View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate
18 April 1918

7^th Parliament · 2^nd Session

QUESTION
- REFUSAL OF ADMISSION TO WHARF
AUSTRALIAN SOLDIERS REPATRIATION BILL
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH BOARDS
QUESTION
- PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONER
QUESTION
- BANK NOTES
QUESTION
- PRIME MINISTER’S DEPARTMENT
QUESTION
- GERMANS IN DEFENCE DEPARTMENT
QUESTION
- ARSENAL
QUESTION
- REPATRIATION TRUSTEES
QUESTION
- LOANS TO SOLDIERS DEPENDANTS
QUESTION
- ADVERTISING WAR LOAN: COST
QUESTION
- IMPORTATION OF PIANOS AND GALVANIZED IRON
SHIPBUILDING SCHEME
QUESTION
- WOLFRAM, ZINC, LEAD, COPPER, AND ANTIMONY: EXPORT
QUESTION
- REFERENDUM CAMPAIGN - TRAVELLING PRESSMEN
QUESTION
- PRICE OF WHEAT
QUESTION
- IMPERIAL CONFERENCE
QUESTION
- PRICE OF SUGAR
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH POLICE
QUESTION
- CHEAP MEAT FOR SOLDIERS’ DEPENDANTS
QUESTION
- MILITARY MEDALS
QUESTION
- EAST-WEST RAILWAYINCREASED FARES
SUPPLY BILL (No. 6) 1917-18
- First Reading
QUESTION
- FOR SOLDIERS’ FAMILIES
SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT
ADJOURNMENT
- Public Service Examinations - Report of- Repatriation Trustees

The President (Senator the Hon. T. Givens) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 4001

QUESTION

REFUSAL OF ADMISSION TO WHARF

Catholic Dignitaries

Senator O’KEEFE:
TASMANIA

– Has the Minister for Defence been informed that yesterday Lieutenant Wills, when the Loongana was about to leave Launceston, refused permission to the two highest dignitaries of the Catholic Church in Tasmania, Archbishop Delaney and Monsignor Beechinor, to accompany the Catholic Apostolic Delegate on to the wharf, notwithstanding that a pass for that purpose had been issued to them either by an officer of the Union Steam-ship Company or by the Naval Officer? Was the refusal in accordance with the usual custom, and, if it is not usual to refuse to those who have received passes permission to go on to a wharf, will the Minister have the officer responsible suspended until the matter has been inquired into?

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · NAT

– No statement such as that of the honorable senator has been made to me. As the duty of guarding ships falls within the province of the Minister for the Navy, I should be glad of notice of the question, so that the matter may be referred to the Navy Department for a reply.

Senator O’Keefe:

– I shall bring up the matter on the Supply Bill, and the honorable senator will have an opportunity of obtaining the information in the meanwhile.

PAPERS.

The following papers were presented : -

Audit Act 1901-1917. - Special Report of the

Auditor -General (under section 64) - Comments upon those portions of the Second (Progress Report of the Royal Commission on Navy and Defence Administration which relate to the Audit Office.

Commonwealth Railways Act 1917. - By-law No. 3.

Defence Department - Commonwealth Government Factories - Report for year ended 30th June, 1916.

Inter-State Commission Act 1912. - Fourth Annual Report of the Inter-State Commission.

Lands Acquisition Act 1906-1916. - Land ac quired at -

Jericho, Queensland - For Postal purposes.

Leichhardt, New South Wales- For Defence purposes.

Papua. - Ordinances of 1918 -

No. 1. - Timber

No.2.-Sago

No. 3.- Superannuation

No. 4. - Superannuation (No. 2)

No.5. - Past Officers’ Superannuation

PUBLIC SERVICE EXAMINATION.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– My sympathies are with the honorable senator. I do not know what has been done, or what can be done in the matter, but I shall endeavour tohave the Public Service Commissioner informed of the desirability of conceding the request.

BALSILLIE RAIN EXPERIMENTS.

Senator LONG:
TASMANIA

– Is the VicePresident of the Executive Council in a position to answer the question which I directed through him to the Minister for Works and Railways regarding the cost of the Balsillie rain experiments?

Senator RUSSELL:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · VICTORIA · NAT

– The total expenditure on the experiments has been £2,418 .

RIFLE CLUBS.

Notices at Post-offices.

Senator GUY:
TASMANIA

– Last week I asked the Minister representing the PostmasterGeneral questions concerning the posting of rifle club notices at post-offices. Has he an. answer yet ?

Senator RUSSELL:

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

The Deputy Postmaster-General, Hobart, reports as follows: - “In July last a charge was made upon the Launceston Rifle Club for extension for a notice-board used by them at the Launceston Post Office: The secretary of the club then advised that the notice-board was no longer required, and it was removed, being the club’s property. No other notices in connexion with rifle clubs are exhibited.”
It is not considered to be a function of the Postmaster-General’s Department to provide notice-boards for authorities who wish to display notices at post-offices. Such authorities should either provide the notice-board accommodation which they require, or contribute towards the cost of notice-boards if they desire the Postmaster-General tosupply them.

METHYLATED SPIRITS.

SenatorFOLL. - Has the Vice-Presi dent of the Executive Council any information to give by way of reply to my question regarding the shortage of methylated spirits in Queensland?

Senator RUSSELL:

– I have received the following information from the secretary to the Commonwealth Prices Commissioner : -

Melbourne, 13th April, 1918.

With reference to your communication of the 11th inst., covering an extract from Hansard relating to a request by Senator Foll that inquiries be made into the question of the supply of methylated spirits in Queensland, I am directed by the Chief Prices Commissioner to state, for the information of the Vice-President of the Executive Council, that inquiries were made recently into the alleged shortage of methylated spirits in Queensland, when it was found that the Bundaberg Distillery Company had on hand about 8,000 gallons of spirit, of which the military authorities intended to take over 1,000 gallons at once. It was also stated that the Bundaberg Distillery Company can now make about 10,000 gallons per month, and that such will meet all requirements in Queensland.

This information was furnished about the middle of last month, and further inquiries are being made by telegram as to whether those conditions still exist.

Melbourne, 17th April,1918.

In continuation of my memorandum of the 13th inst., relative to the question asked by Senator Foll in regard to the supply of methylated spirits in Queensland, I am directed to inform you that a telegram has now been received from the Prices Commissioner in Brisbane, as follows: - “Your telegram 13th inst. methylated spirits Distilling Company mode 4,744’ gallons March April should be higher stocks were so short every one wants some am asking Distilling Company what they will deliver next month.”

page 4003

AUSTRALIAN SOLDIERS REPATRIATION BILL

Bill presented by Senator Millen, and read a first time.

page 4003

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH BOARDS

Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– Last week I asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister a question in connexion with the Pools, Boards, and Committees appointed by the Commonwealth. The reply I received from the Minister for Repatriation was that the information would be obtained and furnished as soon as possible. Has the Minister the information available to-day?

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

– All I can say is that steps have been taken to fulfil the promise given, and that an answer to the honorable member’s question will be furnished to him as soon as possible.

page 4003

QUESTION

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONER

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– Last week I asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister -

Has the Public Service Commissioner as yet been appointed?
If not, what is the reason of the delay?
How many officers on the Public Service Commissioner’s Staff are filling acting positions?
What are the positions filled by such officers?

page 4004

QUESTION

IMPORTATION OF PIANOS AND GALVANIZED IRON

Senator KEATING:
TASMANIA

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

The number of pianos imported into Australia during the last six months?
The ports of entry of same?
The ports from which they were shipped?
The quantities of galvanized iron imported into Australia during the same period?
The ports of entry of same?
The ports from which same were shipped?
The quantities of galvanized iron known to be under order and awaiting shipment from abroad to Australia.
The ports abroad at which the latter are awaiting shipment, and the time they have been awaiting such shipment ?
Are shipping manifests of the Commonwealth’s oversea trade available at any Government Department or elsewhere for perusal by members of the Senate; and, if so, on what terms or conditions?

Senator RUSSELL:
NAT

– The answers are - 1 to 6. See statement attached. 7 to 8. It is not considered advisable to supplythis information.

It is regretted the ships’ manifests cannot be made available for perusal.

Senator PRATTEN:

– I regret the Minister has not given the full answer. It means that no honorable senator is in a position-

The PRESIDENT:

– It is not permissible for the honorable senator to make a statement at this stage.

Senator KEATING:

– As arising out of the answer given, or purporting to be given, by the Minister, may I ask the honorable gentleman to read out the “statement attached” ; otherwise, so far as I know, it will not appear in Hansard?

Senator RUSSELL:

– Certainly. The statement is as follows : -

Statement setting out the number of pianos and the quantity of galvanized iron imported into the Commonwealth during the six months ended 31st March, 1918, showing the ports of entry and the country whence imported: -

page 4005

SHIPBUILDING SCHEME

SenatorFOLL asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Will he guarantee that in connexion with the Government’s shipbuilding scheme a fair proportion of work arising out of this scheme be given to Queensland?

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

– The Government are desirous of affording every State the fullest possible opportunities for building vessels, and will be glad to consider any proposals from Queensland in connexion with the matter.

page 4005

QUESTION

WOLFRAM, ZINC, LEAD, COPPER, AND ANTIMONY: EXPORT

Senator BARNES:
VICTORIA

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

How many tons of wolfram, zinc, lead, copper, and antimony have been exported from Australia since April, 1917?

Senator RUSSELL:
NAT

– It is not considered advisable to supply the information desired by the honorable senator.

page 4005

QUESTION

REFERENDUM CAMPAIGN - TRAVELLING PRESSMEN

Senator McDOUGALL:

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Is it a fact that during the recent referendum campaign a number of pressmen from the leading newspapers were workingfor the Government?
If so, how many were employed, and their names?
Were the services , of the said pressmen given free to the Government by the newspaper proprietors, or were they paid for by the Government ?
If so, what fees and travelling expenses were paid, and to whom?

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

– The answers are -

No. 2 to 4. See No. 1.

page 4005

QUESTION

PRICE OF WHEAT

Senator HENDERSON:
for Senator Lynch

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Whether the Government observed in the morning press of 11th April a report that the price of wheat in New Zealand has been fixed at 6s. 4d. per bushel, with an open market?
Whether, in view of that report, the Government propose to fixa similar price for wheat in the Commonwealth, or otherwise increase the existing guaranteed price of 4s. per bushel?

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

– The answers are -

The report has been observed.
The question of guarantees will be considered at the next meeting of the Australian Wheat Board. It must be remembered, however, that the circumstances of New Zealand differ from those of the Commonwealth. In the Dominion, an importing country, the realization of a comparatively high price can be insured by the regulation of local prices. It is impossible, however, to regulate the price which oversea buyers will pay for Australian wheat, more than two-thirds of which is exported. The object of the New Zealand Government, no doubt, is to insure a sufficient local supply.

page 4006

QUESTION

IMPERIAL CONFERENCE

Senator NEEDHAM:

asked the Min ister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Is he aware whether Sir Wilfrid Laurier, the Leader of the Opposition in theCanadian Parliament, is to accompany the Prime Minister of that Dominion to the Imperial Conference to be held in London this year?
If so, is he in favour of the Leader of the Opposition in the Commonwealth Parliament accompanying the Australian delegates to the same Imperial Conference?

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

– The answers are -

No. I am informed by the Secretary of State for the Colonies that Sir Wilfrid Laurier will not accompany Sir Robert Borden.
See No.1.

page 4006

QUESTION

PRICE OF SUGAR

Effect on Retail Businesses.

Senator Lt Colonel BOLTON:
for Senator Fairbairn

asked the Minister in charge of price fixing, upon notice -

Is he aware whether, by fixing the price of sugar at 3½d. per lb., grocers can only make a profit of 11 per cent., whilst it costs them 19.5 per cent. to handle this line?
Is he aware whether 300 grocers in Melbourne have been driven out of business in the last two years?
If so, will he look into the matter promptly ?

Senator RUSSELL:
NAT

– The answers are -

In Melbourne, grocers’ profits on sugar are approximately from 12 per cent. to 15 per cent. Prior to the war, the average profit was £4 16s. per ton, and now it is £46s. per ton.
No. Searches at the Office of the RegistrarGeneral (Victoria) disclose assignments and insolvencies of grocers and storekeepers registered from 1912 to date as follows: -

See answers to Nos. 1 and 2.

page 4006

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH POLICE

Senator FOLL:

asked the Minister re presenting the Prime Minister, upon notice -

How many members of the Commonwealth Police Force are returned soldiers?

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

– Sixteen. Preference is given to returned soldiers, and this number exhausted the applications of returned soldiers with suitable qualifications.

page 4006

QUESTION

CHEAP MEAT FOR SOLDIERS’ DEPENDANTS

Senator McDOUGALL:
for Senator Gardiner

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

Will the Government arrange with the Queensland Government for the supply of cheap meat to the wives, children, and dependants of the soldiers at the Front?

Senator PEARCE:
NAT

– The whole question of the price of meat is under the consideration of the Inter-State Commission, and the matter will be considered in the light of the Commission’s report.

page 4006

QUESTION

MILITARY MEDALS

Senator McDOUGALL:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

Is it a fact that a firm of contractors for military medals has failed to supply the medals to time?
Has such firm complained that it was unable to get the enamel required from abroad?
If so, is the Minister aware whether the enamel required can be, and is being, manufactured in the Commonwealth?
Is the Minister aware whether a sample of said enamelhas been supplied to the Military Department?

Senator PEARCE:
NAT

– The answers are -

Yes.
The firm has represented that difficulty has been experienced in obtaining supplies of suitable enamel from abroad.
It has been ascertained that some enamel is manufactured in the Commonwealth.
A sample of enamel of Australian manufacture was recently submitted to the Department, but upon being tried was found to be unsatisfactory for the purpose required.

page 4006

QUESTION

EAST-WEST RAILWAYINCREASED FARES

Senator HENDERSON:
for Senator Lynch

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

What is the amount of the increase proposed to be made in railway fares on the EastWest Railway in respect of meals supplied?
Whether such increase bears reasonable relation to the actual or estimated cost of meals already supplied?

Senator RUSSELL:
NAT

– The answers are -

Second class - Child (over three years and under fourteen years of age), 7s. 6d. First class - Child (over three years and under fourteen years of age), 8s. 6d. Second class - Adult, l1s. First class- Adult, 13s. 6d. Children not exceeding three years of age receive meals free of charge. The amount charged first class passengers covers morning and afternoon tea.
Passengers West bound will receive four meals, and those Bast bound five meals, on the respective journeys. The rates charged are estimated as beingthe cost of the service.

page 4007

SUPPLY BILL (No. 6) 1917-18

Dismissal of Men at Cockatoo Island Dock - Expenditure of Senate Select Committees - Naval Supervision of Wharfs in Tasmania - Ministers’ Salaries - Cost of Living - Defence Administration : Business Board - Government Employ ment of Enemy Aliens - Treatment of Interned Aliens: Case of Herman Hayman - German Concentration Camp in New South Wales - Soldiers’ Dependants: Administration of Lord Mayor’s Fund, Sydney - War Expenditure - Government Control of Industries : Enlargement of Boards and Committees - Australian Imperial Force Enlistments: General Service Order : Equipment - Repatriation - Development of Oil Resources - Finance and War Indebtedness : War-time Profits Bill : Taxation of Imports - Rent of Commonwealth Buildings - Land Values Taxation - Nationalization of Industries and Public Utilities.

Bill received from House of Representatives.

Motion (by Senator Millen) 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.

