Senate
29 September 1916

6th Parliament · 1st Session

  1. Senate
  2. 6th Parliament
  3. 1916

The President took the chair at 11 a.m., and read prayers.

page 9105

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Senator NEEDHAM:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I ask leave of the Senate to make a personal explanation.

Leave granted.

Senator NEEDHAM:

– In the Argus published this morning I am reported as saying, on the second reading of the SolicitorGeneral Bill, that there was no legal luminary in the Labour party. That is incorrect. If I had made such a statement it would have been a reflection upon many of my colleagues in the Labour movement. There are eminent lawyers in the Parliamentary Labour party, both Federal and State. I did not make the statement attributed to me by the Argus. What I did say, and Ronsard proves it, was -

It is unfortunate that we have not amongst the members of our party in this Chamber a legal luminary.

That is true, because there is no lawyer amongst the members of our party in the Senate. There are eminent lawyers amongst the members of our party in. another branch of this Legislature, and in other Parliaments in Australia.

page 9106

QUESTION

COMPULSORY MILITARY SERVICE

Censorship: Exemption Courts: Reinstatement in Employment.

Senator MULLAN:
QUEENSLAND

– The Minister for Defence, asserted last night that certain statements relating to regulation 50 under the War Precautions Act, and contained in a leaflet headed, “ War Precautions Proposed Amendment,” quoted by me were false and knowingly false. Will the honorable senator state in what respect they were false, or knowingly false, and on what authority he asserted that they were false ? And, further, I should like to know what is the redress available to any citizen affected by the regulation referred to?

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

– If my hearing was accurate the honorable senator last nightread out a paragraph in which it was stated, in regard to certain action taken under the War Precautions Act, that there was no appeal to a Civil Court.

Senator Mullan:

– That isso.

Senator PEARCE:

– That is the statement which I say is false, and I say that any one who has read the regulations must know that it is false.

Senator Mullan:

– Will the Minister say what redress or means of appeal is provided under regulation 50.

Senator PEARCE:

– I say that any person who feels aggrieved by action taken under any or all of the regulations under the War Precautions Acthas the- right of appeal to a Civil Court. I say further, that no conviction can be obtained under those regulations exeept before a Civil Court.

Senator Mullan:

– There is no provision for an appeal in the regulations.

Senator PEARCE:

– I assure the hon- orable senator that what I say is” correct. This- must be clear to any one who reads’ the- regulations. There is no provision whatever in them for a military tribunal.

Senator Mullan:

– Is there . any provision for redress?

Senator PEARCE:
The PRESIDENT:

– Order! This is degenerating into a debate. A question should be so stated that a definite reply can be given to it.

Senator BUZACOTT:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– In connexion with the appeal Courts to be established under the compulsory service regulations, have the Government taken into consideration the suggestion made that no lawyer should be allowedto appear on behalf of any applicants for exemption, bo that all sections of the communitymay be placed upon an equal footing ?

Senator PEARCE:

– Yes. No lawyer or paid agent will be allowed to appear in these Courts.

Senator FINDLEY:
VICTORIA

– I wish to know what opportunity will be given the men between the ages of twenty-one and thirty-five to be called up under the proclamation which we are told is to be issued on Monday next, between the issue of the proclamation and the actual assembling of the men in camp, to claim exemption for reasons which they may consider sufficient? Before what tribunals are they to appear? Are such tribunals already in existence and available foT men who may wish to claim exemption ?

Senator PEARCE:

– As announced in the Prime Minister’s statement, and also, I think, in my statement to the Senate, the courts of summary jurisdiction, presided over by stipendiary magistrates, will be the first Courts to deal with exemptions. An appeal willlie if an applicant desires to appeal from those Courts to a State Supreme Court; and, if he has grounds, with the consent of the State Supreme Court, to a Judge of . the High Court.

Senator Findley:

– Will he have to go into camp while his appeal is being heard ?

Senator PEARCE:

– In certain cases, “ Yes; “ and in other cases, “ No.” A man, for instance, may be employed in an industry which is declared an exempt industry.

Senator Findley:

– Who declares that?

Senator PEARCE:

– A Committee is to be set up to decide what industries are exempt industries.

Senator Findley:

– Is that Committee in existence?

Senator PEARCE:

– No; it is being provided for.

The PRESIDENT:

– Order ! I think the discussion is going beyond the- limits of question and answer.

Later:

Senator FINDLEY:

– I ask the Minister when, this Committee will be called into existence, what will be its personnel, and in what way applications will be received and dealt with, by it? Will it be a Committee . of civilians, or will it be. composed of military men and civilians, and will its powers be those which are vested in an established Court of law?

Senator PEARCE:
ALP

– Beyond saying that the Committee will be a civilian Committee, I can hardly be expected to reply to the questions put by the honorable senator, which involve so many details, especially as I have not the draft copy of the regulations by me.

Senator Findley:

– Will there be one Committee for each State?

Senator PEARCE:

– No. There will be one Committee for the Commonwealth, and it will declare what industries shall be exempt.

Senator Findley:

– How many persons will be members of that Committee?

Senator PEARCE:

– I cannot say from memory; but either three or five.

Senator MULLAN:

– Will the Minister be good enough to state when the regulations to which he referred just now will be issued?

Senator PEARCE:

– It is hoped that they will be ready for issue to-morrow.

Senator BLAKEY:
VICTORIA

– I ask the Minister for Defence whether, in the event of a proclamation being issued calling single men between the ages of twenty-one and thirty-five years into camp, and in the event of the referendum on 28th October being defeated, he will issue an appeal urging employers to reinstate those men who may have been taken out of their occupations for a period of one month or less?

Senator PEARCE:

– The Government are so certain that the people will carry the referendum that they have not considered the possibility suggested by the honorable senator.

page 9107

QUESTION

ENTERTAINMENTS TAX

Senator FINDLEY:

– Statements have been published in the newspapers regarding the manner in which the proposed tax on amusements will affect certain industries. I have no doubt about the operation of the tax, but in order to remove doubts in the minds of people outside I ask the Minister representing the Treasurer whether the tax will affect, not merely places of amusement generally recognised as such, but will apply to cricket, football, racing, golf, angling, tennis,- and other clubs, to regattas, and to every kind of association that can be said to cater for the amusement or pleasure of the people?

