View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives
9 September 1925

9^th Parliament · 3^rd Session

DISTILLATION BILL
QUESTION
- STRIKE OF BRITISH SEAMEN
QUESTION
- TARIFF SCHEDULE
QUESTION
- RECOGNITION OF HEROISM
QUESTION
- COTTON GUARANTEE
QUESTION
- ENTERTAINMENTS TAX
QUESTION
- TELEPHONE INSPECTORS
QUESTION
- IMPORTATION AND MANUFACTURE OF HATS
QUESTION
- NAVIGATION ACT
QUESTION
- IMPORTATION OF MOTOR CARS
QUESTION
- OLD-AGE AND INVALID PENSIONS
MAINROADSDEVELOPMENT BILL
- Second Reading
LOAN BILL No. 2
WAR SERVICE HOMES BILL.
- Second Reading
ADJOURNMENT

Mr. Speaker (Rt. Hon. W. A. Watt) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 2318

DISTILLATION BILL

Assent reported.

page 2318

QUESTION

STRIKE OF BRITISH SEAMEN

Mr MAKIN:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Will the Prime Minister lay upon the table of theHouse or of the Library all the communications exchanged between the Government and the several interests concerned abroad in dealing with the present dislocation of the shipping services?

Mr BRUCE:
Minister for External Affairs · FLINDERS, VICTORIA · NAT

– I shall look into the matter. I do not think there are any such communications that have not already been made public.

page 2318

QUESTION

TARIFF SCHEDULE

Tariff Board Reports -Collection of Duties

Mr CORSER:
WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND

– Will the Minister for Trade and Customs cause the reports of the Tariff Board to be made available to honorable members, before he proceeds with the new tariff schedule?

Mr PRATTEN:
Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– In reply to the honorable member, and also in further reply to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton), the honorable member for Perth (Mr. Mann), and other honorable members who have privately approached me on the subject, I propose laying a big batch of Tariff Board reports upon the table of the House to-morrow, when I shall move that most of them be printed. I hope to have come to a decision with respect to the remainder of the reports at an early date.

Mr O’KEEFE:
DENISON, TASMANIA

– Will the Minister include in the Tariff Board reports to he tabled to-morrow the report, together with theevidence, on the duties on timber ?

Mr PRATTEN:

– Yes.

Mr SEABROOK:
FRANKLIN, TASMANIA

– In view of the fact that certain oversea steamers, bringing cargo for Australian ports, which should have been delivered before the new tariff duties came into force, have been held up owing to the strike of British seamen, I ask the Minister whether it is the intention of the Trade and Customs Department to collect increased duties from the importers of these goods; if so, will the Minister consider the advisability of refunding to the importers the increased duties so collected, so that all importers may be placed on the same commercial footing?

Mr PRATTEN:

-I answered a similar question last week, but for the information of the honorable member I say again that it is the invariable rule of the Customs Department to charge the duties current on the day that goods are cleared for home consumption. No variationof that rule can be made for any one in any circumstances. To do otherwise would lead to the greatest confusion.

page 2319

QUESTION

QUESTION

TELEPHONE INSPECTORS

Mr SCULLIN:
YARRA, VICTORIA

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

Is it a fact that discretionary increments due to telephone inspectors are being held over pending reclassification of positions?
If so, can the reason be stated as to why such action has been taken in view of the fact thatother officersare being granted their discretionary increments?

Mr GIBSON:
Postmaster-General · CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA · CP

– The Public Service Board, which is dealing with discretionary increments to telephone inspectors, has furnished the following replies . -

No. The matter is awaiting receipt of reports. It is expected that approvals will be issued at an early date.
See answer to No. 1.

page 2320

QUESTION

IMPORTATION AND MANUFACTURE OF HATS

Mr FORDE:

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

What was the number and value of hats imported last year from (a) Great Britain, (b) America, and (c) Italy; and what was the total number and value of hats imported for that period ? 2.How many hat factories are there in Australia, and where are they situated?
What was the total number and value of hats manufactured in Australia last year?

Mr PRATTEN:
NAT

– The information is being obtained.

page 2320

QUESTION

NAVIGATION ACT

Mr BAMFORD:
HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

Whether he has. arrived at any decision as to the suspension of such clauses in the Navigation Act as will permit all vessels en route to eastern ports calling at Mackay, Bowen, Townsville, and Cairns?

Mr PRATTEN:
NAT

– The Navigation Act does not place any restriction on vessels bringing passengers or cargo to Commonwealth ports from overseas or taking passengers or cargo from the Commonwealth to overseas ports. Presumably, however, the honorable member refers to the carriage of passengers and cargo by unlicensed vessels between the ports mentioned and other Australian ports. Permission to enable this to be done can only be given if theservice by licensed ships is inadequate to the needs of the ports. In the case of these ports, the service by licensed vessels is considered to be adequate.

page 2320

QUESTION

IMPORTATION OF MOTOR CARS

Mr FORDE:

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice - 1, What is the total value of motor cars, engines, chassis, and bodies imported last year?

What are the countries of origin, and what was the value of imports from each ?

Mr PRATTEN:
NAT

– The information is being obtained.

page 2320

QUESTION

OLD-AGE AND INVALID PENSIONS

Dr EARLE PAGE:
CP

– On the 19th August, the honorable member for Adelaide (Mr. Yates) asked the following question : -

I ask the Treasurer whether he will make officers available to sign the necessary documents when invalid and old-age pensioners are being paid?

I find that the forms referred to by Mr. Yates are “Income and Property Statements” (Form 37) under the Invalid and Old-age Pensions Act. These statements are being obtained from pensioners in connexion with the general review of pensions in force which is now proceeding. The questions have been couched in the simplest possible form, and care has been taken to reduce them to a minimum. The statements are being obtained in accordance with the provisions of section 38 of the Invalid and Old-age Pensions Act, which reads -

Wherever required by the Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner, each pensioner shall send to the Deputy Commissioner a statement in the prescribed form relating to his income and accumulated property.

This work has been going on for some years, and no complaints have been received concerning the nature of the question or as to any difficulty experienced by pensioners in supplying the answers. The forms may be declared before any of the following persons, and it will be seen that a very wide range is provided : -

A postmaster or postmistress, or person in charge of a post office, a police, stipendiary or special magistrate of the Commonwealth or of a State, a justice of the peace, a barrister or solicitor, a State School head teacher, an officer of the Department of Trade and Customs, a member of the Police Force of the Commonwealth or of a State, a legallyqualified medical practitioner, a notary public, a commissioner for affidavits, a registrar under the Invalid and Old-age Pensions Act 1908- 1923, a minister of religion, an officer of the Commonwealth Department of the Treasury, or a member of the Parliament of the Commonwealth.

No doubt any of the persons mentioned is willing to assist people in filling in the forms if requested. In addition, clause 4 of the Invalid and Old-age Pensions Regulations provides that officers in the Public Service of the Commonwealth shall, so far as is consistent with their duties, give all reasonable assistance to claimants in the preparation of pension claims. In view of the facilities which already exist for the furnishing of the forms, and the absence of any complaints to date, there would not appear to be any necessity for establishing any places at which forms may be filled in, or for detailing officers specially for this duty. papers.

The following papers were presented -

Defence Act - Regulations Amended - Statutory Rules 1925, Nos. 138, 141.

Naval Defence Act - Regulations Amended - Statutory Rules 1925, Nos. 139, 140.

New Guinea Act - Ordinances of 1925-

No. 36. - Lands Registration (No. 3).

No. 37- Mining (No. 2).

No. 38.- Native Labour (No. 2).

No. 39. - Interpretation and amendments Incorporation (No. 2).

No. 40 - District Courts.

No. 41 - Judiciary.

No. 42 - Central Court Assessors.

Petroleum - Report on Petroleum Prospects in parts of Western Victoria, South Australia, and Western Australia, by Arthur Wade, D.Sc. (Lond.), &c.

page 2321

MAINROADSDEVELOPMENT BILL

In committee (Consideration of Governor-General’s Message) :

Motion (by Mr. Hill) agreed to -

That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purposes of a bill for an act relating to main roads development.

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended; resolution adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Hill and Sir Littleton Groom do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill presented by Mr. Hill, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr HILL:
Minister for Works and Railways · Echuca · CP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Under this bill it is proposed, during the present financial year, to make available for allocation to the various States, on a £1 for £1 basis, the sum of £500,000, for expenditure on main roads, and in addition, to set aside a further sum of £250,000 to be distributed among the States on the same proportional basis but free of any contribution by the State Governments. Grants from this additional£250,000 for the reconditioning and strengthening of existing roads come within the meaning of the act. The idea of giving Commonwealth assistance for road construction first assumed concrete form when the matter was placed before a conference of Premiers in 1923, following upon which Parliament passed an act, No. 2 of 1923, making provision for an amount of £500,000 to be distributed among the States on a £1 for £1 basis for the construction of main roads. In the following year another act was passed making available the sum of £500,000 on the same conditions as those set out in the original act. The two grants have been freely availed of by the various States, which I am sure, appreciate the assistance that the Commonwealth Government has given towards road construction, which is one of the most important of presentday problems. The following statement sets out the position regarding the authorization, commitments and expenditure under the grants already approved : -

It will be noted that of the total amount granted under the provisions of the two previous measures, approximately £400,000 is still available; but it should be remembered that practically the full amount, or £918,540, to be exact, has been expended, or committed for works in hand. Honorable members who represent Western Australian constituencies have complained from time to time that the Government of that State has been unable to find sufficient money to take advantage of the grant on the £1 for £1 basis, but reference to the table I have just read will show that of a total amount of £192,000 allocated to that State, the sum of £173,114 has been expended or authorized for expenditure.

Mr Mann:

– That shows that the grant is appreciated.