Senator GRANT:
New South Wales

– A Supply Bill is one of the most important measures that can come before the Senate,but apparently the Government are determined to push this measure through the Senate in the next few hours. There was nothing at all to prevent the Government taking whatever steps they deemed necessary in order that senators might have a full and ample opportunity of discussing every item in the Bill. I hope this is the last occasion on which the Government will ask the Senate to rush through a Supply Bill for such a large amount in the course of a few hours.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

First Reading

Motion (by Senator Millen) proposed -

That the Bill be now read a first time.

Senator McDOUGALL:
New South Wales

– In the absence of the Leader of the Opposition, who is engaged in other business connected with the welfare of the Commonwealth, and which I hope will be successful, I do not propose to say much on this measure. It is readily agreed by all parties that in this hour of the nation’s danger there should be harmony in the community, and it is with a view to promoting such harmony that I propose to point out instances in which the Government are responsible for creating disputes when they ought to be healing all divisions in public opinion. The Government are setting man against man and union against union. But if they wish to bring about the unity of all classesof the community for the sake of recruiting, they must set an example to private employers. Lately they have been guilty of what I regard as one of the most dastardly acts that any Government or employer could be guilty of. I refer to the dismissal from Cockatoo Dock of a number of men who had refused to sign a certain agreement. There may be reasons for requesting men to sign that document, and there may be good reasons in the opinion of the men for not signing it, but this is not the time when the Government should be holding a pistol at the head of the workers and saying, “ Sign this document or leave our employment.” Men who have given good service to the Commonwealth, and earlier to the State Government, are being compelled to leave Cockatoo Dock, where they have been employed for almost a life- time, because they decline to sign an agreement which is obnoxious to them. Those men comprise not only followers of the party to which I belong, but also supporters of the National party, men who quarrelled with their fellow-employees in order to stand by the Government on the conscription issue. It is scandalous that we should find the Commonwealth Government using the heavy hand of tyranny at this stage in the nation’s history. Personally, I would rather do anything than sign such an agreement. Instead of forcing upon men an action that is objectionable to them, we should be trying to get the people together in a solid body to resist the common enemy. Ever since the present Government have been in office they have shown a desire to do something to injure the unionists of Australia, particularly in connexion with the shipbuilding industry, of which I have an intimate knowledge. Men have done almost everything possible, short of the grovelling that is necessary in some countries to-day, to fall into line with the wishes of the Government. Some of them have given up the principles of a life-time in order to try to assist the Government in the hour of need. Now they are dismissed. Thank God, there are private employers who will not draw such distinctions, and those who have been dismissed will obtain employment. But that fact does not excuse the tyrannical action of the Government. I have read in the press that fourteen turners, thirteen fitters, and one patternmaker lately employed at Cockatoo Dock have been dismissed, and Mr. King Salter, manager of the dockyard, is reported to have said that fourteen of the men who had been put off in accordance with the instructions of the Prime Minister were old hands. I guarantee that the manager was sorry to dismiss those old hands, who had held responsible positions, not only in the unions, but also in social and political life. I take this opportunity of entering my protest against the injustice done by the Government,and I hope that the time will come soon when we shall be able to turn the tables on them.

Another matter to which I wish to refer is the administration of the German concentration camp in New South Wales. Some time ago I informed the Minister privately of some irregularities which I thought were occurring there. Rumours of grave irregularities are current, of whichI know nothing, but I shall mention one case, with the particulars of which I am acquainted. I told the Minister that I had written to the State Commandant in regard to the liberation of a certain German internee in order that he might attend race meet ings and other gatherings. I received a rather sharp reply from the Commandant, who practically said I did not know what I was talking about, because there was no man of that name interned in the camp. I had made a mistake in the spelling of a foreign name, and, when I discovered that, I told the Minister that I proposed to take further action. Evidently he communicated with the Commandant, because I received a letter from the latter to the effect that this internee was liberated because he suffered from locomotor ataxia. Despite what the doctors say, his ailment is very slight. He can get about the streets and follow his business as a commission agent. That does not look as if he had much locomotor ataxia. Will the Minister make inquiries into the management of the German Concentration Camp, and see that these unfair proceedings are terminated ? A searching inquiry is necessary. With reference to this internee, a paragraph appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald of 18th March to the effect that a German named Herman Hey man - I spelt it Hayman, and his first name in full, and yet the State Commandant said there was nobody there of that name - was sentenced by Mr. Love, Stipendiary Magistrate, to six months’ imprisonment at the Water Police Court, Sydney, on a charge of having, at Sydney, on 5th February - falsely pretended to George Weil and that he had £300 worth of chemicals at the German Concentration Camp, and, being a friend of Colonel Holman, who knew they were there, he would be able to remove them, and that he had arranged for their disposal, by means of which he obtained £6.

A further sentence of three months’ imprison ment, to be cumulative, was passed upon the accused on a charge of endeavouring to impose upon Ernest Victor Finckh, by falsely representing that if Finckh gave him £3 5s. he would “ square “ the guard at the German Concentration Camp, and get away with 15 ozs. of cocaine belonging to a German internee.

– No. I got them from the Sunday Sun, the Sunday Times, the Evening News, and the Daily Telegraph. Mr. Pontey states -

The reports supplied by the Department are apparently prepared by the Lord Mayor’s Patriotic Fund, who are the people mainly to blame for the whole matter. Firstly, because they failed to provide relief for special distress amongst the soldiers’ dependants since August, 1917, and secondly, because they endeavoured, through the War Council, to prevent other people obtaining and dispensing the necessary help. It is beside the point for the Lord Mayor’s Fund to quote the amount of relief which has been given to these women since the inception of the fund in 1914. It is admitted that grants of money were made to many soldiers’ dependants for special distress prior to August, 1917. The point is, What has been done since August, 1917? As far as I can see, nothing, or practically nothing. The families only received a matter of a few shillings per week, and many of them received this before August, 1917. Then, again, the basis of this weekly dole is absurd on the face of it, for the reason that the women with seven children only receive the same weekly payment from the Lord Mayor’s Fund as the women with only two children. As far as I can see, from the reports furnished, there has been no attempt to deal with the real question at issue, so far as I am concerned, which is, that there has been since August, 1917, a deal of distress amongst active service soldiers’ wives, which the Lord Mayor’s Fund has not only refused to relieve, but has endeavoured to prevent other people relieving. I have never said one word about the amount of relief granted to the families prior to August, 1917, and if a public inquiry takes place, I will undertake to prove my statements that there has been a deal of distress since August, 1917, right up to the hilt. In my opinion, it is a serious bar to recruiting to allow these grievances to continue as they are.

I am going to refer to only one case, but it was made a lot of by those who think I had no right to make these matters public. That is the case of Mrs. Lynch, of Forest Lodge. On this Mr. Pontey says -

This is the case in which a Court ejectment order was made for rent totalling £2 2s. She had got into arrears through having to undergo an operation, and when she received the notice to quit on the 3rd December, 1917, she applied personally to the Lord Mayor’s Fund for assistance to meet it, and was told her case would receive consideration. When she received the summons for ejectment on the 12th December, 1917, she called again at the Lord Mayor’s Fund, and was told that it had not been possible to get the Committee together to deal with her case. (They managed to get’ the Committee together, however, to vote ,£100 to be wasted in buying toys, a number of which went to children who had no one at the war.) Finally, when the fortnight allowed by the Court ejectment order had expired, the Lord Mayor’s Fund wrote and said nothing further could be done for h’er. Furthermore, when this case was investigated by the Daily Telegraph, at the beginning of February, 1918, the Lord Mayor’s Fund people stated they knew nothing of the circumstances, and that they had not been applied to for assistance. This is a plain misstatement of fact, because I have their letter of refusal, clearing showing there must have been an application for assistance, or there would have been no need for the letter of refusal. It would appear that other people are open to charges of misrepresentation. There has never been an explanation of why this woman’s appeal for assistance, to the extent of £2 2s., to save herself and children being put out in the street, was refused by the Lord Mayor’s Fund.

Every ease is inquired into fully by Mr. Pontey, but I shall not occupy time by reading all the information that I have at my disposal. Mr. Pontey is not a supporter of Labour; indeed he has been its consistent opponent, but he is a reputable citizen, and has lost business by his efforts in the establishment of a fruit and vegetable fund for the unfortunate wives and children of soldiers who have been neglected by the Government which sent them overseas to fight. Those who went away were promised that conditions would not be altered, but they have been altered, and it is the duty of the Government to put things right, and to restore harmony. Until that is done, recruiting must suffer. When it has been done, we shall get all the recruiting we want. I advise the Government to give an honorary commission to every man in this Parliament under the age of fifty years, so that he may go out and do what Captain Carmichael is doing. There are in this Parliament and in the Public Service many men under the fighting age who have not done anything like that, al ienator McDougall. though the obligation is not upon one, but upon all in the community. Every man- no matter what his age - should offer his services. When this has been done, we shall get more sympathy from the class that I represent. But while the victimization and oppression of men continues, so that children have to seek their bread in the dust-bins in the streets, we cannot expect the assistance that we desire. I assure honorable senators that it is, unfortunately, only too true that many families have to send to the markets for stale fruit and vegetables, which they use, cutting away the bad parts. Yet the men are told that if they do not volunteer they are -disloyal. There is no disloyalty in the ranks of Labour. But those who will not remedy the state of things about which I complain are doing the work of the Hun. I say: Go into the back ways of the city, and make things right there., Let men get back to their employments, so that they may earn their living. When you have done that you can ask for the sympathy of the class to which I belong, and will have assistance for the Empire in time of need. It is said that Mr. Pontey, who has ruined his own business by his philanthropy, has an object to serve. I do not know what that object can be, if it is not to assist the deserving.

Senator Millen:

– Was he at one time associated with the Red Cross Society?

Senator McDOUGALL:

– I cannot say. His business is the rebuilding up of typewriters at 11 Barrack-street, Sydney. He has his home on the Mountains, where he grows fruit, vegetables, and flowers, and he started by bringing them into Sydney and distributing them amongst soldiers’ families. He soon found that hit own supplies were insufficient, and got friends to help him. Then some of the city caterers, knowing that he- was doing good work, sent him some supplies, and the Government provided him with a depot. Dozens of men and women are now assisting him in the distribution of fruit and vegetables, 1,200 women being dependent on their efforts. I have seen the books in the depot, and have seen the rush . of applicants. The Government v should remedy the grievances that make the distress that has to be relieved. There would then be a response to duty’s calL This is an account of the institution to which I have been referring, which was written by Mr. W. A. Zuill, M.L.A., and printed by the Daily Examiner, Grafton -

page 4011

QUESTION

FOR SOLDIERS’ FAMILIES

Fruit and Vegetable Scheme. more donations wanted.

Fruit and Vegetable Fund,16Carrington street, Wynyard Square, Sydney.

I do not think it is very widely known throughout the Clarence District that there is a depot of the above nature existing in Sydney, whereat the wives and families of fully 1,200 men at the Front are receiving a weekly donation of vegetables, fruit, jam, &c. This institution, which is entirely apart from the Red Cross, is conducted by a philanthropist named R. M. Pontey, and assisted by a number of willing co-workers - ladies and gentlemen of independent means - who roll up at the little depot at 9 o’clock every morning and work like galley slaves, making up hampers and delivering them to women and children, who call on regular days to receive the donations.

The writer had the pleasure of seeing the good work that was being accomplished, and he feels sure than an appeal to the farmers of the Clarence to send along a donation has only to be made and the thing is done.

On the ground floor of the depot, 16 Carringtonstreet, Wynyard Square, the distribution is going on all day long. It is like a miniature vegetable market. Inside, piles of bunches of carrots, cabbages, rhubarb, pumpkins, preserving melons, potatoes, &c., &c., are to be seen, from which the willing workers make up an assorted hamper for the applicant, who sits and waits her turn with a patience that was pleasing to observe.

A small staff attends to the clerical part of the business, for the whole affair is run on Teal business lines; every applicant is registered, and identification is certified by the local clergyman, police sergeant, or public school teacher, so there can be no duplication or “ringing in.” The applicant is each provided with a card which she presents when she comes for her gift, and this is dated and initialed, so that everything is worked according to a system.

The use of the building is granted free by the Resumed Properties Department, and the organization is registered with the State War Council, which brings their affairs under the control of the Auditor-General. Upstairs, in another room, are men and ladies busily engaged in making jam. On the occasion of my visit, several big cauldrons were steaming away, while the workers were cutting piemelons and grammas into cubes and lemons into slices. The jam, when made, is put into pickle bottles or empty treacle tins, and distributed in the same careful way as the vegetables are. One of the city merchants supplies the sugar at cost price.

Now, the workers upstairs, as well as downstairs, are all volunteers. They receive not one penny for their work, and they work like niggers the whole day long. It is their way of helping to win the war, and they are doing it without a grumble. There are no I.W.W. hours at this depôt, no awards, no anything but extreme gratitude from the hundreds of women who are being helped.

My object in writing this article is to endeavour to enlist the sympathy and assistance of the people of the Clarence electorate. By helping the families of the man who is fighting for you, you are at least doing something. There are lots of times when you produce things on your farms that are wasted. Don’t let them waste. Put them on the steamer and send them along to R. M. Pontey, 16 Carringtonstreet, Wynyard Square, Sydney. I feel sure the steam-ship companies trading between the Clarence and Sydney would be only too pleased to carry the parcels freight free. If they will not, Mr. Pontey will pay freight out of cash donations he gets from well-wishers.

I would suggest that a few enthusiastic young ladies at each centre in the district combine and undertake to receive the donations and have them sent along. I was pleased to learn that the Casino ladies, with Mrs. Fanning at their head, were amongst the best contributors to this depôt. Mr. Pontey assures me that regular supplies come from Casino.

Farmers! When shipping maize or potatoes, put in an extra bag for the soldiers’ wives. At present Mr. Pontey is unable to assist women with only child; it is only women with two or more children who are assisted, but I feel sure that when the scheme becomes more widely known sufficient donations will come along to enable him to give these women a weekly dole also.

We ought to be ashamed that there should be need for this effort. On the last occasion when I said something across the chamber, the Minister said that he would not inquire into mere tittle-tattle. This is not tittle-tattle. I do not say that the Minister is not trying to do his best, because I think that he is, and I am pleased with what he has done, and shall help him in any way that I can. But he must not tell me that my statements are incorrect. This is a statement regarding the same institution which appeared in the Sun -

The Fruit and Vegetable Fund for Fighters’ Families has touched bedrock. Instead of a great quantity of commodities, it has on hand but a few carrots and pumpkins; and its organizers (all of whom acted in a purely honorary capacity, under the honorary direction of Mr. R. M. Pontey) are making desperate efforts to remedy the position. They are actuated by a profound and humane incentive in the fact that no less than 4,500 children and 1,200 mothers, the dependants of men who are fighting for Australia, are looking to the fund each week to supply them with the necessary fruit and vegetables that their slender allotments and separation allowances do not permit them to purchase. The incentive is deepened, too, by the fact that every week there are fresh applicants for assistance, at an average of 200.

Similar accounts have been published in other Sydney newspapers, and have been copied into country newspapers. Can we expect a rush of recruits when so much misery exists? I want the Government to remedy the troubles that have caused this distress. I do not justify the last strike, but I say that the condition of German prisoners is not worse than that of some of those who are suffering for it. Men who formerly occupied clerical positions have been forced to try to get work in the mines. Some of those who had got themselves taken on by the Railway Department were sacked again when it was discovered that they had been connected with the strike. This is an order from the inspector of the permanent way at Bathurst -

Bathurst, 22nd March, 1918

Ganger Gibson, Orange Triangle

It has been reported by the District Superintendent, Orange, that Walter Francis Woods was previously employed in Traffic Branchas a leading porter at Orange, and was dismissed in connexion with the late railway strike.

