Senate
8 July 1931

12^th Parliament · 1^st Session

PRESS MISREPRESENTATION
- Personal Explanation
MINISTERS IN THE SENATE
QUESTION
- TRANSPORT WORKERS LICENCES
QUESTION
- EXPORT OF SHEEP AND LAMBS
QUESTION
- SENATE AND SUPPLY
QUESTION
- SENATE AND WHEAT LEGISLATION
PAPERS
COMMONWEALTH DEBT CONVERSION BILL
- Second Reading
PREMIERS CONFERENCE
- Printingof Report
- Ernest Smith, Chairman
SOVIET CHANGES
ADJOURNMENT

– On the 3rd July, Senator Pearce asked the following question, upon notice : -

What is the total number of licences issued or renewed under the latest regulations under the Transport Workers Act, showing-

Number issued to the Waterside Workers Federation ;

To returned soldiers;

To other persons, for each of the ports proclaimed under the act?

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

There are twelve ports to which Part III. of the Transport Workers Act and the Waterside Employment Regulations under that act apply. The numbers of licences issued at each of these ports, to the inclusive dates mentioned against each, to the three classes of persons mentioned in the question, are as follow : -

page 3484

QUESTION

EXPORT OF SHEEP AND LAMBS

Senator BARNES:
ALP

– On the 11th June last, Senator J. B. Hayes asked the Minister representing the Minister for Markets the following questions, upon notice : -

The number of sheep and lambs exported from Australia during the last three months - (a) Wethers; (b) ewes; (c) lambs?
The ports from which they were exported and to which they were consigned?
The average cost of slaughtering, freezing, cartage, freight, and selling the different classesat per lb.?
The average value of skins and offal?

I now desire to furnish the following reply to the honorable member’s questions : -

The export of sheep and lambs from the Commonwealth during the months of March, April, and May, 1931, were -

These figures do not include New South Wales exports, as shipments from that State are not recorded in the manner indicated above. The exports of mutton andlamb from New South Wales during the three months in question were -

2.The meat in question was shipped from Melbourne, Sydney, Newcastle, Brisbane, and Rockhampton, and was consigned to- London; Liverpool; Manchester; Avonmouth; Hull; Southampton; Glasgow; Cardiff; Antwerp; Montreal; Toronto; Cristobel; Marseilles; Colombo; Port Said; Malta; Singapore; Bombay; Hong Kong; Japan; Yokahama; Kobe; Nauru; Ocean Island; Manila; Sourabaya; Macassar; Hamilton Island; Suva; Honolulu; Vancouver; Victoria, B.C.; San Francisco.

The costs of slaughtering, freezing, wrapping, and transport to ship side (i.e., f.o.b. cost) are based on an average of 32 lb. per carcass of lamb and 50 lb. par carcass of mutton, and vary slightly in different States and in different establishments according to the volume ofexport carried on. A fair general average would be -

Average value of skins and offal -

The above values are extremely low at present owing to the low prices ruling for tallow, casings, and other by-products.

Skins. - It is impossible to give any reliable estimate of the general average value ofsheep and lamb skins, as these vary in the different States, and also on account of quality and the period which has elapsed since shearing. At the present time in Victoria the following may be taken as a fair range in values: -

Sheep skins (woolly - 3s. to6s. each.

Old lambs (woolly) - 2s. to 3s. 6d. each.

page 3485

QUESTION

SENATE AND SUPPLY

Senator FOLL:
through. Senator Sir William Glasgow

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Did the Government ever receive information from an “unimpeachable authority”, as stated by Mr. Forde on Saturday, the 27th June, that the Senate would not grant the Government Supply after the 30th June, 1931 ?
If so, whatwas this “ unimpeachable authority “?

Senator BARNES:
ALP

– The Government has no further comments to offer in connexion with the matter.

page 3485

QUESTION

SENATE AND WHEAT LEGISLATION

Did the Minister for Markets (the Honorable Parker Moloney, M.P. ) receive from the Secretary of the Australian Wheatgrowers Federation (Mr. Stott) a letter asking for the enforcement of the Wheat Advances Act, or the payment of a substantial bounty to assist the industry?.

Did the Minister, in his reply, make the following statement : - “ As you must be fully aware of the fate at the hands of the Senate of the several measures which we introduced to provide assistance”?

Was not the bill for the Wheat Advances Act one of such measures’;

Did not the Senate pass this bill, and is it not a fact that it is to-day a statute of the Commonwealth?

If so, why does the Minister in his reply, as quoted, suggest that the Senate is responsible for the failure to give assistance to the wheat-growers ?

Senator BARNES:
ALP

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

A letter dated the 1st June, 1931, addressed to “ honorable members “, was received by the Minister for Markets from Mr. T. C. Stott, Secretary of the Australian Wheatgrowers Federation, intimating that, as it might then be possible to float a loan, endeavours be made to give effect to the Wheat Advances Act, providing a guaranteed price of 3s. per bushel f.o.b,, or failing that, a substantial bounty should be given.
Yes.
The measures to which the Minister for Markets referred were the Wheat Marketing Bill of 1930, which provided for a guaranteed price of 4s. per bushel and an orderly marketing system, and the Fiduciary Currency Bill of 1931, under which it was proposed to finance the bounty to growers of last season’s wheat and assist wheat-growers in necessitous circum stances. Both of these bills were rejected by the Senate. Although the Senate passed the Wheat Advances Act of 1930, this act was rendered inoperative because the legal advisers of the Commonwealth Bank expressed doubt as to the powers of the Commonwealth Parliament, under the Constitution, to guarantee the bank against any loss which might accrue. 4 and 5. See answer to No. 3.

page 3485

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

League of Nations - International Conference relating to Economic Statistics (November-December, 1928) -

International Convention.

Protocol to the International Convention.

Final Act of the Conference.

Nauru - Report to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of Nauru during the year 1930.

New Guinea - Report to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of the Territory of New Guinea from 1st July, 1929, to 30th June, 1930.

Regulations under Transport Workers Act - Particulars as to licences issued and renewed.

Sheep and Lambs exported from Australia - Particulars as to ports of export, value of skins, &c.

Air Force Act - Regulations amended - Statutory Rules 1931, No. 78.

DefenceAct - Regulations amended - Statutory Rules 1931, No. 83.

Naval Defence Act - Regulations amended -Statutory Rules 1931, No. 79- No. 80 -No. 81.

Northern Australia Act -

North Australia Commission - Fourth Annual Report, year ended 31st December, 1930.

Seat of Government Acceptance Act and Seat of Government (Administration) Act-Ordi nance No. 12 of 1931- Cotter River.

New Guinea Act - Ordinances of 1931 -

No. 17 - Liquor.

No. 18 - Explosives.

No. 19- Supply (No. 1) 1931-32.

page 3485

COMMONWEALTH DEBT CONVERSION BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from the 3rd July (vide page 3372), on motion by Senator

Dooley -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE (Western Australia) [3.8]. - I am rather surprised that the debate on this bill is being proceeded with before the Senate has disposed of the motion submitted by the

Leader of the Senate (Senator Barnes) for the printing of the paper relating to the general plan agreed upon by the Commonwealth and State Ministers for the financial and economic rehabilitation of the Commonwealth. I understood the arrangement to be that the Senate would conclude the debate on. that motion and then proceed to the consideration of the several measures to be presented. I again remind the Leader of the Senate that honorable members on this side do not intend to allow this bill to pass its third reading until the other economy proposals have been received from another place.

I shall not occupy much time in the discussion of this bill because last week I had an opportunity to take part in a general discussion on the Premiers Conference plan. I do, however, wish to offer some observations in reply to those who, within the last few weeks, have been criticizing adversely the subscribers to the Commonwealth loans, commonly termed the bondholders. Some time ago I asked for a return giving detailed information with respect to all the loans raised by the Commonwealth Government since 1914, showing the amount raised each year, the number of subscribers, and the amount subscribed by them. This return shows that the total of cash subscriptions amounted to £416,091,637; the total of conversion applications was £214,694,970, and the grand total, £630,786,607 - subscribednot by millionaires or bloated capitalists, but, for the most part, by persons of moderate means. The return also gave the following information : -

Total number of individual subscriptions by persons or bodies in respect of such loans, 1,441,448.

Number of subscriptions by individual persons of amounts of £500 or less, and the total amount of such subscriptions in respect of such loans. Information is not available as regards conversion applications in respect of loans raised from February, 1918, to July, 1923. The information as regards all other loans is as follows: -

Note. - Savings banks have also the following amounts in Commonwealth loans, but they were not investments in ordinary Commonwealth loans, but were domestic transactions. The amounts are -

These figures are a striking testimony to the way in which the thrifty citizens of Australia, as distinguished from the wealthier sections of the community, responded to appeals made by the Government from time to time. This should not be forgotten in the discussion of such measures as the one now before the Senate, and the other legislative proposals of the Government dealing with the present situation. The bill will impose a real sacrifice upon all subscribers to government loans, and particularly upon those persons who subscribed in small amounts. They represent, I repeat, the most worthy class of our community - those people who, throughout their lives, denied themselves personal pleasures and luxuries in order that they might provide for their old age. When, during the war, an appeal was made to their patriotism to ensure the success of government loans, a not inconsiderable number of them realized upon property in order to put money into government loans. During the last few days I have been literally inundated with letters from this class of bondholder, bringing under my notice their position in connexion with the proposed conversion scheme. Their story is indeed a sad one. In many cases, elderly people, who invested in government loans, are drawing just sufficient by way of interest to enable them to live. The sacrifice which they will be now called upon to make will bring their income below the amount necessary to provide them with ordinary comforts. In many cases they will have to sacrifice even some of the necessaries of life. When one remembers the large number of thrifty people who will be so affected by this conversion proposal, one must acknowledge that they will be making a very real and substantial sacrifice. When we compare the sacrifice which the small bondholders are to be called upon ro make with that of those in receipt of salaries or pensions, it will be seen that the small bondholders will make the bigger sacrifice. I could give a number of instances in support of my contention ; but I shall not now take up the time of the Senate in doing so.