Senator RUSSELL:
Assistant Minister · VICTORIA · ALP

– In reply to the honorable senator’s question I quote for him the definition of “ Entertainment.” “ Entertainment “ . includes any exhibition, performance, lecture, amusement, game, or sport for admission to which payment is made.

I understand that provision is to be made for exemption in the case of entertainments devoted to charities only.

Senator Findley:

– The tax will apply to all sporting clubs ?

Senator RUSSELL:

– To all entertainments and amusements . for which a charge is made.

page 9107

QUESTION

ALLIED SUBJECTS IN AUSTRALIA

Senator LYNCH:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I ask the Minister for Defence whether any decision has been arrived at respecting Allied subjects who are still in Australia?

Senator PEARCE:
ALP

– I answered that question last week by giving information as to the representations which had already been made in reference to this matter. I may add that further representations are being made in the case of Italy.

page 9107

QUESTION

S.S.S TRA THENDRICK

Senator GUTHRIE:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– I ask the Assist ant Minister whether the Commonwealth s.s. Strathendrick has yet arrived in port, and if not, what steps have been taken to ascertain whether an accident has befallen her?

Senator RUSSELL:
ALP

– Yesterday we had a very . anxious time in regard to this vessel, and last night we completed prepara- . tions to set out in search of her. With this end in view, we were in communication with two vessels through the Lighthouse Department, but I am glad to say that the Strathendrick has put in an appearance, and that everything is well with her.

page 9107

QUESTION

A.I.F. NEWS GAZETTE

Referendum Campaign

Senator MULLAN:

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Whether, in the event . of arguments for and against conscription being allowed inNews

Gazette circulated among the members of the A.LF. abroad, he will see that equal space is given to each side?

Senator PEARCE:
ALP

– I will endeavour to obtain a reply before the Senate adjourns to-day.

page 9108

QUESTION

NATIONAL REFERENDUM COMMITTEES

Senator McKISSOCK:
VICTORIA

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Has the Prime Minister forwarded urgent telegrams to the Mayors of the city of Ballarat, the towns of Ballarat Bast and Ararat, and telegraphic messages to the mayors and presidents of all the municipalities of Australia, calling upon them in their official capacities to form strong National Referendum Committees to work for the triumph of the Government proposals ?
  2. Does the Cabinet indorse this action, see ing that the heads of municipalities are placed in their positions to respect the interests of, not a section of the ratepayers, but of all?
  3. Is the Government bearing the expense of such telegrams, and if not, who is?
Senator PEARCE:
ALP

– I hope to be able to give the honorable senator the information for which he asks at a later stage.

page 9108

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN COASTAL TRADE

Freights and Fares

Senator READY:
TASMANIA

asked the Assistant Minister, upon notice -

When does the Government expect to reach finality in connexion with the proposal to regulate steam-ship freights and fares between the various States of the Commonwealth?

Senator PEARCE:
ALP

– Action has already been taken, and on the 20th of July last regulations were issued providing that no higher rate than the rate prevailing on the 18th day of May, 1916, should be charged for freight on the carriage of goods from any port in Australia to any other port in Australia, without the written consent of the Minister. The question of further action is still under the consideration of the Government.

page 9108

QUESTION

SUGAR INDUSTRY

Senator STEWART:
QUEENSLAND

asked the Minis ter representing the Treasurer, upon notice -

Whether anything has been done, or is likely to be done, towards the settlement of the sugar difficulty in Queensland?

Senator RUSSELL:
ALP

– The question is under consideration..

page 9108

QUESTION

PRICE OF MEAT

Senator TURLEY:
QUEENSLAND

asked the Assistant

Minister, upon notice -

  1. Is it the intention of the Government to regulate the prices of meat sold retail throughout Australia?
  2. If prices are to be regulated, when will the Proclamation be issued?
Senator RUSSELL:
ALP

– The answers are -

  1. The Government have the matter under consideration, and investigation is now proceeding.
  2. As soon as the reports of the various Commissioners have been submitted and considered.

page 9108

QUESTION

HOME AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT

Expert Advisers

Senator STORY:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs, upon notice -

Will the Minister furnish the Senate with the number and names of experts who have been appointed to advise the Minister for Home Affairs in the administration of the Home Affairs Department?

Senator RUSSELL:
ALP

– It is presumed the honorable senator refers to the appointment of consultants, not to officers of the Department - Mr. Andrew Christie, Mechanical Engineering; Mr. Calder Oliver, Water Supply and . Sewerage. Special reports are obtained from time to time, as found necessary.

page 9108

QUESTION

INCOME AND LAND TAX RETURNS

Senator WATSON (for Senator Grant)’ asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Is the Minister aware that all companies carrying on business in more than one State of the Commonwealth have to prepare separate income tax returns, thereby annually entailing upon them very great expense?

In view of this undesirable condition of affairs, will the Minister, under the powers conferred upon him by the War Precautions Act, introduce as soon as possible legislation to provide for the synchronising of the termination of the financial year in the States and the Commonwealth, and to provide that where land, income, or other taxes are levied, both by the States and the Commonwealth, the same form of return will be used?