As we had no authority to re-employ Woods he should not have been given employment, and you will therefore arrange for his discharge along with others from to-morrow, Saturday, 23rd inst.

Geo. King

While such things exist, we call on men to rally round the flag. I maintain that by the use of the War Precautions Act we can open any shop, or compel any employer to re-employ these men; but if Ministers would only appeal to the New South Wales Government to give these unfortunate men the opportunity of earning a living, they would do something in the direction of helping to win the war. I hope that the Conference sitting at Government House will do effective work. I hope that those obnoxious regulations which have pressed so hardly on the people will be repealed. Let us give men a chance to live. I hope that the Minister will not take my remarks as being criticisms against his administration of his Department. They are intended to help him by way of advice. I have merely endeavoured to tell him of something which is actually existing, and giving dissatisfaction, and I trust that the cause of this dissatisfaction will be speedily removed.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– I propose to trespass upon the time and kindness of honorable senators for the purpose of bringing under their attention a matter which I deem of some little importance; that is to say, the extent to which the Senate has the right to appoint Select Committees, and see that the necessary funds are provided to enable them to properly fulfil the functions for which they are appointed.

During this session the Senate has appointed a Select Committee to inquire into the effect of intoxicating liquors upon outgoing and returning soldiers, and upon demobilization and the repatriation of our troops; and it has also resolved that the Committee should be given the authority to move from place to place, which, as I understand it, means that the Committee had the right to visit any part of Australia, if it so desired. The Select Committee so appointed commenced work, but in a very little while found that the £100 provided on the Estimates for Senate Select Committees would not be sufficient to enable it to do what it deemed necessary before submitting a report. Consequently I, as Chairman of the Committee, communicated with the President, asking that the sum of £350 might be placed at its disposal. On the 6th February, the Clerk wrote to the Treasurer as follows -

On the 10th January, 1918, a Select Committee of the Senate was appointed to inquire as to the extent to which intoxicating liquor is adversely affecting outgoing and returned soldiers, and the best method of dealing with the sale of intoxicating liquor during the period of the war and of demobilization and repatriation, and by the resolution of the Senate of the 22nd idem was given authority to adjourn from place to place.

The Committee is desirous of obtaining evidence on the subject of inquiry in the several State capitals, but the funds at our disposal under the vote on the Estimates of this Department for expenses of Select Committees are insufficient to cover the cost. I have, therefore, by direction of the President of the Senate, to request that you will be good enough to make available from Treasurer’s Advance the amount of £350, which it is considered will be required for the purpose above mentioned.

The Secretary to the Treasury replied as follows -

Your letter of the6th instant, in which request was made for a sum of £350, to enable a Select Committee of the Senate to obtain evidence in the several State capitals, has been duly placed before the Treasurer, who requests me to state that he will be glad if the matter be submitted to the Honorable the President for his consideration.

Lord Forrest states that he would be only too glad to do all he can to meet the wishes of any Select Committee of the Senate, but points out that there will be a large deficit of revenue to be met at the end of the financial year, and would like the Honorable the President to keep this fact in view in dealing with the request for the additional sum involved in the taking of evidence by the Select Committee in the several State capitals.

This is how the President replied -

The secretary of the Select Committee appointed by the Senate to inquire into the effect of intoxicating liquor on soldiers, &c, has shown me the memorandum which has been received from you with reference to the application for a sum of £350, to enable the said Committee to visit and obtain evidence in the several State capitals, requesting that the matter should be again submitted to me, in view of the ‘ desirableness of strict economy at the present time.

I quite agree with the Treasurer that the necessity exists for strict economy, owing to the financial stress caused by the war, but I desire to point out to you that, as you no doubt are ‘already aware, 1 have consistently refused to admit the right of either the Treasurer or the Government to review parliamentary expenditure, and have even refused to discuss the matter with them, because I have always held, following out the practice of the House of Commons, that Parliament should be supreme master in its own household, and that as it has,to impose taxation and find the money for all services, and has no voice in Cabinet discussion on the apportionment of money so provided, it should be supreme in matters relating exclusively to itself.

The £350 asked for by the Select Committee, however, comes under a different category, and is not included in my Estimates of Senate expenditure. It is a request for money which comes from the Select Committee, and as such I have forwarded it on to the Treasurer. It will be for him or the Government to decide, having in view the objects for which the Select Committee was appointed, whether additional expenditure is justified under .present circumstances.

was considerably surprised when I read the President’s letter, and I determined to bring the matter before the Senate, so that, as a senator, I might know exactly the position of Select Committees in regard to securing funds to enable them to fulfil their proper functions. The President’s letter was divided into three parts. It is not necessary to waste a single moment in dealing with the first paragraph, hut paragraphs 2 and 3 raise rather important issues. I have not been in the Senate very long, and I bring this matter forward as one seeking information. I do not quite clearly understand the second paragraph. I realize that the President’s mind has been expressed in faultless language and in perfect grammar, and I know that it is my own fault if I fail to grasp his meaning; but, as I understand it the paragraph states that the President refuses the right of the Government to review or question the expenditure of money that Parliament deems necessary for itsown carrying on.

In order to support his contention the President deals with an analogy from the House of Commons. Again, I am a little bewildered. It seems to me on the face of it that there is no perfect analogy between a House that has the fate of a Govern- . ment in the hollow of its hands, and in which a member’s vote may unseat the strongest of Administrations, and crumble it to the dust, and a House that can pass half a dozen motions of censure on the weakest of Administrations without .the position of the Ministry being affected in any way. Therefore I need not trouble very much about the analogy that the President’ has drawn. It does not seem to me to be a perfect one.

Senator Pearce:

– There was one Government which found it impossible to carry on without the consent of this Chamber.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– If the analogy is a perfect one, Well and good. In paragraph 3 of the President’s letter we are told that the request of the Select Committee for .£350 does not come under the category of that which Parliament deems necessary for its carrying on, because it is not included in “-my Estimates of expenditure.” I. like the use of the word “ my “ ; there is a regal touch about it reminding one of the words used by His Gracious Majesty the .King in opening Parliament. His Majesty says, “ My beloved peers,” “ my faithful commoners,” “ my loyal subjects,” “ my Army,” or “ my Navy.” Do I understand from the use of the word “ my “ that it is not a case of what the Senate thinks is necessary, but a case of what the President thinks is necessary for the Senate to carry on.

The PRESIDENT:

– If the honorable senator will pardon me, I would like to remind him that the Estimates of the Senate, as passed by the Senate, come under a different category from a request from a Select Committee, which has none of the rights of the .Senate and is entirely subordinate to it.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– If in using the words “ my Estimates,” the President is assuming a position which is more important than that of the Senate itself, then the Senate will not be able to appoint Committees or, if any are appointed, see that, their work is carried on, unless on “ my

Estimates there was originally a sufficient sum for the purpose. I found that the President had placed £100 on the Estimates for the purposes of Select Committees. The Senate had passed a resolution calling a Select Committee into being, and that Select Committee could not do ‘ its work unless it was granted more than £100. The Government, through the Treasurer, was anxious that no more than £100 should be expended; and I am not blaming the Treasurer for desiring economy - that is not the point. But in. answer to the communication from the Treasury the President said -

The £350 asked for by the Select Committee, however, comes under a different category,- and is not included in my estimates of Senate expenditure. It is a request for money which comes from the Select Committee, and as such I have forwarded it on to the Treasurer. It will be for him or the Government- to decide, having in view the objects for which the Select Committee was appointed, whether additional expenditure is justified under present circumstances.

As I take it, no discussion is allowed by the Treasury concerning- the item of £100 which the President has placed on the Estimates, but the money asked for by a Select Committee appointed by the Senate “comes under a different category.” It was, I understand, merely a request for money which had been forwarded to the Treasurer in a very peremptory manner by the President, and it was for the Treasurer - this is the point I wish to emphasize - to decide whether or not it should be granted.

This, I believe, is not the only Select Committee of the Senate for which the money placed on the Estimates has proved insufficient. I was not a member of the House at the time of the incident I have in mind, and if I am wrong in regard to some of the details, other honorable senators may be able to put me right. I have to rely, pf course, on the records for information, and I understand that some years ago the Senate appointed a Select Committee to deal with the discharge of a federal servant. That Committee was for the purpose of conducting what became known as the “Chinn Inquiry.” The Committee, I understand, had not been sitting very long “before it was discovered that the £100 placed on “my estimates” was not sufficient, and a request was made for more. I think I am right in saying that the Treasurer of the day flatly refused to give any additional funds. The President of that day, when the reply reached him to the effect that the Government were not prepared’ to grant any. more money, did not say that the case “ came under a different category “ from “ my estimates,” and that the matter was one for the Government to decide. That President came to the Senate, and, according to Hansard, presented the following memorandum : -

I have looked into the matter carefully, and, so far as I have been able to ascertain, this action on the part of the Government is entirely without precedent. I take a very serious view of it, because if it were allowed to pass without question, this or any future Government might at any time entirely nullify the power of the Senate to inquire into a particular matter by refusing to provide the necessary funds. I would point out, also, that several Select Committees have paid visits toother States and other places, in order to collect necessary evidence, and that their expenses were met entirely without question by the Government of the day. A Select Committee on the Tasmanian mail service visited Tasmania. There was a Select Committee to inquire into the case of Major Carroll, which went to Sydney and Brisbane; and a Select Committee which was appointed to inquire into the matter of the press cable service, and of which I happened to be a member, visited Sydney, and there was not, so far as I can ascertain, any question raised by the Government of the day in regard to the expenditure. According to the authorities I have looked up, in the House of Commons- -the procedure of which is used largely as a guide for the Senate - there has never been any question as to the payment of the necessary expenses incurred by a Select Committee to inquire into any matter. I thought it my duty to make this announcement to the Senate, because, as I have- said, in my view the position is a very serious one. It will be for the Senate, and the leaders of the Senate, to take the. necessary action, if they consider it proper, to safeguard its rights, and not to have its powers abrogated or nullified at the discretion of any Government.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– I was not here.

Senator Needham:

– But you have the record ?

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– I say that, by a strange coincidence, his name was the same as that of the present President of this Senate - Thomas Givens. How can I say whether it was the name of the same man who is now President? What I want to know is - “ Why this differentiation ?” In view of the answer of the present President regarding the Committee of which I am chairman, to the effect that it was for the Government to please themselves, I felt that I, and also the Select Committee, were denied the rightful support of the President in our efforts to fulfil the functions with which we were commissioned. This Committee, remember, was not appointed by me, but by the Senate, and, therefore, I thought I was entitled to the proper support of the President of the Senate. On receipt of the letter I went personally to the Leader of the Government in this House with a request that more money should be provided. It was rather an easy task for me, not only as a member of the Senate, but as a member of the party to which the Leader of the Government belongs, to prefer such a request, for I think I can claim that the personal relationship between the members of the Government and myself is most friendly. But supposing a member of the Opposition had been chairman of this Select Committee, and he had thought it his duty, again and again, to assail the Government, as he was entitled to do, in the discharge of his parliamentary duties? Would it have been an easy task for such a man to arrange with the representative of the Government for a further advance? As a result of my interview with Senator Millen, I received the following letter: -

Dear Senator Thomas,

For the information of your Committee I forward herewith copy of a letter which I have received from the Secretary, Commonwealth Treasury, relative to the question ofproviding additional funds to enable the Committee to take evidence in the several State capitals.

From a conversation I had with the Acting Treasurer, it did not seem to me at all likely that any further sum would be available, and therefore I consider the Committee would be wise to make their arrangements so as not to exceed the amount already provided. (Sgd.) Thos. Givens,

President of the Senate.

This letter informed us that the Government had made available the sum of £200, but through the President we were told not to expect any further money for the purpose of our inquiry. There was not a single word of protest from the President, or any indication that he offered any objection to the Government’s refusal to grant the necessary money. I cannot but feel that it was not my duty to ask for further funds in order to carry on the work of a Committee appointed by the Senate, but that that was the duty of one who is supposed to be the custodian of our rights. I am not asking that the President should do anything that is not his duty, but I do desire to know how the Senate stands in a matter of this kind, .especially in view of the statement made by the then President on 10th September, 1913, that it would be a very serious abrogation of the rights of the Senate if the money required for the Chinn inquiry were not provided by the Government. I feel that there is in this question something more important than the mere provision of money for the Committee of which I am Chairman. The action of the Government raises a question as to the free and unfettered right of the Senate to appoint Committees. Either the Senate has, or has not, that right; if the right does exist, it must be free and unfettered. I recognise that this raises a very big question from the point of view of the Government. The Senate might be in future, as it has been in the past, hostile to the Government, and might appoint Committees without number merely for the purpose of harassing the Government, and spend moneys recklessly.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– I am glad that the Minister has raised that point. I admit that there is the possibility of that difficulty arising. In a private conversation^ with a well-known gentleman, who, as a professor in one of the Australian universities, is required to study constitutional history, I asked him what would be the position if the Senate were to be continually appointing Select Committees which might recklessly spend money, and in some way upset the -Budget of the Treasurer. His reply was to the effect that representative and democratic government, as we understand it, presupposes, firstly, that sane men are returned to Parliament, and, secondly, that once a man is in Parliament he realizes the responsibilities of his position. These two things not being conceded, representative government fails. That seemed to me a reasonable argument. Every Select Committee that is appointed by the

Senate must necessarily be the creature of the Government, because unless the Government are prepared to find money for the incidental expenditure, it is useless to appoint a Committee. Suppose that the Government flatly refused to make the money available, what could the Senate do f The Senate’s action would depend upon the circumstances of the cases. There may be a time when the Senate will be absolutely powerless to do more than offer a dignified protest. I Was a member of the other branch of the Legislature at a time when that Chamber deemed that its rights had been interfered with by the Senate. By the way, I supported the action of the Senate on that occasion, and another place felt that it was powerless to fight this Chamber on the issue then raised. Mr. Deakin moved -

That, having regard to the fact that the public welfare demands the early enactment of a Federal Tariff, and pending the adoption of Joint Standing Orders, this House refrains from the determination of its constitutional rights or obligations in respect to this Message, and resolves to receive and consider it forthwith.

Whilst at times, the Senate might be absolutely powerless to get the money it requires to carry on its work, at other times its case may be so strong that even a powerful Government could not refuse to join issue with the Senate on it. But the strongest case the Senate could ever have in a matter like this would be perceptibly weakened if the records of this Chamber showed that a President, speaking, presumably, on behalf and in the name of the Senate, had stated that it was for the Government to decide whether it should or should not grant necessary supplies..

Senator Keating:

– No President has said that.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– The present President has said that.

Senator Keating:

– Has the President said, that a Select Committee appointed by the Senate is dependent upon the Government for means to carry on its operations?

Senator O’KEEFE:
TASMANIA · ALP

– That is the effect of what the President has been saying for a long time.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:
QUEENSLAND

– It is somewhat regrettable that Senator Thomas did not take the opportunity to make in Committee his personal attack upon myself and my administration of my office, as he could have done when the first item of ‘ the Estimates was before us, and when I could have met him on the floor of the chamber on equal terms. When an honorable senator feels that it is necessary for the carrying out of his duties in the Senate to make an attack on another individual, the least that that other individual has a right to expect is that he shall not be placed at a disadvantage when that attack is delivered. My only excuse for speaking at all now is that I would not have the right to speak on this matter at a later stage, because the Standing Orders prohibit the revival of a previous debate. .