I desire now to mention briefly another matter about which a number of honorable senators are somewhat perturbed. Among the loans maturing from 1932 to 1938 are several 6 per cent, loans, one of which was floated as recently as 1928. It is said that the plan involves a general reduction of interest to the extent of 22-J per cent. There is a sense in which that claim is correct ; but there is also a sense in which it is not correct. I take it that, when we speak of a reduction of interest, we mean a reduction of interest over the period during which the country has the use of the money. If we apply that principle to the loans maturing in 1932, or in 1938, we find- that the reduction is, in fact, only 22£ per cent, up to those dates; but, as the principal will not be repaid on the original dates of maturity, but will be retained in some instances for as long as 30 years, the reduction of interest after the present dates of maturity is 33 per cent., not 22-J per cent. Representations have been made to the Government in another place in this connexion; but, so far, the Government has not been able to bring forward any proposals to ease the undoubted hardship which these bondholders will he called upon to suffer. The proposal does not ensure equal treatment to all.

In another direction the Government has attempted to avoid inequality of treatment. The loans which it seeks to have converted bear various rates of interest - per cent., 5^ per cent., and 6 per cent. In order to reduce the interest on those several loans by 22J per cent., the Government adopted the principle of capitalizing a certain amount of the 6 per cent, loans, so that bondholders who have invested in them will receive an accretion of capital as compensation for their interest being reduced to 4 per cent. Could not something of the same kind be done to bring about a result more nearly approaching equality in the case of the short-dated 6 per cent, loans to which I have referred? Could there not be some addition to their capital in order to compensate these bondholders for the tremendous reduction of interest they will be called upon to suffer - a reduction amounting in some instances to 33 per cent.? I commend this suggestion to the Government, not in any spirit of criticism, but in order that wc may not be embarrassed when appealing to the people by having” to meet the objection that equal sacrifice is not to be demanded of all. The conversion of the whole of our internal indebtedness will be a wonderful achievement, and nothing that would militate against its success should he permitted. I believe that the. loan will be a success if we can ensure equal treatment to all.

We have heard a good deal about equality of sacrifice. In this connexion I point out that the sacrifice which the bondholders are being asked to make will bo of a permanent nature. When prosperity again returns, there is no prospect of the rates of interest being raised, whereas other sections of the community will expect to have restored to them the conditions which they enjoyed in our times of prosperity. This point should be taken into consideration when dealing with bondholders.

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE.Nor have wages been fixed on that basis. As in the case of the hen and the egg, it is a question of which came first - the increased cost of living or the increased wages.

The only other point to which I desire to refer is the effect of these proposals on a private savings bank in Launceston. Representations have been made to me in this connexion; but as it is a Tasmanian matter I have passed the communication on to the Tasmanian senators. I think there is a good deal in the claim of this institution ; but I shall reserve any further remarks on this subject until I have heard what Tasmanian senators have to say about it, and the Government’s reply thereto. There is a great deal more that I could say; but I shall not occupy the time of the Senate further.

Debate (on motion by Senator Duncan) adjourned.

page 3488

PREMIERS CONFERENCE

Printingof Report

Debate resumed from 3rd July (vide page 3395), on motion by Senator Barnes -

That the paper laid on the table of the Senate on the 17th June, 1931, namely, “Conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers, held at Melbourne, 25th of May to 11th of June, 1931 - proceedings and decisions of conference ; together with appendices “ be printed.

SenatorRAE (New South Wales) [3.33]. - When I obtained leave to continue my remarks on Friday last, I had not commenced to speak on the proposals embodied in the plan adopted at the Conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers recently held in Melbourne. My remarks to-day are not intended to be lengthy, because I realize that when the various measures to give effect to the policy embodied in this plan come before the Senate we shall again have an opportunity to debate the same subjects.

I shall, however, take this opportunity to state that I am irrevocably opposed to the plan as a whole. The reduction in the rate of interest, as provided in the Commonwealth Debt Conversion Bill, seems to me to be totally inadequate, and the Commonwealth will be faced with a grave danger if the Commonwealth Debt Conversion Bill is passed in its present form. Honorable senators who have referred to the financial position of the Commonwealth from time to time have expressed the opinion that if the present depression is to be lifted, the greatest need of the day is to restore confidence. If that is so, there is a very grave danger of confidence being entirely shattered as a result of the adoption of these proposals. In the first place, it is intended to reduce the rate of interest, but in my opinion, the reduction is not sufficiently great, and secondly, the conversion should be on a compulsory basis, instead of awaiting the goodwill of the bondholders themselves to say whether they will or will not accept a lower rate of interest. I consider that if the emergency is so grave this remedy should be applied without restrictions, and that the only sane and expedient method of securing results would be to make the conversion compulsory.

Notwithstanding the ad misericordiam appeal of the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Pearce) onbehalf of the vast number of small bondholders who, he contends, will be in a precarious position as a result of the extent to which their incomes will be reduced, Ibelieve that there should be a greater reduction in interest rates. I believe that the figures quoted disclose only a very small proportion of the truth, and that a vast proportion of the bonds covering our public debt are held by comparatively wealthy persons and institutions. I am not going to attempt to go into details in this respect as it would take too much time to do so ; but I affirm that the sacrifice tobe made by the bondholders should be sufficient to enable the Government to avoid altogether an attack on invalid and old-age and war pensions. While the Opposition may rightly congratulate itself upon having secured what it has been advocating during the last twelve or eighteen months, this so-called Labour Government has disgraced itself by submitting these proposals, and I can no longer admit that there is anything of Labour in it.

Senator RAE:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– Bad as is the Government, the honorable senator’s party is worse. My contention is that there is no justification whatever for this repudiation of the promises made to returned soldiers, and I am disappointed that some of them, after having strongly opposed the reductions as being iniquitous, now seem to be falling into line with those who are advocating them, and are prepared to compromise. For my part I am not prepared to make any sacrifice in this matter. Itis an absolute act of repudiation of the meanest and most despicable kind to rob the blinded, maimed and T.B. soldiers of any portion of their pensions. I cannot conceive of anything worse, and cannot for a moment associate myself with a party that will support such an absolutely iniquitous proposal. During the war the most lavish promises were made by governments and individuals in authority to the soldiers. One could also give ample reasons of a practical character to show that there is absolutely no justification for depriving the aged, the invalid and the returned soldiers of their pensions. I wish particularly to emphasize the position of the T.B. and blinded soldiers. I suppose that there is no meaner crime possible than that of robbing the blind or the sick. What would be considered a most despicable act by an individual cannot be any more justifiable on the part of a government. While an individual may attempt to do a most villainous thing for his own benefit, there is no occasion for a government to take up such an attitude. If the rates of interest were reduced all round to 3 per cent. - it is quite possible that the rate will go even lower-

Senator Hoare:

– It may come down to 2½ per cent.

Senator RAE:

– It may. Money could once be borrowed in New South Wales at 2½ per cent., and the rate of interest may again be reduced to that figure. While any physically fit person has a1s. of his own money left, it is absolute sacrilege to attack the pensions of the blind and the infirm. I cannot conceive of any government calling itself a Labour Government, consenting in any circumstances to such a vile repudiation of pledges that have been made over and over again. I am heartily ashamed of having been associated with men who are responsible for such a proposal. I am quite prepared to join with the Opposition in turning out the Government on a matter of this kind. I now owe absolutely no allegiance to it.

This plan, even if carried out in its entirety, will be insufficient to effect what the preamble to the measure states is one of its objects; that is, to avert disastrous consequences, and to re-establish the financial and industrial stability of the Commonwealth. It is most obviously optimistic to imagine that this measure will do anything of the kind. To the extent that it reduces interest, it will give the Government command of money that, otherwise, would have to be spent in that direction; but the saving made possible by the reduction of pensions of various kinds will not be any greater than could be obtained by the reduction of interest to a flat rate of 3 per cent. I consider that that is what should be done. Such action would enable the Government to dispense entirely with attacks on pensions, and leave it with a slight balance. Furthermore, if there is to be, in some degree, a restoration of confidence as a result of the reductions proposed, much greater progress in that direction would follow if the cut were made more drastic.

The grave danger that I apprehend is that when this proposal fails - as it will - to achieve anything like what is suggested or hoped, another attack will have to be made upon pensions, interest, and all other forms of expenditure. In all probability, that necessity will arise in a few months’ time. I ask honorable senators to consider the extent to which confidence would be shattered if one conversion having been made at these reduced rates, it became necessary, atno distant date, to seek still further relief in the same direction. We might as well make the repudiation complete with the one operation. While I have no fear that this Government will ever attempt to do that, I am apprehensive that, having once made an attack on pensions and on the maternity allowance, it will abolish those payments altogether should it find itself more deeply involved in financial difficulties.