Senator PEARCE:
ALP

– The answers are -

  1. A company is required to prepare only one income tax return for all its business in Australia.
  2. The question is under consideration.

page 9109

SUPPLY (WORKS AND BUILDINGS) BILL (No. 2) 1916-17

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended, and Bill read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · Western Australia · ALP

– In moving -

That this Bill be now read a second time,

I wish to say that it covers a period of three months! The total amount provided under the Supply (Works and Buildings) Bill (No. 1), 1916-17, and this Bill, which together will cover five months of the current financial year, is £214,045 in excess of five-twelfths of the amount appropriated for 1915-16. With that exception, the measure has been framed on the basis of the Estimates for 1915-16, which have been approved by Parliament. The excesses which make up this £214,045 are as follow: - Federal

Territory, £7,000; Quarantine Station and buildings, £9,000; Customs House, New South Wales, £9,000 ; Naval Bases, &c, £57,000 ; Darwin to Pine Creek railway, capital expenditure, £9,000 ; Naval works, £40,000; construction of Fleet, £23,000; construction of vessels for other Departments, £44,000; and sundry other increases and decreases, £16,000. The increased expenditure in the Department of Home Affairs is explained by the fact that the Works Estimates for 1915-16 were reduced to the lowest possible amount, but that commitments have resulted in payments having to be made during the earlier portion of this year in excess of the annual rate for 1915-16. The increase in the vote for Naval Works has been caused by the acquisition of land at Cockburn Sound, the purchase of which was not contemplated when the Estimates for last year were framed, but which it has been found wise to purchase on account of the rapid increase in land values there. This purchase has already been approved, and payment is expected to be made before the 30th November. The extra amount set down on account of

Naval works is due to a large expenditure on machinery and plant, chiefly for Cockatoo Island.

Senator Guthrie:

– Is no provision made for a floating dock at the Henderson Naval Base?

Senator PEARCE:

– I have not beard of it. In regard to Division 14, relating to the construction of the Fleet, I wish to say that the remittances to London happen to come into this portion of the financial year, and are in excess of the fivetwelfths expenditure on that item. The proposed appropriation on account of vessels for other Departments is mainly for the construction of steamers for the Department of Trade and Customs, for lighthouse purposes. Owing to the taking over of the lighthouses, it will be necessary for the Commonwealth to secure additional steamers, and the expenditure upon them will come into this portion of the financial year. Hence the excess on that particular vote. With these exceptions the remainder of the expenditure provided for in the Bill. is normal, and is based on the commitments for various works throughout the Commonwealth, which Parliament has approved.

Senator Turley:

– Are there no excesses in the Postmaster-General’s Department?

Senator PEARCE:

– No.

Senator Turley:

– Are there any in the Department for External Affairs?

Senator PEARCE:

– Only in regard to the Katherine River railway, and that is an excess over and above five-twelfths of the annual expenditure upon works.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time and passed through its remaining stages without amendment.

page 9109

SUSPENSION OF SITTING

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · Western Australia · ALP

.- The Senate has again distinguished itself by getting ahead of another place, and I suggest, therefore, that it would be convenient to adjourn till after lunch.

The PRESIDENT:

– In view of the state of business in this chamber, and also the progress of business in another place, as disclosed by the statement of the Minister, and to meet the convenience of honorable senators, I shall suspend the sitting of the Senate till half-past two p.m., at which hour I shall resume the chair.

Sitting suspended from 11. S3 a.m. to

page 9110

ESTATE DUTY ASSESSMENT BILL

(No. 2).

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Motion (by Senator Pearce) proposed -

That so much of the Standing and Sessional Orders be suspended as would prevent the Bill being passed through all its stages without delay.

I ask honorable senators to assent to this motion, because they will find, when the proposal for the second reading of the Bill is under consideration, that it is practically of an unimportant character, and there is no reason why it should not be put through all its stages to-day.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a first time.

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · Western Australia · ALP

.- In moving

That this Bill be now read a second time,

I wish to say that it is one of three amending Bills which are necessary in connexion with our various taxing Acts. All have the same purport, and deal with the same subject. As honorable senators are aware, the amount of our taxation, and the scope of it, have immensely increased since the outbreak of the war. We had a Commissioner of Taxation in the person of the late Mr. McKay, who was one of the most valuable of our public servants, but, unfortunately, we lost him through death. Before his demise, the Government had arrived at the conclusion that it was absolutely necessary that he should be provided with assistance in the form or an Assistant Commissioner, and we had decided to ask Parliament to agree to the creation of that office. This Bill, and the two which’ will follow it, provide for the appointment of an Assistant Commissioner of Taxation, who, in the event of the illness or absence from duty of the Commissioner, -will be able to take his place, and who at other times will be in a position to relieve him of a certain amount of work. I am sure honorable senators will agree with me that, dealing as we do with so many forms of taxation, it is necessary we should have ample and competent officers at the head of that Department. In the circumstances, therefore, I think -there will be no opposition to ‘this Bill.

Senator Stewart:

– Have the Government appointed a Commissioner of Taxation yet?

Senator PEARCE:

– No. I think that applications have been invited for filling the position. But it is the intention of the Government to appoint a Commissioner, and, if these Bills be passed, to also appoint an Assistant Commissioner.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment.

page 9110

INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT BILL

(No. 3).

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Sessional and Standing Orders suspended, and Bill read a first time.

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · Western Australia · ALP

– In moving

That this Bill be now read a second time,

I merely wish to say that it is an amending measure consequent upon that which has just been passed.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment.

page 9110

LAND TAX ASSESSMENT BILL

(No. 2).

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Sessional and Standing Orders suspended, and Bill read a first time.

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · Western Australia · ALP

– In moving

That this Bill be now read a second time,

I have merely to say that it is on similar lines to the two measures with which we have just dealt. They relate to specific forms of taxation, and this Bill deals with another form.

Senator Blakey:

– There will not be three Assistant Commissioners appointed, I suppose, but only one, who will under- take all these duties ?

Senator PEARCE:

– That is so. As a Commissioner must be appointed Commissioner of Land Tax, Commissioner of Income Tax, and Commissioner for the collection of Estate Duties, it becomes necessary to appoint an Assistant Commissioner to deal with . these three forms of taxation.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stageswithout amendment.

page 9111

SUSPENSION OF SITTING

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · Western Australia · ALP

– Only one other measure, that relating to the increase in the invalid and old-age pensions, has to come from another place, and my information is to the effect that it will probably be half-an-hour before it is disposed of. In the circumstances a suspension of the sitting will probably meet the convenience of honorable senators.

The PRESIDENT:

– In view of the state of business in this Chamber and, as the Minister informs me, of the state of business in another place, and to meet the convenience of honorable senators, I suspend the sitting of the Senate until a quarter to 4 o’clock.