Senator Maughan:

– Then you would not have the right to speak in Committee ?

The PRESIDENT:

– I should not have the right in Committee to revive a debate which took, place on the first reading. I am therefore reluctantly compelled to take this, the only opportunity I shall have, to reply to Senator Thomas. He made his personal attack upon me in the most approved unctuous, pulpit style at his command. He made my letter to the Treasurer the text of his sermon to me and to the Senate. He divided it into firstly, secondly, and thirdly, and gave us a long disquisition on each of them. I desire to follow his own style seriatim, and to show the Senate the obverse of the medal, so that honorable # senators may judge for themselves. Senator Thomas finds fault with me because I did what I have always done in regard to applications from Select Committees similar to his. I forwarded to the Treasurer, without comment, his request for more money. That has been my invariable procedure in regard to such requests. I did not refuse the money that was asked for, nor did I decline to take the necessary action to have it dealt with. Senator Thomas had not a word to say about the action of the Government in refusing to sanction further expenditure and in sending back his application for money for further information. . Everything that he had to say concerning the Government, and concerning Ministers, was of the most fulsome and servile pattern, his language reminding me of the definition which speaks of gratitude as “a lively sense of favours to come.”

Senator Thomas undertook to prove that my attitude as to the rights of the Senate in respect of the Estimates was entirely wrong. He contended that there is no analogy between the position of the Senate in this matter and that of the House of Commons, a body which makes and unmakes Ministries by a wave of its hand. I am not responsible for the fact that the Senate possesses the same privileges as are enjoyed by the House of Commons; but it certainly possesses those privileges, and the responsibility for that rests with the members of the Convention which drafted the Constitution, with the people of Australia who accepted the Constitution, and with the Parliament of Great Britain which enacted it. If honorable seators .will turn to section 49 of the Constitution, they will see that it is there laid down that -

The powers, privileges, and immunities of the Senate and of the House of Representatives, and of the members and the Committees of each House, shall be such as are declared by the Parliament, and until declared shall be those of the Commons House of Parliament of the United Kingdom, and of its members and Committees, at the establishment of the Commonwealth.

The Senate has declared what its rights and privileges are in certain regards, butin others it has not, and where it has made no declaration, its rights and privileges are those of the House of Commons. If Senator Thomas complains of that, his complaint should be addressed, as I have said, to the framers and acceptors of the Constitution, and to those who enacted it.

Coming . .to his next complaint, he pointed out in a most sarcastic way - his_ remarks constituting a bitter attack upon me - that my attitude towards the Chinn Committee was quite different from that towards his Committee. In what respect, may I ask, was it different? The Chinn Committee sent a request to me for more money in the same way that the Committee of which Senator Thomas is chairman sent its request, and that request was forwarded by me in the same way that I forwarded Senator Thomas’ request. But the Government of the day flatly refused to grant any additional money to the Chinn Committee; the present Government have not refused to grant money to Senator Thomas’ Committee. I reported tol the Senate the refusal of the Government to grant money to the Chinn Committee. That was the only action I took, because it was for the Senate to go further, if it so desired. In this case, there has been no refusal by the Government to grant money. Had there been such a refusal, I should have deemed it my duty to report the matter to the Senate.

Senator Thomas .complains that I speak of the Estimates of the Senate as “ my Estimates.” In so doing, I speak as chief executive officer of the Senate, which I am by virtue of holding the position of President. No personal vanity or personal feeling prompts the expression. The attitude I have always assumed towards the Treasurer in regard to the Senate’s Estimates is that set out in the letter that has been referred to. I do not acknowledge the right of the Treasurer to discuss, and much less to dictate tq me concerning, the Estimates of the Senate. In taking that attitude I am following the practice of the Speaker of the House of Commons, and for the reasons set out in the letter. But there is a difference between the Estimates’ of the Senate and the request of a Select Committee for money. When I require money for expenditure on repairs or renovations, my attitude towards the Treasurer is quite different from my attitude in regard to the Estimates. The amount required may be a £5 note, or it may run into thousands of pounds, as in the case of painting, expensive repairs/ or lift alterations. When money is required for such purposes, I have to go cap in hand to the Treasurer, and to discuss with him the proposed expenditure. Such an application for money on my part differs entirely from the submission of Estimates, because the Senate has not authorized the expenditure which it is proposed to make. Nor is there any analogy between a Commit-‘ tee’s request for money and the submission of ordinary Estimates. I remember reading some time ago that Senator Thomas, who attaches wonderful importance to this Committee, of which he was the originator, was adversely criticised for originating this Committee by a leading temperance newspaper which usually supports him, on the score that he was merely trying to save his face because he had supported the Government in the suppression of the Fiddler and Defeat, two pamphlets which had been suppressed by the Government censor. Probably Senator Thomas attaches an exaggerated importance to this Committee. I do not know whether .that is bo or not.

If the responsibility were mine instead nf the Treasurer’s, I would not give to the Committee the amount for which it is asking, . nor, as President, would I recommend the, granting of that money to them. I shall tell the Senate why I take that position. I find that the Committee proposed to travel, whether it had many or few witnesses to examine, to -every capital city in the Com-, monwealth, and probably to other places.

The clergyman who signs this telegram is a member of the Roman Catholic Church in Tasmania. I admit that he is using rather strong expressions in demanding an investigation by the Defence Department, and I do not propose to say whether I believe his assertions are correct or not. I propose to supplement his statements, by what tha secretary to the Apostolic Delegate told me, when I consulted him after receiving the telegram. The secretary to the Apostolic Delegate lias informed me to the following effect: - Father McNally, a Launceston clergyman, knowing that the Archbishop of Tasmania and Monsignor Beechinor, who is the second highest dig,nitary in the Roman Catholic Church in Tasmania, and one or two other gentlemen, wished to go upon the wharf to take leave of the Apostolic Delegate upon his departure, went to the office of the Union Company, and secured a pass, signed by an official in the’ office. This pass was issued to Father McNally and party, giving them permission to go upon the portion of the wharf which is roped off. A motor .took Father McNally and a couple of other clergymen down to the wharf 7 and they used the pass to get past the barrier, while the car returned to Launceston, and brought down the Apostolic Delegate, along with Archbishop Delaney and” Monsignor Beechinor. But when these three gentlemen arrived at the barrier, they were stopped bv Lieutenant Wills. Of course, the Apostolic Delegate was allowed to go through, because he had his steamer ticket; but Lieutenant Wills, in the words of the secretary to the Apostolic Delegate, and as shown in the telegram which I have read, insolently refused to allow Archbishop Delaney or Monsignor Beechinor to go on the wharf, although Father McNally stood there, and showed his pass, which gave permission to himself and party to go into the enclosed space on the wharf.

According to the telegram the pass was signed by a Naval officer. I put the question to the secretary to the Apostolic Delegate, and he said that, although he was not certain, .he thought it was simply an official of the Union Steam-ship Company who had signed and issued the pass. In any case, the point is immaterial.

Senator Long has also received a telegram from Father McNally making exactly the same charges and assertions as to the insolence of Lieutenant Wills, but in slightly different words. It adds that there was intense indignation on the part of members of the Roman Catholic Church who happened to be present, a’nd that they took it to be meant as a public insult, which was offered to the two dignitaries of the Church by this official.

My reason for bringing this matter forward is that it affects not only the two church dignitaries who might have taken the action of Lieutenant Wills as an insult, but also a large section of the people of Tasmania, who would resent an insult purposely put upon the dignitaries of their church, just as any other section of the people of Australia would resent an insult put on any of the dignitaries of their churches in the circumstances alleged in these telegrams. I make this as an *exparte statement. Perhaps the Minister for Defence will communicate with the Minister for the Navy with the object of having an inquiry made. If the assertions are borne out by the evidence, I hope that the Minister will take the necessary steps to show the officials under his control that they must not go out of their way to insult any member of the public.

Senator PRATTEN:
New South Wales

– When a Supply Bill comes before the Senate it is an occasion for an honorable senator to wander from “Dan to Beersheba,” and speak on almost anything under the sun; it is one of those occasions upon which honorable senators feel that they are free.; but with all the weighty things that are happening abroad, it is rather difficult for honorable senators to concentrate their attention upon mere money details. I am sure we all feel absolutely helpless with regard to what is going on in Europe, but I believe that “doing one’s bit” is a text for a sermon which might still be applied here, and “one’s bit” in Australia just now seems to me to consist in insuring economy with efficiency, not only in private concerns, but in national undertakings. In matters affecting recruiting and administration, and in other matters, the Government may be guided by the honest opinions that honorable senators may express.

Australia does not appear to be suffering very much as a result of the war. The recent Sydney Agricultural Show, an annual festival, resulted in a record amount being taken at the gates, and in drawing a record number of visitors. We are told by Ministers that there is less horse-racing than existed prior to the war, but, so far as one can see and judge, the racing crowds are bigger now, and the amount of money spent in racing is far greater than it was previously. To-day I came across a case showing that secondhand machinery merchants’ businesses are flourishing as they never flourished before, and throughout the length and breadth of Australia, so far as I can see, the war has not really touched us. Evidences of prosperity and of increased expenditure of money can be seen on every side amongst private individuals. There are other evidences of prosperity, all of which has been brought about by the expenditure of the British money that has been paid for produce which still remains unshipped to the Old Country. This state of things makes one wonder what the future holds for us.

What does the future hold for Australia ? No senator dare make a guess as to what is going to happen. No one here this afternoon can say with any certainty that Australia will not some day he a jewel in the hair of the Germanian frau. We cannot prophesy, we cannot even guess, what is going to happen; but the duty which lies nearest to us is that of making the government of the country as efficient as possible, and of doing all we can, directly or indirectly, to help on the great events abroad. If some philosophers or observers came to Australia to-day and saw the evidence of indifference, luxury, comfort, and spending which exists in this young, virile Democracy of ours, to which so many of us are proud to belong, it would strike them that we were decadent. I do not say it; but I do say that comfort, luxury, and extravagance, if placed before duty, have brought down empires, and they are contributors to decadence, as history teaches us.

This Senate has the responsibility of taking a broad-minded view as to what its functions and duties are. I do not think that there is one honorable .senator on this side of the chamber who is anxious to make the difficulties of the Government greater than they already are. Heaven knows how great they are, and what improvization has been attempted to meet them during the last three years.

The Government are to be congratulated upon a reduction in the Estimates as compared with the corresponding period of last year. The Treasurer, in presenting this. Supply to us, has gone some way towards safeguarding economy in expenditure, and I trust that he will continue this policy so that when the next Supply comes before us, we may have further evidence of the fact that the Government appreciate the necessity for economy. The Treasurer has told us that the total loan expenditure of Australia on the war, to the 1st of next September, will amount to £233,000,000, but even should the war cease at an early date, I have no doubt the total liability of Australia, when all our engagements are cleared up, will be something’ approaching £300,000,000. The Treasurer has told us that we have raised, by loan, the sum of £106,000,000, out of a total expenditure of £233,000,000, and that our shortage to-day is £127,000,000. He says, again, that we have borrowed from the British Government the sum of £47,500,000, and rhat we have a deficit, so far as money raised in Australia is concerned, of £80,000,000. He further says, and rightly too, that this position is not creditable to Australia. We are engaged, and successfully engaged I am glad to say, in raising another internal loan of £40,000,000; but on the Treasurer’s own statement, apart from the amount, we have borrowed from the British Government, we have yet to borrow another £40,000,000 before September next in order to make both ends meet. Personally, I do not think Australia is facing the financial problem. On the figures as we know them, the Commonwealth to-day is doing little better than paying the interest on the money it borrows, in addition to the ordinary expenditure of the Government. Britain is paying 4s. and 5s. in the £1 of her war expenditure from revenue, whereas Australia is not paying ls. in the £1 of her capital war expenditure from revenue. I, therefore, say, without fear of contradiction, that we are not facing the financial position. With regard to war loans, I should like to say in all sincerity that I am not enamoured of the cheap-jack methods that are being adopted in order to raise money. I am not enamoured of false-whiskered men in Collins-street, on a so-called tank, or on the model of a ship, singing chanties to induce people to come along and pay £100 for 100 £1 war bonds. I am not enam- oured of all this camouflage and the many circus-like tricks adopted now to raise money from the people of Australia. My experience is that, as a rule, there is one class of people that will always give to Bed Cross, benevolent, and comfort funds; who will always do their best with regard to war loans, and make all the sacrifices that they can be reasonably expected to make under present conditions. There is another class of the community who will do nothing. Capitalists have come to me and said, “ I am not going to put money into war loans, because I can get 6 per cent., 7 per cent., or 8 per cent, for my money, and I should be a fool to invest it at 4£ per cent.” I believe the time has come when this Parliament, by an Act and a stroke of the pen, will have to call upon every man to do his bit, if not voluntarily, then by compulsion.

Senator Needham:

– Will those friends of yours advocate the conscription you speak of?

Senator PRATTEN:

– I do not know whether they advocate conscription or not. I believe that the voting on the question of conscription was very mixed, and I am. quite sure that the men who to-day are making sacrifices also advocate conscription; and, personally, I believe that, if it is right to advocate conscription of manhood, it is right to advocate conscription of wealth. I have already said that I do not agree with the circus-like methods resorted to for the purpose of raising’ money; in my opinion,” as they say in America, they “ cut no ice.” I do not think they bring any large aggregate contributions to the Treasury, while, in the eyes of all serious-thinking men, they degrade the present serious war position.

Senator Russell:

– Whilst honorable senators may be permitted to inspect the manifests privately, it would be unwise to publish the manifests to the world.

Senator PRATTEN:

– I understood from the Minister’s previous answer that the manifests were to be kept a close corporation, and I am glad to have his assurance now that honororable senators may inspect them privately. I can understand that publicity is undesirable, but I know of no reason why an honorable senator should not have an opportunity to know as much as a member of the Shipping Board. I infer from the Minister’s interjection that these manifests will be available to honorable senators to peruse privately and confidentially. I am not suggesting for one moment that in connexion with any of these bodies there is anything that is not strictly honorable, but I suggest that their personnel should be enlarged. Whom do we find controlling the whole of the shipping space and cargoes? Apart from Rear-Admiral Sir William Clarkson, the President and Controller; LieutenantColonel Oldershaw, who represents the Commonwealth Government; and Senator Guthrie, all the members of the Board are colliery owners or ship-owners. They are - Mr. David Hunter, representing Mcllwraith, McEacharn, and Company; A. Gordon Wesche, representing the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company and the British-India lines; Mr. Young, representing Elder, Smith, and Company ; Mr. Brodie, of Sanderson and Company; Mr! Bright, of Gibbs, Bright, and Company; Sir Owen Cox, representing Birt and Company and Lord Inchcape; Mr. Newman, of Howard Smith and Company; and Mr. Eva, of the Commonwealth Government Steam-ship line. I am glad that Senator Guthrie is on the Board, because no man in this Parliament has a better knowledge of shipping from the stand-point of labour. But I remind the Government that shipping is perhaps the most important activity in Australia today. The members of the Board are in a position to bestow favours; they can keep back information. The control of shipping should be in the hands of not only the Government officials, ship-owners, and colliery proprietors, but also two or three gentlemen who have no interest whatever in shipping. I am merely illustrating what might occur under the present system of administration, and in the most kindly spirit I suggest to the Government the enlargement of all these Boards and Committees. The. metal industry supplies another illustration. I understand that one Board controls practically all the copper, zinc, and lead produced in the Commonwealth, and with the exception of Mr. Higgins, who represents the Government, the members of the Board are interested persons. I hope that in the read]justment of the work of the various Cabinet Ministers, which I understand is now being carried out. the points I have mentioned will be considered by the Government, so that there may be no suspicion that anything is wrong, and so that there will be men on the Boards who will insure that the public shall get a fair deal.