For the reasons that I have given, it is my intention to oppose this plan. I know that, unfortunately, the majority of honorable senators think differently from me; but I believe that they are completely out of touch with the people of this country, who will be infinitely more ashamed of the reduction of oldage and soldiers’ pensions than of the attack that is being made upon bondholders. I am not one of those who have attacked bondholders. I, and those who think a3 I do, have had put into our mouths words that we have never uttered in that respect. I have no objection to any person making as much legitimate use, as circumstances permit, of the existing capitalistic system. I have never attacked the individuals concerned; but E do say that those of us who are physically fit, who have money to invest, or any sort of a regular income, ought to be prepared to go right down below the basic wage. So long as we have a shilling in our possession, we should refrain from attempting to rob in this way the old, the poor, the blind and the disabled members of this community. I ask honorable senators whether it is not a fact that, in any decent family, should a member of it be diseased, maimed or blind, he or she is not only treated with kindness, but is given the daintiest food, even though the other members of the family have to go without necessaries. It is considered not only a duty, hut a pleasure, to do all that is possible to lighten the burden of the sufferer. A nation should adopt a similar stand; it should see that any hardship, no matter how great it might be, fell upon the physically fit before it touched a cent of what was necessary for the comfort and the well-being of those who were afflicted. Holding that belief, I shall oppose this scheme to the fullest extent of my power. I know that the numbers are against me; but I feel from the bottom of my heart that I should be committing a crime against the community were I to support what is here proposed.

Senator DALY:
Assistant Minister · South Australia · ALP

– I refute the charge of the previous speaker that the Government has been callous in its administration so far as the sick, the aged and the returned soldiers are concerned. The honorable senator said that we should be prepared to submit to any sacrifice, even to a reduction below the basic wage, before pensions of any description were attacked.

Senator Rae:

– Hear, hear!

Senator DALY:

– I am pleased that the honorable senator has said “ Hear, hear “. How are we to pay pensions except out of production; and how can we produce unless we keep our workers up to a high standard of physical efficiency? I should like the honorable senator to explain how that high standard of physical efficiency can be maintained if the workers are reduced below the basic wage.

Senator Rae:

– There are many above it upon whom a commencement could be made.

Senator DALY:

– I am replying to the statement that we should be prepared to submit to any sacrifice, even to a reduction below the basic wage, before attacking pensions.

Senator Rae:

– I did not say that there should be a reduction of the basic wage.

Senator DALY:

Senator DALY:

– American business interests have to pay their profits into the banks, and the banks, to meet their obligations, rely upon the resources of the country. If the honorable senator wished to send £10,000 out of Australia he would, if he were wise, purchase £10,000 worth of fruit or wine, ship it overseas, and establish the necessary credit in London.

Senator Sir William Glasgow:

– Or else buy credit at the exchange rate of 30 per cent.

Senator DALY:

– If he bought Australian credit in England the transaction would be based on Australian production. For a considerable time now this Government has been at its wits’ end to keep its own party solid, and, at the Same time, steer this country through the financial difficulties which confronted it when it came into office. The rocks ahead, which I have attempted to describe, have to be avoided. To add to its troubles the Senate has resolutely opposed Labour’s financial policy.

Senator Rae:

– We should have entered upon a campaign to smash the banks. Then we should have had the country with us.

Senator DALY:

– The Government, faced with the alternative suggested by Senator Rae, met the situation, and is now prepared to take the consequences. I tell Senator Rae, in all sincerity, that no two men regret more than do the Prime Minister (Mr. Scullin) and the Treasurer (Mr. Theodore) the need to reduce invalid, old-age, and war pensions, and I feel sure that none will be stronger advocates than they to bring the Labour movement back over the ground which it has been forced temporarily to surrender.

– I say that there is no necessity to reduce them.

Senator OGDEN:

– A reduction is preferable to there being no pension at all. Similarly, I regret having to reduce soldiers’ pensions ; but it must be done.

I have said that the community generally is prepared to make a sacrifice in the interests of the nation; but there is one privileged section which is offering the strongest objection to any entrenchment upon its rights and privileges. I refer to the postal officials. The Postal Department is permeated with extremism and revolutionary ideas. The employees of that department publish their own journal, in which great hostility has been shown to the government of the day. During the régime of the Bruce-Page Government that journal disseminated propaganda which would have shamed even the Labour party. Coming from a body of government servants, it was disgraceful. I have here a letter from a number of associations whose members are sheltered behind regulations and superannuation enactments, and enjoy better conditions than any outside workers in this country. It reads -

Dear Sir. - We beg to advise you that the following resolutions were adopted unanimously at a crowded meeting of over 700 Commonwealth Public Service employees held in Sydney on Monday night last, 29th June: -

That- (1.) This mass meeting of Commonwealth Public Service employees enters an emphatic protest against the application of the proposed New South Wales emergency taxation, or the unemployment relief tax to Commonwealth Public Service employees within such State as -

It will defeat the spirit of equality of sacrifice by the imposition of dual taxation of Commonwealth public servants;

It infringes the decisions of the recent conference of Premiers where it was decided that economies should be spread evenly over the entire community;

It is a repudiation of the spirit of the decisions of such conference that the unemployment relief tax should form part of the proposed economics ;

It is a contradiction of the avowed intention of the Premier of New South Wales that all sections of the community should make equal sacrifice. (2.) That we urge the New South Wales State Government to exempt Commonwealth Public Service employees from the incidence of the proposed emergency taxation or the unemployed relief tax, and

That we call upon the Federal Government to protect Commonwealth public servants from the harsh treatment of overlapping taxation by Federal and State Parliaments.

You are invited to give immediate effect to the wishes of the mass meeting.

The following Commonwealth Public Service Unions were officially associated with the mass meeting (All New South Wales branches) : - Amalgamated Postal Workers Union; Commonwealth Public Service Clerical Association; Australian Third Division Telegraphists and Postal Clerks Union; Federated Public Service Assistants Association ; Australian Fourth Division Telegraphists, Postmasters, and Postal Clerks Union; Fourth Division Officers Association of Trade and Customs; Commonwealth Public Service Artisans Association; Line Inspectors Asso ciation (Postmaster-General’s Department) ; Commonwealth Telegraphic Traffic and Supervisory Officers Association; Commonwealth Telephone Officers Association; Australian Postal Electricians Union.

On behalf of the Organizing Committee,

Ernest Smith, Chairman

E. Healy, Secretary.

It will be seen that these gentlemen are prepared to allow the pensions of invalids, soldiers and aged persons to be reduced; but that they protest emphatically against any reduction of their own emoluments. Not only so, but they also object to having to pay State taxation which every other worker in the State has to pay. I regard as brazen effrontery the paragraph which reads, “ You are invited to give immediate effect to the wishes of the mass meeting.” It may interest honorable senators to know the reply that I sent to that communication. On the 4th July, I wrote in the following terms to Mr. Ernest Smith, the chairman of the organizing committee of the associations, which carried the resolutions I have read: -

I am in receipt of two separate communications from the Commonwealth Public Service Organization, New South Wales branches, conveying two resolutions carried at a meeting held on the 29th of June, one of which records uncompromising hostility to the proposed reduction of public service salaries, whilst the other emphatically protests against certain New South Wales taxation having application to public servants, and calling upon the Federal Government to protect them against State taxation. In comparing these two resolutions I am forced to the conclusion that the decision displayed a lamentable lack of public spirit and a selfishness which I trust is not shared by any considerable section of the rank and file of the organization. It is to be regretted that such drastic economies are necessary, but, unfortunately, the condition of the Commonwealth demands sacrifice from every section of the community, and why federal public servants, enjoying conditions far superior to any unsheltered worker should escape their fair share of the common burden when thousands are workless and in destitution, is unexplainable on just grounds. It is further specifically asked that federal public servants should be protected from State taxation. Every other taxable worker has to pay both - then why ask that those much better off should escape? I am prompted to ask from what source is it expected that money should be found? Must it come from the pockets of those who are suffering hardship asa result of unemployment and from slackness of trade, from the hard pressed primary producer, or is it to be begged, borrowed, or manufactured so that a favoured and sheltered section might escape altogether the common burden? Are old-age and invalid pensioners, and crippled, soldiers to suffer reductions that public servants may go free from any contribution towards the rehabilitation of their country?

This is what public servants are asking, and I am amazed and disappointed at such requests which display such utter selfishness and disregard to the welfare of others. Reduction of wages is not a pleasure, but in this crisis it is a duty which we must perform and the only thing we can do. is to spread the burden as equitably as possible. I regret that I am unable to accede to the request that we “ give immediate effect to the wishes of the mass meeting “ as I fail to see any justice at all in the claim as public servants are already awl,1 v protected and by comparison, very favorably treated. I should be glad to see the day come when the privileges now taken away may be restored but until then, all must share equitably in the common sacrifice necessary to enable that to be done.

– I am endeavouring to show that our present financial position is due to some extent to industrial troubles. The honorable senator also said that, “ What we have we hold “ ; but we can hold only that which we have. During practically the whole of the time this Government has been in office Parliament has been devoting its time to industrial matters which are of major importance.

Senator Rae, who advocates the Soviet system of government, concerning which he has spoken on numerous occasions, may have seen the latest statement of Stalin concerning the socialistic system. I should like to know whether the honorable senator endorses the sentiments expressed by Stalin in the following paragraph

The PRESIDENT:

– Has it a bearing on the motion before the chair ?

Senator REID:

– It has a bearing on the subjects covered by the motion. If the trade unionists of Australia considered our industrial problems from the same view-point as Stalin, the solution of many of our problems would be easy. The paragraph reads -

page 3498

SOVIET CHANGES

Stalin’s Policy

Greater Margin for Skilled Workers

Moscow, Sunday. “ It is necessary absolutely to end equality of pay for skilled and unskilled labour,” declared Stalin, addressing the Industrialist Conference where he foreshadowed changes in the complexion of the Soviet ideal. “The wage system compensates for skill in every industry. Every factory has advanced groups of skilled workers, who can be retained only by promotion and wage increases. The Soviet worker who is not suffering from unemployment is free from the capitalistic yoke, the master of his own fate, and demands security in all his material and cultural needs. We must fulfill that demand.”

Stalin pointed out that no ruling class can manage without its own intelligentsia, and urged that energetic, capable and gifted nonparty workers should be more boldly promoted to the leading positions.

The attitude towards the old bourgeois industrial intelligence must be changed. Whereas previously these had been shown the iron fist, they must now be attracted and oared for.