Mr HILL:

– That is so. Complaints have also been made in behalf of the Tasmanian Government that that State has been unable to take full advantage of the grant because of the conditions attached to it. Up to the end of the year only 20 per cent, of the total Tasmanian allocations had been expended, but I am glad to say that since then, the total expenditure or commitments there account for 60 per cent, of the allocations. I should like to point out that, at first, expenditure in nearly all the States was retarded by reason of the fact that some time elapsed before the necessary machinery in relation to the scheme could be got into proper running order. Prior to the institution of the Commonwealth main roads development scheme, it was the practice of several of the States to spend the bulk of their road votes on existing roads. The greater portion of the money allocated as Federal road grants has been expended on entirely new roads. This has necessitated, in many cases, complete surveys, and the re-location of proposed roads in localities varying from wet, hilly, heavily-timbered country to dry, sandy, and open plains. In some of the States, it was found that the existing technical staffs needed augmenting to some extent, to carry out the surveys and supervision of construction, for in most cases the shires were not able, for a considerable time, to detail their engineers to do the work. As a matter of fact, not many of the local authorities were organ ized to do the work. It would have been very easy to spend the money on existing roads already located and graded, and easy of access, but it was provided for roads which would develop new country, and in order to ensure that it would be satisfactorily expended, the preliminary work has taken much time. As all expenditure has to be carefully scrutinized and passed by the Auditors-General in the various States before claims for reimbursement can be made on the Commonwealth, it is often some months after the expenditure has been incurred that a claim for the Commonwealth’s share is made by the State Governments, noted by the Federal Auditor-General, and appears as Commonwealth expenditure. The works in all the States are now being considerably accelerated. This is due to a more complete understanding of the Commonwealth Government’s requirements. I have no doubt that if the proposals of the Government as set out in the bill, are approved, the whole of the present unexpended balances, together with the amount of £1,000,000 to be made available by the Governments of the Commonwealth and the respective States during the current year, and the additional £250,000 which the Commonwealth Government proposes to advance free of contribution by the States, for the purpose of reconditioning and strengthening main roads, will have been expended or commitments entered into with regard to it. In passing, I may say that the introduction of the bill has been unavoidably delayed, but the Government has authorized the various States to proceed with and complete works in hand, or to undertake extensions of existing works, on the basis -of a grant of one-twelfth of last year’s allocation per month. The States have, therefore, already formulated their plans for the ensuing year. Our object in adopting this policy was to permit of continuity in the employment of workers, as well as in the activity of contractors. The period for which that authorization was made has now expired, and I ask honorable members to give the bill their close attention so- that it may be passed at the earliest possible moment. . This will enable the various States to carry on operations continuously. That is very necessary. More than 2,000 miles of roads have been cleared, formed or constructed with money voted by the Commonwealth Government. That is valuable evidence of the beneficial results of the scheme to the country. The details are : -

Those figures bear eloquent testimony to the permanently beneficial effects of the adoption of this policy. If the Commonwealth grant had not been made available, many roads that are now in use would not have been constructed. Possibly the work would have been delayed for a number of years. In- order to provide for continuity of employment and the adoption of a comprehensive main roads programme, I ask honorable members to approve as soon as possible of the proposals in the bill. In the absence of an assurance of some measure of continuity of programme, the authorities are handicapped on account of the difficulty in obtaining suitable tenders for the carrying out of the authorized works. Contractors are not inclined to tender for works of this nature, and to provide expensive road plant, unless they can see the possibility of the works continuing for some time. From the point of view of economical construction, therefore, it is advisable that this further grant be made available during this year. In this connexion I shall read an extract from the report of Mr. W. Calder, chairman of the Victorian Country Roads Board, which he submitted on his return from his tour of ‘inquiry in Great Britain and the United States of America in connexion with subjects relating to road problems: -

Without the assurance of funds in sight for a period of years ahead no systematic programme of work oan be planned. The country people become disheartened with the deferred hope of improved conditions, and the exodus of the young men from the country to city will continue. One of our greatest needs is population, and particularly the peopling of our empty spaces. If we cannot keep our own settlers and their families contented, and the main cause of discontent in settlers- is the condition of the country roads, it is useless to expect the most desirable immigrants farmers of British stock - to settle in a country where the roads are so short of the standard to which they have been accustomed.

The want of a continuous policy of construction is also uneconomical as regards cost, inasmuch that with no definite assurance of the amount of work in sight, contractors are not encouraged to procure the plant and equipment, without which work on a large scale cannot be carried on expeditiously and cheaply.

IF, on completion of a contract, there be delay in letting of new contracts through shortage of funds, the contractor has one of two alternatives - to realize on his teams and plant, probably at some sacrifice; or leave for mother district or State.

When work is again renewed, competition is lessened, and equipment may have to be transported from a distance, and the cost of this transportation is added to the cost of the work.

– Not altogether. Although the railways are carrying wheat at a rate much lower than that at which it can be carried by motor transport, yet it pays them indirectly to do so.

Mr Gibson:

– It pays directly as well as indirectly.

Mr MANNING:

Mr LATHAM:
Kooyong

.- I am sorry that I am unable to join in the general chorus in praise of this bill. Of course, everybody agrees as to the necessity and desirability of making good roads in Australia. We want more roads and better roads. The question is, Who should make them ? Should it be the Commonwealth Government or the

State Governments ? In proposing, year by year, legislation of this character the Commonwealth Parliament is placing itself in a difficult position. . It is merely granting financial subventions instead of devoting its revenue to the work which should properly concern it. Although the Commonwealth Parliament has no power to legislate for main roads as such, we are discussing a bill the object of which, as we all know perfectly well, is to make possible the construction, of main roads, without considering at all whether this admittedly desirable object is one of the objects with which the Commonwealth legislature ought to concern itself. I venture to assert, although I know it will be unpopular to do so, tb at in passing legislation of this description we are not acting constitutionally. This Parliament has no power to legislate for main roads. It has power, of course, to grant financial assistance to States which need it. I suppose this bill would be defended on that ground if it were attacked.

Mr Fenton:

– What about the defence aspect ‘

Mr LATHAM:

Mr Gregory:

– It would be all right, except in the wheat country.

Mr MACKAY:

– That is so. I am certainly pleased that the Government is making further money available for the construction of main roads. I have previously expressed the fear that future Commonwealth Governments may not be able to continue these grants, and in such an event may find themselves in serious difficulties.

Mr LACEY:
Grey

.-I do not intend to oppose the bill. Like other honorable members, I commend the Government for having made a further grant available for road construction, but I think it would have been economy in the long run had the original grant been equal to the sum that is now proposed to be voted. The total amount provided for main road development, assuming the bill to be agreed to, is £1,750,000. This bill makes provision for £500,000, to be spent on the construction of developmental roads, provided that the State Governments spend an equal amount, and, in addition, £250,000 as a contribution for the maintenance of main roads that, perhaps, are not developmental. The previous act and the regulations governing it are largely responsible for the amount of £400,000 at present unexpended. Honorable members know that applications for grants are made through the local governing bodies to the State Minister, whose recommendation is sent on to the Federal Minister. In my electorate, as in that of the honorable member for Wannon (Mr. McNeill) applications for many roads that should have been approved have been rejected. It would be a better policy for this Government to allot the money to the State Governments, who understand local conditions, and to give them the final say in the distribution of the grant. The local bodies would then deal direct with the State Government, and if an application were rejected they would know who was responsible. I believe there is a motion on the notice-paper in another place embodying this suggestion. Had such a system been in operation last year an amount of £400,000 would not now be outstanding. Generally speaking, the bill is hedged round too much with regulations. The large number of regulations attached to the grant is largely responsible for the neglect of some of the district or municipal councils to make application for it. Had the regulations been properly drawn up, and the act leniently interpreted, there would . have been no unexpended amount last year. Many applications for developmental roads have been rejected.

Mr Hill:

– By whom?

Mr LACEY:

– It is difficult to say. If one body were responsible, the reason for the rejection of the application would be known. My electorate is divided by Spencer’s Gulf, and the people living on Eyre Peninsula are to all intents and purposes isolated from the mainland so far as transport facilities are concerned. They are at present dependent on the shipping service to the ports of Eyre Peninsula. I have frequently complained in this House of the high freights charged for transport, and the inadequate shipping service to the peninsula. It is almost impossible to travel by road around the top of the gulf. Persons wishing to take stock from Eyre Peninsula to Adelaide have to take them to Port Lincoln at the bottom end of the gulf, and ship them from there to Adelaide at exorbitant costs. The only alternative is to use an obsolete punt at Port Augusta, which is controlled by the municipal council there. Eyre Peninsula contains more undeveloped good country than any other part of Australia. The State Government is making provision for a water supply which will make available a large tract of undeveloped agricultural and pastoral country. What is urgently required is some means of transport. There has been an agitation for the construction of a bridge across the gulf at Port Augusta, and I. now ask the Minister to say whether he will agree to the construction of that bridge being brought within the province of this bill, so that the people may have this necessary facility.

Mr Hill:

– If the South Australian Government will declare the road leading to the proposed bridge a main road within the meaning of the act, the bridge will automatically become part of the main road, and 50 per cent. of its cost can be acquired as a

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– Of the three, developmental roads are the most important, and I urge the Minister -to either amend the wording of the act or interpret it more liberally.

Mr BOWDEN:
Nepean

Mr MAKIN:

– I accept the honorable gentleman’s assurance, but as the honorable gentleman may see, the organization to which I have referred has communicated to public men what purports to be a statement expressed in his own words. Even if the Minister did not make the promise attributed to him, let me say that it embodies a very good suggestion. There should be continuity of policy in making provision for the construction and maintenance of our national roads. The present practice, with its uncertainty as to the amount available for the purpose of road construction, will not assist in the determination of a progressive policy of road-making for Australia. The work is now beyond the powers of municipal and district councils, it is becoming beyond the powers of the State Governments to perform, and it is essential that the Commonwealth should recognize the part it must play in making adequate provision for the construction and maintenance of national highways. The old macadamized roads no longer serve the purpose. Something of a more permanent character is required to meet the needs of motor transport, particularly to enable residents of isolated districts to market their produce.

Sitting suspended from 6.30 to 8 p.m.

Mr MAKIN:

– The road problem is becoming increasingly difficult, and, consequently, a more generous attitude should be adopted by the Commonwealth Government in the provision of road grants. The present methods of road construction do not lend themselves to efficiency and economy. The shire councils and municipalities adopt various methods of road construction, and as the Commonwealth Government is now taking a part in this national work, it should be prepared to advise the local governing bodies respecting the best methods of road construction, which has now become a highly specialized undertaking. It would, perhaps, be advisable to establish a technical branch, consisting of experts, whose services would be made available to local governing bodies. I suggest to the Minister that he might well refer the road making problem to the Institute’ of Science and Industry as re-constituted. Much of the Commonwealth grant is misspent because of faulty construction of roads, and the provision of inadequate drainage. I have seen many a good roadway almost ruined through bad- drainage. In a continent of great distances such as Australia, the road problem is of first importance. It has a close relation with the question of defence. Road transport will, in the hour of emergency or aggression, be one of the main factors in helping or hindering us, and from that stand-point alone it is essential that a permanent and efficient form of roadmaking should be undertaken. Bridge construction should also be considered part of the scheme for developmental roads. Crossing the border between New South “Wales and Victoria, together with the one crossing the border between Victoria and South Australia, is a roadway which is known as no man’s land. No one seems to accept the responsibility for its maintenance. These roads are in a bad state of repair, and require immediate attention, and I hope that the Commonwealth Government will be sufficiently broad-minded and national in ite outlook to impress upon the local governing bodies the necessity for keeping in effective repair all main roads that lead from one State to another. It is generally recognized that the nearer to the metropolitan area, the better is the class of roadway, but this is not always the case. Even in my own electorate are roadways that could be considerably improved. The main arterial roadway in South Australia runs from the Outer Harbour to Port Adelaide, and over it is carried much of the merchandise and pro duce for the whole of the State. It seems unjust that the people of Port Adelaide should be taxed in order to maintain that roadway, which rightly should be the joint responsibility of the State and the nation. Road making is essentially a national question, and is getting beyond the powers of local governing bodies. A certain municipality in my district had the foresight to construct permanent roadways, and is deserving of every assistance and encouragement. I regret that my representations made recently on their behalf were not favourably received by the Commonwealth Government. We should have a continuous policy of road making, extending over a period of three or five years.

Mr Stewart:

– A period of five years would be preferable.

Mr MAKIN:

– I prefer three years. A Government that is elected for three years has no right to commit this country to a definite policy of road construction, which a succeeding Government might consider to be totally inadequate. The present practice of making grants for one year only, and giving the States no assurance of what will be the grant for the succeeding year, does not permit of the adoption of a uniform policy of road construction. Unless foresight is exercised we cannot have either efficiency or economy in our road construction. Road making must necessarily become more important in Australia. I believe that ultimately we shall need Ministers for Roads just as we need Ministers for Railways. Although roadways can never confer such great advantages on our people as railways, they are nevertheless most necessary to our community life. Generosity on the part of the Government in making this grant will be appreciated everywhere. If we have good roads our visitors will undoubtedly appreciate our country more. Our producers will be able, particularly in times of adversity, to get their produce to market with less expense and worry, and altogether the community will benefit. I request the Government to increase the proposed vote with a view to making possible a continuous road policy on the part of the State and local governing authority. This must necessarily be beneficial to the Commonwealth as a whole. ,

Mr WHITSITT:
Darwin

.- Tasmania has been sneered at because of her roads and the manner in which she has constructed them, but that State’s policy of road construction is a credit to her and an example to all the States on the mainland. We realized that when we put men on the land it was essential to provide them with roads. We were not prepared to allow our primary producers to plough through slush, and slime ti) reach their markets. The authorities on the mainland, however, were prepared to do so. We have borrowed about £5,000,000 in all to make roads. Tasmania recognized that public prosperity is like unto a tree - agriculture is its roots, and industry and commerce are its branches and its leaves. If the roots are not nourished the leaves fall, the branches wither, and the tree dies. Therefore the State mortgaged herself to provide roads for her producers. Now, at the eleventh hour, the Commonwealth Government is providing money f or road making, and we are denied our share of it for the simple reason that while in the years gone by we spent our capital on road construction the States on the mainland did not. That is not right. The honorable member for Lilley (Mr. Mackay) stated that some roads on the mainland cost £12,000 a mile to construct. We built our roads in Tasmania for £1,200 a mile.

Mr Brennan:

– With money that was borrowed from the mainland.

Mr WHITSITT:

– Nothing of the kind. You on the mainland sold your birth right. Instead of putting the proceeds from the sale of your land into roads you put it into revenue and spent it in other directions. We in Tasmania did what was right. We have encumbered ourselves to the extent of £25 per head of the population for road construction, and now the Commonwealth Government tells us that we have lost our opportunity ‘of participating in this grant. Are we to be the Cinderella State of the southern seas - to be looked down upon and denied our rights? The worm will turu. We shall turn before long, if we do not get justice, as sure as my name is Whitsitt. The heavens may fall before this Federation breaks, but we will get justice for Tasmania, even if it means our withdrawal from it. Apparently we may pay, pay, pay; but we can get nothing in return. That is what is worrying me. I hope that whoever succeeds me as member for Darwin in this chamber will be able to make a better plea for Tasmania than I have been able to make. If he does not, I do not know what the result will be. We have mountainous country, basaltic soil, a wet climate, and other difficulties to contend with in our road work. Our pioneers, who “lived laborious days,” tackled the impenetrable jungle, the home of the wombat and the wallaby - had very often to take their winter supplies with them and remain for three months of the year in isolation because of the impassibility of the roads. Every one of them deserved a gold medal for what he did and endured. Yet honorable members -in this chamber slight Tasmania. Shame on them ! Not one of us has half the vitality or endurance of the pioneers, who converted the bush from what it was then to what it is now.

Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt:
BALACLAVA, VICTORIA

– This bill does not deal with pioneers.

Mr WHITSITT:

– Let me say, pioneers so far as road construction is concerned, sir. These men have actually done what I have described. They might have become web-footed had they remained long enough in the slush of that soil. The law of evolution might have turned them into ducks. I want the Government to realize the actual position, and to make special conditions for Tasmania. I want them to say, “ Seeing that the average expenditure of the States on the mainland for main road making is £6,000 or £’7,000 a mile, and that of Tasmania, is only £1,200 a mile, we are willing to make Tasmania’s grant up to the average expenditure of the other States.” That would be the fair thing. It would do justice to Tasmania. In the past the grant has been made under such conditions that Tasmania has not been able to take advantage of it. Our population is small, and cannot bear the expense of constructing tip-top, luxurious roads. We have had to be content with macadamized roads, which we have been able to construct and maintain. To do even that we have had to tax ourselves to the extent of ls. 6d. or ls. 8d. in the pound. Now we say that, as the other States are obtaining from the Commonwealth Government large grants for road work we ought not to be cut out because, in the past, we did work of that description.’ I liken the position to the building of a railway. In the early days a railway is often constructed with 40-lb. rails. Later on the traffic makes 60-lb. rails necessary, and additional capital expenditure is involved in the conversion. The difference between .the cost of the 40-lb. and 60-lb. rails is a legitimate charge to the capital account. I contend that the same principle ought to be applied to our roads. If it is, Tasmania will obtain justice.

Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa

experience. The fact of the matter is, that the shire councils are not able to maintain them. The advent of the motor has tremendously increased road maintenance problems. The Minister for Works and Railways (Mr. Hill) this afternoon by interjection promised a number of honorable members many things, but I do not think he has it in his power to fulfil his promises. Of course all proposals for road construction, for which this grant will be used, must be approved by the Minister, but his approval is only a formal matter. It must necessarily be so, for it cannot be expected that he has a detailed knowledge of the requirements of all the States. He must depend upon the advice of the State officers. The main roads development grant is misnamed, for many main roads and feeders to them do not come within its provisions. In the back country of New South Wales - I speak of it because I know it bes!; - many of the roads are in a dangerous condition. I have in mind those that lead out from the railway terminal town of Crookwell. People have to travel up to 70 miles from it by road, using horses, bullocks, or motors as their means of conveyance. The shire in that locality cannot be expected to> maintain the roads. I refer also to the road from Goul burn through Tallong, to the coast. This road has been surveyed, and it ha3 been demonstrated that the route is a practicable one. If a road were constructed from Nowra, the present terminus of the railway, to Jervis Bay - this country is not in my electorate - besides serving a large area of- useful country, it would tend towards decentralization. Beyond the railway terminus there is a stretch of country which is practically no man’s land, containing a number of farms which have been deserted because of the impossible conditions under which settlers were asked to live there, and its distance from a market.

Mr Hill:

– That matter is now under consideration by the New South Wales Government.

Mr LAZZARINI:

– In that. case, something may be done. To call the road from Sydney to the Victorian border the Prince’s Highway is no ,’OIl]pliment to the Prince of Wales. Some time ago I travelled over the whole length of that road, and along portions of it I expected at almost every 100 yards that there would soon be a byehection for Werriwa. The road was full of holes, notwithstanding that excellent granite was available within a short distance on either side. I agree with the honorable member for Hume (Mr. Parker Moloney) that none of this money should, bc expended on roads which run parallel with, railways, but that preference should be given to the outlying areas where, the producers have no railway communication. At present the best roads seem to be in the vicinity of the railways, whereas in those portions of the country where the population, is scattered there ar« few good roads. Apparently, the authorities seem to care little for the interests of the out-back settlers. The amount set out in this bill is altogether too small to provide the necessary roads. I should like the Government to bring forward a proposal for the expenditure of £3,000,000 for this purpose. I hope that not only will the Government decide to increase the amount, but that once the money is voted it will be spent.

Mr Gregory:

– The unexpended amount is carried over.

Mr LAZZARINI:

– It should be spent.

Mr Gregory:

– The honorable member must realize that it took sometime for the new policy to get into operation.

Mr LAZZARINI:

– The Commonwealth should inform the States that unless they use the money they will forfeit it. They would then see that it was expended or at least act more quickly. If any member representing a country constituency in New South Wales had been given charge of the money, it would have been spent. By carrying over such huge sums each year we are only tinkering with an important matter. I hope that if the Government of New South Wales gives favorable consideration to the construction of the road from Goulburn through Tallong to Nowra, it will be treated as a main or developmental road under this bill, and be entitled to a portion of this money. If that road were built, it would not only be of great advantage to the people in the vicinity, but it would open up one of the most beautiful tourists’ resorts in New South Wales.

Mr CORSER:
Wide Bay

.- While not opposing this bill, for the reason that I look upon it as an improvement on previous legislation of a similar character in that it provides an additional £250,000 for the maintenance of roads already constructed, I regret that the amount has not been increased to £l,000,000 per annum, and that that sum has not been made available for a period of at least five years. I have had many years’ experience as a shire councillor, and know that it is impossible to make good roads when uncertainty exists regarding the amount which will be made available in future years. Thathas been the trouble with previous legislation of this character. In connexion with road-making, it is absolutely essential that an amount of money should be set aside in advance so that the work can be planned ahead until the whole road is completed. This class of legislation was originally introduced to assist the development of new settlements. Cases have come under my notice in which the local board has been unable to obtain grants for the construction of the necessary bridges over creeks. In one instance I was successful in getting the decision reversed, but failed in the other case which I took up. Honorable members will realize that it is useless to construct a road on both sides of a creek if no bridge is provided to cross the creek itself. I hope that that policy will not be louger continued, but that future grants will include provision for the necessary bridges. I hope also that a definite sum will be made available for a number of years, so that the work may be planned in advance and carried out in a business-like way. I disagree with the contention of the honorable member for Kooyong (Mr. Latham) that there is no justification for the Federal Government providing sums of money for this purpose for a period of years. The honorable member said that the revenue derivable in the future from Customs and other sources might become less, but I would remind him that for the year 1923-4 the Customs duties on motor cars, motor parts, and oil for motors amounted to £2,121,000. There appears to be no likelihood of the diminution of motor traffic, and it is probable that that amount will increase in succeeding years. If the money derived from that source, or even £1,000,000 of it were spent on our roads, we shall not be doing more than a fair thing, because we have such an enormous area of untenantedland which can be settled only by the construction of suitable roads. Mention has been made of the fact that £400,000 of this grant was not expended last year. It is probable, however, that a great deal of that sum was allotted. So far as Queensland is concerned, I knowthat a great deal more than the sum allocated was applied for, but at the end of the year no definite decision regarding the applications had been arrived at. For that reason the expenditure of the money was held up.

Mr Gregory:

– The State Governments had to provide for the expenditure of a sum of money that was unexpectedly made available.

Mr CORSER:

– If the Minister will give some assurance as to the continuity of this policy there will be no difficulty in regard to the expenditure of the money in future. The experience that the State Governments and roads boards have had has impressed upon them the necessity for bestirring themselves to expend the money as it is made available by the Commonwealth. I hope that the Minister will do all in his power to improve the policy he has enunciated by making the grants continuous. Such action will, I am sure, be acceptable to all the States.

Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong

– I do not desire to cross swords with the honorable member for Kooyong (Mr. Latham) regarding the constitutionality of grants by the Federal Parliament for the construction of roads in State territory. With all due respect to the legal knowledge of the honorable member, if I were a member of the Ministry I should have no apprehensions or doubts about the propriety of this policy. Money is voted by this Parliament for many different purposes, the constitutionality of which is equally open to challenge. The Australian Constitution resembles very closely that of the United States of America, and I find that for the seven years ended 30th June, 1923, £82,000,000 was spent in America upon road construction. Of that amount the Federal Government contributed £35,000,000. In the following year the total was increased to £102,000,000, of which the Federal Government contributed £45,000,000, whilst for the year ended 30th June, 1925, the Federal Government was contributing another £15,000,000. At least a corresponding amount would be provided by the States, and it is safe to estimate that between £30,000,000 and £40,000,000 is being expended this year by the Federal and State Governments in conjunction, under what is known as the Federal Aid Highway System Act. lt is clear that the American Congress realizes the value of road construction, and does not hesitate to make money available for the purpose. We are told that this expenditure should be restricted to main roads or military roads. The military authorities may declare a certain thoroughfare to be a military road, but probably during war operations many other roads would be used for military purposes. Therefore, the more roads throughout the Commonwealth that are kept in good repair, the better prepared shall we be for the defence of our country. During the Great War motor vehicles were used extensively in France and Belgium, for the transport of both men and provisions, and but for the good roads the troops of the Allies would have suffered heavily. We may justly regard any vote by the Federal Parliament for the construction of roads as a contribution towards the defence of Australia. I understand that these grants are applied exclusively to the construction of country roads. Is any of the money expended within the metropolitan area ?

Mr Hill:

– I do not know of any.

Mr FENTON:

– Within my electorate are the two cities of Footscray and Essendon, through which pass four of the five principal arterial roads between Melbourne and the country. For some miles the main road to Ballarat and Geelong runs through the city of Footscray.

Mr Lister:

– It is in very bad repair.

Mr FENTON:

– Generally speaking, there are as many potholes in roads within the metropolitan area as in any country road.

Mr McNeill:

– There are country districts without any roads.

Mr FENTON:

– I admit that, and I understand that the Prime Minister had a painful experience of country roads when motoring in Gippsland recently. Although I represent a city constituency I sympathize with the people living outback who are wholly dependent upon roads for means of access to the towns and railways. People in the metropolitan area have the advantage of tramways and railways. In respect of some metropolitan roads upon which there has been a considerable amount of cartage from outlying districts theGovernment has come to the assistance of the municipalities through which the roads passed. The main Sydney road and the Bendigo road pass through the City of Essendon.

Mr Hill:

– Those roads bring a lot of trade to the city.

Mr FENTON:

– But the through traffic does great damage to roads within the city boundaries. Through Essendon and Footscray passes the motor traffic to Geelong, Ballarat, the North-Eastern District, the Goulburn Valley, and Bendigo. The only main arterial road to the metropolis that does not run through either of those cities is that to Gippsland.

Mr Lister:

– In my electorate there are more miles of some of those roads than there are chains of them in the electorate of Maribyrnong.

Mr FENTON:

– I admit that, and probably the road between the railway gates at Footscray West and Geelong is superior to the portion between the railway gates and Melbourne. I approve of the principle contained in the bill, and I would vote for a grant of £1,500,000, even if the whole of it were to be expended in the country, districts. Considerable complaint has been made regarding the failure of the States to expend the amount made available by the Commonwealth. The honorable member for Swan has said, by interjection, that because the system was a,n innovation some of the States were caught unprepared, and could not in the time available make provision for the expenditure of the money. Honorable members will, I think, admit that Victoria, by means of its excellent Country Roads Board organization, was in a better position to take advantage of the Federal grant than any other State. Consequently not much of the Victorian quota was unexpended at the end of the last, financial year. As a former municipal councillor, I have taken a keen interest in methods of road construction. Some Government and shire engineers build their roads too flat, with the result that they do not last long. The Country Roads Board has set a fine example by constructing roads with a good crown. That body is composed of able civil engineers - one of them, in particular, ranks amongst the best road constructors in Australia. He gained his first experience in some of the shires, and then passed into the Public Works Department. He is still a young man. and as a member of the Country Roads Board is giving excellent service to Australia. A better organizer than the chairman of the board, Mr. Calder, no one could wish for. The Minister, in the course of his speech, emphasized the importance of the maintenance of roads. The ordinary macadamized road will not withstand modern motor traffic, and the Commonwealth Government should insist, through its engineers, that roads upon which Federal money is expended shall be soundly constructed, well crowned, and top dressed with tar. The honorable member for Kooyong expressed some doubt as to whether the Federal Government would always be able to give this assistance to the States. In the last two years the Federal surpluses have amounted to nearly £8,000,000, and some of the money is now being given back to the States in this way. I agree with those who have advocated the preparation of a comprehensive construction pro- gramme spread over a number of years. That principle should be adopted in connexion with all public works. We should make our plan for works over a series of years. By doing so it would be possible to save a great deal of money. The Victorian Roads Board has asked the State Government to outline a policy of road construction for five or seven years, and I understand that the State Government has determined upon a certain minimum expenditure over such a period. The Federal Government should do the same. We must take the risk of our revenue being sufficient for the purpose. I have explained that the Federal Government of the United States of America has been contributing for some years to a system of road construction, and those who have travelled the roads of that country tell me that they are the finest in the world. I heartily approve of the bill, but I express with other honorable members my regret that the amount of the proposed grant is not larger than it is. I hope that our revenue will permit of the making of a larger grant in> the future, because nothing is better calculated to develop the Commonwealth than is the provision of good roads forour settlers.

Mr GREGORY:
Swan

– I very much regret that there is a rift inthe lute; that the general satisfactionwith this bill which has been expressed’ is accompanied with complaint. I am sorry that a policy which is approved’ by most members of this Parliament, and* I think by the people generally, should have been so strongly objected to by thehonorable member for Kooyong (Mr. Latham). He seems to think there issomething unconstitutional in this measure. If the honorable gentleman is right, then there have been many grants madeby this Parliament in the past that wereunconstitutional. If honorable memberswill study the Constitution, they will find that under it assistance may be given tothe States on such terms as this Parliament thinks fit. The honorable memberfor Kooyong regarded the matter from a. very parochial point of view. Apparently he would not mind assistance being given for the construction of a new road from here to Sydney. That, no doubt, would be very satisfactory to motorists, but thereasons which actuated the Government in bringing forward this policy of Commonwealth assistance for main road construction are exactly similar to those which- actuated the Government of the United States of America when it adopted the same policy shortly after the war. It came to the conclusion that the construction of developmental roads would increase settlement, increase production, and decrease the cost of living. ‘ The figures quoted by the honorable member for Maribyrnong (Mr. Fenton) show how the. policy has developed in the United States of America. I have been pleased to hear honorable members opposite endorsing this policy, and I should like to see it extended. It should be definitely continued over a period of years. There have been complaints that large sums of money have been left unexpended from these grants at the end of each financial year. But we must recognize that when the Commonwealth Government submits a proposal to advance £500,000 to the States under the conditions attaching to these main road grants, the State Governments must make their arrangements for the expenditure they have to meet. No State Government could be expected to submit in the middle of a session a policy for the expenditure of £200,000 or £300,000 on road construction. Their financial obligations render it necessary that they should have ample time for considering such proposals. Under the conditions upon which these grants are ‘made, applications have to be received, the State Minister for Works must have proper surveys made of the roads to be constructed, and, having come to the conclusion as to the best way in which the money available can be expended, he has to send his recommendations to the Federal Minister for his approval before a start can be made with the works. In the circumstances there is no occasion to reflect upon any Government for an delay that may have taken place in the expenditure of these grants. The proposal to’ put the amount available to each State to a trust account is a very good one. Under this arrangement the State Governments will know that money unexpended at the close of one financial vear will be available for the next year. Contracts for road construction and promises of road construction may have been made by a State Government in March, April, or May, and it is impossible for the expenditure upon such works to take place during the remainder of the financial year. It is, therefore, absolutely essential that there should be a carry over from year to year of moneys promised for road construction. If a State Government is not availing itself of the opportunity to carry out a reasonable construction policy under this measure, the Federal Minister for Works and Railways can ta-ke such action as may be necessary. The bill provides for this, and should tend to more speedy construction than has taken place in the past. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) suggested that the construction of developmental roads might obviate the necessity for railway construction. That might be so in some districts, but it would not apply to wheat-growing areas from which the traffic to markets is very heavy. Railways will still be necessary in such areas. There is room for the construction of a large number of developmental roads as feeders to railways. I join issue to some extent with the honorable member for Maribyrnong as to the method of construction to be adopted. If only the best macadamized and tarred roads are to be constructed, the cost may run up to £6,000 per mile.. What is chiefly required is the construction of developmental roads which will afford settlers facilities for bringing their produce to market. That I take to be the main purpose of the bill. Whilst it may be wise in some places to construct first-class roads, I am satisfied that a poorer type of road would be quite satisfactory in many districts. I hope that the Minister will not insist upon high-grade roads being laid down in newly opened-up districts. I was pleased to hear the complaints of the honorable member for Kalgoorlie (Mr. A. Green) in connexion with the large expenditure which has taken , place in connexion with many of these works carried out by day labour in country districts in Western Australia. Day labour construction may be all very well where it is possible to have proper supervision. Where gangs of men have to be sent to places at an enormous distance from centres of population, construction by day labour may result in heavy loss. I have heard many complaints on this ground. Where there are responsible road boards, and the Minister is satisfied that they command the services of competent officers, they should be permitted to carry out these works without many of the conditions that are being imposed in some of the States. I do not blame the Western Australian Government - its predecessor was more responsible than the present Government in this connexion - for many of the complaints that have been made to me regarding the expenditure of these advances for road construction. The proposals submitted by many boards were approved, but the money to carry them out was never made available. It was unjust that they should be promised the advances for which they applied, and should then have been left waiting for the money where official approval for the construction of a road has been obtained, the money should be expended on this work, and not diverted elsewhere. There is provision, in this bill for the advance of £250,000 for the reconditioning of old roads, and the Commonwealth Minister for Works and Railways may provide the whole of the money for this purpose. I do not quite concur in’ this proposal. I believe that the State and local authorities concerned should contribute some portion of the expenditure for the reconditioning of roads..

Mr Seabrook:

– That would cut Tasmania out of the grant altogether.

Mr GREGORY:

– I do not think so. Seventy-five per cent of the cost might be provided by the Commonwealth, and that would be sufficient. I do not say that the proposal is wrong, but it does not appeal to me that the Commonwealth Government should provide the whole of the cost of reconditioning old roads, when if a new road is being constructed the local authority or the State is required to orovide £1 for £1 of the expenditure necessary. The matter is one which may be dealt with in committee, and the Minister in charge of the bill would be warranted in insisting that some proportion of the expenditure upon the reconditioning’ of roads should be borne by the States concerned. The honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Makin) said it would be unfair for any government to commit a future Parliament in these matters, but I remind him that this was done in connexion with the per capita payments to the States. It is within the province of a new Parliament to repeal what it considers to be unjust legislation.

Mr Makin:

– Its action would be’ described as repudiation.

Mr GREGORY:

– Any Parliament is justified in repealing legislation which it does not believe to be wise. This Par liament agreed that the per capita payments should be made to the States for ten years continuously, or until Parliament otherwise provided. Under a continuous policy we should be justified in asking a State to make provision in ite budget statement for the amount of money that it would require to be expended £1 for £1 with the Federal grant.

Mr Makin:

– The per capita payment is a, repayment to the State for something that it has previously foregone.

Mr GREGORY:

– The main road grants is a repayment to the States of money taken from the people through taxation. The per capita payment is made to the States with no condition as to its expenditure, but the main roads grant is made to the States under such terms and conditions as we think fit. The; adoption of a continuous policy for a period of three years would enable the States to make their financial arrangements ahead, and to carry out a satisfactory programme of works. Under such a policy we would not hear the. complaintsthat we have heard to-night about the amount of money remaining unexpended.

Mr Makin:

– Does the honorable member favour a continuous policy for threeyears ?

Mr GREGORY:

– Instead of having a policy brought down from year to year as at present, it should be definitely fixed for three years. ‘ Even if we onlyhad a statement from the Government that it would endeavour to make the grant available for three years, it would enable the State Governments to make provision for their share of the money. I look upon thepolicy of main roads development as one of the best ever initiated in Australia. It is impossible to imagine the great valuethat must accrue from the construction of developmental roads. We are opening up a large area of new country, and it isessential that we should give to thosepeople who have the courage to settle in the back country under adverse conditions, every possible means of getting their produce to market. Large impostsare placed on the people through the tariff, and something should be done toenable them to take their produce to market, and to live under progressive and prosperous conditions. I am pleased that the Minister has introduced the bill, and I hope that we shall have something definite in the nature of a promise that these main road grants will be continued for at least three years.

Sir AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
EdenMonaro

– Many of the statements by honorable members about metal roads were delightfully vague. The Minister for Works and Railways (Mr. Hill) said that it was essential that good roads should run to the railways and to some of the main centres. He said nothing about- the settlers in the back country, who cannot get good roads. Where is the guarantee that if the shire, councils expend their own taxes for the construction of roads, the Federal Government will continue the grant ? Last year large sums of money were expended on roads on the understanding that the State Government would contribute to the cost. In one case £28,000 was granted for a road from an important farming centre to a seaport. This road was to be constructed to enable the settlers to get butter, cheese, and other produce to market, and to open up new country. What happened? The grant of £28,000 was sent to the State Minister, and he promptly turned the proposal down. I approached him, and wanted to know where the grant had gone. He said that he did not know, except that it had been expended on some other road. I discovered by close search that it had been expended on a road in the Minister’s own electorate. That shows how necessary it is that we should place on a sound footing any proposal for the construction of new roads. I am surprised at honorable members representing small constituences in small States such as Tasmania-

Mr Seabrook:

– The honorable member knows nothing about Tasmania.

Sir AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– The honorable member thinks that Tasmania is the only place in the world. ‘ I know something about Tasmania, or at any rate about its roads. I am surprised that the honorable member is satisfied with the roads in Tasmania. New South Wales has done very well in its expenditure on roads. In my electorate, such places as Bega and Moruya, which are dairying districts, are purely entitled to a portion of the Federal surplus for road construction purposes. The settlers do not nsk for macadamised roads. They have subdued the wilderness, established their homes, and sent their produce to markets, and they are entitled to get the best road that can be constructed for the money; and the maintenance of the road for a certain number of years if the surplus can stand, it. We know very well that we cannot get roads unless the Commonwealth Government has a surplus. There is an 0J£i but true saying, “ You cannot get blood from a stone.” Shire councillors get no profit or reward for the work they carry out. They meet once or twice a fortnight to consider the question of costs and the best methods of expenditure on roads. They are surely entitled to some consideration. I cannot understand the attitude of those who are satisfied with the country roads boards, which have no expert knowledge respecting the construction of roads. The shire councillors who have battled all their lives with hard roads, and who get no pay for the work they carry out for the good of the district, should receive some grant to enable them to construct roads. Why should the moneys be handed over to the State Government, and then to the roads board ? I have already given an illustration of what happened to the grant of £28,000 that was obtained to construct a road from Bega to Tathra, which would have given the settlers a market for their butter and cheese. Surely, these people are entitled to consideration. I am concerned, not with roads suitable for motor cars or main roads, but with what I call farmers’ roads. We should give the farmers the help they need, for they are the backbone of the country. Decent roads are necessary for proper agricultural development. The farmers are not asking for concrete or asphalted speedways, but simply for wellmade ordinary roads that will stand up to reasonable traffic. I am absolutely opposed to the adoption of any policy that will place the Federal authority which administers this act at the beck and call of the State Ministers. I have had some experience of -that, and I do not desire any other Minister to suffer it. There is an old saying that he who pays the piper shall call the tune. I believe in that. The Commmonwealth Government is not conferring a great favour on the people by making money available for road construction, for, after all, the people pay the taxes from which this money will come. The man on the soil, particularly, is only getting his due when this money is spent in providing him with reasonably good roads. I was amazed to learn that only £2,000 or £3,000 of the money previously granted had been spent in Tasmania.

Mr Seabrook:

– Tasmania has been allocated her proper proportion, but has not been able to spend it.

Sir AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– If the Tasmanian Government will make it available to the shire council in EdenMonaro, they will spend it and get good value for the money. I cannot understand why the money has not been spent. Plenty of people are looking for work, and plenty of roads need making. The provision of better roads will lee.d to an increase in the productivity of the land. The farmers will be able to give more time to growing their produce, for they will not need to give so much to its transportation to markets. “We have the money and we need the roads. Let us, therefore, adopt a practical, commonsense policy. Many of the coastal districts of New South Wales will eagerly spend all the money that the Government will make available to them for road purposes. I object to giving the State Governments or the State Roads Boards too much authority in connexion with this grant. There is nothing like letting the people spend a bit of their own money in the way they deem best. It is idle to say it is either Commonwealth or State money, for it belongs to the people, and they are entitled to reasonable consideration.

Mr STEWART:
Wimmera

:- As one who took some interest in the initiation of this policy, I am naturally concerned about its development. I wish to make a few observations, more upon the subject of a general roads policy than upon the bill itself. The honorable member for Kooyong (Mr. Latham) has been criticized because he introduced what the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Gregory) called a jarring note into the debate, but if, in his opinion as a lawyer, with a wide knowledge of constitutional matters, he believes that the measure conflicts with the Constitution, he is only doing his duty in saying so. Whether the bill strictly conforms with the Constitution or not, the fact is clear that honorable members on all sides of the chamber are unanimous in supporting it. It seems to me, therefore, that if there is a constitutional irregularity about it, the question is not whether we should abandon the policy, but whether we should make some effort to square it with the Constitution. The advent of the motor car has made a tremendous difference to outback life in Australia, but it has also created a tremendous problem for the local governing bodies responsible for the construction and maintenance of our roads. The problem is, in fact, too great for them to cope with. The State Governments have recognized this, for they have appointed roads boards to consider it. In the first year in which the Government initiated this policy there was no uniformity in the road administration machinery, if I may use that term, of the several States. I refer particularly to the difficulty created by the lack at that time of a. country roads board in New South Wales. The States are now recognizing the necessity for a permanent policy of road construction. The Federal Government has shown that it, also, is aware of the need. Such, a policy ought to provide for the maintenance, as well as the construction, of roads. Otherwise chaos must result. The claims of Tasmania in regard to road construction and maintenance have been ably placed before this Chamber by honorable members who come from . that State. Even when I was administering this legislation, representations had come to hand which indicated that the conditions in Tasmania were somewhat different from those of the mainland. If the people of Tasmania have spent considerable sums of borrowed money in the past in constructing roads, and are still paying’ interest on it, it seems to me that the Government would be justified in fixing some different basis upon which grants might be made. available to them. Certainly a complete inquiry into the position is warranted.

Reverting to the future policy of’ the Commonwealth in regard to road work, I advocate the constitution of a Federal roads board,’ comprised ‘ of representatives of the Commonwealth ‘ and all’ the States, in order that a continuous road developmental policy may be adopted, .Instead of providing money by the- present more or less haphazard methods, I con- sider that, in view of the insistent demands from country centres for road work, a permanent and settled method of providing it should be adopted. It has been requested by various country interests that the duties received through the Customs Department on motor ear importations, and also the revenue from State motor car taxation, should be ear-marked for road -making purposes. That is a matter that could be given close attention. A broad, general policy might . be formulated along those lines. If a Federal roads board were constituted it could fix the standard of road construction and provide for a continuous policy that would not be affected by political changes in either the Commonwealth or States. Experts could be appointed who would work harmoniously and continuously. I have been pleased with the unanimity of honorable members in dealing with this bill. The address of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) this afternoon was particularly gratifying. There is no doubt that road-making and maintaining is one of the big national problems of the day. Australia may rest assured, if one may judge from the speeches that have been made on this bill, that whatever political party may be in power a permanent policy of road development will be adopted. I am satisfied that the country people, especially those in the remote parts, appreciate this action of the Government, and will continue to show appreciation of any government which continues along similar lines.

Mr F FRANCIS:
HENTY, VICTORIA · IND NAT; NAT from 1922

.- The honorable member who has just resumed his seat referred to the amount received by thi Commonwealth in Customs duties on motor cars and other vehicles. I have not the figures with me, but I believe that the amount is between £2,000,000 and £3,000,000 a year. A portion of that money the Government intends to apply to road construction and maintenance. I am glad that the Federal Government, recognizing that the States and the municipalities are unable to meet the growing demands upon their revenue for the maintenance and construction of roads, has entered this field of activity, Those who have had any experience of municipal life know that there are many avenues for the expenditure of the revenue received by way of rates. The honorable member for Maribyrnong (Mr.

Fenton) mentioned some of the richer municipalities in the metropolitan area. I have the honour to represent a constituency which includes the thickly-populated cities of Caulfield, Malvern, and Brighton, whose revenue each year runs into a considerable amount. But, notwithstanding the large amounts received as rates, these municipalities find it difficult to cope with the growing demands made upon them in connexion with their roads. The difficulty with both metropolitan municipalities and country towns and shires is that much of the traffic which passes over their roads comes from other districts. It mustbe evident to any one who travels in our country districts that the country towns and shires experience difficulty in obtaining sufficient money to maintain their roads in proper condition. The state of their roads is not due to a lack of enterprise on the part of shire councillors, most of whom,, I believe, are keenly interested in the development of their districts ; it is due solely to the lack of sufficient funds for the purpose. Within the last twelve months the Government of Victoria has increased very considerably the taxes payable in respect of motor cars-, the annual revenue now derived from that source being approximately £750,000. The owner of a motor car in Victoria who, twelve months ago, paid in taxation £5 per annum, is to-day required to pay £12 per annum. I am glad, however, that the greater portion of the £750,000 received by the Victorian Government from this source will be spent on the roads of the State, including £40,000 in the metropolitan area. The whole of the £750,000 could well be expended in maintaining the roads in good condition. Not only should those roads which carry heavy commercial traffic, and roads connecting the larger towns be considered, but some of the money should be expended to develop roads in tourist districts. Our greatestresponsibility in connexion with roads is to those who have gone into the outback areas as pioneers, and who have considerable difficulty in getting their produce to market. The honorable member for Macquarie (Mr. Manning) pointed out to-day that it sometimes costs a settler as much to convey his produce 14 miles by road as to send it 350 miles by rail. The honorable member said that motor transport is dearer than transport by rail, and while that may be so to-day. I believe that motor transport would be much cheaper if better roads were provided. This measure has my whole-hearted support, because I believe that it is in the interests of the settlers in the outback districts of the Commonwealth. I think the argument of the honorable member for Wimmera (Mr. Stewart) that a portion of the amount received as Customs duties should be applied to the construction and maintenance of roads is a sound one. I pointed out just now that a considerable increase in the taxes payable in respect of motor cars had recently been made in Victoria. To the man who owns a number of cars, that increase represents a big outlay, and he should know what he is to get in return. Personally, I do not object to this taxation if it results in better roads being made available for motorists; but, if the revenue is to be applied to the creation of new departments and to meeting the expenses of administration, I hold that the increase is not justified. I maintain that it pays to make good roads, that- they are cheapest in the long run. The present unsatisfactory state of the Point Nepean road - an important thoroughfare in my constituency - is due to improper construction in the first place. I hope that the :i mount provided in the bill will, in the near future, be increased, and that there will be an undertaking on the part of the Federal Government to give to those people who use our roads some relief from the heavy burden of taxation which they are now called upon to pay. The bill has my hearty support.

Mr GARDNER:
Robertson

.- I support the bill. It has long been recognized that, with the advent of the motor car, shire councils, and even States, have found it ‘difficult to keep their roads in a satisfactory condition, notwithstanding that many shires have raised their i n tes to the maximum allowed by the act. Honorable members do not appear’ to be much perturbed by the constitutional difficulties in connexion with this measure which were mentioned by the honorable member for Kooyong (Mr. Latham). The honorable member referred to the heavy taxation of recent years being the cause of the surplus announced by the Treasurer on more than one occasion. I have no objection to ‘a surplus if it is expended along the lines indicated by this bill, and I am certain that there will be no protest from the people living in country districts, who realize that their very existence depends, to a great extent, on the quality of the roads over which they have to carry their produce to market. Some time ago I had pleasure in supporting legislation which had as its object the finding of markets for our produce. The Government would have shown a lack of foresight if, having introduced legislation to assist in the marketing of Australian produce abroad, it failed to avail itself of the opportunity provided by this surplus revenue to do something to make it possible for our outback settlers to carry their produce .to the railway station over good roads. It would have been absurd to assist in organizing markets abroad while neglecting to provide access to the home markets. The Federal Government, and I hope, the . majority of the State Governments, will probably adopt a progressive immigration policy, which will mean the placing upon the land of more settlers from overseas. State Governments, also, are carrying out comprehensive land settlement schemes, and they will be very greatly assisted by the fact that the Commonwealth Government has recognized road construction as a national responsibility. The allocation of £250,000, independent of any subsidy by the States, for reconditioning or strengthening existing main roads is of vital concern to one council in my electorate. It did not participate in previous Commonwealth grants because it had no absolutely new works for which it could claim such assistance. Under the terms of this bill, however, a shire council will be able to get assistance from the Commonwealth in respect of any existing road, provided that its construction is sound and of a permanent character. 1 cannot understand the fears expressed by the honorable member for Eden-Monaro (Sir Austin Chapman) in regard to the administration of this grant. The Commonwealth Government does not, I understand, investigate the merits or demerits of any road that is recommended to it 1 the State Government; so long as a road is within the definition contained in the act, and the regulations thereunder have been complied with, the Minister for Works and Railways accepts the recommendation from the State authorities. That is very wise. The responsibility of pronouncing upon the merits of different proposals should rest with the shire councils and the M’ain Roads Board, which has been newly created in New South Wales. The honorable member for Eden-Monaro is apprehensive that the creation of that body will deprive the shire councils of their autonomy. I have met the members of the new Main Roads Board, and I consider that New South Wales is fortunate in securing the services of Mr. Garlick and the other gentlemen associated with him. They will, I am sure, cooperate with the shire councils, by whom the applications for assistance from the Federal grant must be initiated. The Federal authorities may safely be guided by the board’s recommendations. Like other honorable members, I would like to see a larger sum provided by the Commonwealth for road construction, but we must feel satisfied that a start has been made, and that a principle acceptable to all honorable members has been laid down, namely, that developmental roads, and others giving access to markets, are the proper concern of the national Parliament. With the Main Roads Board functioning, and public-spirited men continuing to give their services as members of shire councils, we can look forward to a more generous and progressive policy, from which the Commonwealth will benefit to probably a greater extent than from any other legislation that we have passed for a considerable time.

Mr LISTER:
Corio

.- There is in the State of Victoria, and .possibly in other States, an organization known as the National Roads Association, and I was privileged to attend recently a lecture under the auspices of the association in the city of Geelong. The discourse was highly instructive, and was illustrated by lantern views of the most modern methods of road construction in the United States of America. The honorable member for Maribyrnong (Mr. Fenton) mentioned to-night that the United States Congress voted £15,000,000 for road construction during the year ended 30th June, 1925. That amount may sound very large, but, having regard to the fact that it is contributed by 115,000,000 people, it is a very modest charge in comparison with the burden of taxation that the ratepayers of Australia have to bear. The proposal to increase the Commonwealth grants from £500,000 to £750,000 has my hearty approval. Many years ago I had much bitter experience of the difficulties with which the man on the land has to contend, particularly in the bad roads that separate his farm from the railway. I have vivid recollections of a road in Queensland which, on account of the hilly nature of the country, had to follow the bed of a creek for 7 miles. ‘In that distance there were no less than 28 crossings, and after a heavy rainfall it was impossible for a farmer to get his products to market without unloading the dray three or four times on the journey, and carrying his produce through mire and water to high ground further up the gully. Fortunately, such conditions are rare, and I hope that they will become even more so. The grant to be made available under this bill will assist materially a great number of men who to-day have to bear the burden of maintaining a very expensive road which they barely use. During the time I have been a member of this House I have frequently mentioned the injustice done to shires of whose total revenue fully o.ne-third is absorbed by contributions to the Country Roads Board for the maintenance of the arterial roads, not 5 per cent, of traffic upon which originates within the shire. I have in mind a road through Braybrook, from the quarries into the metropolitan area. That road is being cut to pieces by drays carting metal to all parts of the metropolitan area, and the ratepayers of the district are heavily saddled with the cost of its upkeep. Under the bill, as drafted, there seems to be no chance of those people getting any redress, but I hope that the scope of the measure may be widened so that injustices of this kind may be remedied. I give the bill my blessing, and I hope that the Government will, in the near future, submit to Parliament proposals for a continuous policy of road construction. We desire to effect economy, and that can be done only by continuity of policy extending over a period of at least five years, and possibly seven years.

Mr HILL:
Minister for Works and Railways · Echuca · CP

.- The unanimous approval with which the bill has been received by honorable members on both sides of the House is very gratifying. The Government would gladly have proposed a larger grant than that mentioned in the bill, but there is a limit to even the resources of the Commonwealth. For the time being, the finances do not justify the Government in proposing io make a larger sum available for this purpose. Three classes of road come within the scope of this bill, namely, (1) main roads, between two important centres which are not joined by railway communication ; (2) developmental roads from outback country, or new settlements, to railway stations; and (3) arterial highways. The only conditions which the Commonwealth Government imposes with regard to the nature of the roads are three-; the grade of the road, the width of formation, and the depth of metal. The Commonwealth insists that the roads must be properly made. In some cases, particularly in Western Australia, and in some districts of the other States, it is found quite impracticable to obtain blue metal for road construction, and permission is given for the construction of a class of road most suitable to the district by the use of the material close at hand, lt has been found that roads so made are giving every satisfaction. The object of the grant would be defeated if its application were extended to other than main roads, or if it were applied in the construction of other than good lasting roads where heavy traffic has to be carried. I urge honorable members not to defeat the object of the measure by submitting amendments which would prevent the carrying out of this policy. The State authorities are best able to say what roads should be brought under the operation of the act, and the roads that are most needed. They contribute more than £1 for £1 of the expenditure involved, because they have to pay for surveys and the cost of administration, which amounts to about 8 per cent. So that the States spend £108 for every £100 granted by the Commonwealth. The honorable member for Kalgoorlie (Mr. A. Green) mentioned a road 12 miles long with a sand patch extending for half a mile. I submit that that is. a case for consideration by the local authority or local roads board. It does not come within the category of a national road. We have helped Western Australia to this extent, that the minimum expenditure fixed is £1,000 for the whole length of a road. Assuming that a road is 20 miles long, and that there are two or three patches of bogs or sand, we permit the necessary expenditure to make the road good over its whole length. I cannot, however, consent to any alteration in the minimum expenditure. Central roads boards should be appointed by each

State. There are such boards in Victoria, New South Wales, and Queensland. South Australia has a Roads Commission, and in Western Australia and Tasmania the work of road construction is carried out by the ‘Public Works Department. I hope that in the near future all the States will be brought into line in this regard. It will be the object of the Government to see that roads boards are appointed in all of the States. Honorable members who know the work of the Victorian Country Roads Board are agreed as to its excellence. If we can. secure the establishment of similar boards in all -the States, we shall have very much less difficulty in the future in dealing, with the problems that confront us. It has been suggested by several honorable members from Western Australia that a great deal of the work of road construction is carried out there by day labour. The regulations distinctly provide that the method of construction shall be by contract, but in special cases the Minister may approve of the employment of departmental labour provided the work is carried out by modern methods of construction, and modern plant, is utilized to the fullest possible extent. People in Western Australia have said that there is great difficulty in letting this work by contract, and I have suggested that tenders should be called in every case, and failing the receipt of a satisfactory tender, I am prepared to consent to the work being done by day labour. I have had no complaints recently from Western Australia. Most of the complaints that have been received have arisen from the fact that shire councils have not known the proper procedure to follow to secure their share of the grant. I believe that the whole of the proposed grant of £750,000, in addition to the unexpended balance from previous grants, will be spent by the end of the year, because the work of road construction has been considerably speeded up during the last six months. The Government has taken in hand the work of communicating with the State Governments, telling them whatit proposes to do, and asking them to submit their proposals at the earliest possible date. We have now in hand most of the proposals from the various States, though, of course, they have not yet been approved. Most qf the proposals received are extensions of the original proposals, and are for the construction of sections of roads already undertaken with a certain objective. If, for instance, a road were proposed from Ballarat to Warracknabeal, and only a few miles were included in the original proposal, subsequent proposals might be made for advances to complete the road. As the bill has met with so much approval, I hope that it will be rapidly dealt with in committee.

Mr McNeill:

– Would the Minister favorably consider a request for a special grant for a road from Durgan to the soldiers’ settlement at Ellerslie?

Mr HILL:

– I could not promise to do so. The proposal might be brought under the notice of the Victorian Country Roads Board. If the board is satisfied that the road comes within the scope of the act, as it probably would, and it receives its favorable consideration, it will receive the same consideration from me.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 2359

LOAN BILL No. 2

Bill returned from the Senate without amendment.

page 2359

WAR SERVICE HOMES BILL.

Second Reading

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:
Attorney-General · Darling Downs · NAT

10.25] . - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This is a very short measure. The War Service Homes Act has been for some time under the administration of the Minister for Works and Railways. It is desired to appoint the Secretary of the Works and Railways Department to the position of War Service Homes Commissioner. The existing War Service Homes Act provides that if the commissioner engages during his term of office in employment outside the duties of his office his office will be vacated. It is to overcome this difficulty in the wayof the appointment of the Secretary of the Works and Railways Department that the bill is introduced. It is intended to provide that the outside employment referred to in the existing act shall not involve the vacation of the office if it is employment within the Public Service of the Com monwealth. The Minister for Defence, who is administering Repatriation, promised that every case submitted to him by members of Parliament or by direct application would be given his personal attention. That has caused a tremendous amount of work to be thrown upon the Minister and the Chairman of the Repatriation Commission. It was, therefore, necessary that the chairman of the commission should be relieved of this class of work, and that the administration of War Service. Homes should be carried out completely in the Department, of Works and Railways.

Debate (on motion by Mr. Charlton) adjourned.

page 2359

ADJOURNMENT

Charges against Secretary to the Treasury and the Management of the Commonwealth Bank.

Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · Cowper · CP

– I move -

That the House do now adjourn.

In submitting the motion, I desire to inform the House that I purpose laying on the table to-morrow copies of the file dealing with the records of certain transactions which were referred to in the debate last week on the Commonwealth Bank Rural Credits Bill by the honorable member for Bourke (Mr. Anstey). I intend, also, tolay on the table copies of the communications from the Commonwealth Bank dealing with certain statements made by the honorable member for Reid (Mr. Coleman). I am taking this course because it is necessary that some means should be adopted to enable two official advisers of the Government in the Treasury and the Commonwealth Bank to make their defence here as they are precluded from doing so personally. The first file deals with the whole matter raised by the honorable member for Bourke on Thursday last. In the course of the debate he made certain references to the Secretary to the Treasury. He said, amongst other things, “ I know all about Mr. Collins and the double-faced business he has been playing with different Treasurers of this country.” He said also, “ I do not entirely blame the Treasurer, because I know what Mr. Collins is capable of.” Whilst the honorable member was making those remarks I was busy looking up certain records inHansard to use in the debate. In any case, I could not completely refute the statements made by the honorable member until I had seen the records, and had had an opportunity of interviewing Mr. Collins. I am availing myself of this means, as Minister in charge of the Treasury, of defending Mr. Collins, who, as honorable members are aware, has had a very honorable career in the Public Service extending over 40 years. He is well known to practically every one who has been a member of this Parliament. When his attention was drawn to the remarks of the honorable member for Bourke on his return from Sydney, he wrote me a letter, which I now intend to read, and asked that the whole file should be placed on the table of the House. This is the letter I received from Mr. Collins : -

The Honorable the Treasurer,

My attention has been drawn to the Par liamentary debates of 3rd September, 1925, in which Mr. Anstey has madesome references to me. I do not deserve the personal reflections which the honorable gentleman has made.

Herewith is a copy of the Treasury records relating to the arrangements made with the banks immediately after the outbreak of war.

I suggest that this memorandum and the accompanying copy of records be placed upon the table of the House,when Mr. Anstey will be in a position to see that I have not misinformed him or any one else in the matter,

Jas. H. Collins, 9th September, 1925

A perusal of these records will indicate, as the honorable the Leader of the Opposition actually interjected during the speech of the honorable member for Bourke, that Mr. Collins had told the truth. Mr. Collins’ reputation amongst Ministers and members generally, and amongst members of the Public Service is very high. I know him to be a valuable and able officer, who holds four most important and responsible positions - he is a director of the Commonwealth Bank, the Custodian of Expropriated Properties, the Commissioner for Old-age and Invalid Pensions, and the Secretary to the Treasury - in all of which he is doing valuable work. I know that he would not stoop to double dealing’ of any kind. His service in regard to the floating of loans and the general administration of his office is beyond praise. In a matter of this kind he, of course, cannot defend himself, and as hia Minister I am very pleased to beable to defend him. I regret very much that this attack has been made upon cue of the most prominent public servants in Australia. Mr. Collins’ career is unblemished, and he has earned the goodwill and gratitude of the successive Treasurers of the Commonwealth. The honorable member for Bourke professes to be aggrieved because I said that the Labour Treasurer had entered info an arrangement with the banks which was not so good, from the public point of view, as that which had existed between the Commonwealth Bank and the Mutual Life and Citizens’ Assurance Company Limited. To show that I was quite accurate in the statement that I made, it is only necessary that reference be made to the copy of correspondence, which, at the request of Mr. Collins, I shall table to-morrow. That correspondence shows quite distinctly that, on the 9th November, 1914, the final approval to the arrangement with the banks was given by Mr. Fisher, the Leader of the Labour Administration. It is quite true, however, that Mr. Fisher did not initiate the arrangement. Indeed, it is clear that, prior to the 17th September, 1914, when Mr. Fisher took office, the Cook Administration had entered into an arrangement, which, because it was agreed to in the main at a conference of all parties, could not honorably have been departed from by the new Administration, and if Mr. Collins told Mr. Anstey that Mr. Fisher was bound he had every justification for so saying. I showed, in the quotations which I gave the House last week, that there was a little duel between Sir Joseph Cook and Mr. Fisher as to which Administration should have the credit of the action both Mr. Anstey and myself now question. Mr. Fisher said, on the 9th October, 1914-

But thenegotiations with the banks were left incomplete, those institutions not being in agreement with the proposals as understood at the conference.

To that Sir Joseph Cook interjected -

The negotiations were complete as far as we were concerned; that is to say, our terms were submitted to the banks.

Then Mr. Fisher went on to say -

To enable the arrangement arrived at by the conference to be of real value to the country, the banks would have to hold the notes in excess of their ordinary issue. The matter is still unsettled, as the right honorable member knows.

In my own speech on the Commonwealth Bank last year, I said -

Without being unduly critical of action taken during a period of great anxiety, however, I am permitted to say that this three to one arrangement was more doubtful in character than any other act of war finance.

Honorable members will see that in mentioning this arrangement I did not refer to the Administration responsible for it.

Dr EARLE PAGE:
CP

– Mr. Anstey asked me what was the date, and I said 1915. Later, I corrected my statement, and said that the transaction took place in November, 1914. I now desire to place on record as well,” a full statement with regard to Mr. Garvan’s relation to the bank. Mr. Garvan is Chairman of Directors of the Commonwealth Bank, and is not able to refute in this House any statements made. The honorable member for Reid (Mr. Coleman) stated in this House on the 3rd September last -

Mr. Garvan’s company profited by the situation, for in the six months from 1st January to 30th June, 1924. the Commonwealth Bank paid it nearly £40,000 in hard cash on these exchange transactions.

A little further on he said -

I am advised that in twelve months the company cleared through the Commonwealth Bank a profit on exchange of approximately £100,000. . . . My point, however, is that while Mr. Garvan’s company was in the fortunate position of having large sums of money in Australia with which to take advantage of the abnormally high rates of exchange, it had an overdraft from the Commonwealth Bank at 5 per cent.

In this connexion I have a letter dated Sydney, the 7th September, 1925, and signed by all the directors of the Commonwealth Bank, with the exception of Mr. Garvan. That letter reads -

The Hon. Earle Page,

Treasurer,

Commonwealth of Australia,

Melbourne, Victoria

Dear Sir, -

With reference to the statements made in Parliament to the effect that Mr. Garvan and his company had made large sums of money in exchange transactions, with the assistance of the bank, theboard has investigated the matter, and finds the position as follows: -

That the Mutual Life and Citizens’ Assurance Company Ltd. entered into large contracts on behalf of this bank, for the sale of London exchange.

The period covered by these contracts was from October, 1923, to March, 1925, during which period the transfer from London to Australia of the sum of £5,600,000 was effected. Neither Mr. Garvan nor his company, nor any officer of his company, received any profit or recompense in connexion with these transactions, the whole proceeds of which went to thebank.

The result of these transactions enabled the bank to deal effectively with a difficult position created through the accumulation of large funds in London, and also had the effect of saving the bank a considerable sum of money.

As the board is of the opinion that transactions between the bank and its business connexions should’ not be disclosed, it makes this statement with the consent of Mr. Garvan and the Mutual Life and Citizens’ Assurance Company Ltd.

Yours faithfully,

Robert Gibson

B. McComas.
Mackenzie Lees.
1. hordern
s. Drummond.

Jas. R. Collins

James Kell

Far, then, from receiving any profit from this transaction, the facts show that Mr. Garvan, through his company, has rendered very material service to the bank. I believe that everybody in this House, without respect to party, desires to see a strong national bank. We disagree, possibly, as to the methods that should be adopted, but our aim, I am sure, is the same. The most certain way to secure that end, it seems to me, is to put all its transactions beyond suspicion, and I am glad to have the opportunity of vindicating the character of two of the directors of that institution by the production of these papers. One other statement, andI have finished. It is in regard to the question of the insurances of employees of the bank. I have had a statement prepared regarding the 954 policies. Seven hundred and fifty-four were issued by the Australian Mutual Provident Society, 89 by the Mutual Life and Citizens’ Assurance Company, 51 by the National Mutual, and 61 by various other offices. Of the last 62 policies taken out by the employees, only four were issued by the Mutual Life and Citizens’ Company. I am sure honorable members will all be glad to have an official statement which explains in a lucid and convincing manner a position of vital concern to the public and tothis House.

Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter

Question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned at 10.46 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 9 September 1925, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1925/19250909_reps_9_111/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives 9 September 1925

DISTILLATION BILL

QUESTION

STRIKE OF BRITISH SEAMEN

Mr MAKIN:HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr BRUCE:Minister for External Affairs · FLINDERS, VICTORIA · NAT

QUESTION

TARIFF SCHEDULE

Mr CORSER:WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND

Mr PRATTEN:Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Mr O’KEEFE:DENISON, TASMANIA

Mr PRATTEN:

Mr SEABROOK:FRANKLIN, TASMANIA

Mr PRATTEN:

QUESTION

RECOGNITION OF HEROISM

Dr MALONEY:MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

Mr BRUCE:NAT

QUESTION

COTTON GUARANTEE

Mr FORDE:CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

Mr BRUCE:NAT

QUESTION

ENTERTAINMENTS TAX

Sir AUSTIN CHAPMAN:EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES

Dr EARLE PAGE:Treasurer · COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

QUESTION

TELEPHONE INSPECTORS

Mr SCULLIN:YARRA, VICTORIA

Mr GIBSON:Postmaster-General · CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA · CP

QUESTION

IMPORTATION AND MANUFACTURE OF HATS

Mr FORDE:

Mr PRATTEN:NAT

QUESTION

NAVIGATION ACT

Mr BAMFORD:HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

Mr PRATTEN:NAT

QUESTION

IMPORTATION OF MOTOR CARS

Mr FORDE:

Mr PRATTEN:NAT

QUESTION

OLD-AGE AND INVALID PENSIONS

Dr EARLE PAGE:CP

MAINROADSDEVELOPMENT BILL

Second Reading

Mr HILL:Minister for Works and Railways · Echuca · CP

Mr Mann:

Mr HILL:

Mr Fenton:

Mr HILL:

Mr CHARLTON:Hunter

Mr Bowden:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr Gregory:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr Hill:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr MANNING:Macquarie

Mr Bowden:

Mr MANNING:

Mr Gibson:

Mr MANNING:

Mr Hill:

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

Mr Hill:

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

Mr Gregory:

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

Mr Hill:

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

Mr Prowse:

Mr Mann:

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

Mr LATHAM:Kooyong

Mr Fenton:

Mr LATHAM:

Mr Bowden:

Mr LATHAM:

House of Representatives
9 September 1925

Mr MAKIN:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr BRUCE:
Minister for External Affairs · FLINDERS, VICTORIA · NAT

Mr CORSER:
WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND

Mr PRATTEN:
Minister for Trade and Customs · MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Mr O’KEEFE:
DENISON, TASMANIA

Mr SEABROOK:
FRANKLIN, TASMANIA

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Mr FORDE:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

Sir AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES

Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr SCULLIN:
YARRA, VICTORIA

Mr GIBSON:
Postmaster-General · CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA · CP

Mr PRATTEN:
NAT

Mr BAMFORD:
HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

Mr PRATTEN:
NAT

Mr PRATTEN:
NAT

Dr EARLE PAGE:
CP

Mr HILL:
Minister for Works and Railways · Echuca · CP

Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter

Mr MANNING:
Macquarie

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

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

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

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

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

Mr LATHAM:
Kooyong

Mr FORDE:
Capricornia

Mr PROWSE:
Forrest

Mr McNEILL:
Wannon

Mr MACKAY:
Lilley

Mr LACEY:
Grey

Mr SEABROOK:
Franklin

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr BOWDEN:
Nepean

Mr MAKIN:
Hindmarsh

Mr WHITSITT:
Darwin