Sitting suspended from 2.47 to 3.45 p.m.

page 9111

INVALID AND OLD-AGE PENSIONS BILL

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended, and Bill read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · Western Australia · ALP

.- In moving -

That this Bill be now read’ a second time.

I desire to point out that the Bill authorizes an increase in a maximum payment of pensions under the Invalid and Old-age Pensions Act, from £26 per year to £32 10s., or, in other words, an additional 2s. 6d. per week -to those who are entitled to the maximum rate. Where a claimant for a pension is in re-, ceipt of board and lodging the maximum amount which shall be included as income on account of such board and lodging, is to be increased from 5s. to 7s. 6d. per week. A sum of 2s. per week is now proposed to be paid in cases where a magistrate has decided that a claimant is unfit to be trusted with a pension, but that’ sum is not to be paid until the claimant enters a benevolent asylum. A new provision is proposed to be made authorizing payment of moneys due to a pensioner, while in a benevolent asylum, to the asylum for the benefit of the pen sioner. Production of the pension certificate in such, case may be dispensed with. I feel sure that all honorable members of the Senate are heartily in accord with this Bill, and with the provisions by which inmates of benevolent asylums will be able to get a few shillings to spend on tobacco and other comforts. This has been a sore point with them for years, and is a concession which, I think, is thoroughly justified. No doubt there are many other ways in which the Oldage Pensions Act ‘ could be further liberalized, and I wish to say that the Government intend to look into a number of questions affecting this measure. There is, for instance, the question of exemptions, and 1 know several honorable senators are interested in the matter of pensions for blind people. The Treasurer has given a promise- that he will see whether there are any cases of hardship to be remedied.

Senator Long:

– He gave that promise twelve months ago and has done nothing.

Senator PEARCE:

– I can only say that the matter will -be looked’ into. I feel sure the Senate will pass the Bill unanimously.

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

– Whilst I am profoundly disappointed at the taxation proposals of the Government which, we are informed, will be submitted to this- Chamber later on in the session, I am pleased beyond measure at the introduction of this Bill, which seeks to- give a greater measure of justice to those who have laboured long and incessantly in the field of industry throughout Australia and some of whom to-day are in receipt of the invalid or old-age pension. The Bill provides for an increase of 2s. 6d. per week, and, directly bearing upon this point, there appeared in the editorial columns- of the Argus yesterday an article which, for cold bloodedness and heartlessness, has never been equalled in the columns of any newspaper in Australia before. That article contained the statement that the proposed increase in income tax would realize £1,000.000, which was to be handed over as a gift to the invalid and oldage pensioners. The article went on further to say that it was to be given over to persons who- could make no productive use of it. Here in Australia we have a large army of men- and women invalided and totally incapacitated, and because they are not able- to produce in

Australia now, this paper says that, in these times, when the cost of living is so high, they should be denied the very necessaries of life. This party stands for justice to the people who are unable to do anything for themselves. I would not. care if the amount of pension were doubled, ‘if the occasion demanded it. In such circumstances the Government would be justified in introducing even a larger measure of taxation in order to deal justly with these people.- It is proposed to raise, approximately, £3,000,000 by war profits taxation. From whom will that sum be exacted but the people who, apparently, during this war have made undue profits, and, in doing so, have increased the cost of living all round ? No section in the community has felt this burden more than the invalid and old-age pensioners. It appears to me that there is a move, in certain directions, to prevent the invalid and old-age pensioners from getting the increase, for in to-day’s Age I read a copy of a circular which apparently is being distributed in Western Australia dealing with this matter. It was read in the Legislative Assembly in Western Australia by a Labour member, Mr. Hudson, and one clause of the circular is as follows: -

We have thought it wise, in these circumstances, to make an appeal to those who are being specially attacked, in the hope that they will agree to contribute to a fund which will enable the Liberals of Western Australia to make a determined effort to prevent the objects of the Labour party being attained to provide for fair and reasonable security to all.

That circular was signed by Sir John Forrest, Mr. S. Burt, and Mr. W. T. Loton, each of whom has agreed to subscribe £100 per annum for three years for the purpose, evidently, of opposing these Government taxation proposals which provide, amongst other things, for an ‘ increase of 2s. 6d. per week to the invalid and old-age pensioners of Australia. When we see an attempt like this being made to block humane legislation it is time that the people of Australia were informed of the forces that are at work to defeat the aims and objects of the Labour party,

Senator Maughan:

– Does not Sir John Forrest get a pension of £500 a year?

Senator FINDLEY:

– I have seen it stated that he has had a pension for some years and that he will enjoy it for the remainder of his life. And yet he is one of those who, apparently, are prepared to subscribe to a fund the object of which is to oppose taxation proposals to be submitted to us later on. When Invald and Old-age Pensions Bills were last before the respective Chambers, they met with a good deal of opposition in both places, and the newspapers which supported those honorable members then are, apparently, just as determined now to prevent, at all hazards, an increase of this very small sum to the unfortunate citizens of this country. No man with a vein of sympathy in him could find any fault with the measure before us to-day, and yet that circle of readers catered for by the Argus appears to be indifferent to the sufferings of those who have not been able to provide for themselves. No section of the community should enlist fuller sympathy. To me the proposed increase does not seem to be enough, for if 10s. were considered necessary before the war, another 5s. at least ought to be added to the amount now paid. The opposition of the Argus is apparently dictated in the interests of that section of the community which has never borne its full share of the burdens- of government. The only way they think the country can be governed and financed is to lower wages, increase the cost of living, and wipe out old-age and invalid pensions. I hope the day will never come when a majority of the members of this Legislature will wipe such a humane Act off our statute-book. It is an Act which we take some pride in, having passed through both Chambers, and which commends itself to the humanistic feelings of every one who possesses them. When a paper such as the Argus, with a circle of readers probably next in size to that of its contemporary down the street, goes out of its way to attack this section of the community, it stings one to think that in this altruistic age such a cold-blooded and heartless leader could be published, and that that journal should have the audacity - as it had - to ask that section which it supports in Parliament, and that section in the community which subscribes to it outside, to do all they can to prevent the passage of such a measure, in order that those who are able to bear more burdens than they are carrying to-day may be relieved even of those burdens, and that pensioners shall continue to endure hardship and misery, possibly multiplied and intensified. I have no time or sympathy for such writers or for the people who agree with them. When we have another opportunity of considering the Government’s financial proposals, I shall endeavour, with other honorable members, to see that the taxation expedients of the Government, which were, apparently, received with applause in another place because they were not what the Opposition anticipated, are replaced by something which will not cause them so much satisfaction. I rose to express my pleasure at the opportunity presented to me and others to support this liberal measure, which, I hope, will be the forerunner of one still more liberal to the old-age pensioners of Australia.