He added that it was necessary that the Soviet corporations should be changed from collective to individual administration.

– My point has nothing to do with either freetrade or protection. The Labour party, including Senator Daly, denounced Mr. Bruce and his Government, and argued that they wished to reduce wages. Mr. Bruce was opposed to the reduction of wages, and stated so many times; but he directed the attention of the people to the fact that the nation was living beyond its means; that the cost of production was too high; and that, unless care was exercised, a collapse was inevitable. I do not think that he or anybody else foresaw the severity or the widespread nature of that collapse when it came. Warnings were also voiced in other quarters. Australia was visited by a party of business men of ability, standing and world-wide renown, called the “ Big Four “. What effect had their warnings on the people generally ? They were altogether too mild in their criticism of our habits. But, reading between the lines, no one could ignore the gravity of the situation that they forecast. Then there was Sir Otto Niemeyer. He was the guest of the Government, yet was abused from one end of the country to the other by Labour ‘ men. The most insulting remarks that Ministers could think of were made regarding him on the public platform. It was not until he had left Australia that one Minister had the courage to explain that he had been asked by the Government to come here. In a general way, Sir Otto Niemeyer recommended what is now being done. The . Leader of the Opposition in the House of Representatives, discussing the last budget, put forward a programme practically identical with that. which is now proposed. Every person of common sense realized then that we were facing a crisis, from which there was no escape.

Senator Daly:

– Does the honorable senator say that the Leader of the Opposition in another place suggested a reduction of interest?

Senator REID:

– He did not make that suggestion, probably because he thought that that matter was best left alone. But what does all this talk about interest signify? We have asked the public to give us their money so that we might carry on public works, and we have spent that money foolishly. The cost of practically all our public works has been too high, and their revenue-producing qualities have been destroyed by the existing depression. Senator Daly himself referred to a building that was erected by the Government of New South Wales at a cost of £1,000,000. Why was that work undertaken? It was not necessary. Although it is a credit to Sydney, stupidity was exhibited in embarking on it. The majority of Australian industries have been enabled to get on their . feet by the employment of borrowed money; but the borrowers could afford to pay the interest involved, because they were placed in a position to produce at a profit. There are few businesses in Australia that are not carried on by means of overdrafts; but that system is profitable to the proprietors, because it enables them to make articles from which they can obtain a return. Australian Governments, however, have stupidly spent money upon works that have cost so much that there is no chance of their proving reproductive. Take our railways as an example. We have spent, as a nation, more upon railway construction than, possibly, any other country, and have thus opened up the whole of the Commonwealth. The consequence ia that there is not a railway system in the States that pays. We have the land, and we have many people settled on it, but what are they getting to-day? It does not pay to produce wheat. In Queensland, railways were run out hundreds of miles towards the west, and at one time they paid because wool was at a price which enabled it to be produced at a profit. Freights then charged were much less than they are to-day, but the lines paid so well that the State extended them. To-day, however, it does not pay to grow wool at the price obtainable for it, the railway freights are high, the staffs are over-manned, the wages of the railway employees are high, and the Queensland lines are no longer paying. I take railways merely as an example of many other industries.

Quite recently, a letter appeared in the Brisbane Courier, in which the writer pointed out that after spending 60 years in Queensland, and saving a couple of thousand pounds, he had drawn it from the savings bank and invested it in government loans so that he and his wife could live on the interest without applying for an old-age pension. This thrifty man was actually earning on his bonds £4 less than the pension paid to a married couple who had been thriftless, and had saved nothing. Thousands of old-age pensioners have been brought into their present position through disease, distress and so forth, but hundreds of them are drawing pensions because of their own carelessness;because they have spent their money instead of being thrifty like this old pioneer whose plight I have mentioned. There are hundreds in the same plight because they have been thrifty; having saved against their old age, they are now to be sadly affected by the reduction of interest proposed. I am not finding fault with the reduction of interest; it is necessary; there is no escape from it. But if old-age pensions are to be cut down, it must not be forgotten that 17s. 6d. will now purchase more than £1 purchased a couple of years ago.

We have heard a great deal about equality of sacrifice, and another claptrap term frequently employed is “ equal hardship “. There is no such thing as equality of sacrifice, and the phrase “equal hardship” is all so much humbug. Every one must make a sacrifice, but it cannot ‘be made equal. Some will suffer in one way and others in another.

Senator Dooley:

– “We can be fair.

SenatorREID. -We can try to be fair, but we cannot make the sacrifice equal; nor can we bring about equality of hardship.We are governed by the law of economics. All the talk in the world will not convince me that the basic wage is not an uneconomic factor. There can be no basic wage, unless the recipient has earned it. I have no objection to the payment of the basic wage, if it can be done; but the philanthropist who gives a man something he has not earned is burdening industry, and inflicting a hardship on some other person, who has to work harder in order that it may be paid. He is making it harder for those on the bread line to get away from it.

Senator Daly:

– How can they pay the wages in the sugar industry?

Senator REID:

– Just as they do in any other industry so long as it brings in money. I understand that 80 per cent. of the money earned by that industry is absorbed in the payment of wages. But whether the men engaged in the sugar industry get high wages or not, the economic law which affects all industry will affect it in the end. We cannot stop the working of economic law. The basic wage is an uneconomic factor in production, ‘because it means that if a man is not earning the wage he is receiving, some one else has to be impoverished in order that he may be paid.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– That is exactly what applies to the sugar industry.

Senator REID:

– That industry will be affected like other industries. No industry can be bolstered up for all time.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– Why did not the honorable senator say so a few weeks ago?

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. W. Kingsmill) . - I ask honorable senators not to conduct conversations.

Senator REID:

– I sympathize with honorable senators from Tasmania who were not in the chamber when the division took place on the sugar question; naturally they are very sore about it, but I said then what I am saying now.

This afternoon a resolution agreed to by civil servants in Sydney was quoted. Meetings of protest have not been held in any other city of the Commonwealth, and it is rather peculiar that this resolution should have been carried at a meeting in Sydney, above all places. At any rate, the spirit of the resolution and the language used are typical of Sydney and not of the Commonwealth Public Service. I meet a great number of public servants in Canberra, and the majority I find, although regretting the need for a reduction in salaries, realize that it is inevitable. They realize that the Government has not the money and that public servants must make a sacrifice as well as all other sections of the community. One can see from a glance at the balance-sheet of almost every private enterprise that few industries in Australia to-day are paying. In nearly every business establishment, the employees are being rationed or the staff is short-handed. Rates fixed under arbitration awards are all. coming down. While civil servants in Sydney, a sheltered class in constant employment, with no uncertainty about the morrow, are asking us not to carry out these proposed reductions, there are thousands of people in employment outside the Service, in constant fear of what the morrow will bring forth.

To show the position in which Australia is at the present time, I quote the following press telegram from Perth: -

Giving evidence before the Farmers Disabilities Commission, Mr. E. A. McLarty, managing trustee of the Agricultural Bank, the Soldiers Settlement Scheme, and the Industries Assistance Board, estimated that the total debt of the 20,559 farmers in the State was £30,000,000. He said that if prices continued at the present level it was impossible to see success for any farmer.

That is typical of the position of nearly all the wheat-growers of Australia. How can these men get out of debt unless the cost of administration and the cost of living come down? That telegram is an answer to the claim of the civil servants of Sydney. Very few industries in Australia can export goods and bring money into Australia. While this .depression exists, public servants must submit to the sacrifice required of every one in the community. We are all in the same boat. It is most unfortunate, but I do not ‘wish to make political capital out of the situation of the Commonwealth, because it is too .serious. I hope that

Senator Reid. the community generally will take heed of what has happened. As all sections participated in benefits during our years of prosperity, all must now bear a fair share of .the sacrifices necessary to lift Australia out of its present troubles. I have not the slightest fear for the future. Although the path ahead may be difficult for some years, we must all pull together, irrespective of the Government in power.

Before closing I should like to place on record a thoughtful statement made recently by Mr. Davidson, general manager of the Bank of New South Wales. Although I do not know Mr. Davidson, I have a high regard for him, because of the many useful contributions which he has made towards the solution of our troubles. The following report of his speech appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald: - “The thing we have to realize in connection with the financial plan is that it is but the first phase, and the negative phase of reconstruction,” said the manager of the Bank of New South Wales (Mr. A. C. Davidson) in an address to members of the Chartered Institute of Secretaries yesterday. “ This phase,” he continued, “ is concerned with the cutting down of expenses, although there is also an endeavour to raise more revenue. The more revenue that is raised, the more money comes out of private industry. The first phase is to be followed by the positive phase of reconstruction - that is to be one of individual private activity. We have to realize that Governments do not and cannot initiate new industry. Their methods are slow and cumbrous.”

The Government, he added, was too slow to deal with the present situation without causing disturbance, and it was impossible to look to the Government for new industries that must be necessary. Institutions and associations, he feared, would not be of much use in the positive phase of reconstruction. These associations were formed for the purpose of defence, although later- on they became aggressive. Such sectionalism in the community was not going to assist during the recovery period.

The call, as always, was to the directing class, said Mr. Davidson. The energies of this class had been dampened down as a result of easy prosperity. The Government regulations over nearly everything had to be considered. “ These things have got to go,” said Mr. Davidson. “ We cannot have reconstruction if executives are tied up in this way. The call is for personal independence, and for personal work. These must be the great features of Australia’s recovery. We have to accomplish two things that, at the present moment, may seem absolutely impossible. We must expand our exports and provide Australian goods at prices that will enable us to compete. Our exports are reduced to about £90,000,000. We have about £40,000,000 to pay to discharge interest abroad. We have to live within imports, totalling £50,000,000, which is about one-third of what we are accustomed to. Can we live within itr We will have to give up luxuries to do so, and find out which imports are absolutely necessary for the maintenance of Australian industry. Every one must realize that he must train for something harder.”

