Senate
6 December 1933

13^th Parliament · 1^st Session

PAPERS
QUESTION
- OIL FROM COAL
QUESTION
- JAPANESE INVASION OF EMPIRE MARKETS
QUESTION
- NEW ZEALAND MILITARY CADETS
QUESTION
- PRICE OF WHEAT
CANBERRA UNEMPLOYED
- Victorian Onions
ASSISTANCE TO PRIMARY PRODUCERS
QUESTION
- COUNTRY TELEPHONES
QUESTION
- MILITARY UNIFORM
QUESTION
- DEPRECIATION OF AMERICAN DOLLAR
QUESTION
- JAPANESE TRADE
QUESTION
- ISSUE OF PASSPORTS
QUESTION
- DESTRUCTION OF EMUS
QUESTION
- NEW ZEALAND MIGRATION SCHEME
COMMONWEALTH PUBLIC SERVICE BILL 1933
EXTRADITION BILL 1933
INDUSTRIAL PEACE ACTS REPEAL BILL 1933
DAIRY PRODUCE BILL 1933
INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT BILL 1933
FRUIT GROWERS RELIEF BILL 1933
INDUSTRIAL PEACE ACTS REPEAL BILL 1933
INCOME TAX BILL 1933
DRIEDFRUITS BILL 1933
- Second Reading
ASHMORE ANDC ARTIER ISLANDS ACCEPTANCE BILL 1933
- Second Reading
WAR PENSIONS APPROPRIATION BILL 1933
- Second Reading
SILVER AGREEMENT BILL 1933
PATENTS BILL 1933
- Second Reading
HIGH COURT PROCEDURE BILL 1933
- Second Reading
INVALID AND OLD-AGE PENSIONS APPROPRIATION BILL 1933
- Second Reading
SEAT OF GOVERNMENT SUPREME COURT BILL 1933
JUDICIARY BILL 1933
- Second Reading
APPROPRIATION BILL 1933-34
BANKRUPTCY BILL 1933
HOUR OF MEETING

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

page 5564

PAPERS

The following papers were pre sented : -

Seat of Government Acceptance Act and Sent of Government (Administration) Act -

Ordinances of 1933-

No. 25 - Instruments.

No. 29. - Cemeteries.

page 5564

QUESTION

OIL FROM COAL

Senator DUNN:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the VicePresident of the Executive Council seen a report in to-day’s Sydney Morning Herald which states -

The Minister for Mines (Mr. Vincent)said last night that Professor F. A. Easthaugh, of Sydney University, who would leave to-day ona health trip to England, would make inquiries on behalf of the State into the methods for the extraction of oil from coal. It was anticipated that the information gathered would be of value to New South Wales, in view of the proved richness of the Greta seam coal in oil.

Will every facility be offered to the professor in making his inquiries in Europe and, if necessary, in the United States of America ?

Senator McLACHLAN:
Minister in charge of Development and Scientific and Industrial Research · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– So far as lies within the power of the Government all facilities will be afforded. Probably before the Senate rises for the Christmas vacation, 1 shall be able to make, at all events, a tentative statement regarding the Newnes shale deposits.

page 5564

QUESTION

JAPANESE INVASION OF EMPIRE MARKETS

Senator ELLIOTT:
VICTORIA

– On Tuesday, the 28th November, the Minister representing the Minister for Commerce said that he hoped soon to have an answer to my question dealing with trade and industrial conditions generally in Japan. When may I expect a reply?

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON.I am informed that the information is being collected, but is not yet available.

Senator ELLIOTT:

– In view of the apparent inability of the Department of Commerce to supply the information, despite all the resources at the command of the Government, is it not advisable for the Government to reconsider the matter of sending a delegation to Japan until it is well equipped to understand the commercial and industrial conditions of that country ?

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:

– It is not usual to make statements of Government policy in reply to questions.

page 5555

QUESTION

NEW ZEALAND MILITARY CADETS

Senator DUNN:

asked the Minister representingthe PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

With reference to the Minister’s statement, in reply to question by Senator E. B. Johnston, that the reduction of £1 per annum granted in the rental charges of metropolitan telephones will not be granted in the rental charges of country telephones, but that other concessions have been made in regard to the telephone services in the country districts, will the Minister state - (a) What are the other concessions made to telephone users in country districts; and (b) what is their value as compared with the £1 per annum concession granted to telephone users in metropolitan areas?

Senator McLACHLAN:
UAP

– The PostmasterGeneral has supplied the following answer to the honorable senator’s question : -

The most sympathetic consideration was given to the question of tariffs for telephones in country districts; but, in view of the unprofitable nature of those services at their existing rates, it was found impracticable to make any change. The honorable senator is reminded that in the metropolitan areas the charge is as high as £5 10s. per annum, whereas the rates in the country are as low as £3, and are limited to £3 15s. in the areas having as many as 2,000 subscribers. Ninety per cent. of the subscribers situated outside the capital cities are paying £3 5s. or less per annum. With the object of. conferring special benefits on country users, the basis of charging on route mileage was abandoned, in favour of radial distances, on trunk line services, and unit-fee areas were created to allow subscribers to communicate without extra fee with other subscribers on exchanges within a 5-mile radius. In addition, a unit fee of only1d. has been imposed for application in extensive rural areas, in place of the lid. charge which applies in metropolitan centres. Further, in 1929, when the rates were increased in the capital cities, no such additions were made for country areas; but, on the contrary, reductions equivalent to £15,000 per annum were made. If the country rentals had been treated in a similar fashion to those of the metropolitan areas, the excess charges would have amounted to £50,000 per annum.With a view to still further improving countrytelephone facilities, increased hours of service are being arranged at a considerable number of places, and, in addition, orders are being placed for automatic equipment to be installed in selected areas, thus affording continuous service in circumstances where this would otherwise have been impracticable. The total estimated value of the tariff alterations which have been made primarily in the interests of country users is, roughly, £230,000 per annum. If the revised rates for residence telephone service in the capital cities do not result in a variation in the calling rate, or lead to additional services being connected, the loss of revenue consequent upon the change will be approximately £35,000 per annum. There is every reason to suppose, however, that, under the new conditions, there will be an expansion of business which, within a reasonable time, will result in increased revenue,

page 5556

QUESTION

MILITARY UNIFORM

Senator COLLETT:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

In view of references in the Victorian press to the probability of certain units of the Citizen Forces being authorized to wear the Scottish kilt, will the Minister, before arriving at a decision, consider - (1) The extra cost that will be involved; (2) whether it is advisable to abandon the Australian style of uniform with which are now associated very highly-prized traditions; (3) the effect upon the even flow of recruits as a result of permitting distinctions in dress amongst units ofthe same arm of the Service?

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:

–

Yes.

page 5556

QUESTION

DEPRECIATION OF AMERICAN DOLLAR

American dollar. Inquiries arebeing made and a reply will be furnished as soon as possible.

page 5556

QUESTION

JAPANESE TRADE

Senator BROWN:
QUEENSLAND

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

Has the Minister noticed a report in a section of the Sydney press that Japan is issuing free government credit to Japanese exporters for the purpose of assisting them to compete more readily in the world’s markets?
Will the Minister make inquiries as to the truth or otherwise of the foregoing, and inform the Senate of the result?

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:

– The Minister for External Affairs has supplied the following answers: -

No.
If the honorable senator will give further particulars concerning the report in ques- tion, consideration will be given to the matter.

page 5556

QUESTION

ISSUE OF PASSPORTS

Senator DUNN:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior, upon notice -

What has been the total number of British subjects who have been issued with passports to leave Australia, and who have sailed from Australia to the United States of America and other countries bythe American steamships of the Matson Line during the last two years?

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE The Minister for the Interior has supplied the following answer: -

During the period from 1st January, 1932, to 31st October, 1933, 810 British subjects have left Australia for the United States of America, and 3,200 for other countries (total 4,010) by vessels of the Matson Line. It would involve a considerable amount of work and expense to ascertain how many of these travellers obtained passports in Australia as against those who already held valid passports issued outside Australia.

page 5556

QUESTION

DESTRUCTION OF EMUS

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

Is it a fact that on behalf of the Defence Department the Kellerberrin Branch of the Agricultural Bank (Western Australia) lately sent an account for £24 to Mr. D. J. O’Leary, of Walgoolan, Western Australia, for payment of the full cost of the ammunition used by a section of the Defence Force from Melbourne who were detailed with machine guns to destroy emus in the Walgoolan district in 1932?
Is it a fact’ as stated by the West Australian that Mr. O’Leary has rendered a counter claim against the Department of Defence, as follows: -

Has the Minister for Defence or the Agricultural Bank received a letter from Mr. O’Leary stating that “ as Napoleon’s ideas are now obsolete, the army engaged in the campaign did not march on its stomach, but in Mr. O’Leary’s motor car, the well-fed condition of the troops being responsible for the breakage of the ‘chassis of that vehicle.”?
Is it a fact that, as stated by Mr. O’Leary, “ the £900 worth of wheat for which damages are claimed was not consumed by the troops, but was destroyed by the enemy, during the delay in commencing operations, occasioned by the necessary war conference between the bank and Sir George Pearce, Minister for Defence, to determine who should pay the cost of the ammunition used in the campaign “ ‘!
In view of the low price of wheat, is it proposed to hold a conference or. take other steps to secure the cancellation of emu war debts due to the Commonwealth by either the State of Western Australia, or the settlers on the frontier ?>

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:

– If an account was sent to Mr. O’Leary by the Kellerberrin Branch of the Agricultural Bank, as set out, it was not on behalf of the Defence Department, as the following facts will show: - In response to a request, with which the State Government was associated, by settlers in certain districts in Western Australia, I agreed in November, 1932, to allow three members of the Permanent Military Forces to go to the district with machine guns to aid the settlers in their endeavours to protect their crops against emus on the understanding that no cost to the Commonwealth was to be incurred. The military personnel received no extra pay; the State Government undertook to find the railway fares of the military personnel, and to guarantee payment of the value of the ammunition expended. From information which the Base Commandant received from various sources, it is evident that the operations of the military party were successful, and the cause of much satisfaction to the farmers concerned.

page 5557

QUESTION

NEW ZEALAND MIGRATION SCHEME

Senator PAYNE:
TASMANIA

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Has his attention been drawn to a paragraph in the New Zealand press setting out a scheme as outlined by Dr. Campbell Begg, as part of a plan to solve the economic problems of the dominion - the scheme being a reciprocal arrangement between the British and New Zealand Governments under which Britain would remit .the whole of the interest owed her by New Zealand whilst in return the dominion’ would absorb 1,000,000 British nationals infifteen years?
If so, will the Government give consideration to the scheme to see if such a proposal would, be advantageous to the Commonwealth, if it could bo arranged?

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE The Prime Minister has supplied the following answers: -

Yes.
I have not yet had time carefully to peruse the press report, but will do so at an early opportunity. In the meantime, it is not possible to reply to the honorable senator’s inquiry.

£16,647,000 CONVERSION LOAN.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:
Assistant Treasurer · Victoria · UAP

[3.15]. - by leave - Yesterday, I informed honorable senators that negotiations were approaching finality for a conversion loan of £16,647,000 in London, and it was expected that the loan would be underwritten that day. The Prime Minister(Mr. Lyons) has now received advice from Mr. Bruce that the underwriting arrangements were completed yesterday on the terms indicated .by me, namely, 3-$ per cent, at 99 for 15 years, with the option to the Government to repay after twelve years. On these terms, theyield, to the investor, allowing for redemption at the end of fifteen years, is £3 16s. 9d., as compared with £3 17s. lid. for the last operation, and £4 ls. lOd. m respect of the previous conversion carried out in July. The saving of interest on the present conversion will amount to £243,000 a year. In addition, there will be a saving in exchange, calculated at the present rate, of £61,000, or a total saving of £304,000. The whole of this saving will accrue to State Governments.

Since October of last year, loans bearing high rates of interest and totalling £78,589,000 have been converted to loans at lower interest rates. The annual saving on all these operations now aggregates £1,523,000 for interest, and £381,000 for exchange at the present rate, or a total annual saving of £1,904,000. The balance of loans bearing interest at 5 per cent., over which we have optional rights of conversion, is now £17,850,000, and it is hoped that a further operation will be carried out in due course to reduce the interest rates on these loans. The press reception of this latest conversion loan, the Prime Minister has also been advised, has been most favorable.

page 5558

COMMONWEALTH PUBLIC SERVICE BILL 1933

Motion (by Senator Sir George Pearce) agreed to -

That leave be given to introduce a bill for an act to amend the Commonwealth Public Service Act 1922-1932.

Bill brought up by Senator Sir George Pearce, and read a first time.

page 5558

EXTRADITION BILL 1933

Motion (by Senator McLachlan) agreed to -

That leave be given to introduce a bill for an act to amend the Extradition Act 1903.

Bill brought up by Senator McLachlan, and read a first time.

page 5558

INDUSTRIAL PEACE ACTS REPEAL BILL 1933

Motion (by Senator McLachlan) agreed to -

That leave be given to introduce a bill for an act to repeal the Industrial Peace Acts 1920 and for other purposes.

page 5558

DAIRY PRODUCE BILL 1933

Bill receivedfromthe House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended and bill (on motion by Senator Sir Harry Lawson) read a first time.

page 5558

INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT BILL 1933

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended and bill (on motion by Senator Sir Harry Lawson) read a first time.

page 5558

FRUIT GROWERS RELIEF BILL 1933

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:
Assistant Treasurer · Victoria · UAP

[3.25]. - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This is a simple measure. Provision is made in the Estimates for £125,000 to assist the fruit-growers, who have experienced difficulty in marketing their crops at reasonable prices, and this bill will give effect to that provision. The average amount returned to the apple-growers of Tasmania has dropped during the last three years from 5s. a bushel case to 1s. 8d. a bushel case. This collapse of prices is due to three main causes - record crops in some States, imports of oranges into Great Britain, and good seasons in Great Britain. Distribution of the grant will be on the basis of export, this being considered the most equitable method of distribution among the States. Any other method wouldnot return so great a proportion to the Tasmanian growers, who are in most need. Details of the amount allocated to each State are set out in the bill, which is recommended to the Senate as a measure of assistance to put the industry on its feet for the coming season.

Senator BARNES:
Victoria

.- I have no desire to delay the passage of this bill. Like many other bills, it is brought forward ostensibly to give people who are having a hard time some help in the form of a grant. There would be no objection to that in some circumstances, but in this class of bill no attempt is ever made by the Government, while being generous to others in need of relief, to safeguard the interests of workers in the industry. I am strongly of opinion that when the Government is giving relief of this kind, the workers in the industry should be looked after also. There is no provision in this bill to ensure that those who receive the grant shall pay the wages provided by State determinations or Federal awards. Unless such provision is made, I object to the granting of this money. There are awards governing the employment of labour in the fruit industry. My union - the AustralianWorkers Union - is particularly interested in the matter, because, in Victoria, and I think in Tasmania, certainly in Western Australia and South Australia, and in parts of New South Wales, it covers a large number of workers engaged in the industry. Many orchard ists, while taking advantage of everything given to them by governments, avail themselves of every opportunity to escape their responsibilities to the people they employ to gather their crops. It has cost my union quite a lot of money to police awards in the fruit-growing industry. The fruit-growers introduce sweated labour of any description and of any nationality whenever they can. I regret very much that provision is not made in this bill to safeguard the workers’ interests, and I shall try to have an amendment made to that effect when the bill is in committee. Subject to that criticism, I do not object to the Government giving to the fruit industry the help that is considered necessary.

Senator E B JOHNSTON:
Western Australia

– I congratulate the Government upon the introduction of this measure to provide financial assistance to fruit-growers on the basis mentioned by the Assistant Minister (Senator Lawson). Although the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Barnes) raised an objection concerning the rates paid to employees in the industry, I am pleased to learn that the measure will receive the support of the Labour party. The Government has decided to assist the fruit-growers on the basis of export, which is sound, and the relief to be afforded will be welcome to many fruitgrowers who have experienced considerable financial difficulty owing to the low prices they obtained for their products. I also congratulate the Government upon the fact that this measure does not contain the objectionable restriction which I understand is to be applied to those engaged in another important Australian primary industry, the wheat industry. We cannot overlook the manner in which the Government proposes to assist this industry as compared with the way in which it intends to afford relief to the wheat-growers. The fruit-growing industry is of value to Australia and should be assisted, and I am glad that those engaged in it will not be placed in the humiliating position of proving that they have not any taxable income before they will be entitled to relief under this measure, as is proposed under another bill to afford relief to those engaged in another important primary industry.

Senator McLachlan:

– If the honorable senator will peruse the bill, he will see that some of the fruit-growers must be in a bad position before they will be entitled to relief.

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

– I hope that the congratulations which I have offered to the Government are not premature. The apple and pear-growers will be assisted as provided in clause 4, provided they made a loss on their export operations last year. . Although the population of Western Australia is small in comparison with that of some of the other States, I am pleased to find that some of the fruit-growers in that State will receive a considerable measure of relief. I hope that we can assume that the principle embodied in this measure will also be adopted in others of a similar nature, and that the stigma of mendicancy will not be applied to wheatgrowers by the measure which will shortly be under consideration in this chamber.

SenatorRAE (New South Wales) [3.35]. - I endorse the remarks of the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Barnes) as to the necessity to include in the bill some provision to assist the employees in the fruitgrowing industry, many of whom are paid less than arbitration award rates. The position of many of those engaged in fruit-picking in various parts of Victoria during the last season was most deplorable. Many of them were not only forced to accept less than award rates, but were also so intimidated that they were almost afraid to be seen speaking to ‘the union organizer, quite apart from becoming members of the industrial union.

Senator Guthrie:

– Where was that ?

SenatorRAE. - In the Shepparton district. Unemployment at present is so prevalent that it is difficult to enforce arbitration court awards, and certain employers have been paying ridiculously low rates of wages. When labour is plentiful it is difficult to police awards, and I trust that the Minister will accept an amendment to be moved by the Leader of the Opposition to ensure that those who receive financial assistance from the Government shall pay fair wages. I have not had an opportunity to study, the bill closely and, consequently, I do not know if any provision has been made to meet the objections raised yesterday on another measure to prevent grants to settlers from being claimed by creditors. Fruit-growers should be safeguarded from those legal sharks who attempt to grab every penny paid to assist deserving primary producers. Provision should also be made to ensure that, in the event of the death of a fruit-grower before this legislation becomes operative, the grant which would have been paid to him. under this bill shall go to his dependants who may have to carry on the industry. I support the bill.

Senator HARDY:
New South Wales

– I wholeheartedly support the principle incorporated in this bill and congratulate the Government upon its introduction. Clause 4 provides that any money granted under this act shall be for the benefit of fruit-growers who satisfy an authority nominated by a State that they have suffered losses in the export of apples or pears grown by them during the 1932-33 season. I trust that in another measure shortly to come before this chamber, the Government will not lay itself open to a charge of inconsistency. It has been rumoured that the basis on which other primary producers are to be assisted differs from that embodied in this bill, and that a certain amount of discrimination has been exercised by the Government.

Senator HERBERT HAYS:
Tasmania

. - In supporting the second reading of this bill, I should like to inform the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Barnes) and Senator Rae, who referred to the non-observance of Arbitration Court awards, that the fruit-growing industry is carried on largely with the assistance of the growers’ families. Award rates may not be paid in every instance, but the fruit-growing industry is indirectly responsible for the employment of a large volume of labour in the timber industry, which provides the material for box-making, on the waterfront and in connexion with motor and other transport services. From 40 to 50 large overseas vessels visit Tasmania during the apple and pear season. The wages of the employees engaged in the industries I have mentioned are governed by Arbitration Court awards arid, in view of the special circumstances surrounding this industry, I hope that the Leader of the Opposition will not move the amendment he has forecast. Its adoption would have a serious effect upon other industries in which large numbers of unionists are employed.

Senator Rae:

– I referred more particu larly to the wages paid to fruit-pickers.

Senator HERBERT HAYS:

– In many instances that work is done by the members of the grower’s family and, consequently, award rates are not paid. Apple and pear-growers have experienced great difficulty, and I trust that no attempt will be made by any honorable senator to harass them further. Even when prices are low, the whole of the work of the orchard must be carried on as in normal circumstances if the orchardist is to continue in the business.

Senator GRANT:
Tasmania

.- I also support the second reading of the bill. As the Minister has pointed out, the price this year will not average more than1s. 8d. a bushel. That represents an absolute lossto the grower. I am pleased to know that the Apple and Pear Council in Sydney decided to recommend a reduction in the quantity of fruit exported, and will also exercise some control over the variety and sizes of the fruit to be sent overseas. The bulk of the fruit exported to England last year, especially towards the end of the season, did not return to the grower sufficient to pay even the freight. The Government can assist the industry by bringing pressure on the shipping companies to induce them to reduce freights. I understand that action in this direction is being taken, and I trust that, before next export season starts, a substantial reduction of overseas freight on fruit will be announced. Shipping companies have suggested that the freight could be reduced during certain months of the year. That would mean the landing of Tasmanian fruit on the London market in the flush of the English berry-fruit season, with disastrous results to the growers. I am afraid we must admit that the season for export of Australian apples and pears to England and the continent is limited,’ and that it is useless to export outside the seasonal limits. I welcome the bill, and approve of the proposal to limit the assistance to those growers who suffered an actual loss in connexion with last year’s1 export trade. A number of growers sold their fruit at a reasonably good price f.o.b., and, therefore, they should not be entitled to assistance under this bill.

Senator BROWN:
Queensland

– Queensland being only slightly interested in the fruit export trade is receiving a small portion of (the money provided under this bill. The bulk of it goes to Tasmania, and I am pleased to be able to support a proposal to assist fruitgrowers in that State. I hope that, on future occasions, the Tasmanian representatives in this chamber, and especially Senator Payne, will reciprocate by supporting measures for the assistance of Queensland industries.

Senator Grant:

– They have not done badly under the Commonwealth.

Senator BROWN:

Senator Plain:

– The conditions in the industry have altered since 1927.

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES:

– That may be, but even at that time the Parliament was told that the measure would be gladly availed of by the growers. The fact that this industry has carried on without Government assistance until this year, although many other industries have been helped during many years, seems to indicate that its affairs have been satisfactorily conducted:

Regarding the point raised by Senators Barnes and Brown, it need not be supposed that sweating of employees could occur as the result of this measure. Grants will be made only to those who have suffered losses, and how can it possibly be suggested that any great benefit will accrue to” the growers if this assistance is only to recoup their losses? It is imaginable, I suppose, that a grower may be recouped to an extent greater than his losses, but the chances are that he will receive a gre’at deal less. Therefore, the fear of sweating is groundless.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON (Victoria - Assistant Treasurer) [4.18]. - This measure does not provide for a bounty to apple and pear-growers, but, as its title indicates, the object is to provide relief to necessitous fruit-growers who have suffered losses. The subject of wages is not relevant or appropriate to the discussion of this measure. The Government is endeavouring to give some assistance to those who have been so hard hit through losses on last year’s operations that they are scarcely in a position to make preparation for next year’s work. The .distribution of £125,000 amongst the apple and peargrowers of Australia is not an excessive grant. The information that has come to the Government officially, and which many of us have from our own experience, is that some growers have suffered tremendous losses, and after all their year’s efforts, have been presented with debit notes instead of cheques in respect of the fruit which they have sent abroad. The 1932-33 season opened auspiciously, a record crop was gathered, and highly satisfactory returns were expected. Some growers sold their fruit in advance’ to agents and received good prices. Others, having the expectation of satisfactory London prices, exported it on consignment, and many of them did not receive even the average return of ls. 8d. a case nett; instead, they received debit notes. The bill proposes that the Government shall make a grant of £125,000 to be distributed among the States on an export basis, and the States are to set up investigating authorities to insure that the assistance is given where it is most needed. The last clause of the bill provides that those who have suffered losses on their exports during the 1932-33 season may be granted assistance. The whole spirit and intention of this measure is that help shall be given to those growers who need it. The Government is advised that if this assistance is not granted, many of the growers will be unable to continue their operations. If they do carry on as heretofore, work will be provided - I speak of the districts with which I am acquainted - for this industry gives a considerable amount of employment which is well remunerated. Last year’s record crop of apples and pears in Victoria was a Godsend to many who were looking for work, and assisted greatly in relieving unemployment in the fruit-growing districts. I urge the Leader of the Opposition to realize that his proposal to make part of the grant available to the workers is inappropriate. In committee. I shall ask honorable senators to insert the word “ necessitous “ before “ fruit-growers “. Therefore, I cannot accept the congratulation which Senators Johnston and Hardy offered as if the bill provided for a bounty to fruit-growers, lt does not make a grant or give -a bounty to the in- , dustry ; it i3 designed to relieve those who have suffered losses and need assistance if they are to carry on their operations next year.

Senator Hardy:

– This help is to be given to any grower irrespective of his income from other sources.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON.Certain growers are well able to carry on and do not need Government assistance. Others will probably have to go out of the industry if help is not given to them. I hope that the. Leader of the Opposition will not persist’ in his suggestion. I may inform Senator Rae that the Shepparton district produces, not apples and pears, but soft fruits; there- ‘ fore his information from that locality does not apply to those growers who “will benefit under this proposal. I remind Senator Brown that Queensland exports only 10 per cent, of the apple crop.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.

Clause 4 -

Any money granted to a State under this act shall be so granted upon condition that it is applied by the State for the benefit and assistance of fruit-growers who satisfy an authority nominated in that behalf by the State that they have suffered losses in the export from Australia of apples or pears grown by them during the 1932-33 season.

Amendment (by Senator Sir Harry Lawson) proposed -

That after the word “ of,” first occurring, the word “ necessitous “ be inserted.

– If I did not need it, and he did, I should say, “ Hear, hear.” Why should I object? Some persons grumble about having to pay income tax. I have no objection to paying income tax if I have the income. The larger and more prosperous fruit-grower must do something with his fruit. If he sees that his neighbour, who is more necessitous and less fortunate than himself, is able, with the aid of the grant, to get fruit to market, he will send his fruit to market, too. Instead of loafing on the Government, he will send his fruit to market and accept the price fluctuations as part of the game.

Senator J B HAYES:
Tasmania

– I do not think that it was ever intended that relief should be given to fruit-growers who sold all their fruit f . o.b. and made a profit. The bill states that only those who suffered losses on the export of fruit out of Australia shall participate. The Government would be well advised to leave it at that. The word “ necessitous “ which the Government proposes to insert in the definition is capable of a very wide interpretation, and it will certainly hamper the State authorities when they are distributing the grant. One person might say that a necessitous fruit-grower must be below the bread-line; but another might say that he could have an income of £200 or £300 a year. Discretion might very well be left to the State governments, which have their agricultural departments, with officers who know the condition of the growers. They will know, also, that the grant is limited to those who made losses on the export of fruit. I do not like the word “necessitous,” and I hope that it will not be inserted,

I wish to reply to a suggestion that Tasmanian apples, because they are sometimes sold at a lower price, are of inferior quality. Apples from Tasmania are occasionally quoted at lower prices because Tasmania exports 95 per cent, of its crop, whereas other States export only from 30 to 40 per cent., comprising only the best of their crops. Tasmanian apples for export, whether interstate or overseas, have to pass inspection. For the Sydney market, the standard of inspection is as severe as for any other market. The excellence of the Tasmanian apples has always been recognized.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:
Assistant Treasurer · Victoria · UAP

[4.45]. - I strongly urge honorable senators to support the amendment. I have already stated that this is a relief measure, and that the amount to be appropriated is not excessive. The bill provides for the payment of a grant to those engaged in the export of apples and pears. If it were a bounty, it would be paid to all growers regardless of exports.

Senator J B Hayes:

– It is to recoup losses.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:

– Yes. It is a salvage measure to assist those who have suffered losses, and who need financial relief, and not a bill to assist a largo number of well-established growers who suffered losses on last year’s exports, but are able to carry on because they have done well in previous years. As many growers are in a thoroughly sound financial position, there is no reason why the Government should come to their aid. They have not asked the Government for assistance. Wealthy companies, which have capital invested in orchards, would, no doubt, be able to prove that they suffered a loss on last year’s operations, but they should not be assisted. If we do not restrict assistance, we shall be limiting the amount available to those needing relief. Senator O’Halloran said that the Government’s proposal is a premium on inefficiency, and that statement was endorsed by Senator Hardy. Some growers who are inefficient would benefit, even if the word “ necessitous “ were not inserted. I know of a number of growers in Victoria who are trying hard to become established. Many young orchardists are paying for their orchards, and cannot stand up to the losses which they have been compelled to bear. The Government wishes to render substantial aid so far as is possible; but if it is to be available to all exporters, some of those whom the Government wish to assist will not benefit to the extent desired. The responsibility of distributing relief will rest upon the State officials who will inquire into the financial circumstances of the growers seeking relief, and who will have to prove that they have incurred a loss on their exports. Those who can stand up to their losses should do so in a spirit of sturdy independence, but those who need aid should receive it. I trust that the committee will support the amendment.

Senator COLLINGS:
Queensland

– I am glad that the Government proposes to assist apple and pear growers who are in financial difficulties, but’ this is not the best way in which to afford relief. This is only tinkering with the business, and, by expedients of this kind, we do not get down to root causes. What is needed in this industry and other primary industries is proper organization and planning in the matter of production and distribution. If such a system were adopted, these continued appeals would not be made to the Government for financial assistance, and fruit-growers and other primary producers could not be classed as mendicants. I hope that the word “ necessitous “ will be embodied in the clause. This measure is not comparable with other similar propositions that have .come before the Senate, but as the Assistant Minister definitely explained it is to assist those unfortunate growers who are unable to stand the losses they have incurred in exporting their products during the present season and to enable them to carry on their undertakings during the coming season. The sum of £125,000 should not be handed over willy-nilly to those who are not in need of such relief.

Senator Hardy:

– The honorable senator would change his tune if assistance to the sugar industry were under consideration.

Senator COLLINGS:

– If there is one subsidized industry which is an advantage to all the people of the Commonwealth it is the industry mentioned by the honorable senator. The sugar industry is well organized in every phase of its activities and there would be no need for appeals of this nature if fruit-growing and other industries were equally well organized. The amendment is necessary, and I hope that it will be carried.

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES:
South Australia

– I entirely agree with the views expressed by Senator Hardy, Senator Johnston, and I am glad to say on this occasion, by Senator O’Halloran, who has expressed what will certainly be the dominant feeling in South Australia. A grower may be in necessitous circumstances due to inefficiency, or to the fact that he is carrying on his operations on unsuitable land. The money to be appropriated should not be distributed to persons or industries simply because they are in necessitous circumstances.

Senator KINGSMILL:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · NAT

– The distribution will be the responsibility of the States.

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES:

– Yes ; but Commonwealth money will be employed and distributed as prescribed by this bill. If we insert the word “necessitous “ in the bill why not render assistance to necessitous storekeepers, bananagrowers, or land brokers to mention only a few?

Senator Crawford:

– Hardship is recognized by the Land Tax Act.

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES:

– I do not like the hardship sections of our taxation legislation ; in certain cases, they no doubt apply equitably, but they are exceedingly dangerous, particularly when any official can exempt certain persons from the payment of large sums of money which they are liable to pay. If assistance is to be given to an industry it should be given to the industry and not to the growers who, perhaps, not through their own fault, but owing to the poorness of their land or by sheer hard luck are in financial difficulties. If we are to grant assistance to necessitous apple and pear growers, what of the needy manufacturer, if such a person exists ? Why should he not receive assistance ? Perhaps a manufacturer could not readily say that he was in. necessitous circumstances. If the amendment is to be ‘ adopted, a grower should be required to show that he is conducting his operations on suitable land, and that he is capable; otherwise the proposal is uneconomic and cannot succeed. I was elected to this Parliament as a Liberal, and to encourage individual enterprise as far as possible. Under the Government’s proposal individual enterprise cannot be encouraged. It is a thoroughly socialistic proposal. I made my position clear when speaking on the second reading, and I intend to vote against the amendment, because in so doing I shall be carrying out the pledge which I and other honorable senators made to our constituents. We were not elected to this chamber to give money to apple and pear growers, because they incurred certain losses on their exports, and are in necessitous circum- stances.

Senator Sir WALTER KINGSMILL (Western Australia) [4.59]. - There is one reason which few honorable senators have mentioned, and which prompts me to support the amendment; it is that by, doing so we shall not be giving money to those who do not need it.

Question - That the word proposed to be added be so added - put. The committee divided. (Chairman - Senator the Hon. Herbert Hays.)

AYES: 19

NOES: 10

Majority . . . . 9

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment agreed to.

Senator DUNN:
New South Wales

– I move -

That after the word “ growers “, the words “ and/or their dependants “ be inserted.

The clause would then read -

Any money granted to a State under this act shall be so granted upon condition that it is applied by the State for the benefit and assistance of necessitous fruit-growers and/or their dependants. …

Senator Sir Harry Lawson:

– The amendment is unnecessary. Under the clause as it stands, the States will be able to make the necessary provision.

Senator DUNN:

– My concern is to see that the clause is so drafted as to ensure that a State Government will be obliged to do whatever may be required by the act for the dependants of deceased fruitgrowers.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON (Victoria - Assistant Treasurer) [5.5]. - The purpose of the bill is to make grants to the States, which will set up the necessary authorities to distribute the money and determine claims that may be made. There is already ample provision in the clause to enable the legal or personal representatives of a deceased fruitgrower to take whatever action may be required.

Senator RAE:
NewSouth Wales

– I indicated in my second-reading speech that the bill should contain provision to safeguard the interests of the dependants of deceased fruit-growers. I fail to see that the insertion of the words proposed by Senator Dunn, would be an impropriety. On the contrary, it would compel State authorities to do what is right in such matters. The Minister might well accept the amendment; if he has any objection to the language employed, he may alter it. I take it that the intention of the committee is that the bill should provide for necessitous fruitgrowers and also for the dependants of deceased fruit-growers.

Senator Sir Harry Lawson:

– The Government is in sympathy with the amendment but considers it unnecessary.

Senator GRANT:
Tasmania

– In its present form the clause clearly expresses the intention of Parliament. I am sure that every State Government will deal sympathetically with the dependants of all deceased fruit-growers.

Senator Sir WALTERKINGSMILL (Western Australia) [5.10]. - I assume it to be the wish of the committee that all legislation passed by it should be in dueform. This being so, I should like to know whether the comparatively modern and, to me, objectionable form of words “and/or “ is usual in parliamentary drafting. I have not seen it in any documents other than business letters, and I think that we should observe standard language in parliamentary drafting in order to present our legislation in a dignified form. I do not intend to support the amendment. I accept the word of the Assistant Treasurer, who is also a competent legal authority, that itis unnecessary.

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

– I thought that I had clearly indicated that, if the Government accepted the amendment, we should raise no objection to an alteration of the words provided our intention was clearly expressed.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON (Victoria - Assistant Treasurer) [5.13] . - It is not usual, in parliamentary drafting, to employ the words “ and/or “, and the Government does not intend to adopt that practice. I would also point out that the amendment, as drafted, might have quite different consequences from those intended by the mover. His purpose is to provide for the dependants of deceased fruit-growers, but, as I have already explained, provision can be made to enable State authorities to deal with cases of that kind.

Senator Grant:

– And will be made.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON.Yes; therefore, the amendment is unnecessary.

Question - That the words proposed to be inserted (Senator Dunn’s amendment) be so inserted - put. The committee divided. (Chairman - Senator the Hon. Herbert Hays.)

AYES: 3

NOES: 26

Majority . . . . 23

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Senator HARDY:
New South Wales

– This clause refers to fruitgrowers who “have suffered losses in the export from Australia of apples and pears grown by them during the 1932-33 season.” I should like the Minister to tell us whether there is any carry-over of apples and pears in cool storage. Apples and pears grown during the 1932-33 season might be exported eighteen months later.

Senator McLachlan:

– Fruit grown in the previous season is never exported.

Senator HARDY:

– If apples grown during 1932-33 were exported later, a claim could be made under this bill. I should also like, to know whether apples grown during the 1932-33 season,and subsequently canned, would come within the scope of this measure, if exported in a later year. It is because I do not claim to have any knowledge of the industry that I am seeking this information.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON (Victoria - Assistant Treasurer) [5.20]. - There is no export carry-over. Any apples and pears which are taken from cool storage are sold locally. There are no canned apples, and a grower who has parted with his pears to a canner has been paid for them.

Senator BARNES:
Victoria

.- I move -

That the following proviso be added to the clause : - “ Provided that such growers have complied with the terms and conditions of either State or Federal awards applicable to the fruit industry.”

Although this may not be the most appropriate measure on which to propose such an amendment, an important principle is involved. No government is justified in providing large sums of money for persons who deliberately flout the laws of the country. Persons who attempt to evade the awards of the arbitration courts are law-breakers, and should not be given sympathetic consideration by any government. I have no sympathy with the granting of subsidies to industries or people who have not sufficient regard for the welfare of their fellow citizens to pay the rates of wages stipulated in awards of the courts of the land. I regard the principle contained in the amendment to be so vital that, on every possible opportunity, I shall move that award rates be paid in all industries which receive government assistance.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON (Victoria - Assistant Treasurer) [5.25]. - The matter covered by the amendment was dealt with in my second-reading speech. I remind the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Barnes) that the grant herein proposed is in respect of losses on the operations for the year 1932-33. While it would be competent for us to provide for the payment of a bounty in the future, so that money would not be paid to those who did not comply with certain conditions, it is scarcely fair to make such a provision retrospective. The Government cannot accept the amendment.

Question - That the words proposed to be inserted (Senator Barnes’s amendment) be so inserted - put. The committee divided. (Chairman: - Senator the Hon. Herbert Hays.)

AYES: 9

NOES: 19

Majority . . . . 10

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved inthe negative.

Amendment negatived.

Senator DUNN:
New South Wales

.- I move-

That the following new sub-clause be added: -

Any monetary assistance given in accordance with the provisions of this section shall not be attachable for debt.

I submit the same argument in support of this proposal as I advanced in regard to the money to be paid under the Migrant Settlement Agreement Bill. The Minister indulged in window-dressing on behalf of the Government to induce the people to suppose that it was doing much to assist fruit-growers. I am just as anxious as is the Government to help those growers; but, as was pointed out by Senator Elliott, immediately assistance is given by this or any other Government, certain private interests are prepared to take advantage of it.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON (VictoriaAssistant Treasurer) [5.34]. - The money cannot be attached in the hands of the Government, and, as thisamend- ment would cause administrative difficulties, the Government cannot accept it.

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

– I am more than astonished that the Government does not gladly accept the amendment. Certain migrant settlers to whom compensation is to be granted have been approached by private persons, and asked to assign their interests to creditors. Since the professed object of the bill is to help necessitous farmers, it is logical to propose that they should not be deprived of the assistance which is to be granted to them. If other persons could obtain possession of the money to be paid to fruit-growers by the Government, the objects of the measure would be defeated. The refusal of the Govern ment to support this amendment indicates mere obstinacy on its part, and an assumption that the slightest improvement of measures submitted by it is impossible.

Question - That the amendment (Senator Dunn’s) be agreed to - put. The committee divided. ( Chairman - Senator the Hon. Herbert Hays.)

AYES: 3

NOES: 24

Majority . . . . 21

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Clause as amended agreed to.

Motion (by Senator Dunn) proposed -

That the following new clause be inserted: - “ 5. Any fruit-grower qualifying for assistance who can prove to the Government that he or she paid award rates of labour, such grower shall be paid the grant first, on application for assistance.”

The CHAIRMAN:

– It seems to me that the principle involved by this proposal has already been rejected by the committee, although the language differs from that in the earlier amendment. What does the honorable senator mean by the phrase “ on first application “ ?

Senator Rae:

– The object of the proposal is to ensure that those growers who observe union conditions shall receive first preference.

Proposed new clause negatived.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported with an amendment.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 5573

INDUSTRIAL PEACE ACTS REPEAL BILL 1933

Bill brought up by Senator McLach- lan, and read a first time.

page 5573

INCOME TAX BILL 1933

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:
Assistant Treasurer · Victoria · UAP

[5.49]. - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This bill is an annual one for fixing the rates of income tax, and relates to the income tax proposals of the Government for the current financial year, and, in particular, gives effect to the three principal budget proposals in respect of tax alterations. The first of these principal proposals deals with the reduction by 15 per cent. of the rate of tax payable by individuals, whether they be residents of Australia or absentees, on income derived from personal exertion. The second deals with the reduction of the rate of tax payable by companies, from1s. 4.8d. to 1s. in the £1; and the third relates to the reduction of the rate of special tax on income from property, from 10 per cent. to 6 per cent. With these exceptions, the bill repeats all the Other provisions as to rates in the Income Tax Act 1932.

The reduction of the rate of tax on income from personal exertion is set out in the first schedule. The fifth schedule deals with the reduced rate of1s. in the £1 which will be payable by companies in respect of assessments for the present financial year. Clause 5 of the bill provides for the reduced rate of 6 per cent. to be imposed as a special tax on income from property. “ There will not be any alteration of the amount of the general exemption of £250 allowable to each taxpayer, which was granted by Parliament last* year for the purpose of the assessment of the special tax on property income. That exemption is a fixed amount for each taxpayer, and not a diminishing amount like the exemption allowed for purposes of the normal tax.

Sub-clause 2 of clause 5 repeats last year’s similar provision so as to avoid double taxation of dividends from companies in the hands of taxpayers. Subclause 3 of clause 5 also repeats last year’s law. It eliminates the averaging arrangement in respect of the special property tax. It is not proposed that the special tax on property income shall be other than 6 per cent. of the taxable amount, nor is it intended that the new rate of 6 per cent. shall be averaged with the preceding rates of 71/2 per cent. and 10 per cent., as would be necessary if that sub-clause were not included in the bill.

Senator E B JOHNSTON:
Western Australia

– As on the previous bill,I compliment the Government on the reduction of taxation that it is able to propose. The reduction will have a good influence in increasing employment in Australia. Also, as before, I congratulate the Government on its first thought rather than on the alteration it has made. In his budget speech, the Prime Minister (Mr. Lyons) said -

I have shown that remissions in taxation can be made. It only remains to determine what form these remissions shall take, and in what way the objectives the Government has in view can be achieved. These objectives are -

1 ) Stimulation of employment.

Lightening the burdens on industry by reduction of (a) interest, and (b) costs of production.

Seduction of the cost of living.

The proposals divide themselves naturally into two main groups -

Direct taxation.

Indirect taxation.

The figures that I shall now give to honorable members show the annual loss of revenue, or increase in expenditure, as the case may be, which will result from the proposals made. It is necessary to appreciate the significance of these figures if a true picture of the position in the current year and the financial year 1934-35 is to be obtained.

Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.

Clause 4 (Rates of income tax).

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

– This clause says that the rates shall be as set out in the schedules of rates. My education having been neglected in these matters, I should like to know what the figures really mean.

Senator Sir Harry Lawson:

– I will explain to the honorable senator when we are dealing with the schedule.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 5 -

– (1.) In addition to any income tax payable under the preceding provisions of this act, there shall be payable upon the taxable income derived by any person -
1. b ) by way of interest, dividends, rents or royalties, whether derived from personal exertion or from property; and
2. in the course of carrying on a business, where the income is of such a class that, if derived otherwise than in the course of carrying on a business, it would be income from property, a further income tax of six per centum of the amount of that taxable income.

Senator PAYNE:
Tasmania

.- This clause deals with further taxation of income from property. I must again bring under the notice of the Government a very grave anomaly which exists in the collection of taxation from some individuals. A large number of people - I do not know how many - of very small means, who are not, because of their small incomes, taxpayers under the Income Tax Act, contribute 2s. in the pound on income from savings that they may have invested in preference shares in companies. Their dividends may amount only to £5, £10, or £20 a year, and yet 2s. in the pound is deducted by the company and paid to the Taxation Department before they receive their dividends. Section 9 of the Income Tax Assessment Act, 1931, provides that -

Where a company has paid or is liable to pay, in addition to income tax payable at the rates fixed for companies, further income tax of a specified percentage of its taxable income which is derived -

by way of interest, dividends, rents or royalties, whether derived from personal exertion or from property; and

in the course of carrying on a business, where the income is of such a class that, if derived otherwise than in the course of carrying on a business, it would be income from property, the company may, notwithstanding anything contained in the memorandum or articles of association of the company, or in any other document or agreement, deduct from any dividends payable to the preference shareholders of the company an amount equivalent to the amount of that further income tax which has been paid or is payable by the company upon taxable income which has been distributed to its preference shareholders.

[8.32]. - I have made a note of the points raised by Senator Payne, and I shall see that they are brought under the notice of the Government. I remind the honorable senator that the income to which he refers is derived from preference shares. Preference shareholders were not affected by the reductions made under the Premiers plan.

Senator Grant:

– Some were.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON.Debentureholders may have been. Certain preference shareholders were not affected by the deductions, and were receiving 8 per cent. while other shareholders receiving dividends or interest were subject to a deduction. Parliament decided to meet the position by leaving the collection of the tax on dividends on preference shares in the hands of the companies.

Senator Payne:

– I can quote a company that was paying only 4 per cent., and whose shareholders were affected.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON I am passing on the information supplied to me, which is to the effect that the impost was passed on for the reasons I have already given. Briefly the position may be stated as follows: - A company earns so much income which is subject to special property tax. This tax reduces the amount of income available for distribution. Preference dividends must, however, be paid in full in accordance with the terms of the articles of association. Thus the ordinary shareholders in effect bore the full extent of the special property tax. The section complained of allows the company definitely to allot to those persons the special tax, that is really applicable to the income distributed to the preference shareholders.

Senator E B JOHNSTON:
Western Australia

– I move -

That the House of Representatives be requested to amend the clause by leaving out the word “ six “ with a view to insert in lieu thereof the word “ five “.

In my second-reading speech I mentioned that the original proposal of the Government was to reduce the tax to 5 per ‘cent., which met with the approval of the supporters of the Government and of the community generally. I also mentioned that if the term during which the flour tax is to operate were extended by one month, the Government could recover, not. only the £220,000 which it expects to collect, but also an additional £10,000. This tax was reduced in order to afford relief in the direction anticipated when the budget was introduced. I have before me a copy of the Sydney Morning Herald, in which appears a letter addressed to the Prime Minister by the Real Estate Institute of New South Wales, protesting against the decision to increase the super-tax on income from property from 5 per cent. to 6 per cent. in order to supplement the amount to be received by means of a sales tax on flour. The Real Estate Institute expresses the opinion that the retreat from the first announcement may retard the movement towards the restoration of confidence. The letter to the Prime Minister reads - “ No one has felt the depression more acutely than real estate owners. Their losses were accentuated a hundred-fold by the Lang regime, with the outrageous legislation which practically paralysed for the time being the real estate business of this State, .and made the State itself the financial Ishmael of the Commonwealth. The Stevens Government has rendered yeoman service in its efforts to restore confidence, and (place real estate in a position of improved security. Your own Government has given evidence of its grasp of some of the essential requirements for the restoration of the prosperity of the State, and the announcement of the proposed remission of taxation has had a beneficial effect in helping the movement towards the establishment of confidence. The announcement that your Government may not now carry out its- full programme of remission as foreshadowed in regard to tlie property super tax and federal land tax will be received with great disappointment. “

It is pointed out that if the Government does not adhere to its original proposal, it may give an opportunity to some financial institutions to refrain from following the example set by the Australian Mutual Provident Society which reduced interest rates by 1 per cent. It will be serious if many private money lenders and holders of mortgages use this increase as an excuse for declining to reduce interest rates.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON (Victoria - Assistant Treasurer) [S.40] . - This subject has been exhaustively debated in the House of Representatives, and the information which the Government has received confirms the opinion that an increase of the super tax on income tax from property from 5 per cent, to 6 per cent, will not justify companies in declining to pass on benefits to their clients, and that it should not arrest the downward tendency of interest rates. I do not propose to discuss the matter further at this stage, except to say that the additional obligations which have been cast upon the Government render it necessary to protect Commonwealth revenues in this way. It was desired to make this concession as originally proposed, and the Government regrets as much as does any honorable senator that it is unable to adhere to its original proposals. In these circumstances, I trust that the committee will reject the amendment.

Senator GRANT:
Tasmania

– I concur to a large extent in what Senator Johnston has said, but I do not propose to support * the amendment he has moved. I rose more particularly because the Assistant Treasurer (Senator

Lawson) said that companies paying preference dividends have not made reductions, but I can assure him that many companies took, advantage of the full 22$ per cent, and also of the 10 per cent, super tax. It is most unfair that those who made these investments at a time when there was no mention of a compulsory reduction, as it actually was, or a compulsory additional tax of 10 .per cent., should be treated in this way. The holders, of company debentures were in the same position in that their dividends were compulsorily reduced my 22$ per cent. Some companies made a reduction of only 20 per cent., but 6 per cent, debenture issues were altered to 5 per cent., and also had to pay an additional -10 per cent. It is unreasonable that preference shareholders should be taxed and that the companies should be allowed to deduct the amount from the shareholders’ dividends. This is a matter that should be adjusted.

Senator Sir Harry Lawson:

– I have promised that the matter will have consideration.

Senator GRANT:

– I also trust that the Government will give consideration to the fact that a shareholder, even if he is not a taxpayer, has to pay a tax of 2s. in the £1 on his investments.

Request negatived.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 6 agreed to.

Schedules 1 to 9.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:
Assistant Treasurer · Victoria · UAP

[8.43]. - Senator Rae asked if I would explain the formula contained in the schedule. I am told that it is very simple to those who thoroughly understand it. The present rate of tax on the first £1 of taxable income derived from personal exertion 2.55531d. in the £1, which is increased on a graduated scale to 39.20625d., until the amount of taxable income reaches £6,900. The rate on incomes exceeding that amount is 76. 5d. In the department this is described as the Giblin formula.

Senator Rae:

– Is it not possible to have the rate of tax described in simpler language, so that the average person may know what he has to pay?

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:

– - The amount will be 15 per cent, less than was paid last year.

Schedules agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without requests.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 5582

DRIEDFRUITS BILL 1933

Second Reading

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:
Assistant Treasurer · Victoria: · UAP

[8.51]. - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

There are in operation two Commonwealth acts and four State acts relating to the control of the marketing of dried vine-fruits, namely, currants, sultanas, andlexias. The State acts provide for the regulation of trade within the respective States of Victoria, New South Wales, South Australia, and Western Australia. Of the two Commonwealth acts, one provides for the regulation of interstate trade, and the other for the sale and distribution overseas. The Commonwealth DriedFruits Act, relating to interstate trade, was passed in 1928 at the express wish of the governments of the four States which were vitally interested in the dried fruits industry; but it did not empower the Government to exercise control over fruit passing from one State to another. The main object of the Commonwealth legislation, coupled with the powers exercised under the State dried fruits acts, was to ensure to all growers of currants, sultanas and lexias a fair share, and not more than a fair share, of the advantages and disadvantages respectively of selling within Australia and overseas, and at the same time to eliminate any possibility of disorganization resulting from an over-supply on the Australian market.

Experience has shown that, under control, growers have received no more than a reasonable cost of production. Any attempt to raise unduly the price of dried fruits within Australia would have the immediate effect of reducing sales, which would react to the detriment of the industry. There is power, under each of the State acts, to bring by proclamation, additional varieties of dried fruits within their provisions.

No such power exists in respect of the Commonwealth law relating to interstate trade.

It was decidedsome months ago, at a conference of representatives of the various State Dried Fruits Boards and other dried fruits interests, to ask the Commonwealth Government to introduce legislation with the object of extending the existing system of regulating interstate trade, so as to include dried treefruits, namely, prunes, apricots, peaches, pears and nectarines. This request was strongly supported by the Governments of the States of Victoria, New South Wales, and South Australia, which are the only States producing these varieties of dried tree-fruits.

Action has already been taken by the Governments of Victoria, New South Wales and South Australia to proclaim dried tree-fruits as dried fruits under the provisions of the respective State acts, and determinations have been issued by those governments declaring the maximum quantities of dried tree-fruits which may be marketed within each of. the three States during the 1933 season.

It is proposed in this bill to give effect to the representations made to the Government, and, although there is little doubt that a substantial majority of the growers concerned are in favour of dried treefruits being brought within the provisions of the act, the Government considers that a poll of such growers should be taken in order that they might be given the opportunity to decide this matter for themselves. Any grower of fruit from which not less than 10 cwt. of any one or more of dried prunes, apricots, peaches, pears, or nectarines, was producedduring the season preceding the poll, will be eligible to exercise a vote.

As intra-state control will be ineffective to a great extent until federal legislation is passed empowering the State boards to exercise control over the movements of dried tree-fruits from one State to another, in a similar manner to those of dried vine-fruits, honorable senators are asked to give their support to the bill now before the Senate.

Senator Elliott:

– Will the poll be decided on a simple majority basis?

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:

– The measure, as amended in the House of Representatives, provides for a simple majority.

Debate (on motion by Senator Barnes) adjourned.

page 5583

ASHMORE ANDC ARTIER ISLANDS ACCEPTANCE BILL 1933

Second Reading

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · Western Australia · UAP

[8.57]. - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Ashmore and Cartier Islands are uninhabited British possessions, and consist of four small islands between Timor andWestern Australia, about 200 miles from the north-west coast of that State. The islands contain deposits of low-grade guano, and beehe-de-mer, trochus shell and tortoise shell are found on the reefs.

In July, 1924, the Government of Western Australia informed the Commonwealth Government that, for the purpose of dealing with illicit fishing, it considered that the islands should be brought underthe State fishing laws, and as the result of the representations made to the Government of the United Kingdom, the dominions office informed the Commonwealth that the Government of the United Kingdom would be prepared to transfer these islands to the Commonwealth Government.

It was considered that the Colonial Boundaries Act 1895 no longer authorized the King to alter the boundaries of Western Australia owing to the provisions of section 8 of the Common- wealth Constitution Act, and an order was therefore made by His Majesty in Council on 23rd July, 1931, placing the islands under the authority of the Commonwealth. This order is not to come into operation until after legislation has been passed by the Commonwealth Parliament providing for the acceptance of the islands, and the government thereof.

The Government of Western Australia has already intimated its willingness to undertake full responsibility for the control and administration of the islands. The hill makes provision for fixing the date for the coming into operation of the abovementioned , order in council. The islands are declared to he accepted by the Commonwealth as a territory under the authority of the Commonwealth under the name of the Territory of Ashmore and Cartier Islands. The Governor of Western Australia is empowered to make ordinances having the force of law in the territory, and such ordinances are to be notified in the Western Australian Gazette. Commonwealth law is not tobe in force in the territory unless expressly extended thereto.

Senator Rae:

– What is the area of the islands 1

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE.Only a few square miles. The bill has been introduced because of the desire of the Government of Western Australia to police the fishing activities in those waters.

Senator E B JOHNSTON:
Western Australia

– The bill proposes that the Commonwealth shall accept and be responsible for the Ashmore and Cartier Islands, situated in the northwest of Western Australia, in the Indian Ocean, just west of the Timor Sea. It is possible that, in time to ‘come, particularly with the development of aeroplane services to the various ports in the north-west of Western Australia and to Europe that the islands may have considerable strategic value. I am glad to know that the British Government has placed them under our control. In future they will be known as the Territory of Ashmore and Cartier Islands. In view of the extravagance which has characterised the administration of other federal territories, I hope that the Government will not take direct control of these islands at any future date. If these islands are to he under Australian control, they should be included in the State of Western Australia, and not given a grandiloquent title as a new territory of the Commonwealth. I should like the bill to be amended accordingly.

Senator Hoare:

– How far are they from -the mainland?

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

– They are about 200 miles from the Western Australian coast. I understand that, although small, the islands would provide a safe landing ground for aeroplanes. Next to placing these small sea-girt islands, inhabited only bybirds, hut visited occasionally by fishermen or pearlers either from Western Australia or the Dutch East Indies, under the control of Western Australia, the Government is adopting the. best course possible in placing them under the control of the Government of Western Australia under ordinance. If, at any future date, the Government of Western Australia asks for their inclusion within the boundaries of that State, I hopethat no objection will be raised by the Commonwealth authorities.

Senator Sir WALTER KINGSMILL (Western Australia)[9.2]. - I am somewhat puzzled to understand why, in addition to Ashmore and Cartier Islands, this bill does not provide for the inclusion of theRowley and Amphinome shoals, which are just about as much above water as they are. In each case the area of the land varies materially according to the state of the tide. Senator Johnston said that these islands may be of con- siderable strategic value in the future, If regarded only from that point of view, they should be controlled by the Commonwealth rather than by the State of Western Australia. Should it be found desirable at some future date to place them under the control of Western Australia, I have no doubt that arrangement could be made to cede them to the State.

Senator Sir George Pearce:

– In effect, they are to be controlled by Western Australia.

Senator Sir WALTER KINGSMILL:

– In the past a good deal of trouble has arisen through other nations poaching on the pearl-fishing, beche-de-mer and trochus fishing grounds of islands which are the property of Australia. I should like to know why the other two sandbanks which I have mentioned were not included in this bill.

Senator Sir George Pearce:

– Are they in the same vicinity?

Senator Sir WALTER KINGSMILL:

– They are within a couple of hundred miles. Under this bill Australia will acquire a territory which is probably the smallest in the world. I shall await with interest the result of the acceptance of this new territory, particularly the complications foreshadowed by Senator Johnston.

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

.- When I first saw this bill I thought that it was a matter of little importance, but the speeches which have been made suggest that there is a serious aspect of this extension of Empire. Those who believe that mere size is an advantage will agree that every acre we add to our possessions make3 us a more magnificent nation. It is a matter for serious contemplation that these islands are to he handed over to the control of Western Australia which has recently voted in favour of secession from the Commonwealth. What would become of these islands if Western Australia actually seceded? Would they automatically become a part of the seceding State ?

Senator McLachlan:

– That is covered by clause 5.

Senator RAE:

– I fear that a dangerous precedent is being established. Why should we allow Western Australia to add to her territory, and then secede from the rest of. the Commonwealth? Senator Johnston referred to the strategic importance of these islands. I agree with him that the growth of any empire is attended by increased obligations.

Senator COLLINGS:
Queensland

– This is one of those bills which, in the excitement of the rush to get into recess, are being put through in a way which makes the Parliament resemble a sausage machine. The Senate is entitled to a great deal more information regarding this bill than has been given by the Minister. We are told that -

By an Order-in-Council, dated the 23rd July, 1921, made by His Majesty … it was ordered that the said Ashmore Islands and Cartier Island should be placed under the authority of the Commonwealth of Australia.

I should like to know whether that transfer wasordered before the Commonwealth Government was consulted.

Senator Sir George Pearce:

– No.

Senator COLLINGS:

– This Parliament was not consulted. The first we hear of this transaction is that an agreement has been made. Apparently, the British authorities have decided to hand over these territories to the Commonwealth. The preamble continues -

And whereas the Parliament of the Commonwealth is willing that the Ashmore Islands and Cartier Island should be placed under the authority of and be accepted as a territory by the Commonwealth.

When did the Parliament of the Commonwealth state its willingness to accept these islands?

Senator Payne:

– Its authority, is now being sought.

Senator COLLINGS:

– Apparently the whole thing is cut and dried. Last night I endeavoured to show that the Commonwealth could not control its own Federal Capital Territory properly. I complained of the conditions under which people only a few miles from Parliament House are forced to live. Not long ago a serious debate took place in the House of Representatives regarding Australia’s inability to control its mandated territory. Last session we had beforeus a bill to authorize the acceptance of certain territory in Antarctica. The Commonwealth is constantly in trouble in regard to the administration of the Northern Territory; at one time the persons concerned are school teachers; at another time’ Japanese pearl-shell fishermen; or, again, it may be a dispute with natives who have been interfered with by the police.

I emphatically protest against the way in which legislation is sprung on the Senate. The Opposition has no proper opportunity to acquaint itself with the contents of the bills which come before the chamber. Unfortunately for me, the Leader of the Senate (Senator Pearce) explains measures in -an undertone, which I hear only with difficulty. We are supposed to open our mouths and shut our eyes and take what comes. I protest also against the statement in the bill that the Parliament of the Commonwealth is willing to accept these islands, and then hand them over to Western Australia. Clause 8 provides -

Subject to this act, the Governor of the State of Western Australia, acting with the advice of the Executive Council of that State, may make ordinances having the force of law in, ‘and in relation to, the territory. (2) Every such Ordinance shall -

bc notified in the Gazette of the State of Western Australia, and

take effect from the date of notification or from such date whether before or after such date of notification as is specified in the Ordinance.

– I withdraw it.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clauses 1 to 5 agreed to.

Clause agreed to.

Preamble and title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 5586

WAR PENSIONS APPROPRIATION BILL 1933

Second Reading

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:
Assistant Treasurer · Victoria · UAP

[9.29]. - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this measure is to appropriate £10,0.00,000 for the payment of war pensions. Similar appropriations have been made from time to time. Of the last appropriation in May, 1932, £640,345 was unexpended at the 30th November last, and this amount is insufficient to meet the payments for the remainder of the financial year. The usual practice of asking Parliament to vote a lump sum has been followed. The bill does not deal with rates of war pensions, or the conditions under which they are payable.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 5587

SILVER AGREEMENT BILL 1933

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:
Assistant Treasurer · Victoria · UAP

[9.32]. - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Among the subjects discussed by the delegates to the Monetary and Economic Conference in London in June last was the necessity for an improvement of the economic and financial position of the silver-producing industry, and of silverusing countries as such. The agreement was arrived at by the delegates of the countries interested - Australia, Canada, the United States of America, Mexico, Peru, India, China and Spain - acting on behalf of their respective governments. It is necessary that the agreement should be approved by Parliament.

The object of this bill is to validate two agreements - first, the agreement tentatively arrived at by the delegates of the silver-holding countries on the one hand, and the producing countries on the other at the Economic Conference in July, 1933; and, secondly, an agreement with the Australian Refining Companies, this being a corollary to the principal agreement. The main agreement is designed to mitigate fluctuation in the price of silver. Two classes of silver are covered -

Existing silver holdings in the hands of certain governments which desire to sell, and
New silver produced by mines.

The agreement limits the sale of the first class of silver and provides that the silver-producing companies shall absorb certain quantities of silver annually to offset such sale. As far as Australia is concerned, the agreement calls for the withdrawal from the market of 652,355 fine ounces of silver each year for four years, commencing in 1934. India, at the present time, holds very large stocks, part at least of which it desires to sell. At the same time, China and Spain, to a very much smaller degree, have certain stocks available for realization. The International agreement limits the extent to which these countries can continue to realize on their stocks.

India agrees not to dispose by sale of more than 140,000,000 fine ounces during the period of four years, commencing the 1st January, 1934. Silver sold by India to any government, after the date of the agreement, for the purpose of transfer to the United States in payment of war debts, is excluded, provided the total over-all sales do not exceed 175,000,000 ounces. China binds itself not to sell silver resulting from demonetized coins during the same period of four years, while Spain undertakes not to dispose 3by sale of more than 20,000,000 fine ounces during the period in question.

On the other hand, the producing, countries bind themselves to withhold from sale out of current mine production a total of 140,000,000 fine ounces during the period of four years. The Australian proportion of this is 2,609.420 ounces, an average of 652,355 ounces per annum. This will be stored out of the average yearly production of approximately 9,000,000 fine ounces.

The agreement sets out that failure by any country to ratify before the 1st April, 1934, and/or observe the terms, will result in the automatic cancellation of the agreement. It is, however, provided that should one country fail to ratify by the date mentioned, the remaining countries may, by agreement, take up pro rata proportions of that country’s quota. In any case, every provision of the agreement will terminate on the 1st January, 1938. It is also provided that none of the countries concerned shall debase their silver coins below a fineness of 80 per cent, during its currency, and that silver coins shall be issued in place of low value paper currency. Neither of the two last-mentioned provisions affects Australia, the fineness of the Australian silver coinage being 92.5 per cent., and no low value notes heing on issue. The terms of the International Agreement, and the undertaking given by Mr. Bruce in connexion therewith, are schedules to the bill.

The companies concerned at the present time with the treatment of Australian ores for the production of refined silver, the Broken Hill Associated Smelters Proprietary Limited, and the Electrolytic Refining and Smelting Company of Australia Limited, have between them agreed to lodge with the Commonwealth of Australia this amount of silver from the market each year, and so long as this is done, no other obligation in fulfilment of the agreement is required of Australia. All mining operations in which the production of silver and the shipment of ore and concentrates containing silver are involved can proceed in the normal way.

The second agreement, that with the refining companies, is of a machinery nature, relating to the withdrawal from production, storage and safe keeping of the Australian quota. The Broken Hill Associated Smelters .contracts, on behalf of itself and the only other refining company in Australia, the Electrolytic Refining and Smelting Company of Australia Limited, to withdraw the whole of the 652,35.5 ounces. The silver will be Stored at the- company’s smelters under proper safeguards as to lodgment, inspection, and custody. In every way, the interests of Australia have been considered and protected. The bill has already received’ the endorsement of another place, and can be safely recommended to honorable senators, for their approval.

Question, resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 5588

PATENTS BILL 1933

Second Reading

Senator MCLACHLAN:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · South Australia · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This measure relates to two matters. First, to proceedings consequent on the death of applicants for patents, and, secondly, to -the extension of the Patents Act to Norfolk Island. The effect of a recent interpretation of the High Court relative to sections 67 and 68 of the Patents Act has been to make it impos sible to grant a patent on certain appli cations in cases where the original applicant has died. Section 67 of the act provides that a patent shall be sealed as soon as may be, but not after the expiration of sixteen months from the date of the application, or such further date as is prescribed - by regulation - or, as the High Court or Supreme Court allows. It is evident, therefore, that there is full power to grant extensions when thought proper. It is generally imposed as a condition that no action for infringement shall be brought during the period of the extended time beyond that provided in the statute, so that the interests of other parties will not be unfairly prejudiced. Section 68 of the principal act lays down the procedure in the event of the death of the applicant, and provides that if an applicant dies before the expiration of the period of sixteen months, the patent may be granted to his legal representative, and may be sealed at any time within twelve months after the death of the applicant. I may illustrate the manner in which these provisions operate. In one case an applicant, “ A B,” applies for a patent, but finds that. an extension of time is necessary. He has the full sixteen months allowed him, after which the time may be extended under the 1 Call.lations. If that is insufficient, he may then apply to the High Court for a further extension. Another applicant, “ X Y,” is, at the beginning, in the same position as A B, but he dies one month after making the application. As he died before the expiration of sixteen months, the patent may be granted to his legal representative, but may be sealed only within twelve months after the death of the applicant, which, in the case I have cited, would be thirteen months after the making of , the application! Obviously, there is no reasonable ground for this distinction. Accordingly, it is proposed in clause 4 of the bill to amend section. 68 of the principal act-, by omitting certain words and inserting other words, the effect of which will be to deal with the case that I have mentioned. With regard to the extension of the act to Norfolk Island, it is desirable that, in order to provide for inventors in the island who wish to apply there for a patent, the protection afforded by the act shall be available to such persons. Further, Australia is a party to certain international conventions affecting patents, and it is desirable that those conventions should be extended to Norfolk Island.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time and reported from committee without amendment.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 5589

HIGH COURT PROCEDURE BILL 1933

Second Reading

Senator MCLACHLAN:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · South Australia · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This measure is to amend section 26a of the High Court Procedure Act. In all State acts there are provisions prescribing the rate of interest chargeable upon a judgment debt. At present section 26a provides that every judgment debt shall carry interest at the rate of £7 per centum per annum from the time of the trial or inquiry, or, if there has been no trial or inquiry, from the time of entering the judgment. The object of the bill is to amend that section to provide that, while the rate of interest in respect of past judgments shall be 7 per cent., the rate in respect of future judgments shall be 5 per cent. This reduction is in accordance with the genera] downward trend of interest rates. Honorable senators will recognize that, as a judgment debt is an unsecured debt, the proposed reduction is reasonable. It is only in rare instances that the Commonwealth Parliament deals directly with interest rates, and in conformity with the general policy of the Government to reduce interest rates, it has been thought proper in this instance to propose that the charge upon a judgment debt recovered under judgment of the High Court, instead of being 7 per cent, as hitherto, shall, in the future, be 5 per cent. This legislation has been introduced pursuant to a promise given when the Seat of Government Supreme Court Bill was under consideration.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time and reported from committee without amendment.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 5589

INVALID AND OLD-AGE PENSIONS APPROPRIATION BILL 1933

Second Reading

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON (VictoriaAssistant Treasurer) [9.55]. - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The bill is to appropriate from the Consolidated Revenue Fund the sum of £10,000,000 for the payment of invalid and old-age pensions. Prom time to time Parliament makes appropriations of a similar nature, and the amounts provided are transferred under the authority of the appropriation acts to the trust account from which payments are made to the pensioners. The total amount previously appropriated is £151,250,000, of which £146,972,000 had been expended up to the 30th November last. The balance under previous appropriations is therefore, £4,278,000. As expenditure for the remaining seven months of the year will approximate £6,700,000, it will be seen that the balance will be insufficient to meet this amount. The bill is for the usual amount of £10,000,000, and has no relation to the rate of pensions or the conditions under which they are payable.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time and reported from committee without amendment or debate.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 5589

SEAT OF GOVERNMENT SUPREME COURT BILL 1933

In committee (Consideration of House of Representatives’ message) :

Clause 5 (Definitions).

House of Representatives’ Amendment. - After the definition of “ matter “, insert the following definition : - “ ‘ Ordinance ‘ means an ordinance made by the Governor-General in pursuance of the Seat of Government L Administration) Act 1910-1933.”

Senator MCLACHLAN:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · South Australia · UAP

– I moye -

That the amendment be agreed to.

Reference is made to the term “ ordinance” in clause11, which describes the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. It is desirable that the meaning of the word should be precisely defined, and the definition proposed to be inserted simply makes it quite certain that the term mentioned in the bill refers to ordinances passed under the power of existing legislation.

Motion agreed to.

Clause 45 -

When any cause or matter has been , heard at a sitting of the Supreme Count held at any -place . . .

House of Representatives’ Amendment. - After “ place “ insert - “ , being a place at which the court is empowered to sit, “.

Senator MCLACHLAN:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · South Australia · UAP

– I move -

That the amendment be agreed to.

Honorable senators will perhaps remember a controversy . between Senator Brennan and myself regarding the clarity of the language employed in this clause, and clause 46. The addition of the proposed words make it clear that the place of sitting intended in these clauses is the place fixed by the Governor-General, pursuant to clause 9.

Motion agreed to.

Clause 46-.

The Supreme Court or the judge may . . direct that the trial shall be had or continued at some, particular place . . .

House of Representatives’ Amendment. - After “ place “ insert - ‘* , being a place at which the Court is empowered to sit, “.

Motion (by Senator McLachlan) agreed to -

That the amendment be agreed to.

Resolutions reported; report adopted.

page 5590

JUDICIARY BILL 1933

Second Reading

Debate resumed from the 28th November (vide page 5041), on motion by Senator McLachlan -

That the bill be -now read a second time.

Senator BARNES:
Victoria

.- I secured the adjournment of the debate on this bill yesterday in order to have an opportunity to examine it. I have since done so, and as I am satisfied that there are sufficient members of the judiciary to do the work required of them. I offer no opposition to the measure.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 5590

APPROPRIATION BILL 1933-34

In Committee: Consideration resumed from the 5th December (vide page 5488).

Second schedule.

Department of Defence.

Proposed vote, £3,522,820.

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

– I am opposed to any increase of the Defence vote for reasons which I gave partially in the debate on the first reading of the bill. The public outcry, a few months ago, in favour of what was termed the- more adequate defence of Australia was really responsible for this proposed increase of defence expenditure. A number of persons urged from the public platform, and in the newspapers that stronger defence measures were necessary to guard Australia from the menace of the growing populations of nations comparatively near to our shores. When I was a young man I heard similar complaints about our defence unpreparedness. In those years we were told that Australia’s sparse population made it the envy of other nations that were suffering from congested populations, and that, unless we vastly increased our numbers, we could not expect to hold this continent for the white race. All sorts of catastrophic happenings were predicted by the war mongers of that time. We were assured that if we doubled our population we would be comparatively safe. Although the population of Australia has increased threefold since those years, we are still being warned of the imminent danger of invasion by some hostile power which, while not being directly specified, is always being hinted at. One of the favourite arguments of present day war mongers is a comparison of our defence expenditure per head of population with, the defence votes of the Mother Country. But that is comparing things which are not alike. Great Britain is an empire, and must shoulder all the responsibilities of an empire. The Im- perial Government must be ready at all times to repel attack upon its most remote or desolate possession. Australia is not in that position, although by recent legislation we are adding to our possessions, and, consequently, increasing our responsibilities -by .becoming what is virtually an empire within an empire. Therefore, this comparison of the defence expenditure per head of population in the United Kingdom and Australia respectively, carries no weight. The fact that some of the great powers are increasing their armaments to an alarming extent makes them a source .of danger to each, other, but not necessarily to Australia. Obviously, it would be impossible for this country to incur the expenditure necessary to preserve it from any and every possible danger of attack. If we continue in this way, we shall pile up a mountain of debt that will be a greater menace to the future of this country, heavily mortgaged as it is, than any potential enemy is likely to be. I do not wish to speak at great length tonight, because we are passing legislation so rapidly that no one in this chamber would have the patience to listen to anything like a detailed discussion of the Government’s defence proposals. I protest against the proposed increase, ‘ and shall vote against each item.

Senator MacDONALD:
Queensland

– While I agree with Senator Bae that no one in this chamber would have the patience, at this stage of the sitting, to listen to a long discussion of the Government’s defence proposals, every honorable senator should have an opportunity at least to state his opinion, and emphasize the attitude of the party to which he belongs. With other members of my party I stand for the adequate defence of Australia. I do not believe in aggression of any kind, and lately there has been a good deal of warmongering on the part of certain individuals in this country. That is not a healthy sign. We should hesitate before embarking on huge defence schemes, because, however up-to-date our defences may be to-day, they will be obsolete to-morrow, owing to the advance in scientific war methods. Australia’s most vulnerable point is-

Senator Rae:

– The poverty of the people.

Senator MacDONALD:

– I agree that a nation’s best defence is a contented people. Men with a stake in the country are more likely to fight enthusiastically for it than are wretched shivering people who cannot be . other than dissatisfied, with their lot. Disraeli once said that there were always two nations in every country - the rich and the poor. The poor see no necessity to fight an enemy when their energies are devoted to fighting for the necessaries of life. Australia’s danger point is in the Northern Territory. In my opinion we should organize the native population there, and by the utilization of their scouting and tracking abilities, assist in the establishment of a sound defence. Despite what has been said regarding them, the aborigines of Australia are capable of assisting in the defence of this country. If treated properly they could be of great value to us. The Australian Year-Booh for 1910 contains an interesting article on the Australian aborigines, which describes them as intelligent people. For many years they have been generally regarded as belonging to a very early stage of development, but the latest theory is that they belong to the Caucasian race, and though one of the original stocks are related to the European peoples. There is ample evidence that among the Australian aborigines are many splendid specimens of humanity. Their average height is equal to that of the Englishman, and they are capable of performing work in the Northern Territory in districts unsuitable for white men. Instead of allowing the natives of the North to be contaminated by every Asiatic who desires to exploit the wealth of this country, we should take an interest in them, and treat them, not as savages, but as intelligent beings. One way by which we could make them contented and willing to assist in repelling any possible invasion would be by giving them representation in this Parliament. I do not suggest a full-dress ultra-democratic election in the latest style; but some of the most intelligent of them could be selected as representative of the whole. Some of the missionary societies in the Northern Territory are doing good work among the aborigines. The missionaries have considerable knowledge of the natives and they should be consulted in the matter. They may bo; able to put their hands on an aboriginal Einstein or Shakespeare who could enlighten this Parliament as to the best way to deal with the native people, and to act as an intermediary as is done in other countries. As a means of defence, my suggestion is worthy of the consideration of the Government. Recent newspaper reports indicate that the natives of Arnheim Land would be willing to negotiate with any foreign nation which contemplated an invasion of the Northern Territory. It is well that these things should be borne in mind, because some parts of Australia are so far away from the settled districts as to appear to be as far distant as Greenland. Our aim should be a contented native race in the Northern Territory living on friendly terms with the white population. I hope that there will not be any invasion of Australia by an enemy. There will not be, if we act wisely and do not develop imperialistic notions. In the school books of my earlier days the wars between England and France in the time of Edward III. were ascribed to the desire -of the King to extend, his possessions in France, where he already held more territory than he did in England. Later historians have told us that the rivalry between those engaged in the wool trade of Flanders and the merchants of London was the real cause of those wars. It is now generally admitted that the wars between Britain and Spain; Holland, France and) Germany had a trade origin. Australia is expanding its territory to include certain islands off the west coast of Western Australia. Every time a nation extends, or seeks to extend, its. territory, there is a danger of international complications Not many months ago we had before us a bill for the acquisition of certain territories in Antarctica. Some day that land may be valuable. It is hoped that gold or other precious metals may be found there, and it is known that coal-fields exist in the region of the South Pole. Australia’s acceptance of that territory. and now of the islands to which I have referred, may render us open to the charge of having an. imperialistic ambition, notwithstanding that we are really a peaceful people. We hear a good deal of the possibility of trouble with Japan because Japanese manufacturers cannot find in their own country a market for all their manufactured goods and’ are seeking newmarkets elsewhere for their surplus. That kind of thing leads to war.

The PRESIDENT:

– The honorable senator has exhausted his time.

Senator DUNN:
New South Wales

.- I move-

That the House of Representatives be Toquested to amend the bill .by reducing the vote by fi.

– I am surprised at the attempted intimidation by the Minister for Defence (Senator Pearce), and at his challenge. Insofar as Senator Rae and I come within the scope of that challenge, we accept it graciously and cheerfully. I remind the Minister for Defence (Senator Pearce) that Cockatoo Island is adjacent to Balmain where I have lived, since I was fifteen years of age. I worked at the Cockatoo Island Dockyard for many years, and I know hundreds of the artisans now employed there. When I return to my home at Balmain, I am prepared to explain the attitude which we have adopted, and I know that the rank and file of the Labour party will support our action in moving to reduce the proposed vote. We have been informed that it is proposed to build a sloop at the Cockatoo Island Dockyard, but the construction of that vessel will benefit private enterprise, as that dockyard, which has cost the Commonwealth about £2,000,000, has ‘ been leased to a private company at the nominal rental of £1,000 a year. The artisans engaged by the company are getting a very raw deal, and the establishment can only be regarded as a “ Slave pen “, or “ sweat shop “. Senator Rae suggested that it would be better to expend the money which the Government proposes to appropriate under thi3 vote on constructing a fleet of three steamers to serve in the Tasmanian trade. A similar proposal, when submitted some time ago, swept through Tasmania like a bush fire, but, up to the present, nothing has been done. If £500,000 of the amount to be expended on defence were utilized in constructing at least two vessels for the Tasmanian service, the expenditure would be reproductive, and of some use to the community. As mentioned on a previous occasion, the Government is also controlling the Lithgow Small Arms Factory, where there is a modern plant capable of producing all the finer types of machinery, but unable to be used to produce one nail, nut, or screw for use in tlie commercial world. This Government, has deprived the Small Arms Factory at Lithgow of the right to manufacture sheep-shearing machines and combs, and hundreds of other commodities required by the postal department and other Commonwealth departments. The Lithgow Small Arms Factory could be employed working three shifts a day in producing many articles for which the Government pays exorbitant prices to overseas manufacturers. Senator Rae and I are prepared to accompany the Leader of the Senate either to the Cockatoo Island Dockyard or to the Lithgow Small Arms Factory, and in his presence convince the artisans of those two establishments that our action in this respect is fully justified. In opening the proceedings of this Parliament with prayer, our worthy President uses these words “ Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven “. Within a fortnight, the clergymen of all denominations will be preaching “ On earth peace, goodwill toward men “ and singing “ Glory to the new-born King “. The prayer to which we listen each day continues “and forgive our trespasses as we forgive those that trespass against us, and lead us not into temptation “. An .attempt is being made to lead us into temptation by asking us to support the proposed unnecessary heavy expenditure on defence. I again invite the Leader of the Senate to accompany me to a gathering of workmen, who he says will be benefited under these proposals, and to stretch his tonsils in an endeavour to justify the action which the Government proposes to take. I can assure the right honorable gentleman that no attempt will be made to attack him with bottles or with bricks, but he would find it extremely difficult to justify this heavy and unnecessary expenditure for destructive purposes.

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES:
South Australia

– I feel some interest in the speech just delivered by Senator Rae, and also that of Senator Dunn. Whether we agree or disagree with Senator Rae, we must admit that he puts his point of view very clearly, but it is apparent that he is out of touch with realities. He has a double objection to expenditure in armaments. First, he says that

– It is not fair to place the responsibility on the volunteers and allow others to shirk, especially in view of the fact that a very large number of people who are entirely without employment would benefit tremendously by the application of some discipline. In this respect I think that Herr Hitler is right. He believes in applying to the youth of Germany discipline in conjunction with a certain amount of healthy sport. This is a time when it is eminently desirable that we should revert to the well-tried and successful system of compulsorily training the youth of Australia - a. system which was established if not’ by the old Labour party, at all events, with its full support. Reversion to an old and proven system would not be a revolutionary step. In our present economic position it would enormously benefit a great number of young people who have nothing to do by employing portion of their leisure and keeping them out of mischief.

Secondly, I should like to see more substantial provision made for the maintenance of rifle clubs. I know that a considerable number of men living in country districts desire to practice range shooting, but are unable to do so because sufficient money is not available for the provision of the necessary facilities. The sum required is relatively small, but the provision of it would have an important influence on the extension of the rifle club movement, which I regard as most desirable.

Another suggestion which I offer is that the military college should be returned to Duntroon at the earliest possible moment. It is the central pin in the defence structure of this country, and it should not be situated in the unsuitable environment of a big city. It was moved from Duntroon in order to effect a saving of about £10,000 a year, which is an infinitesimal sum in comparison with the scale of expenditure now contemplated. It would make all the difference in the world to the officers and cadets to be returned to Duntroon, which is rich in military traditions, and where they would be near the heart of the Commonwealth. I sincerely hope that the military college will be re-established at

Duntroon before the buildings there go absolutely to rack and ruin. I am convinced that this view is widely held in Australia.

Generally, I congratulate the Government on the sound and thoughtful way in which it is dealing with the defence problem of this country. I fully believe that an increase of the Defence vote was forced upon Ministers; because of the disturbed world condition they had no option. But that does not take away from them the credit for having made a start in the right direction. I hope that they will continue as they have begun, always realizing that Australia is isolated from other parts of the Empire, except New Zealand, and must, according to its capacity, be prepared to defend itself.

SenatorRae spoke of the defence expenditure per head of population and went on to say that because Great Britain had an Empire, its duty was to protect it. It is no more the duty of the British Government to do that than it is the duty of the Australian Government to protect itself and: also assist to defend the Empire generally.

SenatorRae. - The honorable senator has misunderstood me. I said that Australia had only itself to defend, whereas Great Britain, being an Empire, had possessions in all parts of the world, and that, therefore, a comparison of expenditure per head of population in Great Britain with expenditure in Australia Was not fair.

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES:

– Since Australia is part of the Empire surely it is the duty of the Commonwealth to play its part in the defence of the Empire?

SenatorRae.- I do not think it is.

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES:

SenatorRae. - How are we going to dethrone the newspapers ?

Senator HOARE:

– The greatest power for peace should be the League of Nations. It will not always be as it now is. As the world becomes more democratic, the personnel of the League of Nations will become more peaceful. The principle underlying the League’ of Nations is sound.

SenatorRae. - So is the principle underlying the Lord’s Prayer.

Senator HOARE:

– It is of little use to pray for peace when an enemy is on the way to attack us. Every nation that participated in the Great War claimed to have God on its side; but that did not prevent millions of men from being destroyed. If the League of Nations did its work properly, no individual would receive profit from the sale of munitions, nor would wars be instigated by the newspapers. To-day, as in the past, men are devoting their energies to the construction of vessels of destruction, and other men are applying their minds to destroying them. “’ We hear a good deal about defending this country against a possible invader; but the problem confronting many of the people is that of protecting their homes from the bailiff. Of what use is it for one nation to decide to throw down its arms, and say “Away with war,” when another nation is preparing to destroy it? Unfortunately, some nations which profess to desire peace do not appear to be sincere. In order to gain a commercial advantage, a strong nation is not above taking advantage of a weaker nation. No doubt Senator

Rae is pleased that Russia appears to be well able to defend itself. Should not Australia be able to do the same? What is good for the people of Russia should be good for the democracy of Australia. If there is one thing for which I would willingly fight it is the White Australia principle. Mr. HenryFord, of motor car fame, once said that he would like to visit Australia, not because he desired to see its great industries or scenery, but because he wanted to see the great white race which has been built up as a result of the White Australia policy. That principle is worth defending. Halfbreeds are the scorn of the world. It is the duty of every Australian to keep his country white. So long as other nations are preparing for war, it is useless to talk of peace.

Senator BROWN:
Queensland

– An honorable senator who is absent from the chamber desires to speak on the subject of defence. I shall hold the fort until he returns. I again protest against the debate being continued and listened to by tired senators. Members of the Labour party regard war as a bloody and obscene thing, and every honorable senator should do his best to prevent it. I sympathize with the members of the Lang party in this chamber in their anti-war agitation. Of course, they are pacifists.

Senator Rae:

– I do not believe in peace at any price.

Senator BROWN:

– The members of parties which aspire to control the destinies of Australia should express the same opinions when in Opposition, as those which they would advance if in office.

Senator Rae:

– I would not trust the present Government with the expenditure of £1 on defence, but I would trust a Labour Government with millions.

Senator BROWN:

– I am inclined to agree with the honorable senator. The present Government says that it desires to increase the expenditure on defence in order to make Australia safe against aggression. The Labour party advocates the -provision of a defence system sufficient to enable Australia to resist attack by a foreign power. I recently heard an economist in Brisbane say that he would support any government that would place a ring of cannons round Australia, if only for the reason that work would assist in giving employment to a large number of our workmen. It seems that, under the present economic system, waste is incurred in providing employment for the people. On the Clyde bank in Scotland not long ago, an agitation took place for the building of more ships, so that unemployed ship-builders might be given work. -If there were no waste and all nations were thoroughly efficient, three-fourths of the people would he unemployed.

While the idealist looks forward to the time when universal peace will prevail, other men are to he found who would not hesitate to plunge the world into war. An article published in The New Era of the 23rd November last, entitled The Blood Traffic, states that, in the last war, German soldiers by the thousands were killed, with grenades to which were attached Krupp patent fuses. British regiments were shattered by the shells containing gunpowder provided by trusts in which British firms were partners. British crews were sent to the bottom of the seas by submarines made in the dockyards of British firms. Armament manufacturers will stop at nothing. German armament firms control Trench newspapers, and French armament-makers govern German, newspapers; thus the agitation for armaments is maintained. The first sub-committee of the Temporary Mixed Commission of the League of Nations reported in 1921 -

Armament firms have been active in fomenting war scares and in persuading their own countries to adopt war-like policies and to increase their armaments.
Armament firms have attempted to bribe Government officials both at home and abroad.
Armament firms have disseminated false reports concerning the military and naval programmes of various countries in order to stimulate armament expenditure.
Armament firms have sought to influence public opinion through the control of newspapers in their own and foreign countries.
Armament firms have organized international armament rings, through which the armaments race has been accentuated by playing off one country against another.
Armament firms have organized international trusts, which have increased the price of armaments to governments.

Bloody-minded imperialists, who are to be found in every country, are willing to increase their private bank balances by forcing nations into war-like preparations. The Labour party believes in a White Australia policy: it supports a strong tariff policy, and, logically, it advances a programme of adequate defence,

TheCHAIRMAN. - The honorable senator has exhausted his time.

Senator MacDONALD:
Queensland

– The Labour party stands solidly for the adequate defence of Australia, and it seems to me that the provision of an extra £500,000 for defence purposes cannot be seriously cavilled at by the Labour movement. It is only a small increase, 16 per cent, on a vote of £3,000,000 last year. Any one who argues that we are voting for a large increase of expenditure on a Avar mongering scheme, must be very dense. I cannot understand why Senator Dunn, with whom I agree on many other matters, desires this reduction. A large portion of the increase will go in increased salaries and wages to defence employees, with whom I have a certain amount of sympathy. They are entitled, like other sections of the workers, to some measure of restoration of what they have lost during the depression. As a means of relieving unemployment, this expenditure by itself would be only tinkering with the problem. Unemployment should be the subject of a far larger scheme than anything that has been placed before this chamber. I shall vote against the requested amendment, because the increased expenditure will mean a reduction of unemployment. Also, it cannot be said that we are yielding to pressure by those who talk of the possibility of another war. If we were attacked by an Asiatic country, I am certain that thecolour-line would he raised throughout the world. Any Asiatic country that attacked any part of this continent would have against it the armed white forces of the world. Japan is fully occupied in Manchuria, and if it wanted to start a quarrel it would start it on the question of who shall own Siberia. Not within the next 50 years will Japan think of attacking Australia directly. It might attack us’ as part of the disturbance if another big war occurred.

If we had to fight for Australia in another world war, we would certainly fight as part of a world alliance, and take our share of the trouble, as we did in the last war. The increase will bring defence expenditure up to what it was before the Scullin Government started reducing it. Speaking for the workers of Australia, I say that we are not prepared to stand with our arms folded in the event of invasion. “We would regard any attack on this country as an attack on our homes, and would resist it by every means in our power. If Australia were invaded, there would be no need for conscription, which we opposed, during the last war. Every man and woman would stand to arms and show the invading nation that there were no weaklings amongst us, and I have ho doubt that we would receive support from other parts of the world.

Thursday, 7 December 1933

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– My excuse for talking on this subject is that of its importance. There are only two ways to look at it. If we are so secure as to be immune from attack from any quarter, the logical thing is to tear down our defence, and reduce ourselves to the same helpless state as the islands of the Pacific. I doubt whether any of the critics of the defence vote would’ advocate that course. If we are not safe, or if there is any suspicion that our position is not secure in the immediate or distant future, we must do as other nations are doing. They are looking to their own safety. On moral grounds I agree that those who have designs on this country have no moral right to it. This country slumbered until about 140 years ago. Our countrymen, by virtue of their inherent qualities of grit, enterprise, courage, and determination, discovered this land, and set about working it vigorously. Marvellous progress has been made in the short time that has elapsed since Australia was first settled by a few people. Let us examine the speculations of critics . who tell us that our title to this fair land may be disputed. Attack, they say, is expected to come from the north. It is realized by these people that there are at least sixteen countries in Europe in which the density of population is greater than in any country in Asia, pot excepting India, Japan, and China? There is no greater myth than “ the teeming East.” It is the “teeming West” that is the grim reality. Therefore, on the score of congestion of population, this island continent has, so far as moral reasoning is concerned, the strongest case that could be put forward. It was discovered by Europeans, and developed by Britishers. Those who came here, invaded the country, and colonized it, have as good a right to hold it as those, who have designs upon it have to hold theirs. But, realizing that moral influences have little to do with the causes of war, let us look at the practical side. We have noticed lately that the navy vote of the United States of America has been vastly increased because of the strong activity of a power to the north of Australia. . The fact that the warship Mutsa was built, at a cost of millions of pounds, with money subscribed by the inhabitants of Japan, discloses at once the spirit that exists in Japan, as compared with the spirit in this country. If some one started a movement here to raise funds for building a warship, how would it be regarded ? It is quite safe to assume that it would not be treated seriously by the vast majority of our people, but in Japan, as every one knows, the warship was built by public subscription. It has 16-inch guns, and other armament the equal of which were not used in the Battle of Jutland. It was paid for by the citizens of Japan, without compulsion. I ‘ask, “ What is that ship for “ ? Is it for protecting Japanese commerce? It may or may not be, but at all events the ship -is there, and was exempted from the partial disarmament provisions at the Washington Conference because the susceptibilities of Japan were not to be trifled with.

If we cast a glance back at the distribution of the world’s population,- we find it has been one of the driving forces in causing wars. Men, where populations have, been crowded, have sought an outlet to vacant spaces where food has been plentiful. They have done this rather than remain in their own circumscribed areas. In other words, the desire to go out and have a fight is largely because people are looking for an advantage. A burglar would never dream of entering an empty house. He applies himself to a house with something in it. A foot-pad would never dream of tackling a man who obviously had no money in his pockets. So it is with the overcrowded populations of the world. “Why did we dispossess the native Australian race and thrust it aside? We were only obeying the inexorable law of the spread of population down the centuries. When other crowded populations see us with an empty continent, there is an incentive to them to come here and share in our good things. If we give them the opportunity, they will force themselves into this country, and rightly so. The blacks who were in possession of this country had as much right to it as we had, except that they were putting it to such little use, in comparison with what we have been able to do. We came and dispossessed them, and by the same rule, any power is entitled to say that it has as much right here as we have. When that occurs we shall have to defend ourselves, and if we neglect our defence system, we are courting disaster and our own ruin by making this fine country more tempting to others. I should like to refer to several statements made by Senator Rae, who has a most logical mind on the subject of defence. The honorable senator has been associated with the pan-Pacific organization that has very little respect for our White Australia policy. If he still believes in the doctrines of that organization, he is a most logical and consistent opponent of our defence system. He referred to the drilling and the preparation of men to fight, and said that there would be a revolution in Australia if an attempt were made to compel Australian citizens to undergo military training. If honorable senators refer to the book which I have before me, they will find that in Russia, the country that is supposed to set an example as to how a country should he ruled, and how peace should be preserved, the authorities are compelling the citizens to undergo two weeks of military training in each year. Why have the Soviet authorities done that? What was in their minds when they passed this law? Were they occupying their idle time or doing this merely for fun? The obvious reason is that they believe that sooner or late, an attack will be made upon their country.

Senator Rae:

– They have good reasons for protecting themselves, because fourteen nations invaded Russia at the one time. That is not likely to happen to Australia.

Senator LYNCH:

– For the same reason as the people who rule Russia believe in defending themselves, we should defend ourselves. What is wrong with Australia having the same state of mind and the same beliefs? If we hold- the same beliefs, we should act. Let us establish a defence plan and supplement it from time to time, in the same way as the people who own and inhabit Russia are protecting their country against external aggression. We should have the same state of mind ; but ‘it should be a thousand times stronger, because we have greater liberties here than the Russians have ever possessed. We should be more ardent, more determined and more steadfast in our resolve to protect our country than are the people of any other country.

Question - That the request (Senator Dunn’s) be agreed to - put. The committee divided. (‘Chairman - Senator the Hon. Herbert Hays.)

AYES: 2

NOES: 22

Majority … . . 20

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Request negatived.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Proposed votes - Department of Trade and Customs, £498,700; Department of Health, £100,800; Department of Commerce, £313,340 - agreed to.

Miscellaneous SERVICES

Proposed vote, £1,177,970.

Senator GRANT:
Tasmania

– I should like some information from the Vice-President of the Executive Council (Senator McLachlan) in regard to the Commonwealth contribution- to the cost of the Secretariat of the League of Nations. Last year, the vote Avas £20,000 and -the expenditure £50,323. This year, the estimated expenditure is- £54,000. Every one knows what has been happening lately in connexion Avith the League of Nations. The other day the Minister quoted the number of members of the League which have defaulted in respect of their contributions, and also the number of countries that may withdraw from the League. Information was recently given in the press as to the enormous salaries paid to the huge staff at Geneva, and I think that it is time that the Commonwealth called a halt in its contributions to the League. They appear to be increasing annually, and I submit that the proposed “expenditure of £54,000 this year could be more effectively used in relieving unemployment.

Senator MCLACHLAN:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · South Australia · UAP

– This amount is increased owing to the fact that it was decided to pay our contribution to the League of Nations in full, including arrears up to June, 1933. The league’s financial year is the calender year, and the £54,000 mentioned is sufficient to meet our contribution to December, 193.3, and also for the first six months of 1934, at a similar rate. Negotiations are proceeding between the other dominions on the subject of making a united effort to reduce the cost of contributions, and it is hoped that at -the forthcoming assembly, reductions will be effected involving contributions at a lower rate as from the 1st June, 1934.

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES:
South Australia

– Under division 101, Council for Scientific and Industrial

Research, appear a number of items representing Australia’s contribution to various bureaux and associations. Perhaps the Minister (Senator McLachlan) can give to us some information about the work that the council has been doing for for some years. “When the council Avas reconstituted in 1926, the Government set aside, I think, the sum of £500,000 for its activities I understand that the vote has been exhausted, and that the council is now dependent upon annual grants. No one doubts that it would be able to do more, and perhaps better, work if the grant were larger. There is a definite fear that, unless the contributions from the Commonwealth are kept up, Ave may lose some of our most valuable scientists. In the nature of things, as the work being done by the council develops, the expenditure on it is likely to be larger. I do not wish to criticize the Ministry on the vote, but I do think that our contributions are tending to become smaller rather than larger. Nobody who knows anything about the facts can doubt that the council has done extraordinarily valuable work for Australia in the last six or seven years. It has co-operated in a most useful/ way with the State councils, and it wouldbe deplorable if, by not supporting this scientific body, which is really our chief intellectual assistance in the business of production, we were generally to weaken production itself. Perhaps the Minister, under whose aegis the council is, can re-assure us about the future work of that body.

Senator MCLACHLAN:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · South Australia · UAP

– Yesterday we had a very full discussion about the work of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research when the vote for the Prime Minister’s Department Avas before the committee. The expenditure in connexion Avith the council is about £114,000 per annum. This year, owing to the exhaustion of the original fund, Ave were obliged to get a vote of £72,000, and th, balance of the money required for the council’s work is being made up by contributions from various outside sources. Our contribution this year to the Imperial Bureau of Entomology is £250; to the Imperial Bureau of Micology, £100; to the International Institute of Refrigeration, £25; to the Australian Commonwealth Association of Simplified Practices and Standards, £3,000; and to the British Woollen and Worsted Association, £100. I assure honorable senators that we are getting good value in return for that expenditure. Before the close of the present financial year, I expect to submit some proposals to the Government with respect to the future work of the council.

Senator HARDY:
New South Wales

.- Under “Miscellaneous,” division 102, there appears the item, “ Exchange on remittances to London and New York, £692,000.” I do not desire again to criticize the very doubtful practice of treating exchange in a separate item, in view of the way that world monetary policies are shaping; but I hope that the Minister representing the Treasurer (Senator Lawson) will be able to give us some information about this item. I do not query our London indebtedness, because every one is satisfied with the excellent work which Mr. Bruce has done in connexion with the conversion of those London debts in respect of which Australia has had optional conversion rights, and we derive comfort from the knowledge that our favorable trade balance for the last three years amounts to between £79,000,000 and £80,000,000. The Government has been repeatedly congratulated upon the series of successful conversion loans issued in London, but, up to the present time, there has been no mention of the Government’s intentions with regard to our New York indebtedness. The New York position is really very serious, because, apart from its size- the debt is £47,079,523- our adverse trade balance with the United States of America for the last three years has been approximately £39,000,000. The interest charge on the debt, expressed in sterling, is £2,365,852. A disturbing feature is the fact that the rate of interest is 5.6 per cent., and that we have optional conversion rights in respect of only £10,185,000. Can the Minister inform me if the Government has considered the possibility of exercising its rights over that, portion of the debt, and if it will do so at an early date? With the assistance of Treasury officials, I have investigated the position, and I have discovered that if we take advantage of every opportunity to convert the debt, providing we honour our contractual obligations, it will be 20 years before it is brought down to a flat rate of 4 per cent. Because of the uncertainty of the dollar exchange, I should be glad to hear of the Government’s intention to convert, to securities carrying a lower rate of interest, at least that portion of the loan over which we have optional rights.

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:
Assistant Treasurer · Victoria · UAP

[12.40 a.m.]. - At an earlier stage in the debate I explained why the amount referred to by Senator Hardy appears as a separate item. I am advised that this is the practice of all governments. I also mentioned that provision was made in the Estimates for exchange in respect of war services paid out of revenue, Commonwealth railways and the Departments of Defence and the Postmaster-General. During the last few weeks, questions have been addressed to the Treasurer with regard to the New York indebtedness and the possibility of conversion. The answer has been that the Government is watching the position, and that, if a favorable opportunity presents itself, appropriate action will be taken. I am afraid that I am unable to elaborate that reply, but I give honorable senators an assurance that the position is beiug watched very carefully.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Proposed votes - Refunds of Revenue, £1,150,000 ; Advance to the Treasurer, £2,000,000; War Services Payable out of Revenue, £1,011,500 - agreed to.

Part 2. - Business Undertakings.

Proposed vote - Commonwealth Rail-‘ ways, £583,300 - agreed to.

Postmaster-General’s Department.

Proposed vote, £8,881,650.

Senator COLLINGS:
Queensland

– Can the Minister representing the Postmaster-General inform me if provision is made in the Estimates for improving the postal buildings in Brisbane? I refer to the General Post Office, Queen-street, the South Brisbane post office and the post office at Fortitude Valley.

Senator McLachlan:

– Provision is made in the Estimates for new works and buildings which were passed about a fortnight ago.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Part 3. - Territories of the Commonwealth.

Proposed vote - Northern Territory - £132,734.

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES:
South Australia

– Is the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior in a position to make a statement with reference to the proposal to develop the Northern Territory by the chartered company system? I asked a question on that subject about a week ago, and was then informed that the Minister hoped to be able to make a statement before the end of the session. We have read a good deal in the newspapers lately regarding a proposal to develop the Northern Territory by chartered, companies, but so far no statement has been made to Parliament - at least to the Senate - on this subject. Is the Leader of the Senate in a position to give us any information? After all, Parliament is the proper place for such information to be given. Without disclosing anything confidential the Minister should tell us whether any negotiations are in progress, or whether what we see in the newspapers on this subject is merely press propaganda-

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · Western Australia · UAP

[12.47 a.m.]. - Some time ago the Prime Minister announced the conditions under which the Government was prepared to consider offers from private enterprise for the development of the Northern Territory. There have been some inquiries for further information, but they have been of an indefinite character. Apparently, the people concerned have wanted to know what the Government had in mind. A Cabinet committee, comprising the Vice-President of the Executive Council (Senator McLachlan) and myself, and two Ministers from the House of Representatives, was appointed, and, after studying the correspondence, it came to the conclusion that very little is known about the Northern- Territory in Australia, and less outside Australia. Consequently, the committee thought that it would be wise to prepare a prospectus setting out various facts concern ing the Northern Territory - its water supplies, climate, soil; and geological features, as well as a map showing the stock routes, water supplies, and so on. That publication is now in the hands of the Government Printer. When ready it will be distributed to members of Parliament and other persons who desire information about the Northern Territory. Copies will also be sent to the High Commissioner in London and to the Trade Commissioner in New York. By that means the potentialities of the territory will be made known to those who are seeking there an investment for their money. Should the Government receive any practical proposal, it will, as I have already said on a number of occasions, inform Parliament. Any draft agreement will have to be submitted to Parliament for ratification. Nothing.will be done behind the back of Parliament. I am not in a position to say that a definite proposal has been made by any company, although a number of inquiries have been received. Whether any of them will subsequently lead to a definite proposal it is impossible to say at this juncture. Another matter awaiting consideration by Cabinet is a geological and geophysical survey of the north of Australia. Negotiations have been in progress “with the Governments of Western Australia and Queensland in this connexion, and the matter is now awaiting the decision of Cabinet. . The Government is not concealing anything.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Proposed votes. - Federal Capital Territory, £233,734; Papua, £65,652; and Norfolk Island, £3,000 - agreed to.

Schedule agreed to.

Preamble and title agreed to.

Bill reported without requests; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 5606

BANKRUPTCY BILL 1933

Bill received from the House of Repre sentatives, and (on motion by Senator McLachlan) read a first time.

page 5606

HOUR OF MEETING

Motion (by Senator Sir George Pearce) agreed to -

That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn till this day at 11 a.m.

Senate adjourned at 12.57 a.m. (Thursday).

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 6 December 1933, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1933/19331206_senate_13_143/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate 6 December 1933

PAPERS

QUESTION

OIL FROM COAL

Senator DUNN:NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator McLACHLAN:Minister in charge of Development and Scientific and Industrial Research · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

QUESTION

JAPANESE INVASION OF EMPIRE MARKETS

Senator ELLIOTT:VICTORIA

Senator ELLIOTT:

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:

QUESTION

NEW ZEALAND MILITARY CADETS

Senator DUNN:

QUESTION

PRICE OF WHEAT

Senator GUTHRIE:VICTORIA

CANBERRA UNEMPLOYED

Victorian Onions

ASSISTANCE TO PRIMARY PRODUCERS

QUESTION

COUNTRY TELEPHONES

Senator E B JOHNSTON:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator McLACHLAN:UAP

QUESTION

MILITARY UNIFORM

Senator COLLETT:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:

QUESTION

DEPRECIATION OF AMERICAN DOLLAR

QUESTION

JAPANESE TRADE

Senator BROWN:QUEENSLAND

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:

QUESTION

ISSUE OF PASSPORTS

Senator DUNN:

QUESTION

DESTRUCTION OF EMUS

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:

QUESTION

NEW ZEALAND MIGRATION SCHEME

Senator PAYNE:TASMANIA

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:Assistant Treasurer · Victoria · UAP

COMMONWEALTH PUBLIC SERVICE BILL 1933

EXTRADITION BILL 1933

INDUSTRIAL PEACE ACTS REPEAL BILL 1933

DAIRY PRODUCE BILL 1933

INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT BILL 1933

FRUIT GROWERS RELIEF BILL 1933

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:Assistant Treasurer · Victoria · UAP

Senator BARNES:Victoria

Senator E B JOHNSTON:Western Australia

Senator McLachlan:

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

Senator Guthrie:

Senator HARDY:New South Wales

Senator HERBERT HAYS:Tasmania

Senator Rae:

Senator HERBERT HAYS:

Senator GRANT:Tasmania

Senator BROWN:Queensland

Senator Grant:

Senator BROWN:

Senator Grant:

Senator BROWN:

Senator Barnes:

Senator BROWN:

Senator J B HAYES:Tasmania

Senator Brown:

Senator J B HAYES:

Senator Brown:

Senator J B HAYES:

Senator PAYNE:Tasmania

Senator Brown:

Senator PAYNE:

Senator Brown:

Senator PAYNE:

Senator Guthrie:

Senate
6 December 1933

Senator DUNN:
NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator McLACHLAN:
Minister in charge of Development and Scientific and Industrial Research · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

Senator ELLIOTT:
VICTORIA

Senator GUTHRIE:
VICTORIA

Senator E B JOHNSTON:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator McLACHLAN:
UAP

Senator COLLETT:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator BROWN:
QUEENSLAND

Senator PAYNE:
TASMANIA

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:
Assistant Treasurer · Victoria · UAP

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:
Assistant Treasurer · Victoria · UAP

Senator BARNES:
Victoria

Senator E B JOHNSTON:
Western Australia

Senator HARDY:
New South Wales

Senator HERBERT HAYS:
Tasmania

Senator GRANT:
Tasmania

Senator BROWN:
Queensland

Senator J B HAYES:
Tasmania

Senator PAYNE:
Tasmania

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES:
South Australia

Senator O’HALLORAN:
South Australia

Senator HARDY:
New SouthWales

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

Senator J B HAYES:
Tasmania

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:
Assistant Treasurer · Victoria · UAP

Senator COLLINGS:
Queensland

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES:
South Australia

Senator KINGSMILL:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · NAT

Senator DUNN:
New South Wales

Senator RAE:
NewSouth Wales

Senator GRANT:
Tasmania

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

Senator HARDY:
New South Wales

Senator BARNES:
Victoria

Senator DUNN:
New South Wales

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

Senator Sir HARRY LAWSON:
Assistant Treasurer · Victoria · UAP

Senator E B JOHNSTON:
Western Australia

Senator HARDY:
New South Wales

Senator DUNN:
New South Wales