Senator STEWART:
Queensland

– I agree with almost every word uttered by Senator Findley, but would point out to him and other honorable senators, and the public outside, that the old-age pension system and a number of other democratic measures are safe while the Labour party remain in power, but if the party begin splitting straws, quarrel within their own ranks, become divided, and are thrust out of power, as in all probability they will be, what can we expect to befall those enactments ? All who are now present in this chamber belong to the one party, the Opposition being invisible, and I would impress on them the absolute necessity of sinking non-essentials and sticking to our platform. Only in that way can we maintain the confidence of the people and remain in a position where we shall be able to resist any encroachment upon the measures placed on the statute-book by our party.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment.

page 9113

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Commonwealth Government Small Arms Factory - Report for year ended 30th June, 1015.

Dredges, Bridges, Sugar Mills, and Locomotives: Importations of material during past ten years - Additional information. - Further return to Order of the Senate of 18th May. 1916.

The War. - Paper presented to British Parliament - Correspondence with the United States Ambassador regarding the relief of Allied Territories in the Occupation of the Enemy.

page 9113

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Compulsory Military Service : Proclamation

Motion (by Senator Pearce) proposed -

That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn until 3 p.m. on a day to be fixed by Mr. President, which day of meeting shall be notified by Mr. President to each honorable senator by telegram or letter.

Senator MULLAN:
Queensland

– This is a very important motion at this juncture in our history, because before we meet again I understand that a proclamation will be issued calling up troops, regardless of whether the people have decided for conscription or not. If the Government are going to take that action, it is only fair that they should, in compliance with the Acf, call Parliament together and give Parliament their reasons. This is a matter of such supreme importance that I refuse to overlook it, no matter who else may do so. Section 60 of the Defence Act provides -

  1. In time of war it shall be lawful for the Governor-General, by proclamation, to call upon all persons liable to serve in the Citizen Forces to enlist and serve as prescribed.
  2. A proclamation under the last preceding sub-section may call upon all persons liable to service in any military district or subdistrict, who are specified in any one or more of the classes hereunder set out, so to enlist; but so that the persons specified in any class in that district or sub-districtshall not be called upon to enlist until all the persons in that district or sub-district who are specified in the preceding classes are or have been called upon.
  3. The classes referred to in this section are as follow: -

Class I. - All men of the age of eighteen years and upwards, but under thirtyfive years, who are unmarried, or widowers without children;

Class II. - All men of the age of thirty-five years and upwards, but under fortyfive years, who are unmarried, or widowers without children;

Class III. - All men of the age of eighteen years and upwards, but under thirtyfive years, who are married or widowers with children;

Class IV. - All men of the ageof thirtyfive years and upwards, but under forty-five years, who are married, or widowers with children; and

Class V. - All men of the age of forty-five years and upwards, but under sixty years.

  1. If the Parliament is not sitting at the date of the issue of the proclamation, it shall be summoned to meet within ten days after that date.

We have been told that the proclamation is to be issued on Monday next, and there does not appear to be the slightest intention on the part of the Government to call Parliament together within ten days after the issue of the proclamation. The Government would appear to intend to sidestep the law as it stands to-day. In this supreme crisis they should be straightforward. They should put their cards on the table so that every man in the Commonwealth may know exactly what ia their intention. If they intend to summon Parliament that they may be able to explain the reasons why they are calling up the troops, and that Parliament may be given an opportunity to approve or disapprove of their proposed action, they should say so. The real position is that they do not contemplate calling Parliament together, and. they intend to rely upon the fact that what is proposed is only an adjournment, and not a prorogation; to claim that Parliament will technically be sitting, and that the law will be complied with. That may be a technical compliance with’ the law, but it will violate its spirit, which is that in such a supreme crisis Parliament should be called together so that honorable members may have (stated to them the reasons why the Government propose taking so grave a step, and they should then decide, in view of the reasons submitted, whether the step is justified or not. It is the duty of every member of this Senate to maintain his rights and the rights of the people in this matter, and that he may be given an opportunity to do so I intend to move as an amendment to the motion that the Senate, at its rising, adjourn till Wednesday next. I understand that the proclamation will have been issued before that time. If it has not been issued by Wednesday next we can have a further adjournment. I want to put the position fairly and squarely before honorable senators. Let them make no mistake about it. Every man who votes for the motion submitted by the Minister for Defence will take upon himself the responsiblity of aiding and abetting the Government in calling up our men. That is the position, and it is just as well that it should be defined to honorable senators. Every member of the Senate who votes for the motion will be helping to give effect to the proclamation, because he will be enabling the Government to take the course proposed, without giving Parlia-ment .an opportunity to challenge their action. If my amendment be agreed to, whilst the proclamation may still be issued, it cannot be given effect without our indorsement. Who is to be supreme in this crisis? Honorable senators must decide on this motion, whether it is the Government for the time being or the Parliament. So far as I am concerned, I arn not going to allow any Executive or any coterie of men to decide my action in the matter. I sincerely hope that those who are against the action of the Government in attempting to disregard Parliament and to violate the laws of the land in this supreme crisis, will, by supporting the amendment I have indicated, refuse to permit them to do so. I move -

That all the words after the word “ on “ be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “ Wednesday next.”