I am not saying that anybody is not getting a fair deal; I “am merely pointing out the danger that exists when the Government create monopolies and allow interested persons to control them.

Senator Keating:

– Some of the most brilliant men in the world to-day, I believe, are holding back because they cannot, under the present general service order, offer their services.

Sitting suspended from 6.30 to 8 p.m.

Senator PRATTEN:

– Some time last year there were in the Liverpool Camp hundreds of artillerymen and hundreds of men who had enlisted in special units, the Cyclists Corps and mechanical corps of various kinds; but as it was thought that no further artillerymen would be required at the Front, there came a sudden call from Head-quarters asking the whole of these men to go into the infantry. One or two members of another place and I waited upon the Minister in reference to the matter, and pointed out that the honour of Australia was at stake, because these men had been specially advertised for, and had joined special units. As a result of our representations to the Minister, the whole of these men went away in the corps in which they had originally enlisted, and I know, as a fact, that within a month of their landing in England, all the artillerymen were sent to France, because artillery reinforcements were very urgently required. From month to month and week to week the changes in the war are kaleidoscopic. If we cannot call for men for the artillery service, we should certainly not refuse men for special units.

My experience in regard to this war covers Egypt, Salisbury Plain, Abbeywood, and other camps of Australians, and I can say that the boots, clothing, and other equipment from head to foot supplied by the Defence Department for our soldiers cannot be surpassed by the equipment supplied to any other army in the wide world. It was the best that money could buy, and the best that any community could supply. The Australian soldiers preferred an old repaired pair of Australian boots to anything new that the British Army could issue to them. I have nothing but praise for the section of the Defence Department that deals with the equipment of our troops.

I notice that there is no special vote in this Supply Bill for the Repatriation Department, but I assume that the £1,000,000 set down for Treasurer’s Advance is to be devoted to that particular service. I repeat that we are not in a Prussian community, and that every man is a volunteer, and not a conscript, and I urge upon the Repatriation Department, as well as the Defence Department, the need for employing sympathetic officers. If we wish to achieve success in respect to our treatment of returned soldiers we must have them.

– He is a wellknown mining engineer and geologist. Speaking geologically he reports -

The most powerful argument in favour of the existence of oil in the Commonwealth is that this country possesses deposits of coal, brown coal, and kerosene shale unequalled in extent on earth. Coal-fields indicate petroleum nearby, and oil-wells usually exist alongside coal.

Senator de Largie:

– Then why does he not go and find it?

Senator PRATTEN:

– Because the Government have the monopoly, and will not allow private interference in Papua. In maintaining that monopoly they have a responsibility to the people of Australia, to Parliament, and to themselves to deal with this matter in some better way than they have dealt with it hitherto. It seems nothing but playing with this matter when they spend £60,000 in five years, and bore at the rate of less than 800 feet per annum. I appeal to them to put the matter on a business basis, and go ahead with it. It is of vast importance to the internal development of . the Commonwealth. There are plenty of men in Australia who have “the requisite experience and knowledge. The plant required is not very elaborate. One can bore with a diamond drill for tin or gold, even in these war times, at 30s. a foot, and I am informed that it is not any more difficult to put down a bore for oil than it is to put down a diamond drill.

Senator Guthrie:

– The States have all offered bonuses for the production of oil, and yet private enterprise has failed to discover any.

Senator PRATTEN:

– So far as indications go, the oil belt runs from New Guinea to Java, and the probabilities are that supplies of oil will be struck more easily and more quickly in Papua than they would be further south. The- place should be exploited very speedily, because in Timor, half of which is owned by the Portuguese and half by the Dutch, there are good indications of the presence of oil. If we do not strike it, some one else will.

I estimate that our war Budget after the war will be £50,000,000. We will have to spend £20,000,000 per annum on fixed charges of interest on war loans and obligations for repatriation as well as pensions, and we must also look forward to the expenditure of large sums of money upon the development of the defences of Australia. I have already said that I hope the Government will face the position, and that the rich people of Australia will have to bear the biggest part of the burden. I believe that there is a good deal of evidence of misery being an accompaniment of millionaires. The building up of excessive wealth brings in its train extreme want in the community. Speaking broadly and generally, I hope the Government will so shape its financial course that we shall face the obligations of the future, and not pass on too much to posterity. One honorable senator opposite interjected an observation with regard to the War-time Profits Bill. Personally, I think that measure will break down, for I know that two prominent accountants in Sydney each sent in approximately about 100 returns, and by a coincidence only two returns in each 100 were liable to the war-time profits tax. It will be remembered that I opposed this measure, not because it was not a good principle to take war-time profits, but because the Bill was inequitable in its incidence, and did not touch half the rich men.

Senator Barker:

– That is what Sir William Irvine said long ago.

Senator PRATTEN:

– During the second-reading debate I took up this attitude, and the position is the same to-day.

With regard to further avenues of taxation, I was astounded to read in the latest publication by Mr. Knibbs that the imports into Australia for the year 1916-17 totalled in value almost as much as those of the previous year. It may be interesting to know that the importation of alcoholic liquors in 1916-17 exceeded the imports of 1915-16 by about £500,000, the figures being £1,985,000 as compared with £1,488,000. In 1916-17 the imports of tobacco exceeded the imports of the previous year by over £100,000, and the imports of motor cars and motor bicycles, &c, wore within £200,000 of those of the previous year. In 1916-17 the imports of motor vehicles exceeded those of 1914-15 by over £60,000. The total imports into Australia from overseas last year amounted in round figures to £76,000,000, as against £77,500,000 in the previous year; and the total imports of 1916-17 exceeded those of 1914-15 by over £10,000,000. I am quite prepared to concede that in bulk the imports. were less, because clearly the value would be much greater than in the earlier years, but it is a puzzle to me to read about the shortage of shipping and the stringency in the shipping business, and then to be met with these figures. And this importation is still going on. It seems to me to be a fundamental principle that the Treasurer should impose an import tax or a super-tax through the Customs in order to get extra revenue from those extravagant people if they will spend their money on imported luxuries.

I have had a few words to say with, regard to the Defence Department, and do not wish to repeat my remarks, but I would again urge the Minister to take into sympathetic consideration that universal service order and put a strong blucher boot into the Prussianism displayed by some of the junior officers of the Department, of which probably he knows very little. I again urge him to see that sympathy is extended to the men who go into camp, and to give this new Business Commission that has been created tr take over the civil side of the Defence Department absolute powers, subject to his veto.

There are one or two other matters to which I now desire to refer. I thirds it is clear that the proposed re-organization of the Ministry means the creation in Australia of a Trade and Commerce Department that is going to be all-powerful with regard to the whole of our primary and secondary industries. This new Department will take under its sheltering motherly wing practically everything now done by the Prime’ Minister’s Department, and will become a very important Department indeed. My friend Senator Russell and Mr. Massy Greene will be the Assistant Ministers, and I urge them with all the power I possess to insure that responsibility rests upon some independent man, who will see that everything goes straight and well. Something has been said about the organization of industries. I can quite understand that it should bt. easy to organize wheat, wool, metal, or anything else that does not vary, but if the Government attempt to organize secondary industries they will be up against difficulties that are not experienced in the handling of primary products. My word, therefore, to the Government in this matter is to go slowly. You cannot pool boots the same as wheat. There are all sorts of grades and prices for boots, and jam, and biscuits, and milk, and commodities of that sort. While I may agree that the organization of monopolies in primary production is a statesman-like policy, similar action cannot be taken with regard to our secondary industries.

Just a word or two more. We are asked to pass a Supply Bill for three months, carrying the Government up to the end of June next. In this measure, there are many matters, some of them debatable, of which members have no personal knowledge, the items being covered by one line. Personally, I think.it is our duty at this juncture not to carpingly criticise the Government; not to keep nagging at them; but to realize the immensity of their obligations, and the difficulties of their administration. It is the duty of the Government also to realize the immensity of their task, and, having had intrusted to them these great obligations, on behalf of the people of Australia, it is their responsibility to see that everything is carried out in an efficient manner so that, when their time comes, they can at least say they have done their very best.

Senator GRANT:
New South Wales

– We are asked, in the few hours at our disposal, to vote £5,068,404, which will carry us over to the end of the financial year, and I again enter my protest against the very limited time which the Government have allowed for discussion of these items without encroaching upon the time when the Civil Service must be paid.

Senator Millen:

– You have had these figures before you for some months. They were in the statement made here towards the end of last year.

Senator GRANT:

– As a matter of fact, this Bill was only passed by another place a few hours ago.

Senator Millen:

– But all these figures were, covered by those other Bills which you have passed. They were set out in this Chamber at the end of last year, and there is a notice on the business-paper covering them.

Senator GRANT:

– But this Bill only passed another House a few hours aso. The Government could have very well convened Parliament at least a week earlier in order that we might nave had an opportunity of going more fully into many of the items which we are asked to vote upon this evening. To my mind, the attitude of the Government is unfair.

We are asked to vote about £77,000 to pay for the rent of Commonwealth buildings. I should like to know why the Government do not find their own premises, instead of paying rent to some greedy, grasping landlord, mostly, I suppose, around the city of Melbourne. Why do they not, out of the funds at their disposal, erect the necessary buildings for their own accommodation instead of paying away public money year after year to landlords in Melbourne and elsewhere? Any Government worthy of the name would have looked into this matter long ago, and instead of paying rent would have constructed buildings for their own use.

– There are Crown lands; but one might as well look for a fortune as for Crown lands in most, of the States of which I am acquainted.

– The statement of the honorable gentleman is so ridiculous and’ inaccurate that nobody with any knowledge of the matter will place the slightest reliance upon his word. He may know of one or two cases in which the frontages have been reduced; but I would remind him that under the old system of taxation in Sydney it has been necessary to resume large areas, to pull down the buildings upon them, and to reconstruct them on decent-sized allotments. Senator Millen, knows that many of the allotments around Sydney were so small that they were a menace to the health of ‘ its residents. The municipal council, at an enormous expense, was obliged to resume these areas, demolish the houses in them, and map out the districts into decent-sized allotments. Yet the allotments are far too small, even at the present’ time. Let honorable senators go to the district in. South Australia where Senator Senior lives. There they will find that the houses are jambed so tightly together that scarcely a breath- of fresh air can get between them. A proposal to alter the rates, so far as the water and sewerage business was concerned, came before the Legislative Assembly of

New South Wales some time ago. A measure dealing with the matter was passed by that body with very slight opposition, .because for many years it had been a plank in the platform, not only of the Liberal party, but also of the Labour party. But when the Bill reached the Legislative Council,, the astute old gentlemen there said : “ This is a proposal to make us pay more - a proposal to increase taxation.” Consequently, they threw it under the table. Recently, a similar measure was again put through the Legislative Assembly and the Upper House was once more asked to pass it. What happened ? The large owners of vacant land there strongly opposed it. Why ? Because they knew that it is impossible to pass the tax on. Sir Allen Taylor, Dr. Nash, Sir Thomas Hughes, and Mr. R.obson, all have a very shrewd idea as to who would pay this tax. How can a man who owns a vacant allotment of land pass on the tax? The measure to which I have referred is now hung up, with the result that a man who wishes to purchase a home site around Sydney is obliged to pay an enormous sum for it. I should like to know, how the ordinary workman can pay £150 or £200 for a block of land on which he may live. It would take him half a life-time to amass that sum. Honorable senators opposite suggest a graduated income tax for the purpose of securing more revenue. Why? Merely, because they desire to avoid the necessity for levying a tax on the laud-owners of Australia. It is high time that people were called upon to pay taxation for national purposes (proportionate to the land which they own. The St. Leonards branch of the Labour party affirms “ That a uniform tax be placed .upon unimproved land values, without exemption, to raise revenue to pay interest on the national debt.” The Lilyfield branch says “ That the £5,000 exemption should be abolished from the Federal land tax.” The Dunedoo, Kandos, and Annandale branches say “ That Conference abolish the £5,000 exemption in the Federal land tax.” The Goulburn branch affirms “ The imposition of a uniform tax of 3d. in the £1 on all unimproved land values to replace the present Federal graduated land tax; other taxes to be reduced, so that the total amount of Federal taxation may not be increased by the foregoing proposal.” The Lithgow branch says, “That the

Conference amend clause 17 (fresh taxation) by an increase in the incidence of the graduated land tax, and by the abolition of the £5,000 exemption.” All these branches are in favour of wiping out the exemption and imposing a straight-out flat rate. The Surf ace Workers Union in Western Australia suggests a somewhat similar proposal. A further proposal comes from the South Australian Labour party, “ That the £5,000 exemption on land values taxation be deleted, and an all-round land values tax be substituted to help to pay the interest on war loans.” I place these suggestions on record,, not as the opinions of the Labour party, but as the views of a very considerable section of that party, and with a view to showing that this question is receiving a very great deal of public attention.

In my opinion, the Government will do well to take notice of what is going on, and instead of asking us to pass a complicated income-tax measure, to recognise the proper method of raising money for national purposes. I have not the slightest faith in the repatriation scheme of the Government, unless it is accompanied by heavy land values taxation without exemption. In my opinion, nothing else will bring down land values to use purposes. ‘This is the only way in which we can make land cheap. Nobody knows that better than does Senator Millen, although for several years now he has remained as dumb as an oyster upon it. I think it is up to the Government to bring forward a measure such as I have suggested. I have given some consideration to the question of how the necessary money to meet the cost of the part which Australia has played in the war can be raised.

I disagree entirely with many of the things which are being done in connexion with the present war loan, and which have been done in connexion with past loans. It has to be remembered that the contributions to these loans are purely voluntary. We have not yet reached the stage when a compulsory levy must be made. So long as we can get sufficient money for these loans, I do not think a compulsory levy in any other direction should be made. It would be very much better if a larger proportion of the cost of the war was raised by means of direct taxation of the land, instead of being paid for out of loans. Even if the war terminated at the end of the current year, we should be faced with an annual interest bill on our war indebtedness of £10,000,000, and it is impossible to say how much more we shall require to raise on account of repatriation, pensions to returned soldiers, and allowances to their dependants. The only proper method of raising this money is that which I have indicated, and which is so clearly outlined in many of the resolutions which T have read

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · Western Australia · NAT

– I wish to reply to some of the criticisms that have been directed against the Defence Department.

Senator McDougall complained that certain men have been dismissed from the Cockatoo Dockyard because they had not signed the agreement in regard to shipbuilding, and he regarded that occurrence as an attack upon unionism. I should like to point out that the agreement they were asked to sign has been signed by the bulk of the unions engaged in the shipbuilding industry - that is to say, it was signed by them as unions, and not by the industrial members. It does not seem to me, therefore, that the honorable senator is justified in saying that the dismissal of men for refusing to sign the same agreement constitutes an attack upon unionism.

Senator MILLEN:

– But we are learning;and if it were not for the introduction of Supply there would be fewer opportunities for the honorable senator to administer his lesson. The only thing wherein I can see that he has reasonable grievance is that SupplyBills should be introduced for terms of three months instead of being brought in every month.