The extension of primary and secondary industries was the second essential in the recovery of the country. If anyone took the trouble to go through the range of Australian exports, Mr. Davidson concluded, he would be amazed at the small number of items. This range of items would have to be increased.

This part of the Government’s proposal is merely the negative phase. “When all the measures necessary to give effect to it have been passed the Government, if it is to lift Australia out of its difficulties, must introduce other proposals to remove the shackles from industry, and permit the people of Australia to enter upon the positive phase of their task. If -we do this, and if all pull together, there need be no fear of the ultimate result.

Senator Daly:

– “Would the honorable senator favour giving to all industries the consideration accorded to the sugar industry?

Senator REID:

– Apparently it is impossible for a representative of Queensland in this chamber to speak upon any subject without being called upon to reply to interjections relating to the sugar industry.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– It is a very pertinent interjection.

Senator REID:

– The sugar industry is an important one, and it has meant much to Australia. But I shall not pursue that subject further at this stage. Although I believe that, if all sections of the community pull together, we shall overcome our difficulties, I cannot help remarking on an unfortunate recent development in New South “Wales. “Within the last few days there has been another strike in the coal industry, due, it is said, to the dismissal of a wheeler in one of the pits. As I know nothing of the cause, I cannot judge whether the dismissal of the wheeler in question was just or unjust; but I regret that such an obviously minor matter should be allowed to paralyze the coal industry, and throw out of employment thousands of miners and other workmen dependent upon it. That is the policy which threatens to pull down the important State of New South “Wales, and that is the spirit which, if we are to get out of our troubles, we must endeavour to eradicate.

I hope that the several measures to give effect to the plan will be passed, so that at the earliest possible moment money will be available to industry, and the people encouraged to enter upon the positive phase of their task. It is, however, essential that there should be complete harmony and goodwill between employers and employees.

Senator COOPER:
Queensland

– Every one who really has at heart the welfare of Australia must realize the gravity of the position which necessitated the formulation of the plan adopted at the Premiers Conference in Melbourne recently. Consequently, all sections of the community should give earnest consideration and their whole-hearted support to the proposals brought forward by the Government. I admire the courage with which the Prime Minister (Mr. Scullin) has handled the situation. I believe that the drastic cuts in governmental expenditure and the sweeping changes contemplated in administration are necessary to give effect to this scheme for the financial and economic rehabilitation of the Commonwealth. The task upon which the Prime Minister and his colleagues have entered must be very distasteful to them. It mean3 the surrender of the ideals of the Labour movement.

But while honorable senators on this side may approve of the measures now taken, we cannot help commenting upon the length of time which the Government took to reach its decision. If the steps now contemplated had been taken eighteen months ago, the sacrifices then required of the people would not have been so great as will now be necessary. It may be of interest if I review briefly the events of the past eighteen months, and the warnings which ‘the Government received from time to time concerning the steady drift in Commonwealth finance. As far hack as April, 1930, the Treasurer (Mr. Theodore), speaking at Sydney Royal Show luncheon, said -

The diminution in our national income has resulted in the people having at least £50,000,000 a year less to spend. There is the explanation of our most serious problem.

It is as plain as a pikestaff. The facts are so obvious that every intelligent man must realize that a solution must be found. Whether we like it or not, we are compelled to resort to economy - economy by governments and by communities as a whole.

Although that warning by the Treasurer was issued in April of last year, this Government took no practical steps to meet the situation. It should, however, be noted that in July last the Prime Minister (Mr. Scullin), when delivering the budget speech which was prepared by Mr. Theodore, prophesied the balancing of the federal budget for 1930-31. On that occasion he said -

Parliament must recognize that no further drift in Commonwealth finances can be permitted, and that the balancing of the budget is an essential step for the restoration of the credit of Australia. The Government proposes to watch the financial position closely throughout the year, and without waiting until the end of the financial -year, will not hesitate to take immediate steps, if such action appears to be necessary, in order to prevent any serious disturbance in the budgetary position.

Although the position became worse month by month, it took the Government twelve months to make any definite proposal to stop the financial drift. On the 4th November, 1930, the Labour caucus departed from the principle that the federal budget should be balanced when a majority of its members supported the proposal of Mr. Anstey, that the repayment of loans falling due in December of that year should be compulsorily postponed. Happily, Mr. Lyons, who was the Acting Treasurer at that time, refused to agree to any postponement. Indeed, he inaugurated a campaign for the conversion of loans amounting to £28,000,000. So successful was his appeal that the loan was over-subscribed bv £2,000,000.

– Notwithstanding the definite promise of the Prime Minister in his budget speech last year -that the financial drift would be stopped, twelve months elapsed before any definite action to that end was taken. Even now, it is difficult to say whether the proposed remedies will be sufficient to meet the situation.

In his speech the other day, Senator Kneebone suggested that Mr. Bruce, the former Prime Minister, should have foreseen the present situation during his term of office. Mr. Bruce did warn the people on many occasions that the country could not continue its heavy expenditure. Senator Kneebone appeared to forget that. 1927 marked the peak period of prices for our primary products.

Senator Kneebone:

– In that year Mr. Scullin warned Mr. Bruce of the necessity for stopping the drift.

Senator Daly:

– Sir Robert Gibson did the same.

Senator COOPER:

– The reason for the appeal to the electors in 1929 was the determination of Mr. Bruce to rehabilitate the finances of the country.

Senator Daly:

– He was afraid to meet the House of Representatives with a budget along the lines of his proposals.

– Yes. The Commonwealth Bank should have informed the Government twelve months ago that its overdraft could not be further increased.

I agree with the statement of the Prime Minister (Mr. Scullin) that our financial position is a matter of arithmetic and not of argument. A person receiving £3 a week cannot carry on when his weekly expenditure is £4. That is what the Government has been attempting to do. The adoption of such a policy by an individual in business results in bankruptcy, and, in the case of a nation, in default. When a man in business becomes bankrupt his employees and creditors suffer, but in the event of a nation’s default, the whole community has to bear the hurden, and particularly those depending upon the Government for their livelihood. In the event of the Commonwealth Government defaulting, the public servants and those in receipt of invalid, old-age, and war pensions would lose most as they are directly supported by governmental funds. In the event of default, certain social services could not be continued, and what is still more serious, such a state of chaos would result that we would be exposing ourselves to the application of revolutionary principles. That is one of the gravest dangers with which we have to con ten i at present, and which might follow as the result of the privation which som.1. are at present experiencing.

The Government’s plan provides for a reduction of 20 per cent, in all controllable governmental expenditure, including salaries and wages of governmental employees and invalid and old-age and war pensions. In this respect, the public servants are in a much better position than many of those in private employment, who had their salaries reduced some time ago. The proposed reductions, which no one welcomes, must be made quickly. We are all loth to reduce the payments to the aged and infirm, many of whom are worthy pioneers, but when the country is unable to pay 20s. in the £1 it is better to take the position in hand and pay 17s. 6d. in the £1, instead of 9s. in the £1 as the committee of economists suggested would happen in July if adequate steps were not taken to stop the drift. The subject of war pensions has been fully considered by a committee repre-sentative of returned soldiers’ organizations, and I understand that a plan acceptable to those organizations and to the Government has been submitted. ] am pleased to learn that the pensions paid to incapacitated soldiers and the widows and orphans of returned soldiers are not to be interfered with. I should like to inform Senator Rae that as the result of representations made by their representatives the pensions of limbless, blinded, and tubercular soldiers, to which he referred this afternoon, are “not to be reduced.

The interest payable on government bonds held in Australia is also to be reduced. This afternoon the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Pearce), in an able speech, referred to the loss which some bondholders will suffer as a. resulof the Government’s proposals. On pap« 183 of the report of the proceedings of the conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers, the committee of experts states -

Other methods may be considered by which contributions from fixed money-claims may be obtained, but which involve breach of contract. In normal times broach of contract would constitute an insuperable objection, but fundamental as is the sanctity of contracts, it must not be overlooked that insistence on their fulfilment to the letter might, in present circumstances, force the debtor governments into a policy that would surely destroy the value of the bond. Generally, breach of contract would cause lack of confidence, and would set up a flight of capital from the country subjecting investors to it. But when the alternatives are inflation and default, or taxation of an equal or probably greater severity, holders of fixed money claims may find it wiser to accept a variation of their contracts which is less onerous than taxation, and insures them against the greater loss of total default.

There we have a definite statement indicating that there was a grave chance of the bondholder losing not only his interest, but also his capital. That, to my mind, is the strongest argument in favour of the voluntary acceptance by the bondholder of the reduction of interest. By doing so he, to a large extent, safeguards his capital. His interest, for the moment, it is admitted, is to be at a lower rate; but, with such a large amount of capital as £550,000,000 at stake, it is far better to lose 22£ per cent, in interest than to risk the loss of the whole of the capital.

Senator Bae has argued that the confidence of the people internally will be shaken under this proposal, and has contended that a compulsory conversion would result in greater confidence being aroused. I venture to suggest that the reverse would be the case. If a compulsory conversion were forced through, confidence in our generation would be wholly lost, and any future government that went on the market for a loan, except at a very high rate of interest, would find it impossible to borrow. I realize that there is a certain degree’ of repudiation in what is being done; but I consider that, in the light of all the facts, particularly that relating to the safeguarding »f capital, the holders of bonds will rally round the Government at this critical juncture and voluntarily convert their holdings.