The PRESIDENT:

– Before asking for a seconder for the amendment it is my duty to point out to Senator Mullan that it is out of order, since it is a direct negative of the motion submitted by the Minister for Defence. All that it is necessary for the honorable senator to do to accomplish what he desires is to negative the motion. If the motion is not carried the Senate will meet at 3 ‘o’clock on Wednesday, in accordance with Sessional Orders. If the honorable senator were to move that the Senate, at its rising, adjourn to some unusual hour, such as 3 o’clock on Tuesday, or some other nonsitting day, that would be an amendment which I could accept, because it would not be a direct negative of the motion.

Senator MULLAN:

– In order to comply with the Sessional Orders, I move -

That all the words after the word ° on “ be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “ Tuesday next.’-

I desire that there should be no mistake about what I intend. I want to have a division on the amendment to show where honorable senators are. I wish to know what honorable senators are in favour of permitting the Government to call up the troops before Parliament is given an opportunity to indorse such action.

Senator Watson:

– Most of the members of the Senate are absent.

Senator MULLAN:

– I cannot help that. That is their own business.

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

– I am prepared to second the amendment. No matter of greater moment to the people of Australia, or to this Parliament, has been dealt with in this Chamber than that which is involved in the amendment submitted by Senator Mullan. We are told that the proclamation is to be issued pn Monday, and ‘that regulations will also be issued; but none of us have the slightest idea what those regulations will contain.- This morning I put two or three questions to the Minister for Defence which were pertinent to the matter we are now discussing. He said, in reply, that when the call is made of men between twenty-one and thirty-five years of age, an opportunity will be given to those who desire to be exempted to make an application for exemption before recognised tribunals. Some who make application will go into camp and remain there until their applications have been decided. The Minister said, further, that there will be some who will not be required to go into camp after making application for exemption. He told us that a committee is to be appointed of civilians and not of military men - though he did not say how many would form the committee, or who were to be the members of it - to deal with applications from all parts of Australia for exemptions.

Senator Pearce:

– No, in regard to industries, not individuals. The general Courts will deal with personal applications for exemption.

Senator FINDLEY:

– I understand that some who will make applications for exemption will be required to go into camp. We should have some information from the Minister as to the kind of industries the employees of which are to be exempted.

Senator Pearce:

– The railways, for instance, and industries like the Broken Hill mine, producing materials required for munitions.

Senator FINDLEY:

– Are we to understand that employees on the railways and those engaged in the Broken Hill mining industry and in the mining industry in every part of Australia will be exempt ?

Senator Pearce:

– Not all mines; those engaged in the production of things necessary to carry on the war.

Senator FINDLEY:

– Who is to decide that?

Senator Pearce:

– It will be for the proposed committee to recommend, and then the Government will decide the matter.

Senator FINDLEY:

– Are we to understand that there are to be certain “ starred “ industries declared, and- that those engaged in them will not be called up?

The PRESIDENT:

– I am afraid the honorable senator is going beyond the limits of the amendment.

Senator FINDLEY:

– I should not have risen to second the amendment were itnot for the fact that I am quite in the dark as to the real intentions of the Government with respect to the proclamation and the exemptions that will be permitted under it. I am not here to offer opposition merely for the sake of opposing the Government. But I desire to elicit all the information with respect to the Government proposal which the citizens of Australia are entitled to have.

Senator Watson:

– Surely, if any trouble arose, the President and Speaker would be quite prepared to call Parliament together.

Senator Mullan:

– They can do only what the Government tell them to do.

The PRESIDENT:

– I might make an explanation which will clear up the matter. When a motion such as that submitted by the Minister for Defence is passed, Mr. Speaker and myself look upon ourselves as placed in the same position as that occupied by the Governor-General, and we act only upon the advice of the responsible advisers of the Crown. I would never call the Senate together upon my own initiative. It would be useless for me to do so if the Government were not prepared to go on with business. I would refuse to accept the responsibility of having to call the Senate together on my own initiative, because that is a responsibility which should not be , placed upon the presiding officer of the Senate, who occupies a semi- judicial position. It is a duty which devolves upon the responsible Ministers of the Crown, who are charged with the . duty of carrying on the business of the country in an orderly and proper way.

Senator FINDLEY:

– I should not have spoken were it not for the fact that I am in the dark as to the real intention of the Government. The Minister might give an assurance which would clear . up my doubts and enable the readers of newspapers throughout Australia to know what may be expected to happen between Monday next and ten days later. If such an assurance were given my purpose would be served.

Senator Pearce:

– I can make a statement which will satisfy the honorable senator.

Senator FINDLEY:

– If that is so I shall not occupy the time of the Senate any longer.

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · Western Australia · ALP

– On behalf of the Government, I wish to say that the proclamation has already been issued. It was issued to-day, and it was issued in accordance with the provisions of the Defence Act. Honorable senators may rest assured that all the requirements of the Act have been, and will be, most carefully observed. I cannot say more than that for the simple reason that I am not a constitutional lawyer. But the action taken by the Government has been taken in accordance with the best constitutional advice that we could get. The proclamation has been issued, and we are complying with the law.

Senator Mullan:

– We ought to have a copy of the proclamation.

Senator PEARCE:

– Before we adjourn, I shall, if possible, lay a copy of it on the table of the Senate, but there is nothing in it more than has already been stated by the Prime Minister and myself. I ask honorable senators to accept that assurance, which is given in all honesty and sincerity. We would be foolish to act in this matter without being certain that we were upon sound legal ground.

Senator Blakey:

– Give us some outline of the exemptions? They seem to be the chief bone of contention.

Senator PEARCE:

– The exemptions outlined by the Prime Minister are the exemptions specified in the regulations.

Senator Findley:

– Where are the regulations?

Senator PEARCE:

– They are not yet out, but they will be shortly.

Senator Blakey:

– We know the exemptions so far as individuals ‘are concerned, but we do not know the cases to which they relate.

Senator PEARCE:

– The cases have to be established by claim. If the honorable senator will look at the Defence Act he will see quite a number of exemptions there. These have to be established before the Courts.

Senator Findley:

– But is there not to be a committee to deal with special industries ?