Senator McDougall made some reference to matters which, I am sure, excite all our sympathies. That was a certain statement as to hardships being faced by a number of dependants of soldiers at the Front. We know that there must be individual cases ofvery great hardship and privation ; and to those who are suffering we proffer a full measure of sympathy. Having made that statement, and recognising that it is the duty of everybody, especially those charged with Ministerial responsibility, to see what can be done to alleviate the circumstances of those placed as I have indicated, I must point out that there is an obligation upon those who, like Senator McDougall, make these charges, to be at least careful as to their facts before they make them. The honorable senator said that the cases to which he referred seriously and pre judicially affected recruiting. That would be true if they were all authenticated ; but a much more serious effect is produced upon recruiting when gentlemen like Senator McDougall make and remake statements for which there is not sufficient foundation, because they tend to create the impression that these conditions of privation and want are general throughout the States. When the honorable senator some months ago first brought the matter up, he undertook to supply me with a . number of cases for which he said he could vouch. He did so, and I have had them inquired into. At the same time, quite independently of any action I was taking, the Sydney Daily Telegraph, moved, no doubt,by the honorable senator’s statements, sent members of its own staff to inquire. Without vouching for the literal accuracy of my words, I can say that they headed their column dealing with the matter with the line, “ Charges not Substantiated.” They had no possible inducement to do other than record the facts as they found them. I shall place before the Senate the facts of some of these oases. I do not want it to be thought that I am denying the existence of cases of hardship. They do exist ; but it is utterly wrong for any one to create the impression that they are general, and that every statement made in public is necessarily correct. I propose to suppress the names, and to refer to the cases by numbers, sothat Senator McDougall may identify them if he wishes -

The soldier’s wife is receiving now 65s. from her husband’s allotment money, separation allowances for herself and children, and aid from the Lord Mayor’s Patriotic Fund. She was getting that amount when Senator McDougall made his statement. Her husband, before enlistment, was receiving a weekly wage of £3 3s., and out of that he had to be kept; so that the wife is now receiving 2s. a week more in cash, and is relieved of the responsibility of keeping her husband. In addition, she received £10 15s. in cash to pay debts which, apparently, she had incurred.
The wife is receiving 62s. 5d. per week, made up as in the previous case. Before enlistment the husband was earning £2 14s. per week; so that now she is receiving 8s. 6d. per week more, without the expense of her husband in the household. In addition, she has received £15, partly to pay debts, and partly to meet little emergencies.
The wife is receiving 62s. 5d. per week. The husband’s earnings before enlistment were £2 19s. per week. In addition, she has been relieved of debts amounting to £10 9s., and received a grant of £2 for minor emergencies.
The wife is receiving 65s. per week, made up, as in all these cases, as indicated in No. 1. When her husband enlisted he was earning £3 per week; so that she is relieved of the expense of a husband, and getting 5s. a week more. In addition, £17 has been paid to her to pay debts incurred since her husband enlisted.
The wife is now receiving 65s. regularly. Previously the husband earned 66s. per week irregularly. In addition, she has had £10 paid to wipe off debts, all incurred since her husband enlisted, and since she has been in receipt of the income referred to.
The wife receives 58s. per week. Prior to enlistment, her husband was earning only about 30s. per week. Apparently he was not a very steady worker, just knocking about, and earning what he could. In this case, which has been brought forward by Senator McDougall as indicating hardship, she has received no less than £106 from the fund in addition.
The wife is receiving 65s. per week. Prior to enlistment her husband was earning 52s. 6d. She has also had £14 in grants in addition.
The wife’s present income is 65s. The husband, prior to enlistment, earned 54s. In addition, £23 10s. has been paid from the Lord Mayor’s Fund.
The wife’s present income is 65s. per week, which is the same amount as her husband received prior to enlistment. In addition, £22 14s. has been paid in grants.
The wife’s present income is 62s. 5d. Previously the husband was earning £3 per week. In addition, grants amounting to £10 have been paid.

– The figures I have given are the actual amounts paid to the women in every case. I do not quarrel with Senator McDougall bringing these matters forward, except that, living as we do in times when every word ‘of a public nian counts, either for or against our efforts to obtain recruits, there is a responsibility on all of us, while trying to right anything that is wrong, to refrain from creating an entirely false impression as to the condition in which these women are placed. Let me deal with cases of another type to which Senator McDougall referred. He mentioned the case of a woman in New South Wales whose sou had enlisted, and who claimed that she was dependent upon her son, and, as a consequence, obtained from the Defence Department the separation allowance, and subsequently applied to the Lord Mayor’s Fund. I am sorry to say there was no difficulty in getting police reports about this case. A few weeks before the son enlisted, this woman had gone to the police to know if she could not by law compel him to contribute to the upkeep of her house. She said he was hanging around and Would not contribute a shilling. When the son enlisted she came forward and signed a declaration that she was dependent on him.

Sena’tor McDougall. - She’ must have been dependent on him or she would not have asked.

Senator MILLEN:

– Then why did she ask the police to do something to make her son, who had been loafing about, contribute to the upkeep of her home?

Senator McDougall:

– That was the proper course for her to follow.

Senator MILLEN:

– She could not, in the same breath, claim that she was dependent upon him, for she was not. I can well imagine that when a woman goes to a man like Senator McDougall she finds no great difficulty in persuading him that she is the most ill-treated person in the Commonwealth. While we have to administer our patriotic and repatriation activities with every sympathy, we must remember that some efforts will always be made to impose on the funds. The obligation is cast on those who administer them, while doing so fairly and generously, to see that the money contributed by the public, or voted by Parliament, is not handed out for any other object than that for which it is intended. All the inquiries I have made so far indicate that, while here and there there .are a certain number of cases that call for’ revision, the majority are on the basis of those I have quoted. I do not believe that in one case out of twenty I have inquired into, the woman is in receipt today of less income than she had before her husband enlisted, in addition to which most of them have had substantial grants out of the various funds.

– Exactly ; but I have a responsibility which I am now trying to exercise in inviting the Select Committee to consider the aspect of the case which I have submitted, and if, after doing so, members of the Committee come to the conclusion that it is necessary, for the effective carrying out of the duties with which the Committee has been charged, that they should travel over a wider area to secure evidence, that conclusion will be one which Ministers will be bound to consider. In the meantime, I invite the Committee to consider whether by travelling further it can do more than add to the bulk of evidence similar to that which has already been obtained. If they come to the conclusion that they cannot do more, then I think it is fair to suggest, that they should bring their peregrinations to a close, and proceed with the preparation of their report.

Question resolved in the .affirmative.

Bill read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator MILLEN:
New South WalesMinister for Repatriation · NAT

– I move -

That this Bill be now read a second time.

I propose briefly to give the Senate particulars of the amount set out in the Bill, and a very brief statement of figures showing the actual expenditure and revenue to date.

This Supply Bill is intended to cover ordinary expenditure on Government services to the end of June. The amount provided by the Bill is £5,068,484. This amount is based on the expenditure estimated by the Treasurer in introducing his Budget in August last.

In addition to providing for this expenditure the present Bill in the first schedule proposes to amend previous Supply Bills for this financial year to bring them in conformity with the final provision in the Estimates.

The total of each subdivision qf the Estimates is shown in the second schedule to the Bill.

The position at the close of the present financial year promises to be good. For the nine months ended the 31st March the revenue was £19,209,000, and the approximate expenditure was £22,953,000.

The estimated revenue for that period was £20,500,000, being £1,291,000 more than that actually received, and the estimated expenditure was £25,000,000, being £2,047,000 less than the approximate actual expenditure.

In arriving at the exact financial position for the first nine months of the year it is, however, necessary to take into account the sum of £2,077,427, which was brought forward from last year for the payment of invalid and old-age pensions. When this is done it is found that the deficit on the Consolidated Revenue Fund at the 31st March last was £1,666,573. This deficit will .be temporarily met by an advance out of the Notes Fund, for which parliamentary authority exists. It must, however, be remembered that almost the whole of the revenue from direct taxation is received during the last three months of the financial year, and it is highly probable, therefore, that moneys advanced from the Notes Fund will be repaid out of revenue, and that the year will end with a balanced ledger, or even with a surplus.

Senator Pratten:

– That is outside of the notes and the war loans?

Senator MILLEN:

– My statement does not deal with the loan expenditure, but only with revenue and expenditure. The Treasurer has expressed the opinion that when the direct taxation is “received between this and the end of the financial year, which, for the reason I have already set out,’ will be much heavier for this quarter of the year than for the previous three quarters, the year will close with a surplus of a little over £750,000. These figures were given elsewhere by the Treasurer a few days ago, but I understand from him that the indications which have presented themselves during the “last few days .substantiate that estimate and justify him in saying that, at least, that will be the result at the close of the present financial year.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In Committee:

Clauses 1 and 2 and the first schedule agreed to.

Port Pirie Wharf - Coal Industry Dispute - Trade between Australia and the East - National Association for Labour Legislation - Audit Office - Imperial Conference - High Commissioner’s Office - Taxation Returns - Cost of Taxation Office - Commonwealth Police Force - Unlawful Associations : Case of Mr. Wilson - Papua : Administration : Oil-fields - Uniform Electoral Rolls - War Census Statistics - Rent of Commonwealth Buildings - Federal Capital : Housing Accommodation - Pay of Temporary Employees - Tropical Diseases - Forestry - Enamel for Military Medals - Training of Aviators - Manufacture of Woollens and Linen - Arsenal - Commonwealth Factories - Rifle Clubs - Defence Administration : Business Board : Ordnance Branch: Treatment of Returned Soldiers : Staff-Sergeants Major and Honorary Rank: Reductions in Rank and Pay: Citizen Force Training: Expenditure on Camps and Ammunition: Soldiers’ Dependants - Postal Employees : Annual Leave and Pay - Commonwealth Line of Steamers.

Second schedule.

Senator GRANT:
New South Wales

– I should like some explanation of the item -

Administrative expenses, Port Pirie wharf - £2,000.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · New South Wales · NAT

– The money is needed to provide for the installation of certain mechanical appliances for loading, and administrative charges connected with their erection and control.

Senator PRATTEN:
New South Wales

.- The sum of £3,000 is set down as “expenses in connexion with compulsory conference on the coal industry dispute.” I fancy that I have seen this item in a previous Supply Bill. I ask the Minister whether it isa duplication of an item under the bookkeeping adjustment for which the Bill provides, or whether it is an addition? Then, in regard to the item -

Royal Commission to inquire into the matter of trade between Australia and Java, Singapore, and the East Indies- £500.

I wish toknow whether it is a duplication? Last year we voted £255 14s. 9d. under this head. I understand that two gentlemen were sent to the East.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · New South Wales · NAT

– To the honorable senator’s first question my reply is that there has been no previous vote for the compulsory conference, the sum set down being the total amount involved. As to the Commission to the East, the sum provided for is the balance outstanding.

Senator Pratten:

– Has a report been presented which is available to honorable senators?

Senator MILLEN:

– I cannot speak definitely, but I believe that there is a trade report which will shortly be made available to honorable senators, and a confidential report, the contents of which, of course, will not be made public. If the honorable senator will address a question to me on the subject a few days hence, I may be able to give him further information.

Senator GUY:
Tasmania

.- It is not clear what is covered by the item -

National Association for Labour Legislation -grant £100.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · New South Wales · NAT

– The National Association for Labour Legislation is a body which meets in Europe periodically, and Australia has been heretofore represented there by the High Commissioner, and I am not clear that the money will be spent this year, because of the military situation.

Senator PRATTEN:
New South Wales

– I ask the representative of the Government whether the Audit Department is to be added to, so that we may not have a repetition of complaints such as have been made by the Royal Commission on Defence matters and the Auditor-General. The Department is a very important one, in view of the huge expenditure of the Commonwealth, which is now five times as large as it was in prewar days. In fairness to the AuditorGeneral, he should be given every facility for carrying out his work efficiently and well.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · New South Wales · NAT

– The matter raised by Senator Pratten and referred to in the Defence Commission’s report is now under the consideration’ of the Cabinet.

Senator GRANT:
New South Wales

– I understand that the Commonwealth is shortly to be represented at an Imperial Conference. Is there any item in the Bill covering the probable expenses ?

Senator Millen:

– No.

Senator GRANT:

– There is an amount of £28,575 set down for contingencies in the High Commissioner’s Office. That is a very large sum, and, if my memory serves me aright, a much larger sum than was voted last year. What is proposed to be done with the money?

Senator Millen:

– All the particulars embraced under the heading of “ Contingencies “ are set out in the Budget-papers which were presented to Parliament last August. Following the usual practice, certain items which occur regularly have been grouped. There is no innovation.

Senator GRANT:

– Has any serious effort been made by the Government to make it unnecessary for taxpayers to fill in separate returns of income for the information of Commonwealth and State authorities? The present arrangements cause great inconvenience, especially to business men whose operations extend over more than one State. It involves them in unnecessary expense, and creates much irritation. Is the Government taking steps to provide that one return shall suffice both for the Commonwealth Taxation Office and the Taxation Offices of the States?

Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · New South Wales · NAT

– What is desired by Senator Grant necessitates co-operation between the Commonwealth and State authorities, and, as the result of a conference, a Bill has been introduced into the other branch of the Legislature which will put us into a position to effectively co-operate with the States. It remains for the States to complete by their legislation the action that we have begun. Then machinery to enable one form to take the place of many will be set in motion.

Senator PRATTEN (New South to learn that ait last action is to be taken to simplify the complexity of the income taxation returns. I wish to know whether this amount of £197,606, set down for the Taxation Office, is to cover its cost for three months only.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · New South Wales · NAT

– If the honorable senator will look at the abstract, he will see set down there the total expenditure of various Departments, amounting to £17,000,000 odd, from which has to be deducted £12,000,000 odd already voted. The expenditure on the Taxation Department will be in proportion.

Senator PRATTEN:
New South Wales

.- Will the Leader of the Senate inform the Committee what was the cost, or what it is estimated will be the cost, df the Taxation Office for the year ended 30th June, 1917, and for the year ending 30th June, 1918? I ask for the information because this year the Taxation Office is arranging to collect the wartimes profits tax, and the figures will give us some indication of the cost of its collection. When the proposed taxation came under review in this chamber, there was a consensus of opinion that it would not produce as much revenue as honorable senators thought should be obtained, and that the cost of collection would be out of proportion to the amount collected.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · New South Wales · NAT

– The total expenditure of the Department last year was <£197j981, as against an estimated expenditure of £214,909. Acting on the experience gained during last year’s operations, the Estimates for this year have been reduced to £197,606.

Senator PRATTEN:

– That means that, so far as the Federal Taxation Department is concerned, there has been practically no increase this year over last year in the cost of administration, in spite of the additional duties imposed on the Department?

Senator MILLEN:

– That is so.

Senator FERRICKS:
Queensland

Question - That the proposed vote (Attorney-General’s Department) be reduced by £1 - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 12

NOES: 15

Majority . . . . 3

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Request negatived.

Senator GARDINER:
New South Wales

– I am reluctant at this hour to take up the time of the Committee at any length, but I have a grievance which I desire to ventilate before Supply is granted. I wish to protest against the greatest infringement of individual liberty that has yet come under my notice in this country. As I see that the Government have a majority, and a division must have the same result as in the case of Senator Ferricks, I shall only briefly state the facts. A man named Wilson, found guilty of being a member of an unlawful association, was sentenced to a term of imprisonment for six months. The case was brought under my notice, and, exercising the care that Senator Millen told us an honorable senator should exercise before making a public statement, I had supplied to me the press reports of the case. The worst point in the police evidence - and I stake my reputation on this - was that the man had taken thechair at a meeting of the Industrial Workers of the World, and had said that he believed in one big union. His sentence expired many weeks ago, but I understand that he is still detained. I sent a number of telegrams to the Department in reference to the matter, but received no reply. I telegraphed to Senator Grant, who was in Melbourne, to look into the case, and then I did get areply to the effect that no information could be given. In my communications I have taken the line of inquiring whether there was any serious reason why the man should be detained, because the evidence at my disposal showed that this man’s character was such that his employers, a reputable building firm in Sydney, with whom he had been for two years, had offered to re-employ him if he were released. I rest my complaint on the gravity of the action of the Government in detaining this man - who has others dependent on him - in prison after the expiration of his sentence. I do not think that there was any intention on the part of the Government to deport this man. Although he was not born in Australia, his parents had lived here before his birth, but had subsequently gone to New Zealand. As to whether he was born here or in the Dominion, the evidence is very vague. My protest is based on an infringement of individual liberty by Which a man, not of criminal record, and for what is practically a new crime under a new Act, is still detained, so far as I know, after having served his term. I do not think I could put the case any more clearly by speaking further. Icommunicated with the Department by telegram, and by letter to the Prime Minister himself, but received no reply except the one I have indicated. My impression was that there was something against the man if one might judge by the attitude of the Department; and I thought I was entitled to know the facts, so that I might not be led away on a false track. It is not often that I bring matters of this character before the Senate, and I only do so because, unless there is grave grounds to suspect criminality, this man should not be detained after he has served his term of imprisonment.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · New South Wales · NAT

– I appreciate, as I am sure the Committee do, the intimation by Senator Gardiner that, while taking this opportunity to bring forward an important matter, he does not propose to occupy time by pressing it to a division. I have no knowledge of the case, because I hear of it tonight for the first time.

Senator Keating:

– Senator Gardiner referred to it last week.

Senator Gardiner:

– But the Minister has not had it brought officially under his notice.

Senator MILLEN:

– This is the first time my attention has been directed to the case, and I can express no opinion as to what action ought to be taken, beyond saying that, in view of the representations made, I shall undertake myself to bring it before the Attorney-General with a view of having it looked into as early as possible.

Senator KEATING:
Tasmania

– The question raised by Senator Gardiner is of great importance, and if it has not been brought officially under the Minister’s notice, it was referred to by the honorable senator last week in this chamber. We have taken the unusual course of abrogating certain inherent rights of a British subject, and I have defended that course from my seat in this place in connexion with the abrogation of the right of the individual by habeas corpus to have his liberty established. We are in a time of war, and because everything is critical, we have to take extraordinary measures. However, the circumstances that have been related by Senator Gardiner are such as might invite the careful attention of the Government. I hope, at any rate, it will be realized that nothing has been done by this Parliament that will take away from the individual his rights, except in so far as is absolutely necessary for the protection of the Commonwealth, and of the Empire now engaged in the war. I accept the assurance given by Senator Millen that he will give his personal attention to the matter; and I hope, for the sake of Parliament as well as for the sake of the Government, we shall have some vindication of the action that has been taken.

Senator PRATTEN:
New South Wales

– One would have liked to discuss that great “ white elephant “ of ours, the Northern Territory, but I suppose there will be other opportunities, because it is a matter well worthy of all the attention the Senate can give it, apart altogether from party bias. In this proposed vote, there is an amount of £16,000 for the development of oil fields in Papua. This represents a continuation of the policy that has resulted so far in the expenditure of £60,000, for work which, in the hands of an ordinary mining engineer, would probably have been done quite as efficiently for £10,000.

Senator Earle:

– Would it?

Senator PRATTEN:

– Ithink I know a little of what I am talking about, and, unless a large amount, indeed, has been spent in plant, the Government has been excessively charged. For five years the men have been at work there, and, so far, have achieved nothing practical; and I enter my protest against the continuance of such a state of things. The Government have created a monopoly in Papua, and, while they will allow no one else to do anything, they are not doing the job properly themselves. I stress again that the discovery and production of oil in the Commonwealth territories is one of the most urgent matters we could be busied with; and I hope the Government will tackle it in a business-like way. If the present control confesses failure, let us call in some one else, and get ahead with the work.

I should, however, like to say a good word for the administration of Papua under Judge Murray. I understand that the net cost of Papua to the Commonwealth is so little that the Possession is almost self-supporting. During my several visits there, not only this year and last year, but years ago, I beard from the settlers and the white population generally nothing but good of the Administration. I hope that this Possession will be developed, for it will be one of the most valuable we possess in years to come; and 1 trust that Parliament will be broad enough to make some reciprocal Customs arrangements in this connexion.

Senator GRANT:
New South Wales

– Very serious inconvenience is experienced at the electoral office in making it reasonably certain that electors are duly enrolled. It is necessary in nearly all the States to have two separate rolls, one for Federal electors, and one for State electors. A good deal has been said and written on the subject, and I believe some investigations have been made, but. so far, no practical step has been taken to avoid the necessity for publishing two sets of rolls.

Senator Keating:

– It is not necessary to have two sets of rolls. In 1905 this Parliament passed legislation which enabled the Commonwealth to co-operate with the States. The only State that has yet done so is Tasmania.

Senator GRANT:

– The position in Tasmania is somewhat different from that in other States, because there the electoral boundaries of the Federal divisions are fixed, because of Tasmania being given more representation in the Federal Parliament than its population entitles it to. As the boundaries of Federal divisions in that State are not likely to be altered for some time, it is easy for that State to have the one roll for both Commonwealth and State purposes.

Senator EARLE:

– The reason why it is done is that, under the preferential system of voting, we have grouped electorates.

Senator GRANT:

– Apart from the grouped electorates, the fact remains that each Federal divisional boundary in Tasmania is the boundary for each group of electorates. That arrangement cannot be made in Victoria and New South Wales, because in those States the divisional boundaries may alter .according to the fluctuations of the population. In South Australia it is necessary to have one roll for Federal electorates, another for the House of Assembly, another for the Legislative Council, and yet another for the municipal councils. In fact, it is a continuous operation for an elector to insure that his name is kept on the four rolls. Some steps ought to be taken by the Government to see that this matter ‘ is brought to finality, and that once a man’s name is entered on the Federal roll it should automatically appear on the State roll, and remain there so long as he continues in that division.

In regard to the item for census and statistics, I should like to know whether it is intended to tabulate the whole of the information disclosed by the war census cards, or is that information to be pigeonholed in the Statistician’s Office? The cards contained a good deal of information that ought to be made available to the public, and I should like to know what has become of it.

I’ mentioned earlier in the evening that the Government are paying £77,000 per annum for the renting of buildings, and I would like to know if any steps are being taken to obviate that expenditure?

In regard to the Federal Capital Territory, I notice a number of new items in connexion with the repatriation industry, and I ask the Minister to say whether any steps are being taken by the Government to provide proper housing accommodation for the workmen employed at the Federal Capital. I have mentioned repeatedly the disgraceful accommodation that is provided for the ordinary working men there. The present Government should not follow in the footsteps of previous Governments, but should, at once, from the resources at their disposal, provide accommodation for the temporary workmen employed at the Capital. It is unfair that temporary employees should be required to provide their own houses, and then, when they are discharged, be able to get practically no compensation. The Government have no more obligation to provide accommodation for the officers than they have to provide it for the temporary workmen. I do not object to the provision of accommodation for the officers, but if the Government can find thousands of pounds to build a house for the Administrator, they should be able to find a little money to provide accommodation for their other servants.

Senator KEATING:
Tasmania

– I take this opportunity of reminding Senator Grant and other honorable senators that, as far back as 1905, we provided in the Commonwealth Electoral Act an opportunity for the States and the Commonwealth to co-operate in the matter of uniform electoral rolls, and, so far as I know, Tasmania is the only State that has availed itself of that opportunity. If Senator Grant were resident in Tasmania, he would find his name on the Commonwealth electoral roll; and also on the State roll, without any separate effort on his part to register for either. The Electoral Act of 1905 has since been amended to the extent of obliging electors to register for whatever division they are in, and when they go from one division to another to notify the Department of their change of address. The result is that the Federal electoral roll in Tasmania is automatically, so far as the elector is concerned, kept pure. There is no obligation thrown upon the police authorities to keep the roll pure, as has been the case in several other States in the past. All Tasmanian senators will bear me out when I say that during the last thirteen years we have had in that State one set of officers and one set of rolls. Time after time we have been told by the Melbourne press that we are frittering away money by having a duplicate system of registration and control in connexion with- electoral matters.

Senator de Largie:

– Victoria only needs to come into line to set an example to the others.

Senator KEATING:

– If either Victoria or New South Wales desired to cooperate with the Commonwealth in this matter it could do so to-morrow. What is the use of Senator Grant casting on Federal Ministers a responsibility for obligations which they are not bound to shoulder ?

Senator Grant:

– But the boundaries in Victoria and New South Wales are not fixed as they are in Tasmania.

Senator KEATING:

– Then why do not those States fix their boundaries? They are too slow to catch worms. Two States of the Commonwealth have done this, and the New South Wales and Victorian Governments could do it if they chose.

Senator Grant:

– I would like to know why they do not do it.

Senator KEATING:

– The honorable senator must ask the New South Wales Government. He must not challenge

Federal Ministers on a matter for which they are not responsible. The Commonwealth is prepared to co-operate with the electoral organization of every State and make it practicable to have the same officers, the same rolls, and the same administration for both.

Senator FOLL:
Queensland

– I am in entire sympathy with the remarks made by Senator Keating. I believe that a very large majority of the people in Queensland would welcome the adoption of the course he has indicated. I may say also that there are many members in the Queensland State Parliament who would welcome a change from the present system, for the reason that at the last State elections there were between 20,000 and 30,000 more names on the State electoral roll than were on the Federal roll, and I am of opinion, although I have no proof of it, that there were more names on the State roll than there were voters in the State. It is time some action was taken to bring about the co-operation of the State and Federal electoral organizations.

Another matter with which I wish to deal is the reduction during the last few months in the salaries of temporary employees in the Public Service. I know of deductions which have been made in the salaries of employees in the Federal Taxation Department, but as I am not allowed at this stage to deal with Treasury expenditure, I shall apply my remarks to Commonwealth Departments generally. I enter my protest against any reduction being made in the salaries of temporary employees. At a time like this, when the cost of living is increasing, we should be considering the increase rather than the reduction of the salaries of temporary employees. In the Governor-General’s speech last year the Government announced their intention to economize, but I do not think any honorable senator, no matter what political opinions he holds, desires to see them economize at the expense of low-paid temporary employees.

Senator PRATTEN:
New South Wales

.- Is the vote of £4,300 for the advancement of the study of diseases in tropical Australia connected with the institution at Townsville?

Senator Millen:

– Yes.

Senator PRATTEN:

– I regard it as quite a laudable expenditure. I wish to congratulate the Minister on items regarding forestry appearing on the Estimates for the first time. The importance of this matter cannot be too greatly stressed, and I hope, the good work will be developed.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · New South Wales · NAT

– Senator Grant drew attention to the expense incurred for renting premises. A good deal of this expenditure, so far as it is an increase, arises from the necessity for providing accommodation for those commercial undertakings which have developed in consequence of the war. The policy of the Government of the Commonwealth for some years has been to rent rather than to build in Melbourne, because of the anticipation, which some little time ago was general, that in a few years the Parliament would be moving to Canberra. Senator Keating has sufficiently answered the questions raised regarding electoral law. Senator Pratten, who raised the question of the oil fields, knows the policy being pursued so well that he is inclined to regard it as ill, but the representations he has made from time to time in this chamber have not been lost sight of. I have forwarded them on to my colleague who has control of that important Commonwealth responsibility. I can assure Senator Foll that he is quite wrong in regarding the reduction of the salaries of certain temporary employees in Queensland as part of a general policy. There may have been individual cases where the readjustment of some Department has brought about a reduction here or there, but generally speaking every move lately has been to increase salaries in the Public Service of the Commonwealth. I shall be glad if the honorable senator will furnish me with particulars of the cases he has in mind, so that I may look further into them.

Senator McDOUGALL:
The Minister for Defence (Senator Pearce · New South Wales [11.5].

this afternoon, in answer to a question by myself regarding the manufacture of enamel in Australia, stated that the. enamel made here was not good enough to be used for the purposes of military medals. This is an industry that will give a large amount of employment to returned soldiers. I have seen the enamel manu factured from the raw material, and seen the medals stamped out, and the enamel placed on them. I shall have great pleasure next week in showing the Minister the finished article, made in Australia by Australian workmen. I cannot promise to give him one, because they are made in connexion with the Red Cross movement, and cost a guinea each. If the enamel is not good enough, it is fair that the Government should make an attempt to perfect it. It should not be left to private individuals to introduce industries of that description, that would give employment to a large number of returned soldiers. It is a matter of repetition work, all done by machinery, on which the men could be given a standard w age. Most of these things are made today by female labour, which I have ob- ‘jected to for a long time unless the women receive the same pay as the men. I do not say the enamel is good for anything else, but it has been proved good for the purpose of medals. I hope the Minister will go beyond the decision of his expert, and look further into the matter. I have some knowledge of the industry, because in years gone by it was necessary to obtain annually a number of medals for a certain association, and I know what I am talking about. If the enamel is fit for the purpose of making medals it can be made fit for other things, and if that is done an industry can be established that will give a large amount of employment to returned men.

Senator GRANT:
New South Wales

– Perhaps one of the most attractive branches of the Army is that qf flying. Has any request been made that the Government should train considerable numbers of aviators in view of the ample facilities existing here? If so, have steps been taken to give effect to the request? The establishment of the Woollen Mills at Geelong is one of the best things ever done by a Commonwealth Government. It is an industry that gives a great deal of useful employment. We ought to make a strong protest against the labour of returned soldiers or others being used to provide a lot of unnecessary trinkets. One would think we were a walking pawn-shop to see the number of trinkets some people display. This industry cannot be classed in that category. I am told that the price of many other softgoods has

Increased greatly since the war began; that the price of linen, for instance, has risen from 4d. to more than ls. 2d. a yard.

Senator Pratten:

– Linen is not made in Australia.

Senator GRANT:

– Still, the increase in price is not justified. It may not be possible at the present time for the Government to secure machinery for the manufacture of linen, but the matter should not be overlooked. I understand that because of the existence of the Commonwealth Woollen Mills at Geelong the Government is no longer at the mercy of private manufacturers in regard to supplies.

Senator Pratten:

– The Minister has not told us what prices are charged by the Government factories.

Senator GRANT:

– I understand that the cost of production at the Geelong factory being known, the Government is able to buy supplies from private manufacturer’s at prices which are, perhaps, slightly higher, but they are not at the mercy of those manufacturers. I should like the Government- to see whether it cannot manufacture linen as well as woollens. The rise in the cost of living and the price of clothing is a serious thing to those whose wages remain practically stationary.

Senator Pearce:

– What District Paymaster was a letter-carrier before the war?

Senator Lt Colonel BOLTON:

Captain Fordyce.

– Every one of them is willing to go out to-morrow if we can get a returned soldier to take his place. They are only staying in these positions for patriotism, and not for pay.

– The honorable senator said we might as well strike out the vote.

Senator Lt Colonel Bolton:

– I did not.

Senator PEARCE:

– The honorable senator distinctly asked what we wanted the item “ Ammunition “ for. We want it in order to keep a certain amount of ammunition in Australia in the event of the enemy, by any chance, being able to get here. We are, therefore, continuing the annual vote.