I believe that the confidence of the public would be greater if the Government were to show a little more leniency in regard to those particular issues with respect to which it is proposed to give a premium. I note that the 6 per cent, bonds which fall due in 1938 will be issued at a premium of £4 3s. 6d. The amount of the bonds falling due on that date is approximately £14,000,000. Then we come to the large issue which was converted last December. It is generally recognized that that was a patriotic conversion. At the time, 6 per cent, bonds could be bought on the open market at somewhere about £90. These bondholders converted their holdings at par, repayable in 1932. The total amount of the bonds falling due in 1932 is roughly £34,600,000. The premium that we have been led to believe those bonds will carry is approximately 18s. 8d., which is £3 4s. lOd. below that of the 1938 bonds. If a special prize is to be awarded, it should go to those who voluntarily con-, verted last December. We are really penalizing, to a certain extent, those who then gave the Government the use of their money for a further period of two years. An additional premium of £3 4s. lOd. in their case would amount, in the aggregate, to £1,115,000. It would not actually cost the people that sum, because it would be issued in the form of bonds, and would be added to the amount of the re-converted bonds, spread over a period of 30 years.

Then there are conversions of roughly £4,000,000 in 1934, £4,600,000 in March, 1935; £96,000 in September, 1935, and £53,000,000 ip 1937. If the premium on the whole of those issues were made the same as for the 1938 issue, the holders of all of these stocks would be placed on an equal footing, and it would be a gesture by. the Government indicating that it was endeavouring to give as attractive terms as possible. The additional premium would be £1,839,000. The addition of £2,000,000 to the total conversion would make very little , difference, considering the huge conversion involved. I feel .certain that such an action would appeal to the bondholder. It would give, him far greater confidence, and be a powerful stimulus to voluntary conversion.

Senator COOPER:

– The proposal that extra taxation should be imposed was thoroughly explored by the experts who reported to the Premiers Conference, and they came to the conclusion that already Australia had practically reached the taxable limit of direct taxation. A nation that exceeds a certain limit in direct taxation is really straining the source from which revenue is drawn. It is actually taking from the community that portion of its earnings which can be made available for further production. The experts reported- that although there was a possibility of certain extra taxation being secured, it should not be obtained by means of direct taxation. In Australia to-day between 300,000 and 350,000 have registered as unemployed. It is a bigger army of workless than we have ever had before, and its existence is one of those things which justify the steps now proposed to.be taken; because with such a large army of unemployed, we are running a grave risk, not only of extremism, but also of the total collapse of the existing social structure. We are also compelled to use a large proportion of our revenue upon unproductive undertakings, or in providing doles. It is estimated that the enormous sum of £10,500,000 will be spent on unemployment relief during the year 1931-32. The estimate is a moderate one.

Senator Kneebone:

– The experts saythat the amount required will be £3,000,000 more.

Senator COOPER:

– If the position is not greatly improved during the next twelve months, allowing the unemployed only £1 a week, the amount we shall have to pay out in this direction will be in the vicinity of £1S,000,000. It is, therefore, of vital importance that men should be got back into employment as quickly as possible.

It has been said that the recommendations of the experts will not’ assist private industry; but I think they will go a long way towards doing so. It is certain that we can only hope for an ultimate reduction in the number of unemployed by thu means suggested, because the expenditure of money on unproductive works, or doles, or on any like form of relief, has no permanent value; the country is getting no return for the money spent. Certain of the proposals are drastic, but they are warranted if by means of them we can overcome the grave unemployed predicament we are in at the present time. Still more drastic measures may even be warranted.

I am pleased to note an improvement in the means of trade - the money necessary for the extension of our present activities or for the establishment of new enterprises. During the past fortnight the banks and financial institutions generally have added their weight to the effort to bring about this altered condition by reducing their overdraft rate by 1 per cent. This will make an enormous difference to our primary producers. Individually it may not appear to be much; but when we are informed that the farmers in Western Australia alone are in debt to the tune of £30,000,000, a reduction of 1 per cent, in their interest will make a very great difference, and, in some cases, perhaps the difference between profit and loss.

It is said that the proposals before us are only the beginning, and that we shall have to go further before we can definitely say that Australia has turned the corner. One factor that will greatly assist tho country in turning that corner is greater production. Whatever is done in the direction of- reducing rates of interest, wages, pensions, and expenditure on social services is only an actual saving in money. It brings no new capital into the country. Until there is a definite increase in the export of our produce we cannot expect any great relief in this direction.

The tariff may not have been actually mentioned in the proposals before us, but it has a great bearing upon the industries of Australia. On page 181 of the report of the Premiers Conference, the experts’ opinion on this point is set out as follows : -

The increased primage duty and the valuation of imports in Australian currency, if adopted, should be accompanied by the abolition of embargoes and rationing in respect of imports imposed during the last two years, and by a reduction of some of the extreme protective duties. Such measures would be no longer necessary, and their removal would promote better feeling overseas, or at least’ 011-set any unfavorable reaction to increased primage and the higher valuation of imports. On the whole, about £8,000,000 should be obtained from the com-

Dilution of primage, sales tax, and a revaluation of imports, accompanied by a reduction of embargoes and high customs duties, and a more liberal exemption of basic foods and instruments of production. (The principles of these exemptions require careful detailed statements, which cannot be attempted here.) These proposals would yield £10,000,000 of new taxation, which reduces the gap between revenue and expenditure in 1031-32 to £16,000,000.

The experts have hit upon one of the sources of our present troubles by saying that there should be a “more liberal exemption of basic foods and instruments of production “. During the last eighteen months heavy tariffs and embargoes, imposed without being submitted for ratification by this chamber, have added at least 15 per cent, to the cost of production. [Extension of time granted.]

– That matter was fully discussed in this House on a recent occasion and, I think, it was demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the Senate, that the Government’s policy with regard to the cotton industry was amply justified. My concern now is to prove that, since the tariff has substantially increased the price of all requirements on our farms, proposals for relief in this direction should be regarded as part of the general plan for the rehabilitation of the Commonwealth, because our prosperity depends upon the successful marketing of our surplus primary products overseas. Unless we can do this, the finances of the Commonwealth will be wrecked, and our primary producers will be forced off their properties.

Senator Kneebone, speaking to this motion last week, mentioned that the Senate had rejected a number of Government proposals which, he said, were definitely designed to meet the special difficulties now confronting the Commonwealth. Those measures, he added, included the proposed fiduciary note issue, and the nationalization of banking. The former proposal was exhaustively considered by the Under-Treasurers and economists whose services were placed at the disposal of the Premiers Conference in Melbourne recently, and this is what they had to say about it-

There are two methods by which, without a technical breach of contract, contributions’ might be exacted from internal holders of fixed money Claims. One is that of raising the price level, either by the issue of additional currency or by the creation of bank credit. There can be little doubt that under present conditions, such a policy would destroy confidence in the currency. With such loss of confidence, both interest and exchange rates would rise. The rise in exchange Would increase the cost of meeting overseas interest obligations, and, therefore, upset the whole plan for budget equilibrium. The increase in interest rates would be damaging to conversion operations, and again impose an additional strain upon the budget. The net effect would be to increase the deficit, and to require an increasing amount of new credit and currency to be created for balancing the budget in successive years. Under these circumstances an inflationary policy would soon get out of hand and bring about a collapse of the currency.

That was the considered opinion of experts who had been specially deputed to investigate the proposal. They had no doubt that an inflation of the currency would quickly get out of hand.

The Government is now taking the only course that is open to it, and I have not the slightest doubt that once the people of Australiarealize the gravity of the situation, and the sacrifices that will be necessary to place the Commonwealth again on a sound basis, they will, figuratively speaking, take off their coats, get to work, and quickly pull Australia round the corner.

– They might have been instituted by some friends of the honorable senator’s party. When the Government came into office there was a clamour for it to take over the coalmines. That was not constitutionally possible, even had the Government felt inclined to take over a dying industry.

One of the first things the Government did after it came into power was to ask the banks to release credits in order to assist industry, stabilize prices, and provide employment. Unfortunately, the banks had practically exhausted their funds, and were not willing to advance further credits. For that position they themselves were largely to blame, because in the past they had poured out money like water without due regard for the consequences. I know of instances in which parsons who desired to borrow money were offered more than they asked for. Eventually, the banks found that they could not continue the policy they had been following. The trouble was that the change of policy came about too suddenly. Competent authorities say that deflation can be as great an evil as inflation. The policy of deflation was put into operation so suddenly that the present chaotic state of affairs resulted. Confidence was lost, not because of any action of the Government, but because of the operation of the policy of deflation. Credits were not made available to carry on the industries of the country. We cannot attribute the blame for our present economic situation entirely to anything that has happened in this country, because the present depression is not confined to Australia; it is world-wide. Similarly, the banking practice followed in Australia is the banking practice of the world.

During recent years, our national income has fallen enormously, and as a consequence, unemployment has increased. The fall in our national income is due to the much lower prices received in the world’s markets for our primary products. In order to meet that difficulty, the Government proposed to increase the currency; but the banks would not agree. Legislation was then introduced to meet the situation, only to be rejected in this chamber. The Government was then faced with the possibility of being unable to pay more than 12s. in the £1. The circumstances were such that it was forced to accept the proposals put forward at the recent Premiers Conference to reduce invalid and old-age pensions to 17s. 6d. a week, and to make a percentage reduction in the salaries and wages of its employees. Concurrently with those proposals, the Government insisted that interest rates on fixed deposits, mortgages, and other securities, should be reduced by 22½ per cent. The inclusion of reduced interest rates in the plan agreed to at the Premiers Conference was a wonderful achievement for the Government, because not one of the plans previously submitted by the Opposition provided for any reduction of interest. It can he claimed for the plan now before us that it is allembracing.

I hope that the time is not far distant when we shall again have climbed to prosperity. The Government feels very keenly the reduction of pensions, and hopes that the day will soon come when they can be restored. Although it will be difficult to convince pensioners that, even with the reduction of their pensions, they will be no worse off than they were in 1927, the Statistician’s figures prove that that will be the case.

Honorable senators will agree that the vast majority of the workers of this country are reasonable men and women, who would not object to a reduction of their wages, provided that the cost of living were reduced to the same extent. They would be prepared to accept £2 for every £3 they previously received, so long as the purchasing power of their incomes remained the same. One cannot blame the workers for objecting to being called upon to make greater sacrifices than other sections of the community will bo asked to bear. It is well to remember that, although wages have increased, they have done so only because the cost of living figures on which they were based have justified the change. The workers have never secured through the Arbitration Court increased wages unless prior to such increases the cost” of commodities had risen proportionately. The same process should have been adopted when prices began to fall, in which case there would have been no complaint from the workers. Any one who has studied the position must realize that it is indeed serious and that, consequently, drastic remedies are necessary. The Government recognizes the gravity of the situation, and has set itself determinedly to grapple with it. Although I feel that we can hope for very little from this scheme, I am prepared to give it a trial. The problem that confronts Australia confronts most of the civilized countries of the world, and men who have made a life-time study of economics, banking and finance have applied themselves to a solution of it.

– Nevertheless, I support the general scheme, because I am unable to suggest an alternative that would be acceptable to all governments, and, at the same time, meet the difficult situation that confronts us. I doubt that there is precedent for the legislation which it is now proposed to place on the statute-book of the Commonwealth. As recently as November last . the Government made an urgent appeal to the people to subscribe to a conversion loan. Thewinning slogan adopted for the campaign, andwhich played no small part in the success of the loan, was “ Commonwealth bonds are as good as gold “.

Present market quotations for the new Government securities do not suggest that they are as good as gold. If a holder of those bonds wished to realize on them, he would have to be content with something in the vicinity of £80 or £85 per £100.

– I am not working myself into a frenzy.

The PRESIDENT:

– I must ask Senator Crawford to assist in conducting this debate in a reasonable and impersonal manner. Those honorable senators who have not yet spoken will have an opportunity of replying in an orderly way to the observations of previous speakers.

Senator HERBERT HAYS:

– I am not making any personal attack on the honorable senator. I am merely pointing out directions in which the Government could confer a benefit on the whole of the people of Australia without interfering with those who have invested their money in the cane-fields of Queensland. I submit that if the workers in the canefields are to be called upon to accept reduced wages, there could be a reduction of 20 per cent, in the cost of sugar without the profits of those who have invested money in the industry being affected. I fail to understand why a Labour Government, which claims to be democratic, should introduce proposals demanding heavy sacrifices on the part of the workers, and yet signs a contract to renew the sugar agreement for a period of three years at the previously existing rates. The gold bounty and other bounties are to be reduced. I maintain that by reducing the assistant granted to the sugar industry a considerable saving could be made without causing injury to any one.

Senator CARROLL (“Western Australia) T9.50]. - As a humble representative of a political party which was not consulted by the Prime Minister (Mr. Scullin) when these proposals were being considered, I desire to say that I regard the plan of the Melbourne conference as being in the nature of a circle, which, however, is not complete. If we have heard of one thing more than another during the last two or three weeks it has been the slogan “Equality of sacrifice “.

Senator Kneebone:

– It. is like that blessed word “ Mesopotamia “.

Senator CARROLL:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– And like “ charity “, covers a multitude of sins.

One or two important considerations which have to do with the rehabilitation of. this country were, apparently, not taken into account by the conference of Premiers. There are two sections in the community which should’ be treated in the same way under any proposal for the restoration of our financial position. First, there is the importer, who is generally a citizen who lives decently with his wife and family, and contributes his share of the taxation demanded by governments - no small item in these days. He has suffered so much from embargoes, prohibitions, and high duties that he has practically been forced to close his establishment in consequence. Then we have the Australian manufacturer who, under this scheme, is not required to sacrifice one penny. Notwithstanding that in the past he has been the recipient of enormous gifts from the Commonwealth, he is not to suffer a 20 per cent, reduction in the hour of the nation’s trial. On the contrary he is to retain the full measure of protection which has been afforded to him in the past. The Minister told us of one manufacturer in Sydney who is employing 100 more persons to-day than he did previously. I assume that his employees are mostly girls. I do not object to that, because girls must live, and, if they are to live decently, they must work. I do say, however, that, even if the Government’s policy has resulted in an additional 100 employees in one place, it has thrown out of employment 1,000 persons somewhere else. Under these proposals a favoured section of the community is to be immune from sacrifice, while others less able to bear the burden are required to carry it.

Senator Daly:

– Has the honorable senator studied the stock exchange schedules lately?

Senator CARROLL:

– I do not hold any shares in any company in Australia, and therefore I do not study the stock exchange schedules very closely. I point out, however, that the shares of some companies are low to-day only because of the reduced purchasing power of the people. That some companies are not so. prosperous as they were does not disprove my statement that one section of the community is being given preferential treatment.

The people are beginning to realize the enormous cost of government in this country. There is no wonder that they complain. It is indeed strange that, so far as we know, the Melbourne conference did not study that question. At least, it made no proposals whatever for reducing the cost of government by attempting to evolve any scheme whereby the tremendous overlapping between the Federal and State governments could be avoided, and needless expense saved. To that extent the conference failed.

There is no doubt that, during recent years, the Commonwealth has engaged in activities which should have been left entirely to the States, in which case they would have been better performed than they now are by the Commonwealth. That invasion by the Commonwealth might have been justified had it led to the retirement of the States from those fields ; hut, instead of accomplishing that result, the action of the Commonwealth has only resulted in a duplication of activities.

– I do not say that it is not. I am contending that in Canada they do not incur the expense of establishing courts and appointing judges for whom, as legal men, I have the highest admiration, but who know little or nothing about the industrial problems upon which they are engaged. Our Arbitration Court judges have to be guided entirely by the evidence placed before them by the advocates on each side, and in that way unnecessary expense is involved. If arbitration is to be continued in this country, a simpler method must be adopted, otherwise we shall not get anywhere.

I remember reading that, after the conclusion of the American Civil War, the representatives of the Southern States were continually ventilating grievances of every description. On one occasion one of the Northern representatives said to his Southern friends : “The trouble with you people from the South is that if you were to raise more hogs and less hell you would get on better”. That seems to be our position. We have been raising too much of the latter commodity which has no exportable value. In support of that we have only to read a paragraph which appeared in the newspapers this week to the effect that about 2,000 men in one of the New South Wales collieries have ceased work, and that the trouble is likely to spread because one wheeler has been dismissed. I have no knowledge of the justice or otherwise of the action of the management in dismissing the person concerned, but it is impossible for the industries of this country to be’ carried on if operations are to be held up merely because one .employee has a grievance. That is not an isolated case; the same kind of thing is going on day after day. At present we are operating under a double-barrelled system. The employees have arbitration as one barrel and the right to strike as another, and if they miss their bird with one they will bring it down with the other. By way of interjection Senator Bae said on Friday last of the industrialists, “ What we have we hold “. That is the old law of tooth and claw. We are supposed to have advanced and to have democratic methods of dealing with our troubles. As reasonable people we are supposed to be amenable to the conditions in which we find ourselves. But how far have we advanced when such a view as that expressed by Senator Bae is held by a very considerable section of the people?

Senator Rae:

– I hope it will be held by all.

Senator CARROLL:

– The honorable senator reminds me of Wordsworth’s lines concerning Rob Roy -

. the good old rule,
. the simple plan

That they should take who have the power,

And they should keep who can.

The Assistant Minister ‘ (Senator Dooley), in blaming the late Government for the position we are in, said that it realized that a change of policy was necessary only in its dying hours. He said that although the Commonwealth Government had not borrowed lavishly the figures proved that the Commonwealth Government should have restrained the States from extravagant borrowing.

Senator Dooley:

– I said that the Commonwealth Government was a party to it.

Senator CARROLL:

I am exceedingly glad to learn that a committee representative of returned soldier organizations has reached an agreement with the Government with respect to the reduction in war pensions.

Senator Rae:

– Their leaders have sold out.

Senator CARROLL:

– It is easy to make such an assertion; but I venture to say that the members of that committee realized that reductions were inevitable.

Senator Sampson:

– It knew that the Government could not continue to pay the present pensions.

Senator CARROLL:

– It came to an agreement with the Government because it realized that that which it proposed, and which the Government was willing tq accept was the best that could be done in the interests of those whom it represented.

If honorable senators have any doubt concerning Australia’s position, they should refer to the Commonwealth YearBook in which they will find that while the number engaged in Australian secondary industries during the last four years has increased by 5 per cent., our total production has decreased by 11 per cent.

I wish also to refer to the proposed reduction in the maternity allowance. The women of Australia through their organizations are prepared to accept a 20 per cent. reduction, but, in addition to the reduction, it is now proposed to pay the allowance only to those mothers whose husbands’ income does not exceed £250 per annum. The maternity allowance when first introduced was not regarded as a charitable gift, but as a recognition by the nation of the motherhood of Australia. This Government now proposes to take the maternity allowance off that high plane, and to treat it as a charitable donation.

Senator Kneebone:

– The representatives of the State Governments which do not have to provide the money supported that proposal.

Senator CARROLL:

– That does not alter my contention that it is a drastic alteration of the basis upon which the maternity allowance was first granted. The whole principle has been departed from as the allowance was never intended to be a charitable contribution in any shape or form. The Government has taken an entirely wrong action. It should have made the reduction, and left the principle intact. I believe that the women of Australia will never forgive it for having changed that principle.

A proposal with which I do not agree relates to the gold bounty. This was not a part of the agreement originally, but I believe that it has been embodied in one of the bills that is to give effect to the agreement. The gold-mining industry is more capable of assisting this country in the present period of trouble than is any other industry with which I am acquainted. But while the bounties that are being paid to other industries are to be reduced to some extent, the gold bounty is to suffer a reduction of no less than 50 per cent. It must be borne in mind, too, that it was never intended to pay this bounty on the full production of gold, but only on what was produced above the average for the three previous years; consequently, it would have been paid on a very small proportion of the total production, whereas in the case of every other industry the calculation is made on the total production. However, I understand that there is a possibility of the Government modifying its views to some extent. Whether the crumbs that the gold-mining industry has been able to pick up will prove sufficient, I cannot say, but it is some comfort to get at least a crumb.

Senator Dooley has endeavoured to make us believe that a great deal of our trouble was due to the tremendous deflation that has taken place. I remind him that Mr. Ramsay MacDonald, speaking on the Army Estimates only a few weeks ago, directed the attention of the House of Commons to the fact that the appropriation of £70,000,000 which he was seeking for army purposes, was no greater than the £50,000,000 voted in 1911. I invite the Minister to reflect on that statement, which to me indicates that there has been a good deal of inflation.

Before concluding, I should like to refer to the delightful speech that was made the other night by Senator Brennan. It was not only a model of diction, but was couched in most appropriate, and very fine, language. The honorable senator struck a note that, in my opinion, fits the position very aptly when he said that within the last few years we had lived joyously and spent our substance, and that the time had come for us to foot the bill. His words reminded me of the following passage from Omar Khayyam: -

While the rose blows along the river brink,

With old Khayyam the Ruby Vintage drink :

And whenthe Angel with his Darker Draught

Draws up to thee - take that, and do not shrink.

In Senator Brennan’s words, we have lived joyously. But the rose has now shed its bloom. We have drunk the wine to the lees, and now have to drink the darker draught. In other words, we have to pay up and look pleasant.

Senator Dooley:

– We have to sober up.

Senator CARROLL:

– We have had our financial “jag”, and the reckoning has to be made. It is useless to blame any particular parliament, government, or person. There are crowds of business men in the big cities, now posing as financial advisers to the Government, who were guilty of making the most ridiculous investments in properties. We have all been involved to a greater or less extent. This and the previous Government were advised that the moment the prices of wheat and wool dropped, Australia would be on the rocks ; and that we should take stock of the position, and trim our sails to suit the different wind that would blow when such a time arrived. That time has arrived, and it is our duty to stand up like men to our responsibilities. Again, I say to the Government that it must compel every section of the community to bear a portion of the burden. No section must be allowed to escape. Every means of reducing the expenditure, which is now crushing the people of Australia, should be explored most minutely.

Debate (on motion by Senator E. B. Johnston) adjourned.

page 3524

ADJOURNMENT

Queensland Loans: Interest Rates. - Conditions in Canada.

Senator DALY:
Assistant Minister · South Australia · ALP

– I move -

That the Senate do now adjourn.

It is my duty to correct the statement of Senator Carroll this evening that while the present Federal Treasurer (Mr. Theodore) was Treasurer of Queensland, he borrowed money at an interest rate of 7 per cent. When that statement was made I communicated with the honorable gentleman, and I am instructed to inform the honorable senator who made it, that he has been misinformed; that on no occasion during the period that Mr. Theodore was Treasurer of Queensland did he borrow money at an interest rate of 7 per cent.

Senator Sampson:

– Might it not have been while he was Premier?

Senator DALY:

– Neither when he was Premier nor Treasurer of Queensland. Honorable senators will realize that the honorable gentleman has no opportunity of defending himself in this chamber. When the statement was made it was communicated to him, and he was asked to say whether it was accurate. To me it appeared incredible. The reply to me by the Treasurer was emphatically in the negative; that on no occasion did he, either as Premier or Treasurer of Queensland, borrow money at the rate suggested.

Senator Sir William Glasgow:

– For the State?

Senator DALY:

– For the State.

Senator Reid:

– All that I know is that it is now being paid.

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

– I should like to make a brief reference to the comparision drawn by Senator Carroll, between the conditions in Canada and in Australia.

Senator Carroll:

– I said that Canada was in a better position than Australia.

Senator RAE:

– The honorable senator was in Canada three years ago, but in the intervening period there has been an opportunity for that dominion to encounter misfortunes similar to those which have afflicted this country. To indicate the present position, I read the following paragraph from a letter sent to Australia by the Saskatchewan section of the United Farmers of Canada, Saskatoon, dated the 29th May, 1931 : -

We, the farmersof Western Canada, are living in troublesome times. Most of us arc facing bankruptcy ; our land is covered with mortgages. The price of farm products is the lowest in history, which, of course, makes it impossible to pay either taxes or even interest payments on our loans.

Our streets arc crowded with unemployed men and women, and to cap it all, the powers that be, i.e., both, Provincial and Federal Governments seem to bo going around in circles holding conferences and accomplishing very little by way of a solution to the economic problem.

To me, those statements establish the fact that there is a parallel between her position and ours.

Senator Carroll:

– Yet the government of Canada can raise millions of pounds, while we cannot raise a shilling.

Senator RAE:

– I have rend that por tion of the letter first, because it relates to the position of the farmers and the workers of thatcountry. The letter was received by the Premier of New South Wales, Mr. Lang, in justice to whom I shall road theremainder. It is as follows : -

Dear sir, -

One of the lodges of our organization, namely, the Fennell Hall Local Lodgeat North Battleford, Sask, passed a resolution at a meeting hold recently, requesting me to express to you appreciation for the human stand taken by yourself, recently, when, according to press reports, yon stated publicly that you would not take money from labour and farmers tobe given to bondholders. The members of our organization realize that it requires a man of courage and strong convictions to take such a stand against the capitalistic exploiters, and they wish toadvise you that your action is being noted in far-off Canada.

It is, therefore, a great pleasure for us to convey our most sincere appreciation to you for the commendable stand which you have taken.

Wishing you every success, yours very truly,

Frank Eliason,

Secretary.

I mention these matters, because there is a good deal of truth in the old saying that distant fields look green. Canada, like other countries, including Australia, was probably enjoying a period of prosperity when the honorable senator was there. Since then there has been ample time for it to meet with misfortune similar to ours. If we except Soviet Russia, which honorable senators generally do except, I venture to say there is not one country in the world to-day that has not at present tens of thousands of unemployed, the number, of course, varying according to local conditions. The worldwide unemployment figures amount, according to the statisticians, to upwards of 30,000,000 people. It all goes to show, as I have maintained all along, that, apart from local circumstances, the whole capitalistic system under which we live has almost reached the point of collapse. It was the declaration of a very orthodox philosopher and economist, John Stuart Mill, that small means are worse than useless in coping with big problems. The remedies put forward by the Premiers Conference, I contend, will only carry us over a few months, by which time we shall have to take further steps in the downward path we are now treading.

Senator CARROLL:
Western Australia

– When I made my comparison between Canada and Australia, I had thought of what the position of . Canada was when the parliamentary delegation was there. What I had in my mind was the simple fact that a month ago the dominion applied for a loan of £54,000,000 at 4½ per cent., and it was subscribed seven times over inside a day, whereas we are unable to borrow at all.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senate adjourned at 10.33 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 8 July 1931, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1931/19310708_senate_12_130/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate 8 July 1931

PRESS MISREPRESENTATION

Personal Explanation

Senator DUNCAN:NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

MINISTERS IN THE SENATE

Senator BARNES:Vice-President of the Executive Council · VICTORIA · ALP

QUESTION

TRANSPORT WORKERS LICENCES

Senator BARNES:ALP

QUESTION

EXPORT OF SHEEP AND LAMBS

Senator BARNES:ALP

QUESTION

SENATE AND SUPPLY

Senator FOLL:through. Senator Sir William Glasgow

Senator BARNES:ALP

QUESTION

SENATE AND WHEAT LEGISLATION

Senator BARNES:ALP

PAPERS

COMMONWEALTH DEBT CONVERSION BILL

Second Reading

PREMIERS CONFERENCE

Printingof Report

Senator RAE:NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator Hoare:

Senator RAE:

Senator DALY:Assistant Minister · South Australia · ALP

Senator Rae:

Senator DALY:

Senator Rae:

Senator DALY:

Senator Rae:

Senator DALY:

Senator Rae:

Senator DALY:

Senator Rae:

Senator DALY:

Senator Herbert Hays:

Senator DALY:

Senator Herbert Hays:

Senator DALY:

Senator Herbert Hays:

Senator DALY:

Senator Herbert Hays:

Senator DALY:

Senator Rae:

Senator DALY:

Senator Reid:

Senator DALY:

Senator Reid:

Senator DALY:

Senator Reid:

Senator DALY:

Senator Sir William Glasgow:

Senator DALY:

Senator Ogden:

Senator DALY:

Senator Sir William Glasgow:

Senator DALY:

Senator Sir William Glasgow:

Senator DALY:

Senator Ogden:

Senator DALY:

Senator Herbert Hays:

Senator DALY:

Senator Reid:

Senator DALY:

Senator Reid:

Senator DALY:

Senator Sir William Glasgow:

Senator DALY:

Senator Sir William Glasgow:

Senator DALY:

Senator Reid:

Senator DALY:

Senator Sir William Glasgow:

Senator DALY:

Senator Rae:

Senator DALY:

Senate
8 July 1931

Senator DUNCAN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator BARNES:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · VICTORIA · ALP

Senator BARNES:
ALP

Senator BARNES:
ALP

Senator FOLL:
through. Senator Sir William Glasgow

Senator BARNES:
ALP

Senator BARNES:
ALP

Senator RAE:
NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator DALY:
Assistant Minister · South Australia · ALP

Senator OGDEN:
Tasmania

Senator REID:
Queensland

Senator COOPER:
Queensland