Senator PEARCE:

– There will be a committee to advise the Government as to what industries are necessary to enable us to carry on the war. Our railways naturally occur to one in this connexion. But it does not follow that every person employed upon the railways will be exempt from service.

Senator Blakey:

– Will the men who are called up be required to go into camp before they can be exempted ?

Senator PEARCE:

– They will first have to come up for enlistment, and then they may claim exemption.

Senator Blakey:

– But in the meantime they must go into camp ?

Senator PEARCE:

-Undoubtedly , unless they are engaged in an exempt industry.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– With all due respect to him, I think that the Minister for Defence has made his case much weaker than it was. If, in response to the questions which I put to him yesterday, he had given the explanation which he has now given, I might not have taken the stand which I did. The Defence Act provides that when the proclamation calling up men for service is issued Parliament shall be summoned, to discuss the reasons for issuing that proclamation, within ten days. Last night the Minister stated that he would follow the law and the Constitution in regard to this matter. But we did not then know whether Parliament would be sitting when the proclamation was issued. In the newspapers this morning, however, the Prime Minister is reported as having definitely stated that Parliament will not be sitting next week. If I had received that reply yesterday it would have been a straight-out, honest answer to an honest and courteous question. I contend that the Defence Act is not being observed in regard to this matter. The Minister has told us that the proclamation has been issued. That is all the more reason why this Parliament should meet to discuss the reasons for the issue of that proclamation, and to debate the proclamation itself. If Senator Mullan had not moved his amendment the Senate would have been adjourned till an indefinite date, and we would not have known that the proclamation has already been issued. The information has only now been dragged from the Minister.

Senator Pearce:

– That is not correct: The announcement was typed, so that I would be in a position to make it. The honorable senator saw the Prime Minister come and hand it to me a few minutes ago.

Senator NEEDHAM:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

– I accept the assurance of the Minister. But under the provisions of the Defence Act, this Parliament has the right to discuss the reasons why the proclamation has been issued, and also the regulations in connexion therewith. I have no desire to embarrass the Government in any way, but I want to see the- law obeyed. Had the Minister been more frank with me, I would not have supported the amendment of Senator Mullan. But because of his lack of candour, I think we shall be wise to carry the amendment.

Senator STEWART:
Queensland

– I wish to point out that Parliament is now sitting, and that the proclamation has already been issued. Subsection 4 of section 60 of the Defence Act provides -

If the Parliament is not sitting at the date of the issue of the proclamation it shall be summoned to meet within ten days after that date.

But the proclamation has been issued today, and Parliament is sitting.

Senator Mullan:

– We have not seen a copy of it.

Senator STEWART:

– As Senator Mullan has interjected, we have not seen a copy of the proclamation, and we have not been made acquainted by the Government with their reasons for issuing it. My reading of the sub-section which I have quoted is that if Parliament be sitting a copy of the proclamation must be laid on the table of the Senate, and the reasons for issuing it must be stated to Parliament, whereas if Parliament be not sitting it must be summoned to meet within ten days of the issue of the proclamation. For what purpose must it be summoned ? To hear the Government’s reasons for issuing the proclamation. Now I think that the Government have an easy way out of this difficulty. They can at once state their reasons for issuing the proclamation. Parliament is sitting. The opportunity is here. The Government will be well advised if they take advantage of that opportunity. If they do so, they will be complying with the Act, andthe necessity for meeting next week will be obviated.

Senator Mullan:

– Provided we get a chance of discussing their reason for issuing the proclamation.

Senator STEWART:

– Well, Parliament is sitting, and there is no reason why it should rise to-night. We are ready to discuss the question if it is put before us in a proper way. I suggest, therefore, that the Minister should give us the reasons for the issue of the proclamation.

Senator Pearce:

– Has not the honorable senator heard those reasons stated in this House and in another place?

Senator STEWART:

– That is quite true. We know why the proclamation has been issued, but we want the Act to be complied with.

Question - That the words proposed to be left out be left out - put. The Senate divided -

Ayes … … … 8

Noes … … … 7

Majority … … 1

Question so resolved in the affirmative’.

Question - That the words proposed to be inserted be inserted - put. The Senate divided -

Ayes … … … 8

Noes … … … 7

Majority for the amendment … … 1

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment agreed to.

Original question, as amended, resolved in the affirmative.

Resolved -

That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn until 3 p.m. on Tuesday next.

page 9118

ADJOURNMENT

Wireless News for Transports - National Referendum Committees - Censorship: Broken Hill: Western Australia

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · Western Australia · ALP

– In moving -

That the Senate do now adjourn,

I desire to say that I promised some information to Senator McDougall concerning the supply of war news by wireless to our incoming transports. The Minister for the Navy informs me that an arrangement can be made by which news will be transmitted from the Perth Wireless Station. Senator McKissock asked me some questions with regard to telegrams sent by the Prime Minister to the Mayors of Ballarat and other municipali ses, inviting them to take action to form National Referendum Committees. In reply to those questions I have to say that the telegrams were sent by the Prime Minister in his capacity as Chairman of the Council of the National Referendum Committee, and that the Government are not bearing the expense of such telegrams.

Senator McKissock:

– Can you tell the Senate who is?

Senator PEARCE:

– That is not the honorable senator’s business.

Senator McKissock:

– But I asked the question, and the Minister might : be courteous enough to give a reply.

Senator PEARCE:

– The honorable senator is entitled to ask any question about Government expenditure, but it is not his business to inquire about anything else. I wish also to say that although the majority of the Senate decided to meet on Tuesday next, the Government will have no business, except the motion that I have moved here today.

Senator MULLAN:
Queensland

– During the week the Minister for Defence was asked several questions in connexion with an alleged disturbance at Broken . Hill, and he repeatedly told us there Was’ no truth in statements that -there had been disturbances there.

Senator Guthrie:

– Rumours !

Senator MULLAN:

– I have information which shows that there is trouble there. I have been told that on Monday evening,, at Broken Hill, forty policemen threatened with revolvers and used their batons upon a decidedly good-humoured crowd of men, women, and children. This, it appears, is the first blow in for the conscriptionists. My information shows that there is a great deal of excitement and indignation there as the result of this action, and that probably there will be a general strike at Broken Hill on Monday next.

Senator Lynch:

– Would the honorable senator like to see one?

Senator MULLAN:

– Would you ?

Senator Lynch:

– No.

Senator MULLAN:

– Then the honorable senator may answer for himself.

Senator Lynch:

– I am answering for myself; there is no doubt about my position.

Senator MULLAN:

– I am pleased to know that the honorable senator’s position is so perfectly clear. I want also to define my position, and I draw attention to the fact that there is altogether too much censoring of news just at present. The public ought to know what is being done. Even in this Senate we cannot get information from the Minister concerning the happenings from day to day. We have been told that the men at Broken Hill regard this as a dastardly, and probably an inspired, attempt to place them in a false position. Anyhow, if they go out on strike next Monday, it will probably be as a result of the great provocation they have received by this wholesale batoning of men, women, and children. I understand that six women were batoned and injured on Monday night; and my information shows that an attack was made upon peaceable citizens holding a good- humoured demonstration. This, then, is a sample of that Prussianism, which at the outbreak of the war, we all hoped would not be imported into Australia, and which our men have gone overseas to fight against. This, it appears, is the sort of treatment we are going to get even before we adopt the pet scheme of conscription favoured by some honorable senators.

Senator Lynch:

– It is the scheme of. the honorable senator’s party.

Senator MULLAN:

– Which party?

Senator Lynch:

– The Labour party?

Senator MULLAN:

– Does , the honorable senator belong to the Labour party ?

Senator Lynch:

– I imagine I do. I belonged to it before the honorable ‘senator did.

Senator MULLAN:

– Well, Mr. President, I will conclude with the hope that we shall not have a repetition of this trouble in the future.

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– I wish also to urge upon the Government the necessity of paying a little attention to this much-abused Department of the Commonwealth Censorship. I realize, of course, that it is- impossible for the censors to . satisfy all parties, because the men appointed to these positions are only human and liable to err on both sides;

Senator Findley:

– I said the other day that there was general complaint about the censorship.

Senator LYNCH:

– I am glad to have the honorable senator’s manly expression of opinion, because it makes my task all the lighter. I intend to repeat what I said the other day, that the censorship in Western Australia, by some means or other, has been directed against the cause of conscription. At a recent meeting of the Trades Hall Council, Fremantle - a body composed of a large number of delegates whose business it is to look after the industrial interests of the western State - a motion was tabled in favour of bringing about a general strike, in the event of conscription being decided upon. Notice . of that motion was given wide publicity; the public knew when it was to be debated ; but when it was defeated by 35 votes to5, although the representatives of the press were present, and reported the overwhelming rejection of the motion, the censor censored it. The much-abused office of censor is just as much directed against one - side as the . other. In Western Australia, at a meeting of the metropolitan council, held to discuss the question of supporting or rejecting the Government policy, the question was debated at full length, and it was ultimately decided by a majority, which I am not in a position to state, that the council stand behind the Government. That was censored. Where is Senator Mullan now, that he does not protest ? Where are the other’ honorable senators who look -upon the censorshipas an evil instrument, to be used on all. occasions against theanti-conscriptionists’? I should not . mention these trifles but for the extraordinary attitude of those who look on the censorship as a kind of weapon that will shoot in one direction and not in another. Those are two important cases, where the censorship in Western Australia . was directed towards suppressing opinions in favour of conscription. Therefore, I say, let these men hold their peace.

Senator Mullan:

– You are making a protest, and you have a right to do it.

Senator LYNCH:

– I am not. I am trying to open the eyes and minds of honorable senators to the fact that the censorship can err on one side just as much as on the other. When people tell us that it is directed in only one way, Western Australia comes along and puts witnesses in the box to confound them.

Senator Blakey:

– That is an isolated case against a hundred.

Senator LYNCH:

– Does the honorable senator . call the metropolitan council of his fellow workers in Western Australia an isolated case ? Is the opinion of a body representing 80,000 persons in the western State an isolated case ? That argument will . not hold water with me. It looks both ways in most awkward fashion for honorable senators who think they see the hand of the tyrant in this . matter,. Complaints have also been made about mayors receiving notices from the Federal Government with regard to the referendum.

I have to . lodge a complaint - on the strength of rumours, it is true; but, seeing that many statements are made on the strength of rumours, I may as well be in as out of the fashion. We have, a very important centre in Western Australia, called Yorkrakine. The mayor has not been invited up to date to take action, nor has he had any notification from the Federal Government. I want to enter my protest here, as. solemnly as I can, and with all the force, at my command, against such treatment of that dignitary. It is not fair to this rising centre that ite mayor should not be treated with the same consideration as the mayors of other States.

Senator Findley:

– Where is Yorkrakine?

Senator LYNCH:

– Honorable senators around’ me who ask where Yorkrakine is have evidently not. been far “ out-back.” They, may have been as far as Flemington ; but even that’ is not far enough to enable’ them to gain “ out-back “ experience. They do- not know where’ Yorkrakine in. I am treating this matter quite seriously in the interests of that rising and flourishing centre in the western State. I protest against the action of the Federal Government in not sending an invitation to the mayor of that classic resort to see that the common sense of that community is aroused in this great crisis. I am speaking in the interests of the pioneers of the western State, which is made up of the best men in the Commonwealth; because, after all, those who remain in this State are the people who stopped behind where the soup kitchens were some time ago. The men in the West are the men who pressed out, and are to be found in the neighbourhood of Yorkrakine. They and their families have gono to build up the prosperity that surrounds that centre of advanced civilization, culture, and prosperity in Western Australia - Yorkrakine of to-day. Again I say, according to rumour, its mayor has not received an invitation. I admit that I am going on no better foundation than rumour; but, all the same, I want to enter my earnest protest against the action of the Federal Government in not seeing that the mayor of Yorkrakine is treated with the same courtesy and consideration, and regarded’ as of the same importance, as the mayor of Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, or. Adelaide.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senate adjourned at 5.6 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 29 September 1916, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1916/19160929_senate_6_80/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant