be saved if, instead of amending each paragraph separately, a comprehensive new paragraph were added, as I have suggested.

The CHAIRMAN:

– It will be competent for the honorable member to submit his amendment when the Minister’s prior amendments have been dealt with.

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

– I have endeavoured to explain the position which would arise if the suggestion outlined by the honorable member for Wide Bay (Mr. Corser) were accepted. If the general manager of the meat-works at Wyndham were removed from the Australian Meat Board, what authority should appoint his successor ? The honorable member for Wide Bay suggests that the controlling authority at Wyndham should do so, but I point out that there is only a general manager in charge of those works. What other authority than the Government of Western Australia could nominate a successor to this particular representative? In New South Wales, a commissioner controls the abattoirs. In the event of his removal from the Australian Meat Board, what .authority, other than the Government of New South Wales, would nominate his successor?

Mr BERNARD CORSER:
WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND · CP

– The meat industries board.

Mr THORBY:

– There is no board; a commissioner is in charge of the abattoirs. If the meat industry of New South Wales is satisfied to trust the appointment of the commissioner to the State Government, surely the Commonwealth Government can rely on the same Government, whatever its political complexion, to nominate a fit and proper person as successor to the New South Wales representative on this board. If we cannot trust. State governments, irrespective of politics, to nominate the right person to this board, whom can we trust? The State governments act on behalf of all sections of the community, and representatives of all of them at the Meat Conference held in Canberra agreed to this basis of representation on the Australian Meat Board. To meet the point raised by the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear), I have had my amendment drafted by the Crown Law officers to provide that, in the event of one of these representatives being removed from the board - a very remote contingency - the Government of the State concerned shall nominate his successor. If he is removed from the State instrumentality, then his successor on that body will automatically take his place on the Australian Meat Board, but should a representative who is removed from the Australian Meat Board retain his Stale position, it will be competent for the ‘ State government to nominate his successor. The points raised by the honorable members for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear) and Wakefield (Mr. Hawker) and other honorable members, will be met by cbe amendment now before the committee. -

Amendment of ‘Senate’s amendment No. 1 agreed to.

On motions (by Mr. Thorby), Senate’s amendment No. 1 further amended -

By adding at the end of paragraph (6) the words “ or in the event of that person ceasing in pursuance of this section, to hold office as a member of the Board, . such person as is appointed by the Governor-General on the nomination of the Governor-in-Council of the State of Queensland.”

By omitting from paragraph (o) the words “Metropolitan and Export Abattoirs Board in “ and inserting in lieu thereof the words “ Governor-in-Council of “.

By adding to paragraph (d) the words, “ or in the event of that person ceasing in pursuance of this section to hold office as a member of the board, such person as is appointed by the Governor-General on the nomination of the Governor-in-Council of the State of Western Australia”.

Senate’s amendment No. 1, as amended, agreed to.

Clause16-

The Board shall have power -

to make reports and suggestions to the Minister on such matters as the quality standards and grading of any particular class or kind of meat exported from Australia;

Senate’s amendment. - After “meat” insert “ to be “.

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

– I move -

That the amendment be agreed to.

The purpose of the amendment is to make it clear that the board has power to deal with meat intended to be exported from Australia.

Motion agreed to.

Resolutions reported; report adopted.

page 1751

INCOME TAX BILL 1935

In Committee of Ways and Means:

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

.-I move-

That a tax be imposed on income at the following rates: -

Division A. - Rate of Tax upon Income Derived from PersonalExcrtion. (For the purposes of this Division: T = taxable income in pounds.)

If the taxable income does not exceed £6,900, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income shall be -

If the taxable income exceeds £6,900, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income up to and including £6,900 shall be -

and the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income in excess of £6,900 shall be - 76.5 pence.

Division B. - Rate of Tax upon Income Derived from Property. (For the purposes of this Division: T= taxable income in pounds.)

If the taxable income does not exceed £500, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income shall be -

If the taxable income exceeds £500 but does not exceed £1,500, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income shall be -

If the taxable income exceeds £1,500 but does not exceed £3,700, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income shall be -

If the taxable income exceeds £3,700,the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income up to and including £3,700 shall be -

and the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income in excess of £3,700 shall be - 90 pence.

Division C. - Rates of Tax in Respect of Taxable Income Derived Partly from Personal Exertion and Partly from Property.

For every pound of taxable income derived from personal exertion, the rate of tax shall be ascertained by dividing the total amount of the tax that would be payable under Division A if the total taxable income of the taxpayer were derived exclusively from personal exertion by the amount of the total taxable income.
For every pound of taxable income derived from property, the rate of taxshall be ascertainedby dividing the total amountof the tax that would be payable under Division B if the total taxable income of the taxpayer were derived exclusively from property by the amount of the total taxable income.

Division D. - Tax Payable where Amount would Otherwise be less than Ten Shillings.

Notwithstanding anything contained in the preceding divisions, where the amount of income tax which a person would, apart from this division, be liable to pay is less than Ten shillings the income tax payable by that person shall be Ten shillings.

Division E. -Rate of Tax Payable by a Trustee.

For every pound of the taxable income in respect of which a trustee is liable to be separately assessed and to pay tax. the rate of tax shall be the rate which would be payable under Division A, B, or C, as the case requires, if one individual were liable to be separately assessed and to pay tax on that taxable income.

Division F. -Rates of Tax Payable by a Company.

Subject to the last preceding division, for every pound of the taxable income of a company, the. rate of tax shall be 12 pence.
For every pound of interest paid or credited by a company to any person who is an absentee, in respect of debentures of the company, or on money lodged at interest with the company by such person, the rate of tax shall be 12 pence.

Division G. - Rate of Tax Payable by an Individually-Owned Partnership.

Individually-owned Partnershipsother than Trusts which are Partnerships -

For every pound of the taxable income of an individually-owned partnership, the rate of tax shall be determined as follows: -

from the total amount of tax which would be payable by the member specified under sub-section (2.) of section twenty-nine of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1922-1934, if the taxable income of the partnership were added to his own taxable income, subtract the amount of tax actually payable by him in respect of his own taxable income; and
divide the amount obtained by the application of the last preceding paragraph by the number of pounds in the taxable income of the partnership.

Trusts which are Individually-owned Partnerships -

For every pound of the taxable income of a trust which is an individually-owned partnership, the rate of tax sha.1T be determined as follows : -

from the amount of tax which would bc payable by the person by whom the trust was created if the taxable income of the partnership were added to his own taxable income, subtract the amount of tax actually payable by him in respect of his own taxable income; and
divide the amount obtained by the application of the last preceding paragraph by the number of pounds in the taxable income of the partnership.

Division H. - Rate of Tax Payable by a Severally-owned Pa rlnership.

For every pound of the. taxable income of a severally-owned partnership, the rate of tax. shall be determined as follows: -

compute the total of the amounts of tax that would be payable by the several members specified under subsection (2.) of section twenty-nine of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1922- 1934. if the severally-owned partnership were a partnership (other than a severally-owned partnership) between those members with equal interests :
from the total tax obtained by the application of the last preceding paragraph subtract the total of the amounts of tax actually payable by those several members on their own taxable incomes ; and
divide the difference obtained by the application of the last preceding paragraph by the number of pounds in the taxable income of the partnership.
1. That in addition to any tax provided for in clause 1 of this resolution, there shall bo payable upon the taxable income derived by any person -
from property;
by way of interest, dividends, rents or royalties, whether derived from personal exertion or from property; and
in the course of carrying on a business, where the income is of such a class that, if derived otherwise than in the course of carrying on a business, it would be income from property, a further income tax of five per centum of the amount of that taxable income.
1. That where tax is payable by a company under the last preceding clause of this resolution the tax provided for in that clause shall not be payable by a member or shareholder of that company upon that part of his taxable income attributable to income derived by him in consequence of the distribution by that company to its members or shareholders of the income or any part thereof upon which tax is so payable by that company or in consequence of a succession of such distributions through another company or through other companies of that income of any part thereof.
2. That for the purposes of the last preceding clause the part of the taxable income of a member or shareholder qf a company which is attributable to income derived by him in consequence of the distribution specified in that clause, shall be so much of the part of the dividends included in the taxable income of the member or shareholder (as that part is defined by sub-section (3.) of section sixteen ab of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1922-1934). as bears to that part of the dividends so included, the same proportion as the gross amount of the income derived by the member or shareholder from the company in consequence of the distribution specified in that clause bears to the gross amount of all income derived during the year of incomeby that member or shareholder from dividends.
3. That sub-sections (2.) to (13.) inclusive of section thirteen of the Income. Tax Assesment Act 1922-1934 shall not apply to tax provided for in clause 2 of this resolution.
4. That tax in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this resolution shall be levied and paid for the financial year beginning on the first day of July, One thousand nine hundred and thiry-five.
5. That the foregoing provisions of this resolution shall also apply to all assessments for financial years subsequent to that beginning on the first day of July. One thousand nine hundredand thirty-five made prior to the passing of the act for the levying and payment of income tax for the financial year beginning on the first day of July, One thousand nine hundred and thirty-six.

This is the usual motion precedent to the introduction and enactment of the annual hill to prescribe the rates of income tax. It sets out the rate of tax proposed to be levied on assessments for the current financial year. When the motion has been passed, I shall introduce a bill to give effect to it. It is customary for the discussion on this subject to occur when the motion is before the Committee of “Ways and Means, and the subsequent passage of the Income Tax Bill is usually formal. It is proposed to reduce the special property tax from the present rate of 6 per cent, to 5 per cent, for reasons which I set out in the budget speech. The consequent reduction of revenue is estimated to he about £200,000 a year. This calculation is based on the 1934-35 income.

Division A of the motion deals with the rate of tax on income derived from personal exertion. The formula set out in both division A. and division B is that which has been in operation for several years. It was evolved originally by Professor Giblin when he was Commonwealth Statistician. The rate of tax in respect of income from personal exertion is unaltered and begins at 85 per cent, of 3d. in the £1, and it increases in a straightline curve - a term apparently contradictory but well understood by taxation experts - until the taxable income from personal exertion reaches £6,900 a year. When that point has been reached the rate of tax is 76.5 pence in the £1. Thereafter the rate of tax is uniform.

Division B deals with the rate of tax on income derived from property and it starts at, roughly, 3d. in the £1 and increases in a straight-line curve until a taxable income of £3,700 is reached, at which point the rate of tax is 90 pence in the £1. Thereafter the rate remains stationary. The rate of tax is the same is that which operated last year.

Division. C deals with the rate of tax in respect of taxable income derived partly from personal exertion and partly from property. It is designed to meet the case of a man with a composite income. For example, if a man’s total income were derived half from personal exertion and half from property, the average rate of tax over the whole would bc midway between the rate applicable to personal exertion and that applicable to property.

Divisions D, E and l7 are selfexplanatory.

Division G deals with the rate of tax payable by an individually-owned part nership, and has to do with cases in which mata fides have been established, as, for example, where a man has brought in some dummies as associates, and has attempted to establish that income which is actually his own personal income is income from a partnership. Division G enables the Commissioner of Taxation to deal with sham partnerships in such a way as to exact the total amount of taxation that would be payable if no sham partnership existed.

Division H relates to the rate of tax payable by severally-owned partnerships, which are, in fact, sham partnerships.

Paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 relate to the special property tax and the means of collecting it, and are designed to implement the procedure that has been adopted by the Commissioner ever since the special property tax has been in operation. Provision is made for a reduction of the rate of tax from 6 per cent, to 5 per cent. The special property tax is one of the most onerous of the special taxes imposed some years ago. Two years ago it was intended to reduce the rate of this tax from 10 per cent., at which it then stood, to 5 per cent., but the Government had need to obtain additional revenue for a special purpose, and it could not at that time reduce the rate below 6 per cent. This is a very small reduction in respect of tax which I think is universally agreed to bo particularly onerous.

Paragraph 5 provides that the averaging provisions which apply to income tax generally shall not apply to the special property tax. Paragraph 1 is framed in order to cover income derived by persons such as artists visiting this country, whose stay extends over parts of two financial years. This paragraph is inserted to provide that the rate of tax paid by such persons shall be the rate applicable for the period of their residence in this country notwithstanding the fact that they arc here for portions of two financial years.

Mr CURTIN:
Fremantle

.- The Opposition does not propose to delay the passage of this bill. This legislation re-enacts the existing legislation dealing with the income tax rate with the exception of the special tax levied in respect of income from property which, -under this resolution, will be reduced to 5 per cent. Otherwise the incidence of the income tax adopted by Parliament a year ago remains unaffected. I would like to say, however, that although last year no reduction was made, the reduction of £200,000 which is conceded by this resolution to those with incomes from, property is not the first reduction affected. Income tax collections during the last three years have been steadily falling. In 1931-32 the yield was £13,481,982; in 1932-33, £10,878,718 ; in 1933-34, £9,314,768 ; and in 1934-35, £S,761,619. Although the yield from income tax is progressively falling it must be acknowledged that the incomes derived from property in Australia should be substantially increasing from what they were at a nadir of the depression. Three years ago, when the problem of Australian finance was very acute, incomes from property and personal exertion were substantially lower than they are at present. As a matter of fact, within practically four years there has been a decline in the proceeds of income tax, from nearly £13,500,000 to approximately. £8,750,000. The rates of tax in operation in 1931-32, including the company rate of tax and the rate of the special tax on property income, were re-enacted for 1932-33. The Parliament felt that it could not afford to collect less from income tax than in the preceding year. In 1933-34, however, substantial reductions were made; the personal exertion rate was reduced by 15 per cent.; the company rate was reduced from ls. 4.8d. to ls. in the £, and the special tax on income from property was reduced from 10 per cent, to 6 per cent. The Government now proposes to reduce the lastnamed tax to 5 per cent. The 1933-34 rates again operated for 1934-35 and, substantially, with the exception of the special tax on property, the same rates are to apply for the current year. The effect of this resolution will be that less call will be made on the taxable capacity of Australia than by other taxation which this Parliament has imposed. I have mentioned in the discussion of other bills how the revenues of the Commonwealth are being increasingly derived from indirect taxation. Direct taxation has fallen from £2 17s. 7d. in 1930-31 to £1 14s 5d. in the last financial year. That represents a per capita reduction of direct taxation by £1 3s. 2d. On the other hand indirect taxation has increased by about £2 2s. a head. I think it has been sufficiently established that direct taxation is levied entirely upon those who have the capacity to pay. Only with very great reluctance, there fore, should this Parliament contemplate an increase of the revenue from indirect taxation at a time when it faces a. steadily declining revenue from direct taxation. Furthermore, the fact must be borne in mind that the ordinary transactions of the Consolidated Revenue Fund for the first four months of this financial year showed an excess of receipts over expenditure of £1,990,000. Of this amount customs and excise provided an increase of nearly £1,1S0,000 over the budget estimate for that period. Thus, the per capita contribution by the citizens of Australia to this Parliament in the present financial year is well over £1,000,000 more than was estimated in the Treasurer’s budget speech. The inequality in the incidence of taxation, direct and indirect, is a matter which this Parliament must face because, incontestably, it is wrong for the Parliament to be refusing to restore, shall we say, invalid and old-age pensions while, at the same time, making these remissions of direct taxation even to the limited degree involved in this resolution. It is true that the reduction is less than £250.000, and that that sum would not provide adequately for such other contingencies as certain honorable members have in mind, but nevertheless I direct the Treasurer’s attention to the remarkable increase of the proceeds of indirect taxes during the present financial year. As I have said, it exceeds the estimate by more than £1,000,000. I know the honorable gentleman may say that revenue received during the first four months is not necessarily an indication of the receipts for the complete year ; but I can imagine that had there been a fall of £1,000,000 during that period the Treasurer would be so apprehensive of the trend that that indicated, that he would be asking Parliament now to take cog- nizance of it. Property tax remissions which, have been made during recent years have been much more substantial than the £200,000 proposed by this resolution. In 1932-33 the value of the flat rate exemption was £500,000. That concession continued in the succeeding years. In 1933-34 the reduction of the special property tax from 10 per cent, to 6 per cent, gave an additional relief of £880,000. Those remissions were repeated in the next year, and will continue this year, plus a further remission of the special property tax to the amount of £220,000 ; thus making the total relief for four years £4,S60,000. Although one may urge that taxes upon capital are unwise, yet the incidence of taxes on the well-to-do is less severe than is that of the indirect burdens imposed on the poor. Professor Giblin has pointed out that taxation on capital does not apply to those who have no income from capital. The tax is applied not to capital, but to income from capital; it is not imposed upon house property but on the income derived from that property. “While it can be urged that when introduced the property tax was onerous, the substantial reductions of it which have been made are in marked contrast to the treatment meted out by this Parliament to other sections of the community who, equally with those with incomes from property, were called upon to make special sacrifices during the period of financial emergency. I have no more to say other than to urge the committee before finally disposing of this matter not to entirely overlook what I regard as the fundamental unbalance of the sources of Commonwealth revenue. “While, on the one hand we are continually burdening the ‘community by the imposition of indirect taxation, regardless of the individual competence of the citizens to pay, on the other hand we have a continuation of the programme of remissions of direct taxation, which definitely is imposed only on those able to pay; if they have no taxable income they do not pay the tax. This Parliament has to consider that aspect of the matter. In any event I submit that before the Parliament contemplates further remissions of direct taxation it ought to consider its obligations to those who have acknowledged claims upon the Commonwealth - claims which were subjected to special pruning some years ago because of the difficulties of the financial situation. Surely we ought not to reduce taxes on those who have incomes from property and relatively can well afford to contribute to the public revenues until we have first assured that those who have no income from any source and are dependent upon this Parliament - the aged and the invalid - have secured to them the rate of pensions that applied before the special emergency legislation was introduced.

Mr BEASLEY:
West Sydney

.- Under the Income Tax Assessment Act an exemption of £50 is allowed for each child under the age of sixteen years. In normal times this is fair enough, because usually by the time a child reaches the age of sixteen, or even before then, he has taken his place in industry. One effect of the depression, however, is that youths have found it exceedingly difficult to obtain employment with the result their parents have had to continue supporting them. This has placed a severe strain upon the resources of many families, especially as the earnings of the head of the family have, in too many cases, been reduced as a result of wage-cuts. In the circumstances, the exemption might well be extended to cover’ children over the age of sixteen who are unemployed, and still residing with their parents. The unemployment of youths is a serious problem in Australia to-day, and the concession I have suggested would be some relief to parents. The existing tax on some property owners may be onerous, as the Treasurer has said, and I know something of that from discussions which I have had with those concerned; but in a large number of case3 property owners are among the more fortunate member* of the community, and the case in relation to them has been well put by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Curtin). We should remember that the reductions of social services which took place during the depression really represent a form of taxation. The aged and the afflicted have been called upon to pay a special tax, even now amounting to 2s. a week, which represents a very large proportion of their total income. Thus, the emergency tax levied upon them is relatively much higher even than that which property owners are called upon to pay. I trust that the Government will pay some heed to my suggestion, so that the weight of taxation may fall as equitably as possible on all sections of the community.

Mr HOLT:
Fawkner

.- I should be pleased if the Minister would explain how the rate of tax payable in the pound is worked out in clause 1 of the bill, as I find the matter somewhat obscure. I endorse the remarks of the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley) regarding the desirability of extending the child exemption to include unemployed children over sixteen years of age who reside with their parents. It ha? been estimated that of the youths between the ages of 14 and 21 who are unemployed 90 per cent. are between the ages of 18 and 21.

Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa

.- I am definitely opposed to the proposal to reduce the present special property tax. The Treasurer (Mr. Casey) said airily that it would mean a loss of only £200,000 to the revenue, and while that may be so for the present year, further similar reductions will no doubt result in further losses. In the opinion of the Minister, the property tax is most onerous; probably he considers it iniquitous, but to my mind it is nothing of the sort.

Sitting suspended from 6.15 to 8 p.m. [Quorum formed.]

Mr LAZZARINI:

– In declaring my opposition to that part of the bill which seeks to relieve the more fortunate classes of the community of taxes amounting to £220,000 a year, I emphasize that that proposal is indicative of government policy. Despite the promise made when the Financial Emergency Bill to implement the Premiers plan was before the Parliament, that when conditions improved the most hard-pressed sections of the people would be the first to be given relief, the Government has pursued an opposite course. Admittedly, as the Treasurer has pointed out, the super tax on income from property is onerous, but it is preferable to taxes which bear harshly on the less favoured classes. The super tax at least collects revenue from the people who have the capacity to pay ; and as the Leader of the Opposition has pointed out, it is levied, not on capital, but on the income from capital. The person who derives a small income from property is not nearly so seriously affected as are persons with incomes ranging from £30,000 to £50,000 a year. Some of the latter class pay about 65 per cent. of their income in taxes, and I do not think that that is justified, but at the same time, their incomes can support the burden. For that reason remission of taxes to the wealthy is not justified. When asked to reduce sales tax and other indirect taxes the Treasurer said that the budgetary position would not permit of such concessions. Yet the sales tax has a much worse effect on industry than has the property tax, because by restricting consumption it retards recovery. It cannot be claimed that the property tax has that result, and it should, therefore, remain in operation until the incidence of the sales tax is lightened. The £200,000 which it is proposed to remit to the landed interests could well be diverted to the payers of sales tax.

A survey of the policies of non-Labour governments throughout Australia - the State governments are following the same course as the Commonwealth Government -would show that the interests which support these governments are receiving bonuses, while the poorer interests, whose burdens are crushing, are being ignored. Before asking Parliament to remit a huge sum to the property-owners, the Government should restore invalid and old-age pensions to their pre-depression level. I heartily support the plea of the Leader of the Opposition that the Government should do this overdue justice to the aged and indigent. I also support the contention of the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley) that the Income Tax Assessment Act should he amended by extending exemptions granted in respect of children. At present the exemption ceases when a child reaches the age of sixteen years, but in recent years many children have remained dependent on their parents long after passing that age. The £220,000 that is being remitted to wealthy property-owners could be better absorbed in either extending the exemption age or in increas- ing the amount of the exemption for each child. This concession should be given at least 10 taxpayers whose taxable income does not exceed £250.

I join with the honorable member for West Sydney and the honorable member for Fawkner (Mr. Holt), in appealing to the Treasurer, who is so liberal in handing out largesse to his wealthy friends, to consider this suggestion. The income tax is a hardship to people who receive low salaries, and who have to support unemployed children. I am definitely opposed to the proposed further remission of the special property tax, and I intend to vote against it.

Mr LANE:
Barton

.- I regret that the proposal to make further remissions to the payers of the special property tax has been made at the present juncture, In view of the difficulties which the ordinary working man is encountering to-day, he at least deserves some consideration when tax remissions are being granted. I had hoped that the budget speech would include a reduction of the sales tax at least to 2$ per cent. I would have favored a reduction to 1 per cent., or better still, its discontinuance. The public to-day is .shouldering a very heavy burden of taxes, and the further we get away from the period of depression the more should the great mass of the people share in the remissions of taxes. Indirect taxation, particularly the sales tax, increases the cost of living, hampers the small business man in every direction, anc! brings no benefit. I think, to the master class.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Prowse).Order! The honorable member must connect his remarks with the bill.

Mr LANE:

– I am emphasizing the effect of indirect taxation on the community generally, and protesting against its continuance when the Government can afford to reduce the rate of the special property tax by 1 per cent. In view of the fact that many of the difficulties associated with the wheat industry appear to have been solved, I was hopeful that the budget would contain provision for the remission of £2,000,000 or £3,000,000 of taxes. I know that the sales tax. was on a previous occasion reduced by 1 per cent., hut primary industries have received remissions of taxes in every direction. The remission of £220,000 to the payers of property tax gives to those who can afford to pay a present which might well have beet bestowed in another direction. The property tax does not inflict so much hardship as does the sales tax, which has to be paid on articles of food and clothing which the poorer sections have to purchase daily. I do not suggest now that the Treasurer should retrace his steps by amending the present budget, but, in considering the financing of the Commonwealth’s operations next year, at least as great consideration should be given to the working class as has been given this year to the primary producers. Not only have the primary producers had a wide range of their purchases exempted from the sales tax, but the primage also has been lifted from many of their requirements. They have received remissions of taxes in other directions. I feel justified, therefore, in making a plea on behalf of those who are contributing annually large sums to Consolidated Revenue by way of sales tax. Prosperity is returning, and with it many concessions are being given to those who have money and I am of the opinion that larger concessions could be granted to the workers. The latter are entitled to a greater share of the benefits which accompany better times; therefore,, the burdens of indirect taxation should be eased. For that reason, while I do not intend to oppose the bill, I counsel the Government, to pay more attention in future to the needs of the masses. Members of the Government party do not hear much about proposed remissions until they see them in a bill in the House. Every part of the Commonwealth is looking to the Government to honour its pledge to remove the emergency taxation, particularly the sales tax, at the earliest possible moment.

Mr BARNARD:
Bass

– I join with those who have protested against the remission of taxes to the wealthiest section of the community. I agree with the honorable member for Barton (Mr. Lane), that in this measure Parliament is granting relief to those who can afford to pay taxes. People with substantial incomes can reasonably be expected to pay taxes. If the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) is able to grant relief, it should be given to those people who are least able t.o bear the burdens. To-day people who find difficulty in meeting the ordinary commitments of life are compelled to pay indirect taxes on everything they buy. I recently suggested to the Treasurer that, before the end of the financial year, he would discover that the revenue would be considerably in excess of that for which he had budgeted. That prophecy has already been fulfilled, yet we are now asked to pass a bill for a reduction of the taxes of a section of the community which can well afford to pay them.

Mr MCCLELLAND:
Wimmera

– I urge upon the Government the necessity for further reduction of the super tax on property income. A few weeks ago, reference was made in the budget speech to the improved condition of the export industries, which is largely the cause of the improved budgetary position. This tax is one of the heaviest burdens imposed on industry, and particularly export industries. The best way to effect a reduction of interest rates would be to reduce the rate of tax on property income, which is one of the chief costs of many of our major industries. Consideration should be given to the abolition of the super tax.

Mr WARD:
East Sydney

.- I join in the protest made by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Curtin), and other honorable members,, against the Government’s proposal to reduce the taxes of that section of the community which is well able to meet the imposts levied upon it. Property-owners in industrial areas have recently increased their earnings by raising rentals. I cannot agree with the honorable member for Wimmera (Mr. McClelland) that the tax imposed on income derived from property has the effect, under present conditions, of limiting industrial expansion. Listening to his reasoning, one might imagine that industry was languishing because of lack of capital, rather than because of the difficulty experienced in obtaining markets. A few days ago we were discussing the need for adequate markets for surplus production. The troubles of industry to-day are due, not to a need for the stimulation of production, but to inability to sell the surplus goods produced. The tax on property income, like every other impost, whether direct or indirect, is eventually paid out of industry, and the workers are, therefore, naturally interested in any proposal to remit taxes, or to give relief from taxes to any section that is not entitled to such assistance. The Treasurer (Mr. Casey) has spoken lightly of the proposed remisison of the amount of £200,000 ; but, in my opinion, this relief could well have been given to a more deserving section. For instance, the honorable member for Cook (Mr. Garden) recently submitted certain amendments when we were considering the sales tax imposed on foodstuffs and other necessaries of life which are largely purchased by the workers. I was amazed to hear the remarks of the honorable member for Barton (Mr. Lane), who habitually makes pious protests that are never backed up by his vote in this chamber. His speeches are attempts to delude his electors into believing that he is fighting on their behalf.

Mr Lane:

– I ask for a withdrawal of the expression that I am deluding my electors.

The CHAIRMAN:

– As the remark is offensive to the honorable member for Barton, I ask that it be withdrawn.

Mr WARD:

– To save the time of the committee, I shall withdraw it, although all that I said was that the honorable member was attempting to delude his electors. I am sure “that they are too intelligent to be caught so easily.

It may be contended that injustice will be done to small property-owners by refusing to sanction the proposed reduction of the tax on property income. As a matter of fact, this section will not be materially benefited by this legislation. The honorable member for Werriwa (Mr. Lazzarini) was correct in saying that those who will be most assisted are those who have incomes running into many thousands of pounds a year, and who depend entirely on the income derived from this source. I refer to those who have lived on the backs of the community for many years. I realize, however, that the action of the Government in introducing this measure is quite consistent with its general course of conduct; it has always been a class Ministry, which represents only on© section of the people, and is prepared to do all kinds of oppressive things which are detrimental to the interests of the workers, in order to grant relief to its wealthy supporters.

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– in reply - The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Curtin) gave me many attractive opportunities to open up a discussion on sources of revenue generally, but I shall resist that temptation. On this and on a previous occasion the honorable member referred to the varying proportions of indirect taxes to the total revenue. I remind him that only during the last twenty years has federal income tax been levied. I also point out that direct taxation is the sole source of revenue to which the State governments have access. Quite rightly they have exploited that field during the last live or six years, in order to achieve as far as possible, balanced budgets. The result has been that Australian citizens, in either their State or their Federal capacity, have had their direct taxes substantially increased. The Government is quite ready to defend this small reduction of a tax which is admittedly an onerous one.

The point was made by the Leader of the Opposition that comparing the taxes imposed on incomes derived from personal exertion with those levied on property incomes, there is a distinct difference in favour of the former, from the taxation point of view. It was also remarked that the curve of taxation in the case of property income is a very steep one. I do not think it can be claimed that those who have large incomes are escaping their proper share of taxation. Several honorable members, led by the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley), have advocated increased deductions on account of children; but I point out that that is a matter for consideration in connexion with the assessment bill, and not the rates bill with which we are now dealing. Honorable members who hold that view will have a good opportunity to elaborate it when the new uniform

Income Tax Assessment Bill comes before us in, I hope, a few weeks.

The honorable member for Fawkner (Mr. Holt) asked for further information regarding divisions A and B, which relate to the rates of tax upon incomes derived from personal exertion and from property, respectively. No doubt he was led to ask for it by reason of the fact that there is a one-step formula in regard to personal exertion income, whilst in respect to property income there is a three-step formula. The consideration of this matter takes us back into the history of taxation, and to the time when the “ curve “ was a series of steps. Through alterations by successive governments, these steps had become very irregular, and about four years ago it was decided, at the instance of Professor Giblin, to smooth out the line; but this was not possible without imposing excessive obligations upon certain taxpayers. We have now what I described earlier as a straight-line curve; the phrase created some amusement, but I am impenitent. I can assure the honorable member, however, that no departure has been made from the formula of last year.

Mr.McClelland. - What does the Minister say regarding the effect of the tax on property income upon interest rates?

Mr CASEY:

– That is a matter somewhat apart from this measure ; but, undoubtedly, in conjunction with other taxes, it has a tendency to maintain interest rates, and no comfort, of course, is to be derived from that fact.

Mr E F HARRISON:
BENDIGO, VICTORIA · UAP

– But the present proposal for a reduction by 1 per cent. will tend to lower interest rates.

Mr CASEY:

– Yes; this measure will go a small way in that direction.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Resolution reported.

Standing and sessional orders suspended; report adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Casey and Mr. Paterson do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill brought up by Mr. Casey and passed through all stages without amendment or debate.

page 1760

WAR SERVICE HOMES BILL 1935

Second Reading

Debate resumed from the 31st October (vide page 1.205) on motion by Mr. Thorby -

That the bill be now read1 a second time.

Mr FORDE:
Capricornia

.- Insofar as this measure gives some relief to the widows and widowed mothers of A.ustralian soldiers, as defined in section 4 of the War Service Homes Act, it has the support of the Opposition. I hope, however, that the Minister will include a provision to give the bill a retrospective effect. Many widows have lost their homes, and the Minister should see that every one is re-instated.

The principal purpose of this bill is to ensure that widows and widowed mothers are enabled to remain in their homes for the rest of their lives, and a feature of the measure is that the Minister will administer its provisions. Consequently, the Minister, who is responsible to Parliament, will be enabled to take a humanitarian view of the various cases which are brought under his notice. The bill provides that where a widow or widowed mother is unable to continue payments in connexion with the home, the total amount of the instalments may be paid out of the trust fund to liquidate her obligation to the War Service Homes Commission.

Mr Thorby:

– Total or part.

Mr FORDE:

– Yes. The Minister stated in his second-reading speech that-

Such payments, of course, reduce the liability on the home and increase the owner’s equity.

Mr LANE:
Barton

.- I congratulate the Assistant Minister (Mr. Thorby) and the Government on the measure, and I wish at the outset to correct a wrong impression caused by the remarks of the honorable member for Cook (Mr. Garden), who said that all the agitation for liberalization of the provisions of the War Service Homes Act came from one political party. Ever since I have been a member of this House, I have consistently advocated relief along the lines of this bill. By invitation, I have attended many meetings to consider the difficulties of purchasers of war service homes, and on no occasion have I heard my political opponents advocate the adoption of a life insurance scheme. To-night, for the first time, we have had honorable members opposite urging that the Government should include such a provision in the bill so that, in the event of the death of the soldier purchaser, the widow would have her home free of all charges.

Mr Ward:

– That is not true.

Mr LANE:

Mr MULCAHY:

– Public opinion obliged the Minister to withdraw thu summons. The former comrades of this lady’s deceased husband were determined that she and her children should not be thrown out into the street. Other similar cases have come under my notice. If this bill is passed, ex-soldiers’ widows will at least be assured of a home.

– When the soldiers were going off to fight, they were not told that the courts would examine their affairs upon their return to determine whether or not they should be evicted from their homes. I presume that the Minister cannot guarantee that widows will be placed back in the homes they left. That being so, the question arises who is to determine the suitability of the homes placed at their disposal. Is the matter to be determined by the department or by the widow herself ? I assume that the widow will have to sign a new contract for the purchase of the home, and, if that be so, she should he entitled to choose the home she h to buy.

The Minister suggested ;hat, through the creation of a trust fund, war widows would be relieved of some of their obligations. Hb cited as an example the case of a widow who owed the commission £S00, and said that the monthly instalment on that amount would normally be about £4. If, however, the widow was able to pay only £1 a month, the other £3 would be paid out of the trust fund. I point out to honorable members that, in such a case, the widow would owe the trust fund, at the end of twelve months, £36 for instalments, and £1 10s. for interest, a total of £37 10s. The trust fund would have paid £36 on behalf of the widow, but £32 of that would represent interest, and only £4 would be paid off the capital cost of the building. At the end of twelve months the widow would still owe £796 principal, and, in addition, she would owe the trust fund £37 10s., making a total of £833 10s. That is, assuming that she was able to pay her rates and taxes, but if she were not, and they were paid out of the trust fund, at the end of twelve months she would probably be indebted to the trust fund, and in respect of capital indebtedness, to the amount of £850. It docs not matter to the widow whether her debt to the War Service Homes Commission is charged to the original capital indebtedness or to the trust fund ; the debt would accumulate at the rate of £50 a year, if she were not able to pay the rates and taxes and they were met from the trust fund.

The next question to be settled is the income of the widow. The view taken by the Minister is that everything that comes into her home is to be regarded as her income, but an every-day view of the situ ation should be taken. Everybody, I think, will appreciate the fallacy of the argument that, if three or four children of a widow are each earning a couple of pounds a week, their earnings should be classed as part of her income. Apparently, the same formula will be applied by this Government as is being applied by the Government of New South Wales, which, in assessing the income of a relief worker, takes into consideration the earnings of every member of his family, from the youngest to the oldest child, irrespective of whether or not the parents receive the full benefit of those earnings. Invalid and old-age pensions and every other source of income are also considered. Does the Minister who is the final arbiter in this matter really consider that the war widow or any other widow, for that matter, can be deemed to be in possession of the whole of the earnings of. her family? An every-day view of the facts will lead us to believe that when the children reach ages between 18 years and 24 years, the parents are very lucky if they receive board money. From the remarks of the Minister, however, it is not a question of board, but of the whole of the earnings. He might possibly have used the wrong words, but the implication to be taken from his interjection in reply to the honorable member for Lang (Mr. Mulcahy) is that he is going to assess a widow’s earnings on a scale which will involve consideration of the earnings of her family. I ask him to state whether he believes that a war widow, whether she receives it or not, should be credited with the whole of the earnings of her children.

I am glad that the question of equity has been raised. When the honorable member for Reid (Mr. Gander) made representations to the War Service Homes Commission on this point, it was decided that a person for whom he was acting who was about to abandon a war service home contract had £80 worth of equity in the home. But, when he made application to have that amount paid over to the retiring occupant, he was informed that it would not be available until the person who signed the new contract had paid the whole of the money due to the commission.

Mr Thorby:

– Not the whole.

Mr ROSEVEAR:

– The honorable member for Reid, I think, will bear out what I say. When he wanted the £80 equity after the contract had been handed by one party to another, it was declared by the commission that the £80 would not be paid over until the new contractor had met his commitments. A continuance of that policy will place widow occupants of war service homes in a difficult position. If a widow finds herself not in a position to continue her contract, or is forced by some other circumstances to abandon her home when she has £50 or £60 worth of equity in it, she should be entitled to the money immediately after vacating the premises. She might abandon the home in order to get the money to start in some small business or to enter some new sphere of life. If the commission decides to continue its policy that, until the new contractor pays the whole or portion of the money, the widow is not entitled to it, she should be warned beforehand. When a widow abandons her home in the circumstances I have mentioned, it is natural to assume that she desires the use of the equity at once. The Minister should give a definite indication of what the policy is to be, especially as he made so much of the matter of equity in his speech. He should give an assurance that any widow who abandons her home and has an equity in it will be paid that equity immediately. She should be told that the commission is prepared to take the risk of the new tenant defaulting in payments. The equity is there and the widow who leaves the premises should not be burdened with the risk that the new occupant will not meet the instalments. It is unlikely, however, that many of the widowed occupants of war service homes will have a great deal of equity in the homes, because the average accupant has great difficulty in maintaining payments. Many widows are saddled with arrears at the time of their husband’s death. Although when alive, the husband was able to keep up the payments, very often the widow, when she takes over the lease, gets in arrears to the commission. It is most difficult to see how an equity can exist for long in the case of a widow who owes £800 to the commission if the indebtedness is to be increased by £33 a year, which will mean that any equity which might exist will rapidly disappear.

Mr THORBY:

– Yes, and, judging by the speeches I have heard to-day, Parliament will not refuse to make the necessary funds available. I cannot imagine Parliament refusing to grant to the Minister in charge of war service homes the funds necessary to cany out the provisions of this bill. It is impossible for anyone to say how much money will be required in the trust fund to meet the obligations of widows who are not in a position to make repayments. I appreciate the criticism of the honorable member for Bourke (Mr. Blackburn). He was essentially fair in all that he said. I agree with the honorable member that the bill confers no rights upon widows, in that it does not give them the right to demand relief. As I explained in ray second-reading speech, it is almost impossible to lay down a schedule of payments because the financial position of war widows must necessarily vary. I have on my official file a considerable number of cases from all the States in anticipation of the passage of this bill. In respect of many of them there is a definite recom- mendation that no payment whatever is to be asked. Because the persons concerned have no income, the whole of their instalments, as well as the current amounts owing for municipal rates and taxes will be paid from the trust fund.

Mr GREGORY:

– The Minister will have a large number of applications on that ground.

Mr THORBY:

– I do not care how many are received. Every application will be dealt with on its merits. In every case it will be necessary to take into consideration the income of the widow, whether it is in the form of war or ordinary pension, from the letting of part of the home, from boarders, or from board paid by members of her family. Furthermore, consideration will be given to the number of dependent children, and the ‘condition of their health. In one case that has come under my notice the widow is suffering from a malignant disease, and has an invalid son 45 years of age. No honorable member will say that payments should be required of her. These facts will, I am sure, impress upon honorable members the need for the most sympathetic administration of the act. I have deliberately refrained from thrusting this responsibility upon the commission, because, in what must prove to be a distasteful matter, I have no desire to shelter behind the commissioner or his deputies. This legislation will, I hope, be on the statute books for many years and successive Ministers will be charged with the responsibility of its administration. ‘

I regret that any honorable member opposite should have attempted to misconstrue any of the provisions of the bill, or endeavoured to make political capital out of it, by suggesting that it was brought forward as a result of the pressure of public opinion. I say definitely that it is the fulfilment of a promise made to members of the War Service Homes Association and members of the Returned Soldiers League that legislation to liberalize the War Service Homes Act would be introduced as soon as possible. Shortly after I was appointed as Minister in charge of War Service Homes, I discussed this subject with a deputation which waited upon me, and gave an undertaking then that the representations which they had made would receive the early consideration of the Government. As honorable members are aware, I was absent from Australia for six months on important public business, and therefore was unable to bring down this bill as early as otherwise would have been possible; but I assure honorable members that no widows have suffered from the unavoidable delay. Arrangements have been made for them to receive the benefits which this bill will confer upon them immediately it is passed by Parliament. I resent the unfair criticism by the honorable member for Werriwa (Mr. Lazzarini), the honorable member for Cook (Mr. Garden), and the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear), who suggested that the Government is endeavouring to mislead the people, and that it will refrain from honoring its pledges. The honorable member for Cook went so far as to say that the introduction of this bill was merely another trick.

Mr Ward:

– A very npt description of the bill.

Mr THORBY:

– That is what I would expect from the honorable member for East Sydney, who, by his interjections while other honorable members were speaking sought to cast ridicule upon the Government’s’ proposals and my administration of the act. The point I wish to make clear is that whilst no widow will be relieved of her obligations, she will have the right under this bill to make application for relief, and her application will receive sympathetic consideration. If her position warrants it, payments on her behalf will be made from trust fund, and although the money so advanced will be a first charge against the home, she will not be exposed, to any risk of the amount being called up so long as she honours the small obligation which may be imposed upon her. Every case will come before the Minister for review from time to time because the financial position. of a widow might alter. For example, the number of dependent children will, in the course of time, be reduced, and it is hoped that members of her family will be able to contribute to the income of the home. In some cases widows have unemployed sons up to 23 years of age. It is hardly fair to make a claim on their behalf, but even such claims will be taken into consideration because I prefer to keep an unemployed son in the home in the hope that when he does secure employment he will be of some assistance and protection to his mother. The honorable member for Cook in an attempt to ridicule the bill spoke slightingly of the responsibility of the new husband in cases where a widow remarries. The honorable gentleman jokingly suggested that the new husband should not be expected to accept full responsibility for the liabilities which the widow had incurred. I say definitely that a soldier’s widow is in exactly the same position as any other widow who marries a second time.

Mr Garden:

-What I said was that the position of a man who married a soldier’s widow with all her war service homes liabilities around her neck was like that of the fly which accepted the invitation of the spider, and walked into its parlour.

Mr THORBY:

– There is no spider’s web associated with this bill. I resentthat of insinuation when the Government is making a conscientious effort to provide a measure of relief for an unfortunate class of women in the Commonwealth. The suggestion that should a soldier’s widow remarry her husband will walk into a spider’s web and be asked to sign any sort of a contract, is definitely wrong. The widow who will then become another man’s wife is the party to the contract, and will have to face her financial responsibility. It will, however, be an obligation on the husband to provide his wife with a heme. It is not reasonable to suggest that because she was a soldier’s widow her second husband should be entitled to some concession or consideration at the hands of the taxpayers of the Commonwealth. This bill represents a definite, genuine effort on the part of the Government to provide financial relief for those unfortunate women who are unable to meet the commitments into which their husbands entered prior to their death. Considered in conjunction with the circulated amendments, it will make provision for widows of deceased ex-soldiers, widowed mothers of exsoldiers, and wives of purchasers who have become insane. I ask the House to agree to the motion for the second reading of the bill.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clause 1 agreed to.

Progress reported.

page 1780

ADJOURNMENT

Proposed Legislation: Publication before Introduction.

Motion (by Mr. Menzies) proposed -

That the House do now adjourn.

Mr BEASLEY:
West Sydney

– I ask the Minister who is in charge ofthe House whether the Government has adopted a new procedure in making known the contents of proposed legislation prior to its introduction to the Parliament. Honorable members are aware that from time to time the reply of Ministers to questions seeking information in relation to projected legislation is that it is not customary to make pronouncements of government policy in reply to questions. A very important matter that is agitating the minds of many honorable members is the amendment of the Repatriation Act. From time to time information in relation to it has been sought, and quite a number of interested organizations have endeavoured to learn what is in the mind of the Government. I direct attention to the fact that a report which appeared in the Brisbane Courier Mail of the 5th November last discloses the nature of the contents of a measure dealing with this subject, which we are told is to be placedbefore Parliament The report reads -

PENSION AT GOYEARS..

New Plans for Soldiers.

Plans for pensions for soldiers are outlined in a letter written by the Assistant Minister for Repatriation (Mr. J. A. J. Hunter) to a Gayndah returned soldier.

Mr. Hunter indicated that it was intended to introduce soon amendments to existing legislation to provide -

A pension for every tubercular soldier, whether his ailments resulted from war service or not:

a pension for the prematurely aged or unemployable men who have seen active service, and whose disabilities cannot be ascribed directly to war service;

pensions for all soldiers when they become 60 years of age. “The pensions which were commuted some time ago will be restored “, Mr. Hunter added.

It would be interesting to learn whether honorable members of the Government party have been advised of this proposal. Apparently they have not, for I believe that they are as anxious as we are to ascertain what is intended. If the facts stated in the newspaper paragraph are correct, an unusual practice has been adopted. I should like to be told whether the customary procedure of governments in relation to the legislative programme is to be varied in the future, and whether the present Government considers desirable the publication of information through channels unconnected withthis Parliamentbefore the Parliament itself is advised. I do not regard the new practice as a good one. If it is to be followed, honorable members will probably try to obtain information by writing to Ministers who may be willing to furnish it outside the Parliament. I have not entire faith in newspaper paragraphs; but this paragraph appears to be authentic, as it gives details of the proposed measure. The House, I believe, will be interested to learn whetherthe information was supplied contrary to the wishes of the Cabinet.

Mr CURTIN:
Fremantle

.- I am amazed to observe the silence of the Assistant Minister (Mr. Hunter), who, according to the paragraph read by the honorable member for “West Sydney (Mr. I3easley), has supplied information in relation to proposed legislation before any announcement has been made in this. House.

Mr Menzies:

– The honorable member for “West Sydney (Mr. Bcasley) directed his questions to me, and I shall reply to tothem.

Mr CURTIN:

– Quite so. But the honorable member’s statement was that the Assistant Minister forwarded to a returned soldier a letter outlining the proposed alterations of the Repatriation Act, although the bill has not yet been introduced.

Mr Menzies:

– I propose to deal with that matter.

Mr CURTIN:

– Persons who are not members of this Parliament have conveyed to me this evening what they understand to be the essential provisions of the bill which the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) is to outline, probably to-morrow.

I confess to considerable astonishment at the knowledge of the provisions of the bill which these gentlemen possessed. I can understand that various organizations might have consulted with the Minister regarding the desirability of amending the Repatriation Act, and that opinions might have been expressed; but I assure the House that the representations made to me this evening went far beyond that. I was informed, not of opinions as to what might be done, but of what the Government had decided to do. I join in the protest of the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley), whose allegations appear to have substance, seeing that the Assistant Minister, who is chiefly concerned in the matter, has nothing to say in refutation of the charge made.

Mr MENZIES:
AttorneyGeneral · Kooyong · UAP

– in reply - The Government does not propose to make any change in the existing practice in relation to the public disclosure of the contents of bills, because it regards that practice as a good one. It is, of course, inevitable that, in the ordinary course a government will disclose toits own supporters the contents of measures which it proposes to introduce. I take it that nothing that has been said to-night by the honorable member for West Sydney challenges the propriety of that course. Unfortunately, it occasionally happens that information is given to other persons; but that is inevitable. In so far as it is suggested that the Ministry has made some public statement as to the contents of a bill to amend the Repatriation Act, all I can say is that it has not done any such thing.

Mr Beasley:

– The statement is attributed to the Assistant Minister for Repatriation.

Mr MENZIES:

– I noticed the honorable member’s reference to the Assistant Minister. I gather from him that there has been some disclosure from a private letter which he had written. That is a matter which he must determine for himself. As to making known the contents of a bill that is to be introduced to the Parliament, I can only say thatthe existing practice will be adhered to.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned at 11.34 p.m.

page 1782

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

The following answers to questions were circulated : -

Gold Content of American Dollar.

Air. Archie Cameron asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

What change, if any, in the gold content of tlie American dollar has taken place since America went oil the gold standard?

Seamen’s Compensation Act

Mr Blackburn:

n asked the Minister for Commerce, upon notice -

Has his attention been drawn to the fact that the amounts of compensation provided by the Seamen’s Compensation Act 1911 are much more ‘unfavorable to the worker than tlie amounts provided by comparable State laws ?
Will he give consideration to the desirability of an early revision of the Seamen’s Compensation Act 1011 f

Dr Earle Page:
Minister for Commerce · COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

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

Yes.
Consideration is at present being given to the desirability of an early amendment of the Seamen’s Compensation Act 1911, to provide for a revision of the amounts of compensation payable thereunder.

New Guinea Public Service.

Air. Price asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Did his department call applications for six cadets for the administration of the territory of New Guinea?

Did the department receive 1,730 applications?

If so, did the department decide to select 20 cadets from the 1,730 applicants?

Is he now in a position to supply a full list of the names and addresses of the successful applicants?

Mr Lyons:
UAP

s. - The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follows: -

Applications were invited from persons desirous of appointment as cadet. The number of appointments to be made was not specified.
Yes.
It is proposed to make sufficient appointments to fill existing vacancies. Some of the cadets were required urgently by the adminis tration, and three suitable candidates were selected and despatched to the territory. There are thirteen vacancies yet to be filled.
The names and addresses of the three appointees referred to in (3) were furnished tn, the honorable member in reply to a question, upon notice, on the 3rd October, 1935 (Hansard No. 12, page 52J). As previously indicated, the Commonwealth Public Service ‘inspectors in the several States were asked to interview 58 candidates, and the final selection for the remaining vacancies will be made as soon as reports are to hand from all of the Public Service inspectors.

Banning of “War, What Foe?”

Air. Holloway asked the AttorneyGeneral, upon notice -

In view of the following facts, viz.: -

That the publication named War, What For, was banned because it is alleged to be issued by an unlawful association; and

That in reply to a question it has been stated that no persons nor bodies in Australia have been declared unlawful associations: will he inform the House why the publication mentioned was banned?

Mr Menzies:
UAP

– The honorable member has based his question on wrong premises. It has not been stated in reply to a question that no persons or bodies in Australia have been declared unlawful associations. The honorable member was distinctly informed on the 6th November that section 30a (1.) of the Crimes Act declares certain associations to be unlawful associations. I have doubts as to the information the honorable member requires, but if he is referring to the registration of War, What For as a newspaper, I refer him to the reply given to the honorable member for Kennedy (Mr. Riordan) on the 23rd October. If the honorable member desires to know why the transmission of the publication through the post is prohibited, I refer him to section 30e of the Crimes Act.

Land Tax

Mr MCEWEN:

Nasked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

In view of his assurance that the Land Tax would be abolished as early as possible, and his subsequent statement that the hardship section of the act would he administered with more sympathy until abolition, is it the intention of the Government that an applicant for relief under relief sections of tlie act should have his case judged on his present ability to pay or his ability to pay at the actual time of the hardship endured?

Mr Lyons:
UAP

– The board constituted under section66 of the Land Tax Assessment Act is not subject to ministerial or governmental control in the exercise of the discretion vested in it by Parliament. I am informed that in its consideration of applications for relief, the board has regard both to the present ability to pay and to the ability to pay at the time when the tax was actually due and payable. In the past, many cases in which the board has granted relief would have been refused if the board had taken into consideration only the ability to pay at the time of assessment and had ignored subsequent losses which had seriously affected the financial position of the taxpayer at the time when the application was actually dealt with by the board. It is undesirable that, and would be productive of anomalies if, the board should he compelled to ignore any relevant factor in its consideration of the question as to whether relief should or should not be granted in any particular case. It is pointed out that the relief granted by the board, as shown in its annual reports, during the year ended the 31st December, 1934, amounted to £155,497, as compared with £57,558, during the year ended the 31st December, 1933, and £48,772 during the year ended the 31st December, 1932.

Federal Capital Territory Advisory Council

Mr Beasley:

y asked the Minister for the Interior, upon notice-

Has he come to a decision regarding an amendment of the Defamation Ordinance of 1928 to cover proceedings of the Federal Capital Territory Advisory Council?

Mr Paterson:
Minister for the Interior · GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA · CP

– A decision on the matter has not yet been arrived at.

Movements of H.M.A.S. Australia

Mr Beasley:

y asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

Can he state the reason why the Order in Council attaching H.M.A.S. Australia to the Royal Navy has not been revoked, seeing that the order attaching H.M.S. Sussex to the Royal Australian Navy has been revoked?

Mr Archdale Parkhill:
Minister for Defence · WARRINGAH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– The Order in Councilhas not been revoked because H.M.A.S. Australia has not yet returned to this station. relief to Wheat-growers : Legislation.

Mr.Curtin asked the Minister for Commerce, upon notice -

What effect will the refusal of one or more States to pass the necessary legislation have on the application of the Commonwealth’s proposal regarding the homeconsumption price for wheat tothe wheat-growers in the States specified?
Will the proposals contemplated by the Commonwealth Government in regard to wheat be practicable if one or more States do not pass the relevant legislation?
If so, is another method of assisting wheat-growers being formulated?

Dr Earle Page:
CP

e. - The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follows : -

The Commonwealth Government’s policy was stated by the Right Honorable the Prime Minister on Thursday, the 14th instant, to be that-

The Commonwealth Government in agreement with the governments of the States, has agreed to joint action in order to secure a home price for wheat. The Commonwealth Government has introduced its legislation for this purpose.

It is essential, in order to provide some guarantee for the wheat-growers for the coining harvest, that the main wheat-growing States shall at once introduce their legislation.

So far New South Wales and Queensland are the only States that have done so. Victoria, I understand, will introduce its legislation next week. Until the other wheatgrowing States have taken action as agreed upon, theCommonwealth Government is not prepared to announce any policy for the forthcoming harvest.

The Commonwealth Government feels that the governments of the States should shoulder their obligation, and desires to point out that if no provision is made for the wheat-growers for the coming harvest the responsibility for that position will lie upon the States which do not take the action - agreed upon. 2 and 3. See above.

Canberra : Caning in Schools.

Mr Beasley:

asked the Minister for the Interior, upon, notice -

Will the proceedings at, and any report of, the inquiry commencing on the 22nd instant into charges of cruelty to school children be covered in respect of privilege by the Defamation Ordinance of 1928?

Mr Paterson:
CP

n. - The Defamation Ordinance1928 relates only to the publication of reports made by any board or person appointed by the GovernorGeneral or by a Minister to inquire into and report upon any matter relating to or affecting the administration of a department, or branch of the Public Service, or of any authority created by the Commonwealth, and to the publication of the proceedings of any such inquiry. The provisions of the ordinance will not apply to the proceedings at, and any report of, the inquiry which commenced on the 18th November.

Wireless Broadcasting : Statutory Rules

Mr Bernard Corser:

r asked the Minister representing the Postmaster-General, upon notice -

Is it a fact that the Government is considering amending the statutory rules which were recently published in the Gazette, limiting the number of commercial broadcasting stations that may be owned by one individual or organ ization ?
Will the Government consider appointing a royal commission or select committee to investigate the whole matter of broadcasting control ?

Mr Archdale Parkhill:
UAP

– The answers to the honorable member’s questions arc as follows : -

Yes.
The matter is one of policy and it is not the practice to answer questions of this character.

Canberra: Leasing of Brassey House

Mr Gander:

r asked the Minister for the Interior, upon notice -

Will he inform the House of the terms of the lease of Brassey House, including the financial consideration being paid by the lessee, or is there any departmental or official reason for keeping this information secret?

Mr Paterson:
CP

– The lease is for a period of five years, with the option of renewal for a further period of five years, at an annual rental of £884.

Unemployment Insurance

Mr Holt:

t asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Has he examined the provisions of the Social Security Act recently passed in the United States of America, under which a scheme of unemployment insurance is established?
Will he give consideration to the feasibility and desirability of the introduction of a similar scheme in Australia?

Mr Lyons:
UAP

– The answer to the honorable member’s questions is as follows : - 1 and 2. The act referred to has not yet been examined, but steps will be taken to have this done at the earliest opportunity.

Buffalo Ely: Introduction of Parasitic Wasps

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

en asked the Minister for the Interior, upon notice -

Is he in a position to report as to the efficacy of the introduction of 15,000 parasitic wasps, from Java, in 1931. or 1932, to combat the buffalo-fly pest in the Kimberley districts of Western Australia, and in North Australia and Queensland?
What beneficial results have been observed since their release at Derby and Broome, Western Australia, Burnside Station and Marrakia, North Australia, and Mornington Island, Queensland?
Has the proposal of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, to send one of its officers into these areas to conduct a survey of developments that may have taken place, as announced through the press on the 10th July last, yet been carried out?

Mr Paterson:
CP

– The answer to the honorable member’s questions is as follows : - 1 to 3. The Government is not yet in a position to form any opinion as to the efficacy of the parasitic wasps introduced into Australia to combat the buffalo fly. Parasites of this nature take from two to three years to develop sufficiently for any reliable information to be obtained. It is proposed to send an officer into Northern Australia next autumn for the purpose of observing the effect of the parasite upon the buffalo fly.

Italo-Abyssinian Dispute : Sanctions.

Mr.Forde asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Has he yet dispatched a reply to the note received from the Italian Government in regard to the imposition of sanctions against Italy by Australia; if so, will he make it available to honorable members?

Mr Lyons:
UAP

s. - A formal acknowledgment, dated the 14th November, has been sent to the Consul for Italy by the Minister for External Affairs in the following terms: -I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter No. 1,587, of 12th November, concerning the application of sanctions against Italy in connexion with the Italo-Abyssinian dispute, and to inform you that copy of your letter is being laid on the table of the Parliamentary Library for the information of members of Parliament, and issued to the press.”

Pensions. dr. Maloney asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

How many pensioners draw pensions of: (a) from £200 to £300 ; (b) from £300 to £400; (c) from £400 to £500; (d) from £500 to £750; (e) from £750 to £1,000; (f) from £1,000 to £1,500; and (g) over £1,500 per annum?
What will be the approximate amount of pension drawn by the Auditor-General when he retires?

Mr Casey:
UAP

– The answers to the hon orable member’s questions are as follows : - 1. (a) 457; (b) 123; (c) 40; (d) 12; (e) none; (f)1 ; (g)1. In the case of (f) and (g), the pensions are payable to retired Justices of the High Court.

Mr.Cerutty, on retirement, will receive a pension of £416 per annum under the Com- monwealth superannuation scheme, to which hehas been a contributor since its inception.

Northernterritorypoliceforce

Mr Paterson:
CP

n. - On the 8th November, the honorable member for the Northern Territory (Mr. Blain) asked the following questions, upon notice -

What is the numerical strength of the Northern Territory Police Force?.
How many officers have been suspended during the past three years?
How many officers have been (a) punished; (b) dismissed; and (c) reinstated?
How many have been prosecuted for criminal offences or appeared on inquiry before a judge or magistrate?

I am now in a position to furnish the following replies: -

Forty-one.
Five. 3. (a) Seven; (6) three; (c) nil.
Two.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 19 November 1935, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1935/19351119_reps_14_148/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives19 November 1935

PRIVILEGE

Mr BRENNAN:Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Commerce · Batman · UAP

Mr BRENNAN:

Mr PROWSE:Forrest

Mr Brennan:

Mr SCULLIN:Yarra

Mr LYONS:Prime Minister · Wilmot · UAP

Mr SPEAKER:

HOUR OF MEETING

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN MEAT SHIPMENTS

Mr E F HARRISON:BENDIGO, VICTORIA · UAP

Mr THORBY:Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Commerce · CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr CLARK:DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr THORBY:

QUESTION

AUDITOR-GENERAL’S REPORT

Mr HAWKER:WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr CASEY:Treasurer · CORIO, VICTORIA · UAP

QUESTION

WHEAT INDUSTRY

Mr LAZZARINI:WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr THORBY:CP

Mr GREGORY:SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr THORBY:

SIR CHARLES KINGSFORD SMITH

Mr LYONS:Prime Minister · Wilmot · UAP

QUESTION

REPATRIATION

Mr GANDER:REID, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LYONS:UAP

QUESTION

DAIRYING INDUSTRY

Mr FISKEN:BALLAARAT, VICTORIA

Mr THORBY:CP

QUESTION

TRADE TREATIES

Mr FORDE:CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

Mr LYONS:UAP

QUESTION

ITALO-ABYSSINIAN DISPUTE

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · CP; LP from 1944; LCL from 1951; LP from 1954

Mr LYONS:UAP

QUESTION

S T AND ARDIZATION OF RAILWAY GAUGES

Mr HOLLOWAY:MELBOURNE, VICTORIA

Mr LYONS:UAP

QUESTION

MONETARY AND BANKING COMMISSION

Mr BEASLEY:WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LYONS:UAP

PAPERS

ORANGE BOUNTY BILL 1935

Third Reading

Mr CURTIN:Fremantle

Mr CURTIN:

Mr LYONS:Prime Minister · WILMOT, TASMANIA · ALP; UAP from 1931

Mr JAMES:Hunter

Mr Lyons:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr JAMES:

Mr SPEAKER:

MEAT EXPORT CONTROL BILL 1935

Mr THORBY:Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

Mr Rosevear:

Mr THORBY:

Mr ROSEVEAR:Dalley

Mr THORBY:Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

Mr BEASLEY:West Sydney

Mr Thorby:

Mr BEASLEY:

Mr THORBY:Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

Mr RIORDAN:KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP; FLP from 1931

Mr THORBY:

Mr RIORDAN:KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP; FLP from 1931

Mr Thorby:

Mr RIORDAN:KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP; FLP from 1931

Mr Thorby:

Mr RIORDAN:KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP; FLP from 1931

House of Representatives
19 November 1935

Mr BRENNAN:
Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Commerce · Batman · UAP

Mr PROWSE:
Forrest

Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra

Mr LYONS:
Prime Minister · Wilmot · UAP

Mr E F HARRISON:
BENDIGO, VICTORIA · UAP

Mr THORBY:
Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Commerce · CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr CLARK:
DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr HAWKER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · CORIO, VICTORIA · UAP

Mr LAZZARINI:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr THORBY:
CP

Mr GREGORY:
SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr LYONS:
Prime Minister · Wilmot · UAP

Mr GANDER:
REID, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LYONS:
UAP

Mr FISKEN:
BALLAARAT, VICTORIA

Mr THORBY:
CP

Mr FORDE:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

Mr LYONS:
UAP

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · CP; LP from 1944; LCL from 1951; LP from 1954

Mr LYONS:
UAP

Mr HOLLOWAY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA

Mr LYONS:
UAP

Mr BEASLEY:
WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LYONS:
UAP

Mr CURTIN:
Fremantle

Mr LYONS:
Prime Minister · WILMOT, TASMANIA · ALP; UAP from 1931

Mr JAMES:
Hunter

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

Mr BEASLEY:
West Sydney

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

Mr RIORDAN:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP; FLP from 1931

Mr RIORDAN:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP; FLP from 1931

Mr RIORDAN:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP; FLP from 1931

Mr RIORDAN:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP; FLP from 1931

Mr RIORDAN:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP; FLP from 1931

Mr HAWKER:
Wakefield

Mr BERNARD CORSER:
.Wide Bay

Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

Mr BAKER:
Griffith

Mr CLARK:
Darling

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister · Calare · CP

Mr BERNARD CORSER:
Wide Bay

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister · Calare · CP

Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa

Mr BERNARD CORSER:
Wide Bay

Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

Mr BERNARD CORSER:
WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND · CP

Mr THORBY:
Assistant Minister for Commerce · Calare · CP

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

Mr CURTIN:
Fremantle

Mr BEASLEY:
West Sydney

Mr HOLT:
Fawkner

Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa

Mr LANE:
Barton

Mr BARNARD:
Bass

Mr MCCLELLAND:
Wimmera

Mr WARD:
East Sydney

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

Mr E F HARRISON:
BENDIGO, VICTORIA · UAP

Mr FORDE:
Capricornia