The honorable senator said we had too many camps. Already we have been concentrating them. Bendigo and Seymour have been abolished, and we have been concentrating at Broadmeadows. The same applies to the other States; but the recruiting authorities are now asking for more camps. They say we want camps where’ the people can see the training going on, as this will stimulate recruiting. If Senator Bolton’sproposal were adopted, and all the soldiers were brought to Melbourne, the people in the other States would never see the men training at all. When a soldier enlisted he would have to say farewell to his friends, as he could not be sent home to his own State for final leave.

Senator Lt Colonel Bolton:

– So he ought to if he wants to be a soldier.

Senator PEARCE:

– We cannot go on those lines when dealing with voluntary enlistment. Some respect must be paid to sentiment and to love of home and people.

Senator FOLL:
Queensland

– In reading the report on the administration of the Defence Department, I have not picked out the nasty parts, as some honorable members and many of the papers have done. I have also read the pats on the back given to the Department, and was very pleased to notice that special commendation was given to the administration of the Pay Office in Queensland. I believe it is well staffed by men who, with very few exceptions, conscientiously carry out their duties. Recently, however, a case came under my notice of a woman, named Rebecca Wright, who had two little children, and whose husband was at the Front. It was surmised by the District Paymaster that she had been receiving two allotments in- stead of the one to which she was entitled. She was accused of having drawn pay at two offices - at the Central Office at the General Post Office or at the Desmond Chambers office, and also in the Valley. An officer of the Department hearing this, stopped her pay pending inquiries. I saw the woman leaving the office in tears, and sympathetically asking the cause, discovered what had happened. The allowance to a soldier’s wife is little enough, and it is a very serious thing for a woman with two little children to be without money for a week, or even for a few days.

Senator Pearce:

– The allowance should not have been stopped.

Senator FOLL:

– Very many soldiers’ dependants are living from hand to mouth, the allowances to them not being as large as we should like them to be. Immediately I brought the matter under the notice of the Minister he had the pay restored. But, in the interval, had not assistance been given from the local Patriotic Fund, the woman would have been in a very deplorable condition. The point I wish to make is that, in cases of this kind, the Department should treat dependants as innocent until they have been proved guilty.

Senator Keating:

– They should be given the benefit of any doubt.

Senator FOLL:

– Yes. It was subsequently discovered that there was no truth in the allegation that this woman had been drawing two allotments. Prior to the Minister’s interference, I sent a telegram to the Defence Department in Melbourne urging that payments be continued, and just as I was leaving for the north to take part in the referendum campaign I received a reply to the effect that that could not be done until certain inquiries had been made, and that the matter was before the Crown Law Office. I do not think that Senator Pearce knew anything about the case until I brought it personally under his notice. The officials in Brisbane were blameworthy for stopping the payments, to this woman ; but the authorities in Melbourne, who issued the instruction that, pending inquiries, the payments should not be recommenced, were still more blameworthy. I hope that the Minister will issue the instruction that, in cases of this. kind, payments to dependants shall not be stopped until it has been proved that wrong-doing has occurred, and that the Department has a just case.

Senator Pearce:

– As I have stated, the allowance to the woman referred to should not have been stopped.

Senator FOLL:
Queensland

– On the vote now before the Committee, I wish to bring under the notice of the Minister representing the PostmasterGeneral a state of things that has caused a great deal of discontent among the telegraphists at Brisbane. For some unknown reason they have great difficulty in obtaining their annual leave, and a large amount of ‘leave is owing to many of them. Their work is particularly trying, and therefore I urge the Minister to rectify this grievance.

Another matter to which I draw the Postmaster-General’s attention is the fact that unless the letter-carriers and many others in the employ of the Department in Queensland are members of the union they receive something like £2 a year less than others who are unionists and lose seniority. I have never said a word against unionism; in fact, I would persuade a man to join a union, but it is a serious infringement on the liberties of the employees on whose behalf I speak to compel them to pay compulsory levies. This union has struck a levy on its members to support the anti-conscription movement and to subsidize the Brisbane Daily Standard,. Many of them are entirely out of sympathy with both these objects.

Senator RUSSELL:
VicePresident of the Executive Council · Victoria · NAT

– It is not the intention of the Government to deprive any one in any Department of the leave to which he is entitled under the Public Service Act. There must be some special circumstances operating in the case referred to by the honorable senator. Probably it is due to the fact that a number of telegraphists have gone to the war. In such a. case the holidays will be made up. to the men at a later date. I know nothing of the other matters to which the honorable senator has referred, but I shall see that they are brought under the notice of the PostmasterGeneral at the earliest possible moment.

Senator SENIOR:
South Australia

– I know that in many cases the casual employment of temporary men in the Public Service cannot be avoided, but the practice has grown to such an extent that it may become dangerous to the efficiency ofthe staff generally. One weakness lies in the fact that a considerable portion of the time of the permanent employees is occupied in teaching temporary employees the work which they have to do. A temporary hand, after learning the business, may not remain in the position for more than a month, and then another temporary employee has to go through the same operation. It is time the Post and Telegraph Department took into serious consideration the whole question of temporary employees. In my opinion, it would pay the Department to increase the number of permanent men. It would make the work more efficient. It would lead to better supervision, and might prevent a great deal of the pilfering that is taking place. As a rule, the permanent employee joins the Department as a lad, and is under continuous notice in doing his work. In time he grows up to realize that he has some interest in the work of the Department and in its general efficiency. I have no desire to asperse the characters of men who are brought in as casual hands, but they come from no one knows where, they are generally unemployed who seize the opportunity . of getting work, and they are called upon to do something to which they are not accustomed. I know that the system applies generally, but it is time we adopted a policy of staffing each Department with men who know their business and have an interest in the work of the Department as a whole.

Senator RUSSELL:
VicePresident of the Executive Council · Victoria · NAT

– Shortly after the outbreak of war, the Fisher Government determined that no permanent appointments would be made to the Public Service except in very exceptional circumstances. That rule was to apply for the period of the war. It was felt that those who went away to make sacrifices for their country should not come back to find themselves handicapped by reason of the fact that the positions which they previously held were occupied by those who had remained behind and had not made sacrifices. It may be true that temporary men are- not efficient, through lack of experience and training in postal work, but Australia should be prepared to put up with that lack of efficiency on their part in> order to give some little return for the sacrifices which are being made by those permanent men who have gone away to fight for us. Our ‘appeal for recruits would be useless if we had to tell the people that on their return they would not get an equal opportunity of securing positions in the Government service with those who enjoy the comfort of staying at home.

Sitting suspended from 12.16 to 1 a.m. (Friday).

Senator PRATTEN:
New _ South Wales

– There is an item of £1,000,000 for the Commonwealth trading vessels, and I ask the Minister whether a balance-sheet will be laid on the table of the Senate in due course in regard to the trading of these ships, on the lines of the balance-sheets submitted in connexion with the Defence Department’s factories? I presume that in the item of £183 for contingencies in the Military Branch of the Defence Department there may be included some cab hire for General Stanley and Colonel Thomas. In my opinion, the first progress report of the Royal Commission conclusively shows that General Stanley is not equal to his job. I direct attention to page 7 of that report, where, speaking of the Contract and Supply Board, the Commission reports that, prior to the creation of that Board, the system of purchasing military supplies was “most unbusiness-like, and that there is strong evidence of much waste of money through the faulty buying by inexperienced persons in the employ of the Department.” I understand that General Stanley is responsible for this defect. General Stanley was an officer of Artillery in the Permanent Forces, and succeeded to a job which virtually put him in control of the whole of the business transactions of the Department.

Senator Pearce:

– Do you say that the report states that he was unfit for his position ?

Senator PRATTEN:

– I think there is a misunderstanding. The words I used, I think, were that, the report of the Commission was a tribute to the unsuitability of General Stanley for the position, and the accountants, in their reply, made a most scathing reference to Colonel Thomas, and said in the most definite terms that he was unfit for the position. I am completely satisfied with the reply given by the Minister for Defence, that the new Business Board will take entire control, subject only to his responsibility to Parliament, of the whole of the civil side of the Defence Department.

Senator Pearce:

– That includes Colonel Thomas’ duties.

Senator PRATTEN:

– Yes, and also the duties which General Stanley is intrusted with. I hope this will usher in a new era; and I only regret that the Minister did not make the announcement much earlier. I take it that the item 132 in reference to war pensions is merely a book entry, as is another item in connexion with the Department of Trade and Customs. I do not think I am in order ; but, on the question of commissions which I was discussing in connexion with the item of £1S3 for contingencies, I should like some information from the representative of the Government as to how the Business Board, or the Royal Commission, is getting on with regard to its report on Naval administration. I have a feeling that, under ordinary circumstances, honorable senators would much prefer to have more time to discuss such weighty matters as Supply. I quite recognise that what happened in another place rendered our present position inevitable; but I feel sure that, in the future, in connexion with

Supply Bills, the Government will realize the importance of allowing honorable senators ample time for discussion.

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · Western Australia · NAT

– The Royal Commission has completed its investigations of the Defence expenditure on the military side in Australia, and has proceeded some distance with its investigations of Naval expenditure. Owing to the resignation of one member of the Commission, the Government, on the advice of the chairman, have decided on the appointment of an additional member to complete the inquiry on the Naval side. A gentleman has been selected, and is being communicated with; but, as we have not reached finality in the matter, I am not in a position to state his name. He is a well-known business man in Sydney, with special qualifications for this work. When he has been appointed, the inquiry on the Naval side will be completed, and the Government propose to consider whether any further inquiry is to be made in regard to expenditure overseas, where, it will be realized, a great deal of our expenditure lies.

Senator Pratten:

– What about the balance-sheet of which I spoke ?

Senator PEARCE:

– I understand that it is the intention of the Government to have reports dealing with all those trading concerns, on the lines suggested. Arrangements to that end are being forwarded as fast as possible, but the enterprise in regard to the trading vessels is a vast one hurriedly entered into, and the arrangements are only now being formulated.

Senator PRATTEN:
New South Wales

.- The AuditorGeneral, in his early, report on the finances of the Commonwealth, draws attention to the incomplete accounts in connexion with the Commonwealth line of vessels. No complete accounts have ever been put before Parliament, and, seeing that those ships were purchased at least two years ago, speaking from memory, I think a reasonable time has elapsed, and some further information should be afforded to honorable senators.

Senator Guthrie:

– There are also the interned ships.

Senator PRATTEN:

– I am speaking of the sixteen vessels originally purchased by Mr. Hughes during his visit to London. Those ships were purchased with public money, and have been trading at a profit. The transaction has turned out to be an exceedingly good one for the country, but I think that after two years has elapsed Parliament and the country are entitled to a balance-sheet.

Schedule agreed to.

Preamble and title agreed to.

Bill reported without request; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 4064

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Motion (by Senator Millen) agreed to-1-

That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn till Wednesday, 1st May, next.

page 4064

ADJOURNMENT

Public Service Examinations - Report of- Repatriation Trustees

Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · New South Wales · NAT

– I move -

That the Senate do now adjourn.

I should like to redeem promises I gave earlier in the day to refer to two matters which were raised by questions. Senator Bolton asked for information in regard to the intention to hold a Public Service examination on the 26th April. Inquiries made this afternoon have resulted in this statement having been supplied by the Public Service Commissioner -

On that date the examinations are only for optional subjects, and the numbers of candidates required to attend are very small. The numbers in the various capital cities, except Brisbane, are as follows : - Sydney, 7 ; Melbourne, 12 (till 10.30, and then 6); Adelaide, 1; Perth, 1; Hobart, 1. At Brisbane the celebration of Anzac Day takes place on the 25th, and arrangements have been made so that the examination will not interfere with the convenience of those men desiring to be present at the celebrations.

Senator Long:

asked a question with regard to the publication of the report of the Repatriation Trustees. In conformity with the terms of the Act which constituted that body, the report is to be presented to Parliament in a few days, and having been so presented will be printed.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senate adjourned at 1.15 a.m. (Friday).

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 18 April 1918, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1918/19180418_senate_7_84/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate18 April 1918

QUESTION

REFUSAL OF ADMISSION TO WHARF

Senator O’KEEFE:TASMANIA

Senator PEARCE:Minister for Defence · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator O’Keefe:

Senator MILLEN:Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator LONG:TASMANIA

Senator RUSSELL:Vice-President of the Executive Council · VICTORIA · NAT

Senator GUY:TASMANIA

Senator RUSSELL:

Senator RUSSELL:

AUSTRALIAN SOLDIERS REPATRIATION BILL

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH BOARDS

Senator PRATTEN:NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator MILLEN:NAT

QUESTION

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONER

Senator THOMAS:NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator MILLEN:NAT

QUESTION

BANK NOTES

Senator McDOUGALL:NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator MILLEN:NAT

QUESTION

PRIME MINISTER’S DEPARTMENT

Senator PRATTEN:

Senator MILLEN:NAT

QUESTION

GERMANS IN DEFENCE DEPARTMENT

Senator FOLL:QUEENSLAND

Senator PEARCE:NAT

Senator FOLL:

Senator PEARCE:

QUESTION

ARSENAL

Senator GRANT:NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator PEARCE:NAT

QUESTION

REPATRIATION TRUSTEES

Senator LONG:

Senator MILLEN:NAT

QUESTION

LOANS TO SOLDIERS DEPENDANTS

Senator FOLL:

Senator PEARCE:NAT

QUESTION

ADVERTISING WAR LOAN: COST

Senator NEEDHAM:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator MILLEN:NAT

QUESTION

IMPORTATION OF PIANOS AND GALVANIZED IRON

Senator KEATING:TASMANIA

Senator RUSSELL:NAT

Senator PRATTEN:

The PRESIDENT:

Senator KEATING:

Senator RUSSELL:

SHIPBUILDING SCHEME

Senator MILLEN:NAT

QUESTION

WOLFRAM, ZINC, LEAD, COPPER, AND ANTIMONY: EXPORT

Senator BARNES:VICTORIA

Senator RUSSELL:NAT

QUESTION

REFERENDUM CAMPAIGN - TRAVELLING PRESSMEN

Senator McDOUGALL:

Senator MILLEN:NAT

QUESTION

PRICE OF WHEAT

Senator HENDERSON:for Senator Lynch

Senator MILLEN:NAT

QUESTION

IMPERIAL CONFERENCE

Senator NEEDHAM:

Senator MILLEN:NAT

QUESTION

PRICE OF SUGAR

Senator Lt Colonel BOLTON:for Senator Fairbairn

Senate
18 April 1918

Senator O’KEEFE:
TASMANIA

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator LONG:
TASMANIA

Senator RUSSELL:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · VICTORIA · NAT

Senator GUY:
TASMANIA

Senator PRATTEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

Senator McDOUGALL:
NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

Senator FOLL:
QUEENSLAND

Senator PEARCE:
NAT

Senator GRANT:
NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator PEARCE:
NAT

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

Senator PEARCE:
NAT

Senator NEEDHAM:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

Senator KEATING:
TASMANIA

Senator RUSSELL:
NAT

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

Senator BARNES:
VICTORIA

Senator RUSSELL:
NAT

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

Senator HENDERSON:
for Senator Lynch

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

Senator Lt Colonel BOLTON:
for Senator Fairbairn

Senator RUSSELL:
NAT

Senator MILLEN:
NAT

Senator McDOUGALL:
for Senator Gardiner

Senator PEARCE:
NAT

Senator McDOUGALL:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator PEARCE:
NAT

Senator HENDERSON:
for Senator Lynch

Senator RUSSELL:
NAT

Senator GRANT:
New South Wales

Senator McDOUGALL:
New South Wales

Senator McDOUGALL:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator O’KEEFE:
TASMANIA · ALP

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT