View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives
17 June 1926

10^th Parliament · 1^st Session

CONSTITUTION ALTERATION (INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE) BILL
QUESTION
- ELECTORAL OFFICIALS
QUESTION
- APPLE-GROWERS
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH BONDS
QUESTION
- AEROPLANES
ORDER OF BUSINESS
PAPERS
CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION BILL
- Second Reading
ECONOMIC LAWS
- Queenslander Says High Wages Destroy Industry
BENEREMBAH SOLD
- Melbourne, Thursday
ADJOURNMENT
- Leagueof Nations

Mr. Speaker (Son. Sir Littleton Groom) took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 3205

CONSTITUTION ALTERATION (INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE) BILL

Powersof the Parliament.

Mr GREGORY:
SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– In another place, an honorable senator asked the following question : -

Could Parliament, in allotting powers to a court, stipulate that the hours of industry should not be more than 44 hours per week?

The responsible Minister replied -

Of course itcould. It would be a very foolish thing to do; hut it could be done.

This answer will be published, and I therefore ask the Attorney-General whether it would be possible, under the Constitution Alteration Industry and

Commerce Bill, for this Parliament to lay down hours and conditions, or must it leave such matters entirely to an authority?

Mr LATHAM:
Attorney-General · KOOYONG, VICTORIA · NAT

– Under the proposed powers, it would not be possible for this Parliament to legislate for the hours to be worked in any industry. It would, however, be possible for the Parliament to limit the powers of a wages board, committee, court, or other authority to the prescription of hours within specified limits. That limitation would be merely a restriction of the power of the authority, and would not have effect in fixing the hours of industry.

Mr HUGHES:
NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I do not quite follow the Attorney-General. What the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Gregory) wanted to know was whether the powers conferred on this Parliament by the proposals contained in the Constitution Alteration Industry and Commerce Bill include the power to limit the scope of the jurisdiction of a court, wages board, or other authority in such a way as to in fact prescribe the number of. hours which the people of this country are to work. I think the Attorney-General’s reply did not make the matter quite clear.

Mr LATHAM:

– The answer to the question in the form submitted by the right honorable gentleman is “ No.” Although this Parliament would have no power to legislate as to wages or hours, it would be within its discretion to confer upon any authority set up by it such powers as to the determination of wages and hours as it thought proper. It would be possible for the Parliament to provide that no award, regulation, or determination of an authority should prescribe more than a certain number of hours, or less than a certain number. That would be within the power of the Parliament under the proposals to be submitted to the people. Such legislation, however, would not of itself do anything more than confer power upon the authority subject to a limitation, which power that authority would exercise according to its discretion; Parliament could not itself fix the hours of work in any industry. That would be a matter for the industrial authority to consider.

page 3206

QUESTION

ELECTORAL OFFICIALS

Compensation for.referendums.

Mr MAKIN:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– In view of the extra work which will be imposed upon divisional returning officers and other officers of the Electoral Branch by the taking of the referendums, will some special compensation be given them?

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

– Additional payment for services performed by officers of the Public Service beyond their ordinary contemplated duties is a matter for consideration in determining what will be just and equitable. The request of the honorable member will be borne in mind.

page 3206

QUESTION

APPLE-GROWERS

Financial Assistance

Mr SEABROOK:
FRANKLIN, TASMANIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Markets and Migration, upon notice -

In view of the extremely unsatisfactory state of the English market for Australian apples, will the Government take into immediate consideration means for financial assistance to growers, who, otherwise, may be faced with absolute ruin?

Mr ATKINSON:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · WILMOT, TASMANIA · CP

– The Minister for Markets , and Migration has furnished the following information in reply to the honorable member’s question: -

The High Commissioner, at the instance of the Government, has already conferred with the leading brokers and organizations controlling the importation and distribution of Australian apples in Great Britain, and is doing everything possible to secure the best returns for growers in the difficult position which has been created by the dislocation of transport services ‘throughout Great Britain. The whole position is rendered more difficult by reason of the fact that the apple-growers of the Commonwealth have no representative organization in Great Britain, such as the London agencies established by the Dairy Produce and Dried Fruits Export Control Boards.

page 3206

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH BONDS

Transfers - Income Tax

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

asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

What are the totals of bonds that are transferable without’ endorsement, by being simply handed over?
Are such bonds traceable by any transfer register in the Income Tax Department or elsewhere?
Is it possible for evilly-disposed persons, by making use of suchbonds, to avoid paying their just income tax?
What are the totals of bonds that must be endorsed by the owners before transfer?
Are such bonds traceable by any transfer register in the Income Tax Department or elsewhere?

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

– Details of stock and bonds outstanding are being obtained from the several stock registries. When the inform a tion is available replies will be furnished to the honorable member’s questions.

page 3207

QUESTION

AEROPLANES

Gift by Imperial Government.

Sir NEVILLE HOWSE:
Minister for Defence · CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– Yesterday the honorablemember for Hindmarsh (Mr. Makin) asked the following questions : -

Whether the aeroplanes made as a gift by the Imperial Government to the Commonwealth have all been unpacked?
What were the dates of the receipt of such machines in Australia?
Howmany machines were included in this gift?
How many machines have been reconditioned ?
What was the cost of such reconditioning?

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

Yes, with the exception of thirteen landplanes.
During the latter half of 1920.
One hundred and twenty-eight.
One hundred and fifteen, including those in course of reconditioning.
Average price, £460 each, by contract.

page 3207

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Mr BRUCE:
Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT

. - (By leave.) - I move -

That Government business shall take precedence over General Business for this day of sitting.

As honorable members know, the Standing Orders provide that on every third Thursday the first item on the noticepaper shall be the question “ That Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair.” For the present session the House has agreed that on that day general business, which is, of course, private members’ business, shall take precedence until 9.30 p.m. But as the term of appointment of the two deputy presidents of the Arbitration Court expires on the 26th of this month, it is necessary for this Parliament to proceed immediately with the bill amending the Arbitration Act, so that these appointments may be continued until the deputy presi-. dents have given decisions in respect of cases that are incomplete and outstanding, such as the railway servants case, in which Sir John Quick is making an exhaustive examination of the conditions of employment. Consequently, the Government now proposes to ask the House to allow Government business to take precedence on this Thursday; but general business will take precedence next Thursday in exchange for the time which will be taken from private members today. I think that arrangement will be acceptable to the House generally.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Mr BRUCE:

– I move-

That order of the day, No. 1, be postponed until after order of the day, No. 2, Government business.

This motion is in furtherance of the arrangement I have just mentioned. Order of the Day, No. 1 - “Question - That Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair,” which is the motion under which grievances are discussed, will appear next Thursday in the order that it appears to-day.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 3207

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Union for the Protection of Industrial Property - Report by Col. Chas V. Watson, Commonwealth Representative of the Conference held at The Hague, OctoberNovember, 1925.

Northern Territory Acceptance Act and Northern Territory (Administration) Act Ordinance of 1926 - No. 14 - Police and Police Offences.

page 3207

CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 21st May (vide page 2238), on motion by Mr. Latham -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Mr Latham:

– Hear, hear!

Mr CHARLTON:

– And that court can proceed immediately to fix a standard working week. The New South Wales Parliament recently passed a law making the standard week 44 hours; but the awards of the Federal Court provide for a week of 48 hours, and as a State law cannot override a Commonwealth law, all Federal awards operating in New

– That tribunal has done good work, and there has not been a strike by the miners since it was created. The dispute that has just been settled relates to the engine-drivers in the coal industry; it had nothing to do with the miners. The engine-drivers have agreed to submit their case to the tribunal, thus proving its efficacy again. The tribunal has the right to call the parties together, and it did so in this dispute. This provision is absolutely necessary if we aim at preventing serious consequences from industrial disputes. I believe that if a conciliatory commission had taken action at an early stage of the recent dispute in the coal industry, no cessation of work would have occurred. I am not saying, and have never said, anything about the merits of that dispute. I am not satisfied with the provision that gives power to the AttorneyGeneral to intervene in any industrial dispute before the court. I admit that, in making a general rule, care should be taken not to exclude any of those affected by it ; but I am not satisfied that the clause will not permit the AttorneyGeneral to intervene at any time. When he was speaking on the motion for the second reading, I interjected -

Does it not give to any person in the community who feels he is interested the right to go” to the court?

The honorable the Attorney-General replied -

It does not do that. The words of the clause disclose the meaning quite clearly When the Attorney-General has given the prescribed notice in writing to the court, the court inserts an advertisement in the Government Gazette, and “ upon publication of the notice in the Gazette any person or organization or association of employers or employees may apply to the court.”

There is probably justification for this provision if application has to be made by an organization of employers or employees whose members feel that they would be affected by the decision of the court; but the clause bears another interpretation, for it reads -

The Attorney-General on behalf of the Commonwealth may, by giving to the Registrar a notice in writing of his intention so to do, intervene in the public interest in any proceeding before the court in which the question of standard hours of work in any industry or of the basic wage is in dispute.

– If he did he would merely be following the example that has been set by the secondary industries, which do not fail to pass on every increase. Country dwellers do not contend that the working man is not entitled to receive an increase to counterbalance any extra cost of living, but they do want to know what consideration is to be given to the primary producer. If he is making such immoral profits that he can bear the extra costs which are continually imposed upon him nothing can be said, but the statistics which are available prove that primary industry is not such a profitable undertaking.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– The remarkable thing is that that increase in wages was made after wool had fallen from £33 to £17 a bale.

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– That is so. The honorable member for Wimmera (Mr. Stewart) said the other night that when the dried fruits industry was absolutely “down and out,” and the Government was greatly concerned as to what action should be taken to put it on its feet, the Arbitration Court made an award which increased the wages of the men who were employed in that industry. The workers are entitled to an increase when the cost of living rises, but is it not absurd that at a time when an industry is languishing the employees in that industry should have their wages increased ? The following figures taken from the CommonwealthYearBook show the area of unoccupied Crown lands in the Commonwealth, with the exception of the Northern Territory and the Federal Capital Territory, in the years specified: -

A certain number of mineral leases reverted to the Crown, but they do not account for this increase of 10 per cent. The conclusion cannot be escaped that land is going out of occupation.

Mr Forde:

– That would not be good sheep land.

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– I do not think it can be, because men hang on to decent land as long as they can. But instead of settlement advancing it is going back, and one of the principal reasons is that on account of the high cost of production it is not worth while to try to do anything with inferior land.

Mr Forde:

– When pastoral leases revert to the Crown in Queeusland and are subdivided for closer settlement, there are as many as 1,400 applicants for some blocks.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– Those are ‘ lottery prizes.

Mr Forde:

– The successful applicant must reside upon the land for five years, or .it is forfeited.

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– I admit that there is a tremendous land hunger in Australia; but, at the same time, the figures which I have quoted prove that large areas are reverting to the Crown. Queensland is a striking example - it has gone back to the extent of ‘20,000,000 acres in the period covered by the figures. I honestly believe that the system of leasehold tenure in that State is the cause.

Mr Fenton:

– Would it not be due to the fact that the beef industry is not now in as good a position as it was formerly ?

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– That applies, to a certain extent. My recent visit to Queensland convinced me that one of the principal causes is the system of leasehold tenure. I listened with interest th, other night to honorable members discussing that system in connexion with the lands of the Northern Territory. The following paragraph, which appeared in yesterday’s Melbourne Herald, is significant’: -

page 3213

ECONOMIC LAWS

Queenslander Says High Wages Destroy Industry

Brisbane, Wednesday. - An interesting contribution to the subject of economic laws was made last night by the former Minister of Lands of the Queensland Labour Government (Mr. H. F. Hardacre), who is now a member of the Land Court Bench.

Mr. Hardacre said if they raised wages they destroyed industry and created unemployment.

He had found that two-thirds of the cattle holdings in North Queensland would soon have to go out of business, and probably the country would have to bc abandoned ‘because of continual increase in the cost of production and low prices that had made it unprofitable to carry on.

Mr. Hardacre, correctly appraised the position. The high cost of production is causing many people to ask themselves whether it is worth while to put their money into land when a manufacturing industry in the city, or even bricks and mortar, would give them a better return without the risks that attend primary production. Whether land is held under leasehold or freehold makes a very big difference. When a man takes up land, he desires that it should be his own.

Mr SPEAKER (Hon Sir Littleton Groom:
DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND

– The honorable member will not be in order in comparing the leasehold and freehold systems under this bill.

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– I shall not labour that point. Honorable members know that if a man owns his house he will improve it, and if he rents it he will not. That applies also to the occupation of land. In Queeusland, I saw land upon which I worked 20 years ago reverting to its original state because it did not pay to keep it in order. That means the deterioration of an asset of the country. In connexion with the effect of high cost of production on land settlement, I have a few more figures showing the number of land-holders in Australia, which I think are interesting. For the years specified the number of landholders in the various States was : -

Figures are not available for Queensland, but I do not think that the Queensland figures would improve the position.

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

– The big fellows have gobbled up the little fellows’ estates.

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– I thought there might be something in that, and therefore looked into the matter. I found that in nearly every State the men holding from 500 to 1,000 acres about held their own. I confess that I can find no satisfactory explanation for these appalling figures, which are taken from the official YearBook. There are no figures published which go to prove what the honorable member for Kalgoorlie (Mr. A. Green) has suggested. There must be some reason why the number of people going on to the land is less than the number leaving it. It seems to me that the high cost of production consequent upon awards given by the courts of this country affecting primary industry, is one of the main reasons for the reduction in the number of land-holders. It is absurd to talk of immigration when our own people, who are the best we could possibly have on the land, are leaving it. What are we to do with the migrants who are being brought into the country when the figures show that our own people are leaving the land? We need to discover some means of increasing the number of our own people on the land before we talk of settling people coming here from other countries who will not make nearly as good settlers. I think that the awards of the Arbitration Court, which are made without regard for the conditions of the primary industries, have a good deal to do with the matter. I have a few words to say about the wool industry, in which I am interested in a small way. I do not see how it is to continue to carry the baby for the Commonwealth, as it has been doing for the last few years. I have here some figures showing the number of sheep-owners in the Commonwealth. They were used in an address given by Sir John Higgins at a conference held in Melbourne on the 12th June, 1925, and were taken by him from the Commonwealth Year-Book. They show that there are 80,000,000 sheep in the Commonwealth, and they may be roughly divided in this way: - 96 per cent. are in flocks of 5,000 and less, and only 3 per cent. are in flocks of over 5,000. I admit that 3 per cent. of the owners own nearly one-half of the total number of sheep in the Commonwealth; yet half the sheep in the

Commonwealth are owned by small men. I should say that a man with 5,000 sheep is clearing, roughly, about £1,500 a year at the present price of wool. Honorable members may say that that is a good return, but to secure that return the sheepowner has, inmy opinion, had to invest something like £20,000. Good country that will carry a sheep to the acre year in and year out is worth about £3 per acre.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– How much? It is worth £10 per acre in Victoria.

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– I am speaking of New South Wales, and trying to be as conservative as I can in my calculations. For an investment of £20,000, the man owning 5,000 sheep secures an annual return of £1,500. If he put his capital into Government loans at 6 per cent. he would get an annual return of £1,200 without any effort, and if he put the same amount into city property, he would probably get a return of 10 per cent. I think it would be very risky for a man to put £20,000 into a pastoral property to-day because of the continual rise in wages and in the cost of living. Honorable members should bear in mind that the pastoral industry carries a tremendous risk which does’ not apply to any other industry. It carries the risk of being suddenly and absolutley wiped out at any time. I have experienced its risks, though not to the degree that some people have done. A pastor alist may get an apparently prosperous year, and next year he may be entirely ruined because of a change in the season. I should like to put before honorable members three instances showing the conditions under which people who are not taken into account in the fixing of awards are called upon to struggle. I propose to quote from a letter from a friend of mine who is a rural inspector of the New South Wales Government Savings Bank. I frankly admit that he sent me the letter to see if something might not be done in the three cases to which he refers in it.

Mr Fenton:

– I understood the honorable member to say that the wool-grower is suffering from awards of the court, but has he not the right to put his case before the court?

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– The court takes into consideration that an industry is worth so much. It returns a certain number of million pounds a year, and the court bases .its award on the cost of living to, the worker, and does not inquire as to the profits or losses of the individual wool-grower. Whilst I admit that some men make large fortunes out of wool, I stress the fact that a great many men engaged in the wool industry are not making anything like the incomes from it that some honorable members think they are.. The first case referred to in the letter I have received is as follows : -

A man came to me one night in the country - an old man - lie had driven 60 miles across wet, black-soil plains. He unfolded a story of his struggles; drought and floods had wiped hi,u out. His son, .a- city barber, had lent him some money to buy food, which had enabled hint to remain on his property. His other son, while droving, was bitten by a snake: and’, being many miles from a doctor, had no alternative but to chew the affected part out, which lie proceeded to do. The old chap still struggles on.

The next case referred to is stated in these terms -

I spent a night with a man near Rowena, lt was shearing time. His two sons were shearing, a daughter was doing the machine experting, the mother was picking up and wool rolling, a daughter .was mustering, and another girl was doing the housework. A selfcontained unit ! By doing this they were enabled to make ends meet. It was just after a drought, during which time the parents (mum and dad) had brought the cattle to the coast, and the boys and girle had taken sheep to Queensland. Some young girls remained at home to care for; the property. You can imagine what privation and anxiety all this meant, particularly for the old people.

There is no consideration of the wages, if any, being paid to the sons and daughters of this man, or of the charges that his industry oan bear, and what he can afford to pay. Such questions are not taken into consideration by the courts. The last case referred to is as follows : -

At Narromine, a young returned soldier returned’ in 1019 in time to put his crop in. It failed. The next year, being a good fanner, he had a bumper crop. A bush fire swept through and burned hundreds of bags of wheat already stacked, 200 tons ‘of ha’, and all his fences. His dwelling was just saved. This meant going into debt to replace the. fences and to carry on. The next year was almost a failure; the following year was a total failure, despite the fact that every acre was sown on fallowed land .which had obtained three prizes in the fallowed land competition. The cause was unprecedented dry weather. Everything that could be done had’ been done to ensure a crop, but the return was nil. He is still struggling, and hopes to pull through some day.

– The Postmaster-General might be concerned, and it is desirable that a department employing as many persons as the Post Office does should have the right to apply to be heard.

Mr SCULLIN:

– That difficulty could be overcome without giving the right to all persons to apply to be heard. That, however, is hardly the point I wish to make now. If the representatives of other industries than those actually concerned in a dispute were represented in the court, and the basic wage and standard rate of hours were fixed, the award of the court would apply only to the par ticular industry concerned in the dispute. I shall be interested to hear how a general rule could be made in those circumstances. A general rule is not a common rule; and, as to that, there is some confusion in the public mind. . A general rule, I understand, is a rule that applies to all industries represented at a hearing, but only to those employers or employees interested in the particular dispute. That, therefore, does not overcome the difficulty of the common rule, and I see no way of overcoming it under our present Constitution. I gathered from the second-reading speech of the honorable the Attorney-General that the clause relating to intervention by the AttorneyGeneral does not mean that the AttorneyGeneral, as representing the Federal Government, may intervene and argue the merits of the question in dispute unless a Commonwealth Government department is concerned. I do not want the AttorneyGeneral, or any one appointed by. him, to have the right to argue the question at issue unless a Federal department is particularly interested; and that, I believe, is not intended.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– The Commonwealth Government could not- take sides.

Mr SCULLIN:

– And I want to make it clear, not only that that is not the intention, but also that it cannot be done. It would be easy to alter the clause so that any one who believed he was interested could apply to the. court without the intervention of the Attorney-General, and the decision could be left entirely with the court. That might cause the court to be inundated with applications to be heard. Many people might feel that they were interested in a case, but they might not have the right to apply to be heard, because the Attorney-General had not intervened. I should like the opinion of the honorable the AttorneyGeneral as to the meaning of the following proposed new sub-section : -

A judge shall, as from time to time required by the Governor-General, make such investigations, inquiries, and reports in relation to industrial matters or to any public matter or any power of the Commonwealth as the Governor-General specifies.

Docs the proposed new sub-section 18b (1), which relates to the power of the Attorney-General to intervene, limit that power to permitting parties to apply to be beard with regard only to standard hours and the basic wage? I should like that to be made clear. There is the following provision in the proposed new sub-section : -

Upon publicationof the notice in the Gazette any person, or organization or association of employers or employees may apply to the court for liberty to be heard and the court may, if it is of opinion that the applicant is interested in the determination of the question, permit the applicant to be heard and to examine and cross-examine witnesses. “ Publication of the notice in the Gazette “ - that is all that has to be done in connexion with the basis upon which all future awards will be built, namely, standard hours and basic wage. If a notice in the Gazette is sufficient for that purpose, why not permit claimants before the court to cite respondents by publishing a notice in the Gazette? One union showed me a list of 5,000 names of respondents, each of whom had to be served with a copy of a log. The names of the respondents have to be printed, and the log posted to each of them, and that procedure has to be repeated when the summonses are issued. Some unions, when they file a claim, are involved in an expenditure of about £500 for printing and postage alone.

Parliament acts through an authority. At present Parliament can only deal with industrial disputes and the limitation of them : but under the amended powers that are being sought, it will be able to set up authorities or tribunals to deal with every phase of the industrial situation, and to make a common rule. I draw attention to the reply of the Attorney-General this afternoon to the question of the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Gregory), dealing with the important question of hours. It indicated that this Parliament would be able to pass a law authorizing a tribunal, not only to fix hours, but also to fix the maximum hours beyond which no one could go. I intend to support the bill, but propose, in committee, to try to effect certain amendments to it, with the object of improving it.

Mr MANNING:
Macquarie

.- I shall support the bill as I realize that it will lead to an improvement in our existing arbitration practice. I should not have participated in the debate did I not think a few words should be said on one aspect of the matter. I have listened with interest to the discussion that has taken place during the last few days on the proposed constitutional amendments. The question has been raised by that, debate, both inside and outside of this House, whether industrial arbitration has been of any real value. As I believe one concrete example to be worth a dozen generalities, I propose to relate the history of arbitration in the pastoral industry, with which I am most acquainted. I feel sure it will prove beyond question that the system has been most advantageous. The honorable member for Adelaide (Mr. Yates) a few days ago pointed out what the workers of Australia had gained through strikes. But. even though I am quite ready to admit

I that at times arbitration courts make awards which are not altogether satisfactory either to the employees or to the employers, I am firmly of the opinion that, with all their imperfections, they have been more advantageous to both sides than strikes have ever been. The strike, as the honorable member for Adelaide pointed out, is an obsolete weapon which should he forgotten. The first pastoral award of the Commonwealth Arbitration Court was made in 1907 by Mr. Justice O’Connor. Previously, the general rate for shearing had been 20s. per 100 sheep, and for shed hands 22s. 6d. to 27s. 6d. per week with keep, according to the class of work done. These rates were increased by the award to 24s. per 100 for shearing, and to from 27s. 6d. to 30s. per week with keep for shed hands. The award operated until 1911, when a new award was made by Mr. Justice Higgins, which did not alter the rate for shearing, but increased the rate for shed hands to 37s. 6d. per week with keep. In 1917, a. further award was made bv Mr. Justice Higgins which, in view of the great increase in cost of Jiving owing to war conditions, . increased the rates, with the consent of the graziers, to 30s. per 100 for shearing, and 60s. per week for shed hands. In 1917, award rates were fixed for the first time for general station, hands. Those were as follow: - For adults, 48s. per week with keep, or 63s. per week without keep. His Honour compared the 48s. rate with the previously ruling rate of 20s. to 25s. per week with keep. It was subsequently determined by the court that the “found” rate was excessive, and it was reduced to 42s. j but in 1920 it was again increased to 4Ss. per week. The 1917 award was fixed for the period 28th June, 1917, to 31st December, 1920, and covered the States of Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia; but during its currency the Australian Workers Union applied to the Queensland State court, and obtained increased rates and reduced working hours, thus deliberately taking advantage of two tribunals at the same timer It was finite clear that; in the following year, 1920, trouble would occur in the southern States unless the Queensland rates and hours were conceded. As the cost of living had undoubtedly increased since the 1917 award was made, it was- agreed in voluntary conference that the rates of the ‘ Queensland award should be granted for the season; but without prejudice to future proceedings in the Arbitration Court. The conference agreement rates were 40s.. per 100 for shearers, and 90s. per week for shed hands. These terms continued in force until His Honour Mr. Justice Powers, in June, 1922, after hearing full evidence and argument, fixed the shearing rate at 35s. per 100, with 70s. per week for shed hands. The day that this award was issued, the officials of the Australian Workers Union instructed members of the union to refuse to engage, notwithstanding that they had undertaken, when the conference agreement was made, to accept any reduction that might be subsequently considered by the court to be justified.

Mr Lacey:

– Did not the judge admit that he made a mistake in that case?

Mr MANNING:

– Yes; and he rectified it immediately. I have given the corrected rates. The consequence of the action of the Australian Workers Union was- that a strike prevailed throughout the greater part of the 1922 shearing season, and the union and several of its officials were fined for taking part in it, and were ordered by the High Court to discontinue it. As the union found itself unable successfully to carry through the strike policy, it accepted the award at the beginning of 1923; and later in the season, applied to the court for a variation of it, based on the increased cost of living; and it was granted a shearing rate of 3Ss. per 100, with a rate of 75s. lOd. with keep for shed hands, and 52s. per week for station hands. Those rates were current until a few days ago, when a new award was made in Perth giving the slight increase of 2s. per 100 for shearers, and other slightly altered conditions. In the light of that history, can any one do other than admit that arbitration has been beneficial, not only to the workers, but also to the pastoralists? Some pastoralists think that they have been obliged to pay excessive rates. I have nothing to say either for or against that, for the rates were fixed by a judge after hearing full evidence on the matter; but I think that even those who feel that way must admit that the industry is in a better position through having enjoyed many years of unbroken peace than it could possibly have been in had it been subject to a series of- strikes, with the payment of slightly lower rates of wages. It is unfortunate that officials of the Australian Workers Union, and the leaders of other unions, have at times incited unionists to disobey awards of the court. That has done more than anything else to bring our industrial arbitration system into disrepute. In 1923, the leaders of the Australian Workers Union practically forced many of the members of that union to go on strike. In the brutal vocabulary of the strike-monger, there is an epithet which is often used most unjustly; and, rather than risk its application to them, many unionists would participate in what they were convinced was an unreasonable strike. Actually, they are forced into striking. That is not simply my opinion. In the Australian Worker, of the 14th June, 1923, an address is reported, which Mr. H. E. Boote, a prominent member of the Australian Workers Union, and a leader in the Australian Labour movement, delivered at the Australian Workers Union convention. The following is extracted from it:-

He congratulated the convention on their policy for 1923. At’ the same time he realized it was not only a difficult, but a bitter, and therefore a courageous, tiling to do. In that connexion a conviction had been growing up in his mind for a considerable time, and had been brought to a finality, with recent events. That was that they had to revise their attitude towards the great masses of men and women who comprised the Labour movement. They had always spoken of the rank and file as if they were very militant, as if it was necessary to keep a leash upon them, that the officials of the organization were holding them back, and that, if they only gave them their heads, something would be doing. He had come to the conclusion, not hurriedly, perhaps regretfully, that they would have to revise that opinion. They were not as militant as they always supposed them to be, and the Australian worker, with all his magnificent qualities, was not an economic fighter. The leaders of thought in the movement would have to recognize the character of the material with which they dealt, and act accordingly. That was why he congratulated them on their 1923 policy. They saw it was no longer possible to put up a fight which would lead to victory, and, therefore, as bitter as it might be, they had admitted for the time being that they had been stopped, not because of what anybody in authority had done, but because of what’ the rank and file had failed to do. It was obvious, if their movement was to make progress in the future, their militancy must be manifested ou the political field.

I am glad that the Government has introduced this bill, for it will make the position of the workers more secure. I trust that honorable members who advocate the referendum proposals on the public platform will point out that, until the Constitution is amended, we shall not be able to have any other than a stunted arbitration system. As the honorable member for Yarra (Mr.’ Scullin) has said, the proposed amendments to the industrial power of this Parliament, are necessary to enable a common rule to be applied to industry, and that, in my opinion, is essential before we can have genuine and general satisfaction with the operations of the court.

Sir ELLIOT JOHNSON:
Lang

– Both, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) and the honorable member for Yarra (Mr. Scullin) have stressed very strongly the need for recognizing that the provisions of this bill should not be considered in conjunction with the proposed amendments of the Constitution. This is an entirely separate and independent measure, and even if no move had been made to amend the Constitution, its introduction would still have been necessary. I am not to be found in the ranks of those who condemn the arbitration courts, and the work which they have done, and I dissociate myself entirely from the antagonistic views that have been expressed by some honorable members on this side. Although the Commonwealth Court has been greatly hampered, and its methods have- in many respects been cumbersome, and although ifc has not fulfilled the ideals of those who were responsible for its establishment, it has accomplished a great deal of very useful work, although there has been sometimes congestion, delay and expense in connexion with getting it to function. Its principal difficulty has been that it has lacked the power to enforce its awards. Unfortunately, some of its awards, which have been made after a very minute and earnest investigation, have been flouted, -and it has not possessed the power to ensure their enforcement. This measure is, among other things, designed to remove that very serious disability from those who administer the Arbitration Act. It contains a provision, under which the new court will be clothed with ample powers to enforce its awards. Many persons at one time indulged the hope that the establishment of arbitration courts would bring about the end of the strike era, but that hope has not been fulfilled. Certain organizations have considered that their interests would be best conserved by having recourse to the strike weapon, and they have taken that extreme step before seeking the intervention of the court. Such a difficulty is inescapable with human nature as it is. I should like to have seen in the measure a provision whereby an organization which had had recourse to a strike before asking the assistance of the Arbitration Court, would not have its claims considered until that strike was declared off, and normal con- ditions were resumed, so that it could approach the court free from ohe reproach of having precipitated action that might prejudice its case.

Mr Lacey:

– That principle is now adopted by the judges of the court.

Sir ELLIOT JOHNSON:

– Quite so; but there is no such provision in the act. It should not be left to the judges to make that stipulation: it should be stated in express terms in the act so that unions would know exactly the position in which they stood. The reason for the proposal to appoint judges with life tenure nas been fully explained by the Attorney-General (Mr. Latham). I join with those who consider that it would be preferable to appoint judges for a fixed term, which could be renewed subject to good behaviour. Apparently that is not possible under our existing powers. Some provision ought to be made for an age limitation. There comes a time in the life of every man, when, by reason of age or infirmity, those faculties which enabled him to discharge his duties efficiently have become impaired.

Mr Bruce:

– Under the Constitution the Government is precluded from making provision for an age limitation.

Sir ELLIOT JOHNSON:

– I recognize that. But it is a disability that ought to be removed from the Constitution. I disagree with those who think that pensions ought not to be provided for judges. That is a wise and a just provision. Incidentally, may I remark that this Parliament frequently concerns itself with the provision of pensions for other sections, but never seeks to make a similar provision for its own members. That is an omission which one day, perhaps, will be remedied. Some members of Parliament, are able to make provision for old age or infirmity, without a pension scheme; but it must be remembered that others are not in that fortunate position, and some such provision should be made for them. One of the most important provisions in the bill, and one which commends itself to my approbation, is that which deals with the appointment of conciliation commissioners. I endorse the remarks which the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) made in the course of his speech this afternoon. Some means should be devised for bringing the parties together and effecting a settlement by conciliation before a dispute reaches the stage when it is necessary to have recourse to arbitration. The bill provides that means, and it is one of its best features. It is likely to produce better results than have so far been achieved by either wages boards or arbitration courts. I - and I dare say many other honorable members - would prefer wages boards or similar institutions, if they could be satisfactorily set up under our Constitution, but that is not possible with our restricted powers. If the referendum proposals are endorsed by the people, the system of settling disputes might be extended to include, not only arbitration courts, but also other tribunals such as wages boards and conciliation boards. Those who are personally acquainted with the details of an industry in relation to which a dispute arises, could then meet at a round-table conference at the seat of the trouble. Each side would be able to give expert advice, and a satisfactory conclusion ought to be arrived at with much greater expedition than is possible with any other form of tribunal. I am sure that honorable members will give the Government the credit of endeavouring to establish tribunals which it believes, and we all hope, will reduce the number of industrial- disputes, and go a long way towards establishing an era of industrial peace. With that established, we shall have a stable groundwork for the future prosperity of Australia.

Mr LACEY:
Grey

.- My principal reason for rising is to refute certain statements that have been made by the honorable member for Macquarie (Mr. Manning), and to give instances, other than that which he quoted, of the breaking of awards. I shall always cheerfully support any action of the Government which will tend to expedite the hearing of cases in the Arbitration Court, and give the judges wider powers to effect that purpose, and enforce their awards. The honorable member for Macquarie referred to a strike that occurred in the ranks of the Australian Workers Union, subsequent to its having been given an award of the court. In that case, the judge admitted having made a mistake to the extent of 200 sheep a week. He based his award upon a judgment that had been given pre viously by Mr. Justice Higgins. In readjusting the wages of the shearers, he did not completely rectify the mistake, but dealt only partially with it. I could quote a mass of evidence in contradiction of the assertion of the honorable member for Macquarie, showing that that great organization, after having waited for years to have its claim heard by the Arbitration Court, had received an adverse award, and yet had advised its members not to take drastic action, but to rely wholly upon the system of arbitration. Considering the extent of its membership, very few disputes have occurred in that organization since it was brought into existence. It is interesting to note the large number of converts that have been made to the principle of arbitration. Until recently, honorable members opposite were opposed to that system. When I first contested the Grey seat in 1922, I received from a body known as the Single Purpose League a circular letter in which I was asked to state my opinion in regard to arbitration. That letter stated that National Liberal Federations, the Country party - itf fact, almost all the political organizations that were opposed to the Labour party - were pledged to abolish the Arbitration Court.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– That is not so.

Mr LACEY:

– The Single Purpose League is still in existence, but it is remarkable how many of its members are now in favour of arbitration. I am very pleased that so many honorable members on the other side have been converted to that principle. There are many anomalies arising under the existing Arbitration Act which are not dealt with in this measure. I do not approve of the fixing of wages solely upon the cost of living without taking into consideration the profits of an industry. It must be admitted that every worker should receive a wage equal to lie cost of living. Every one must have the means to live ; but where an industry is flourishing, and its profits would enable the employers to pay their workers more thaan a living wage based upon the cost of living, they should do so. Mr. Justice Higgins, in some of the awards he made, said that, whilst the wages he fixed were based on the cost of living, he left it to the employers from time to time to reward the services of employees at rates higher than those he fixed. I know of very few employers who have done so. I know of some squatters who have paid shearers more than the award rates. I know of many small squatters, or men engaged in mixed farming, who would never think of asking their shearers to work for award rates; hut always pay more.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– And they give them better conditions than are given by others.

Mr LACEY:

– Yes; they give them better conditions than are provided in many of the big sheds. I have noticed that, when an employer is in direct touch with his men, he shows them much more consideration than is shown by the chairman or manager of a company who is not in direct touch with its employees. When an employer is not in direct touch with his men. he will fight them on the least pretence, and will not give them the conditions which he would be prepared to give them if he dealt directly with them. Although Mr. Justice Higgins left it to employers to specially reward efficiency and skill, in the great majority of cases they pay no more than the basic rates. It is said that employees often break awards, but awards are more frequently broken by employers. Certain conditions prevail when employers approach the Arbitration Court, and wages are ad-‘ justed on the cost of living whilst those conditions prevail; but in nine cases out of ten, when an increase of wages is granted to employees, the’ employers set to work immediately to alter the conditions under which these men have to work, and so. break the award. I know of some industries in which men work in groups, and, immediately an award was given in the case of one of these industries, the number of men employed in it was reduced. When an employer alters the conditions under which the employees have to work, he breaks an award just as certainly as do employees when they demand higher wages than have been awarded to them. All these things should be taken into consideration. If the Arbitration Court had the right to determine whether an award has been broken or not, the industrial position might be improved. I welcome the establishment of conciliation boards. I know of many large organizations that have tried to do something in this direction by appointing disputes committees. But, in the case of soulless companies, the directors of which do not come into direct touch with the employees, it is often found that an employee who has acted on a disputes committee is dismissed from his occupation. In this age such things should not occur. When a man who is familiar with the conditions of the industry in which he is employed possesses the confidence of his fellow workers to such an extent that they elect him to a disputes committee, he fulfils a very useful function indeed by acting upon such a committee. The Leader of the Opposition stated that conciliation boards would be able to prevent disputes arising, and I agree that they should be able to do so by performing work which, in some instances, is done by disputes committees. I hope that the bill will have the effect desired. Further legislation is required to ensure greater expedition in the settlement of cases brought before, the Arbitration Court, and I trust we shall be given an opportunity to consider legislation of that kind.

Mr WEST:
East Sydney

.- I. regret the gloom and sorrow that has been introduced into the debate by the references which have been made to the unfortunate position of the men on the land. It would appear that we cannot discuss measures of this kind without such references, and the painting of glorious pictures of the. advantages enjoyed by those who live in the, cities. I can tell the honorable member for Gwydir (Mr. Abbott) that there is more misery in 40 square feet in the city than is to be found in four square miles in the country. The purpose of this bill is to secure the appointment of a number of judges. Fortyfive lines of the measure are entirely devoted to making provision to give them splendid salaries, high travelling expenses and good pensions. After that there is not much of the bill left. I congratulate the Attorney-General (Mr. Latham), as a member of the legal trade union, upon the care with which he has provided for members of his union. I take the view that judges should be treated in the same way as persons following other occupations. They should be paid salaries in accordance with the importance of the position they hold, and there should be no excuse for them becoming old-age pensioners. I am sorry that the House should, in this matter, depart from principles previously laid down. Speaking of the difficulties of people engaged in the pastoral industry, I may inform the honorable member for Gwydir that I often attend agricultural shows, and I have found that the greatest number of buyers of motor cars there are men coming from the country districts. They are purchased with ready cash, and not under the hire system, the adoption of which will, sooner or later, be regretted in Australia, America and England. I have noticed1, further, that it is men on the land who pay the highest probate and death duties. I hope that honorable members will discontinue the gloomy statements made from time to time about the difficulties of people’ on the land. We know that too high a price is paid for land, and the man who holds land has, in most cases, to carry a “ blister.” People on the land are much better off to-day than they ever were before. Millions of money have been spent in providing them with roads, and there are many whose lands adjoin these roads. We are subsidizing country people to a much greater extent than city people. The residents of the city have to pay rates and taxes to municipal authorities, but those authorities are given no road grants from the revenues of the country ? Many years ago, when acting as secretary to the Labour Council in New South Wales, I induced a number of public men, including Sir Joseph Carruthers, Sir George Dibbs, Mr. B. R. Wise, and others, to deliver addresses to my colleagues on conciliation and arbitration. I remember that a Commission, of which Sir Robert Garrans father - a very able man - was a member, reported in favour of conciliation and arbitration. In the building trade in Great Britain, with which I was connected, it was the practice, in November of each year, for representatives of trade unions connected with the industry, and of builders, to . meet in Manchester and other places, and fix the hours and conditions of labour in the industry for the next twelve months. I have in my library a book which is 154 years old, and in it are set out wages in the building trade and piecework rates in other trades. In the early days we were told that supply and demand should govern, wages, that the fixing of wages was ridiculous, and that it was stupidity to try to interfere between employer and employee. Now all these things are being done. Instead of continuing the present system of arbitration, we should appoint conciliation committees, on which employers and employees will be represented, with power to appoint their own chairman, and, in the event of no agreement being reached on certain matters, the decision of the Arbitration Court would be final. At one time . conciliation committees operated satisfactorily in New South Wales; but the employers insisted on being represented on those committees by members of the legal profession, and this eventually led to the appointment of arbitration courts, composed of persons with a knowledge of the law, but, unfortunately, not of the technicalities of the various trades and callings with which they have to deal. The bill provides that the AttorneyGeneral - as the representative of the Government - may intervene in a case before the court, and I take strong exception to that. The States of New South Wales and Queensland are the most progressive in the Commonwealth, both -in production and social reform. Their people are happy and contented, and this is evidenced by the numbers of persons that arrive there from other States. The workers of those two States now enjoy a working week of 44 hours. If the question of standard hours is referred to the Arbitration Court, the Government may, under the bill, intervene, and, in that event, would probably influence the court’s decision. Judges are only human; and being in the pay of the Crown,, it would take a lot of argument to convince them that the workers of New South Wales and Queensland were entitled to a working week of 44 hours, when workmen in other States were working 48 hours a week. Until the common rule is introduced, we shall have to bear our present disabilities. The Attorney-General has given no real reason for the appointment of judges with life tenure, or for the payment of pensions. The Arbitration Court will be an expensive tribunal, costing the country from £20,000 to £25,000 annually. Each judge will require an office, a messenger, a typist, and an associate. A deputation of which I was a member once asked Sir Henry

– Their value is determined by the necessaries and comforts that they will purchase. The honorable member for Gwydir (Mr. Abbott) could not help having a tilt at the tariff; but the honorable member for Wannon did not do that, for he takes a broad national view of our fiscal policy. He realizes that secondary, as well as primary, industries are necessary for the welfare of the country. But I disagree with his concluding remarks. Not high wages, but other factors, are undermining our stability. The honorable member for Macquarie (Mr. Manning) suggested that Australia had suffered seriously through industrial troubles - he’ read his brief remarkably well - but other circumstances contribute more than what may be called “ days off “ by the workers. The honorable member for Wakefield (Mr. ‘’ Foster) and the honorable member for Perth (Mr. Mann) a few days ago quoted passages from a recently published book on industrial conditions in the United States of America, which seems to have had considerable influence on honorable members opposite. I have in my hand the annual report of the Bureau of Commerce and Industry for 1922, which contains, among other things, an American article on “ The Elimination of Waste in Industry,” that indicates conclusively that the workers are not chiefly to blame. It includes the table -

I think even honorable members opposite will be prepared to admit that that shows quite clearly that inefficient management in industry is responsible for more waste than strikes, limitation of output, and other methods that are sometimes adopted by workers to achieve some measure of justice. I remind honorable members that those figures refer to industry in what is reckoned to be the most efficiently organized country in the world. When we are considering the conditions in the United States of America, it is well for us to look at them in a broad way. The following paragraph is also from the article that I have already quoted: -

Some of the evils of restriction of production are chargeable to owners and management. In the building trades, contractors, builders, and supply dealers have restricted production by maintaining high prices, collusion in bidding, and unfair practices. At times there has been collusion beween employers and labour, tending to raise prices unduly. The waste from these causes cannot be measured in this study.

All these factors militate against achieving the maximum degree of success. Unfortunately, in the hurry to get rich quick, many business men descend to practices that no one can excuse. Many more casualties occur in America than in

Australian industries. On that point this report states -

A report on national vitality, prepared in 1009 for the National Conservation Commission, appointed by President Roosevelt. estimated that there were then about 3,000,000 persons seriously ill at all times in the United States of America. This meant an average annual loss per person of thirteen days owing to illness. It was estimated that 42 “per cent, of this illness was preventable, and that such prevention would extend the average life by over fifteen, years. Since that report was issued an apparent reduction in illness has been accomplished; so that to-day an estimate of between eight and nine days5 working time lost through illness is probably near the fact.

It appears, therefore, that between 1910 and 1921 conditions improved so much in the United States of America that 210,000,000 working days were saved to the employees through improved health. The article proceeds -

In discussing public health conditions there is no clear distinction between the standing of the 42,000,000 persons classed as gainfully employed in the United States and those specifically engaged’ in industry. The 42,000,000 men and women gainfully employed probably lose, on an average, more than eight days each annually from illness disabilities, including non-industrial accidents - a total of 350,000,000 days.

Mr Maxwell:

– All this goes to show the necessity for economic stocktaking.

Mr FENTON:

– I have no objection to that. If any honorable member thinks that he should sound a warning note, that is his business ; but the doleful sentiments with which the honorable member for Wannon concluded his speech were, in my opinion, unwarranted. Better organization is needed in industry. The honorable member for Indi (Mr. CooM knows its value to the primary producers, for I suppose that the various cooperative producing and marketing movements that he has been connected with in the last quarter of a century have saved them hundreds of thousands of pounds. It is common for comparisons to be made between city and country life, usually with the object of showing the privileges and conveniences enjoyed by those who live in the cities; but I dare say that, notwithstanding the variety and amusement that may be had in a city like Sydney, with its 1,000,000 and. more inhabitants, or a city like Melbourne, with about 900,000 people, honorable members who have lived in rural districts for the greater part of their lives would not dream of residing permanently in a city.

I adroit that those who are engaged in primary production have to work long hours - in the dairying industry, their work is practically continuous from the beginning to the end of the year. I desire to see rural conditions improved, and I believe that gradually greater comforts are being provided for those who live outback. The telephone system is spreading its influence further and further, and the greatest invention of all - wireless - takes to the homes of country people pleasures that it was impossible for them formerly to obtain. Generally speaking, although the working hours may be longer and the rewards of labour for the time being not so great, rural life is much to be preferred to that in the city. The health statistics prove that those who live in rural areas are much more fortunately placed than the dwellers in congested parts. The average working man in the city frequently has to travel 5, 10, and more miles to his work, which he has to reach by about half -past 7 o’clock in the morning. That necessitates early rising, and results in a late return, to his home in the evening. I am acquainted with men in my constituency who are supposed to be working under favorable conditions, yet they could not reach the polling booth in time to record their votes before 8 o’clock in the evening. I hope that country members, instead of preaching disaffection amongst their constituents, v.Till enlarge upon the pleasures and healthgiving qualities of country life. The testimony of medical men who have inquired into the health of those who are employed in industries in the United States of America, is to the following effect: First there comes to the worker fatigue; secondly colds; thirdly, tuberculosis; and fourthly, death. The industrial statistics of the United States of America show that, annually, 350,000,000 days are lost through sickness and accident; proving that the health of the people in that country is very much inferior to what it is in Australia. High wages, greater output, and other alleged benefits are dearly purchased if they are obtained at the expense of human life. I am pleased that the industrial organizations are now limiting the hours worked by men who are engaged on piece-work. Australians pride themselves upon their physical standard. The recent^ great war showed that the Australian soldiers were second to no others in the matter of mentality and physique. Why? In the first place, we have sprung from a good stock. The best of Britain’s sons came to Australia in the early days of her history, and we are their descendants. We live under more healthy conditions than those which exist in most other countries, and we have thus been able to build up a race whose physique is not excelled by that of any other nationality. We should not attempt to copy the methods that areadopted by other countries. With all its wonderful wealth and large output, the death rate in the United States of America, especially in the big industries, is much greater than it is in Australia. The part of the bill in which I most strongly believe, and that which will prove the most effective, is the provision relating to the appointment of conciliation commissioners. As the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton) said this afternoon, it is much easier to prevent an industrial dispute than to settle one. I add my tribute to those of the Attorney-General (Mr. Latham), the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Charlton), and the honorable member for Yarra (Mr. Scullin), to the work which has been done by Mr. Justice Higgins. Although he was preceded in the office of President of the Arbitration Court by the late- Mr. Justice O’Connor, he had to break fresh ground, and he has left behind him a record of which Australia is proud, and from which other countries have benefited. Tens of thousands of workers have had their troubles settled by conciliation. Whilst Mr. P. McM. Glynn was the member for Angas, he was also the legal representative of practically all tie Broken Hill mine-owners, and of a number of employers in South Australia. He always met the secretary ‘of the union, and, together, they drew up an agreement in accordance with the regulations of the act. It was taken along to the Registrar of the court, and was subsequently made an award by the judge. I hope that provision will be made which will enable the conciliation commissioners to intervene whenever there is likely to be trouble, and thus have the matter settled amicably. I do not think that much opposition will be displayed to the bill. If amendments are proposed from this side I trust that the Attorney-

– It is an answer to the interjection of the honorable member for Boothby. There are other industries whose working hours should be less than 44 a week. There is no doubt as to the desire of the workers themselves. They, and not the people who talk academically about economic factors, do the job and produce the wealth of this country, and, therefore, should be the determining factor respecting hours of work.

Mr Maxwell:

– On what principle does the honorable member suggest that the hours should be fixed at 44 a week? Of course, one understands that there are various occupations in which a smaller number of working hours should be fixed.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– The general principle is that a 48-hours working week is too long.

Mr.Maxwell.-That is not a principle.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– Surely it becomes a principle if the workers decide that a working week of 48 hours is too long, and does not give them sufficient time for relaxation and recreation. Surely they are the most competent to judge what is a fair working week. Apart from that, it has been laid down on many occasions by employers such as Leverhulme, Ford, and others, that there is a point of time after which the resistance and vitality of a worker decreases, and a distinct economic loss is occasioned by working beyond that point. That has also been determined by medical men and others investigating the subject, and we are quite content to accept their views, because we know from personal experience that a working week of 44 hours is inevitable.

Mr Lister:

– Does the honorable member suggest fixing the working week of a wife at 44 hours ?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– Should we restrict the working hours of members of Parliament to 44 a week? The honorable member reminds me of the intelligent elector who stands on the edge of the crowd asking whether beer will be laid on to his house, is the candidate in favour of making an inland sea, and other more or less silly remarks, well knowing that such things would be impossible. The honorable member realized that, too, when he makes such a puerile interjection. The appointment of judges to the Arbitration Court and the right of intervention by the Attorney-General to refer to it the question of hours and wages will not be opposed by me. I should like to know whether a judge of the court will be able to deal with the question of hours in respect of a section of industry, such as the rock-choppers, or will three judges be required. That is, of course, a matter primarily for the committee. The Council of the Federated Unions is in favour of the bill, and we hope that at least an earnest attempt is to be made to establish the Arbitration Court on a proper basis. I regret that because of the referendum proposals, the general amendment of the act has been postponed for at least twelve months. We hope that when this legislation is operating the political- influence which has been used previously on the Arbitration Court will disappear, and thus enable the workers to obtain a universal working week of 44 hours and a universal basic wage.

Mr PARSONS:
Angas

– I should not speak on the bill had not the honorable member for Grey (Mr. Lacey) this afternoon referred to a certain circular issued by the Single Purpose League, in which, he said, was a statement that, among other organiza tions, the Liberal Federation of South Australia was opposed to arbitration. As a member of that federation, I wish to inform the honorable member and any others who may be under the same misapprehension, that the Liberal Federation of South Australia is not opposed to the principle of arbitration. As a matter of fact, that is a plank of its platform. A statement was made this afternoon by the honorable member for Maribyrnong (Mr. Fenton)- that some workers - I presume he meant industrial workers, because I do not think that he refers very often to the country workers - had an interval of thirteen hours from the time of going to work in the morning to the time of returning in the evening. He said that that was a serious state of affairs, and showed that the conditions of work in the country were. far better than those in the city. But farmers’ wives, especially in the outback mallee country, rise at 4 a.m. at harvest-time; they toil hard through the day, and are rarely free to retire before 10 p.m. They work those hours through seeding time, except that they do not rise until 6 a.m. I speak on behalf of my farmer friends, because I have lived amongst them at various, times, and assisted, them with their harvesting, and I was, for many years, in business in a rural district. I am glad to see in this bill provision for conciliation. The attempts that are made in this Parliament and outside to set employer against employee, and vice versa, are mischievous. If conciliation were aimed at, and practised more generally, employer and employee, and the vast majority of the people in country and in city, who, though not parties to the disputes, suffer most by them, would fare better. I heartily support the bill, which, I hope, will prove another step towards industrial peace.

Mr COLEMAN:
Reid

.- The bill provides for the reconstitution of the Arbitration Court by appointing judges with life tenure, because the High Court has decided that, according to the Constitution, judicial power cannot be exercised by judges appointed for a prescribed term. It further provides for the appointment of industrial commissioners and the payment of pensions to judges. The proposal to appoint judges for life has, I understand, the approval of a representative majority of the trade union movement; therefore it is not for me to oppose it. I saythat advisedly for fourteen years before entering this Parliament. I was aunion official, and was able to observe theoperation of the arbitration system, and, in regard to industrial matters, I am prepared to be guided very largely by those with whom I was associated in the administration of industrial unionism.

– Yes; but the clerks were not allowed to have a wages board, because the Upper House excluded them from the schedule of the bill. I do not wish to recite my industrial biography, and I only mention these facts incidentally to show that unless resort to compulsory arbitration is available, the employers will not recognize the right of any body of workers to bargain collectively about their rate of remuneration or the conditions of their employment. It will interest the right honorable member for Balaclava (Mr. Watt), who has praised the wages board system, to know that the wages board system in New South Wales failed, and was abandoned many years ago. This is what Mr. Justice Heydon, of the Arbitration Court, said before a royal commission in 1913 -

Nothing is more destructive of industrial content than inequality. With 28 chairmen dissociated and unco-ordinated, inequality is incessantly arising and exercising an irritating influence.

Summed up, his conclusions, and the conclusions of the commission, were -

That the attempt to mix the Wages Board mid judicial systems is a mistake.

I appeared before one of those wages boards, and it took me fifteen months to conclude the case, because the chairman, who was a barrister, when ha was needed on the board, had a big law case to attend to, or other members of the board had to go away from Sydney. Thus the interests of from 10,000 to 15,000 workers were put aside to suit the convenience of one or two individuals. Wages boards may operate satisfactorily in Victoria, but even Victoria has not been able to eliminate the ultimate appeal to a judicial tribunal. I have mentioned wages boards to bring me to the conclusion that the system adopted in New South Wales at the present time is calculated to work more satisfactorily than any other. I pay my tribute of admiration and respect to the statesmanship of the Lang Government in devising a tribunal so free from legalism. It is a tribunal that approaches industrial matters from a common-sense standpoint.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– Who presides over it?

Mr COLEMAN:

Mr G FRANCIS:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · NAT

.- I shall support this bill, not because I think it is the last word in industrial arbitration and conciliation, but because I regard it as a definite attempt to improve our present methods. When I spoke on the Constitution Alteration Industry and Commerce Bill, I said that, in our experience, if industrial arbitration had not been a failure up to the present, it at least had not been a success, but I by no means suggest that we should abandon it, for it seems to me that, before we abandon a thing that has been tried out, and has proved tobe not quite satisfactory, we should have a substitute for it which we are sure will be an improvement. I believe that a good deal of the mischief that has been caused in the past may bo removed when the provisions of this bill are put into operation. That industrial arbitration has, up to the present, been unsatisfactory is evidenced by the conditions that prevail in our commerce and industry. I mentioned in a previous speech on this subject that, in the years l920-24, inclusive, the loss in wages sustainedby the workers, through strikes, amounted to £6,285,574. I do not suggest that that is greater proportionately than the loss suffered under the same heading in other countries. I am not greatly concerned with other countries at the moment, but I am with myown. I regret very much that we havehad an inadequate arbitration system for so long, andthat it has entailed loss on so many workers, and their wives and families.

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

– About twelve times as much has been lost through unemployment.

Mr.G. FRANCIS. - I agree with the honorable member for Kalgoorlie (Mr. A. Green) that the losses due to unemployment are also an indictment of the present unsatisfactory condition of our economic and industrial system. There can be no doubt about that. We must recognize that conditions are not satisfactory, and that it is our duty to do what we can to remedy them. The honorable member for Gwydir (Mr. Abbott) gave some interesting figures to show the trend of events in connexion with land occupation in Australia. The unsatisfactory state of affairs that he revealed is in part due to our system of industrial arbitration. I am not ascribing that as the sole cause, but it is one of the effects of the system. The following figures relating to Australia’s external trade show that we have not advancedunder our present system: -

Mr Gregory:

– Values are worthless.

Mr G FRANCIS:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · NAT

– Let us take the exports for the same years. They were as follow : -

Our imports have steadily increased, and our exports have as steadily decreased.

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

– In 1923-24 there was an increase in the exports compared with 1922-23.

Mr G FRANCIS:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · NAT

– It is very trifling.

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

– There have been bad seasons in Queensland.

Mr G FRANCIS:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · NAT

– The value of our imports and exports per head of population will afford a better criterion. Notwithstanding the interjection of the hon orable member for Swan, the following figures certainly are of value: -

It will be seen that our trade has not been moving in the right direction. I suggest that the causes which have militated against the success of arbitration are eight in number, and are as follow: -

The great delay which has been experienced in obtaining awards and other relief from the court.
The fact that awards have been based on evidence and not on personal knowledge.
The wages have been fixed solely on the cost of living, without regard to the service rendered or the ability of the industry to continue paying that sum.
The fact that the minimum wage fixed by awards automatically became the maximum wage paid.
The inability to prove in the court a lookout.
The fact that, save as to lockouts, the awards are rigidly enforceable, and are so enforced, against employers.
The utter and complete inability of the court to secure the observance of awards by employees.
The consequent contempt which employees have frequently shown, with complete immunity, towards the court’s awards.

Mr Gregory:

– Surely, after that, the honorable member will not support the bill !

Mr G FRANCIS:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · NAT

– I shall, because it proposes to change the conditions. The delay in obtaining awards has been due partly to the system, and partly to the insufficiency of the machinery of the courts and the number of judicial tribunals that are available to handle cases. A tremendous number of employers and employees have been cited, and volumninous evidence has been taken. The latter has been rendered necessary because of the fact that the tribunal has not had sufficient first hand knowledge of the industry to arrive at a determination without it. Any one who is familiar with any phase of industrial activity knows that every industry presents its own peculiar and exclusive problems. As has been pointed out by the honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley), in some industries 30 hours are, in certain conditions, too many to ask men to work. It is impossible to lay down a flat rate and a given number of hours for the whole of our industrial life. The hours and wages must vary according to the exigencies of the industry, and the conditions under which the men have to work. It is impossible to remunerate adequately those who are engaged in some industries. Whilst 30 hours may be too long for certain industries, there are others to work in which for 48 hours a week would not cause distress. Wages should be fixed not merely on what is called the cost of living, but also upon a standard which takes into account the services that are rendered. Those wages should be as high as the industry can possibly afford to continue paying. For that reason employers must accept the full measure of responsibility involved in the scientific and economic management of their businesses, and their employees must co-operate with them to’ the fullest extent. The impossibility to prove a lockout, which is as serious for the community as a strike, is selfevident. Everybody must recognize that awards are rigidly enforceable, and are so enforced, against employers; but great difficulty is experienced in taking similar action against employees. If the conditions of an award do not suit a man, he has the right to decline to work under them ; but he has not the right to say, “ Not only shall I not work, but I refuse to allow other people to do so.” Yet that is a right which some men have arrogated to themselves. It is more the fault of the leaders than of the men. It must, of course, be recognized that the leaders are not always actuated by the desire to plunge th’e” country into a state of unrest. They wish to secure those conditions which they regard as essential. We mus!; be just to those men. They come in for a great deal of opprobrium, and, in many quarters.; they are denounced as leaders of industrial strife. They are merely agents, or instruments, to give effect to what they regard as being in the best interests of the people whom they represent. They would act falsely to their trust if they did not put up a fight at times. It must be recognized, however, that many strikes are promoted on the most insufficient and’ iniquitous grounds. I have in mind a strike that occurred in the Burdekin River Meat Preserving Company’s works, in the Kennedy division. The management refused to give an undertaking that the union secretary would be employed during the slack season. They said, “We will give him the first preference if there is any work to be done.” He said, “ That is not enough; I must be employed during the whole of the time, otherwise I cannot adequately protect the interests of the men.” The point was not conceded by the management, and the men were called out on strike during the operating season.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

-What happened finally?

Mr G FRANCIS:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · NAT

– The court called the parties together, and the men accepted the undertaking that the union secretary would be given preference in employment. Another strike occurred in Townsville, which was just as ludicrous and iniquitous. An employee of the Queensland Meat Exporting Agency Company bought a ring containing a stone from another employee. He took the stone to a jeweller; who- informed him that it was of very little value, and that the whole- ring was not worth the sum which he had paid for it. He insisted that the man from whom he had purchased it, who had reluctantly parted with it, should buy it back. Because that man declined to buy it back, the whole of the men were called out on strike, and remained out for nearly a week. It was a matter that did not concern either the industry or the employers ; but it is an instance of what happens when power is abused. The instances T have quoted give evidence of the utter and complete inability of the court to secure the observance of awards by employees, and there must be many others known to honorable members. There is no doubt that the employers and employees alike desire industrial peace, and it will be a good thing for the community if we get as nearly as possible to that ideal. Although industrial arbitration has, in my opinion, failed to some extent, it has not, I think, been completely tried out. I think we should give it a further trial and improve the conditions so far as we may. Whilst speaking on the Constitution Alteration (Industries and Commerce) Bill, the honorable member for Yarra (Mr. Scullin) attributed to me certain statements which I did not make. He quoted me as saying -

The Arbitration Court destroyedthe friendly relations that once existed between employers and employees in the pastoral industry.

I am quite certain that the honorable member completely misunderstood me, perhaps I expressed myself with a lack of clarity, which I should regret. I am satisfied that the honorable member would not have attributed those words to me unless he believed that I had used them. What I did say was -

In the pastoral and agricultural industries, the most cordial and friendly relations have always existed between employers and their employees; but that spirit has not been the result of industrial arbitration.

That statement was interpreted by the honorable member as a statement that the Arbitration Court had destroyed the friendly relations which previously existed between employers and employees in those industries. Amplifying his remarks on the subject, the honorable member referred to the history of the shearing industry, as if shearing were the only labour connected with the pastoral industry. I have in mind a property to which I contribute at present - because it does not return anything to me - on which we employ permanently fifteen hands. I am not taking any notice of casual hands employed. That is the equivalent of the employment of 5.475 hands for one day. Our shearing men, including wool-classers, shearers, rouseabouts, and pickers-up, number 25, who are employed for 50 days. That is the equivalent of the employment of 1,250 men for one day. These figures show the very small proportion of time which the shearers and rouseabouts represent in the pastoral industry. They represent only about 25 per cent. of the labour in the industry. I say that the most cordial and friendly relations exist, and have always existed, between employers and employees in the pastoral industry. There is no limit to which the men employed on stations hesitate to go to assist their employers, and there is no limit to which the employers have hesitated to go to assist the employees in the pastoral industry. That has not been brought about by industrial arbitration, but is the result of the actual conditions under which these people have to live together. They have to share common hardships and privations, and as a consequence they are brought closely together and understand one another. Above “all, the mow understand the conditions and difficulties which have to be faced by their employers, and the employers share with their men the hardships of their lives.

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

– The honorable member says that the property to which he has referred is yielding nothing to its owner.

Mr G FRANCIS:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · NAT

– There is a very large amount of capital invested in it, and in this year of grace instead of producing anything, our operations will resultin a big loss, which we do not ask the employees to share. I can speak for those engaged in the cattle industry in Queensland. Although it has been brought to its knees; in connexion with the border trade in Queensland, under a system of industrial arbitration, an increase of wages has been given to the employees in the industry. I quote from the issue of 28th May of this year of the Flinders Chronicle, a pastoral newspaper published in the centre of the Hughenden district. It is of good standing, and is widely read throughout that district. It says : - .

.- I was somewhat astonished by the remarks of one honorable member, and, later on, I shall give him the date of an Age newspaper, from which he may see that, during one election campaign, the Nationalist. Union spent far more money than the Labour party has spent during the whole of its political career. At the last election over £900 was contributed from its funds towards the campaign expenses of my opponent. Many questions have arisen respecting a working week of 44 hours, and I cannot understand why the Government refuses to follow the trend of public opinion. A universal working week of 44 hours is inevitable as sure as night follows day. A large number, if not the majority, of employees engaged in various trades and in the Public Service and in the Postal Department are to-day working 44 hours a week.

Mr Gibson:

– Some of the postal employees are working 34 hours a week.

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

– Why, then, are we making so many bites at a cherry? The principle of a working week of 44 hours is known not only in Australia, but also in South Africa. When I was there in December, 1924, a proclamation was issued stating that every skilled worker in the building trade must work 44 hours a week. The credit for that innovation must be given to the late Alfred Deakin, whose advice to a South African delegation to this country was instrumental in bringing it about. The South African Government preferred, so far as possible, to eliminate overtime, which, although it meant higher wages for a short period, was usually followed by unemployment. In the interests of South Africa’ the Government sought continuity of employment, neither overtime nor slackness. In February of last year a council was there called together, consisting of employers and contractors. In conference with the representatives of skilled trades it was decided to increase the wage paid in certain portions of South Africa from 2s. 9d. to 3s. 4d. That was an experiment in conciliation made by that country. To show how trade unionism has grown there, I might state that since the Hertzog Ministry took office two years ago, a deputation approached the Minister for Railways, and placed certain grievances before him. He told the members of it to form themselves into a decent union, when he would be pleased to meet them. The previous Minister for Railways had abolished unions, reduced wages, and increased the working hours. Lord Leverhulme, in his book The SixHour Day] advocates a working week of 36 hours, and therein he is supported by Viscount Haldane, who at one time was prominent in British politics. In his introduction to the book, Viscount Haldane says -

The whole man must be kept in view throughout. The spiritual leaders, in churches and in Parliament, and elsewhere, must cooperate. For it is not by bread alone that man can live. But the soul cannot be saved unless the body is attended to, and it is because I think that the result of Lord Leverhulme’s striving will be, if he succeeds, to better the condition of both body and soul, and that I have ventured by his desire to write these introductory lines in his book, and especially that part of it which considers the six-hour day.

Stanley Unwin, one of the keenest journalists in Europe to-day, in his foreword to the book, says -

The two opening essays on the “ Six-hour day “ have been especially written for the volume and embody Lord Leverhulme’s considered views on this all important subject. They demonstrate that in the opinion of one of the most enlightened capitalists and foremost business administrators in this country a six-hour day is no mere chimera, but a practical and necessary stop in the reconstruction after, the war. If this volume serves to focus attention upon this one attainable ideal, its most important purpose will have been achieved.

The argument has been used in this debate that the shortening of hours will lessen output. The following remarks are contained on page 326 of Lord Leverhulme’s book: -

In 1847 Lord Ashley, better known as Lord Shaftesbury, proved that wages had not fallen, but had risen; that profits had not fallen, but risen; production had not diminished, but increased; that the general prosperity of the whole country had not suffered, but had been benefited by each reduction of working hours. And now to-day, fifty years later, we can state that all these assertions have been still further proved to be correct, and with even more astonishing results.

In his book, Lord Leverhulme also sets out the weekly wage in the United Kingdom and the United States of America for the year 1912. The figures are as follow : -

Lord Leverhulme was certainly a great organizer, and succeeded in amassing a huge fortune. But his efforts only in a faint degree compare with those of Henry Ford, who is the recognized organizing genius of the world. Henry Ford has introduced a working week of 44 hours, and has stated that even a working week of 40 hours would be sufficient for all the work in the world. In that case why should we be afraid of instituting a working week of 44 hours in Australia. I am certain that if we added to the referendum proposals the questions of the initiative, referendum, and recall, and a working week of 44 hours, they would be unanimously adopted by the people. Although we now advocate a working week of 44 hours, we look forward to the future, when the working week in Australia will, be leven .less (than 36 ‘hours. In the State of New South Wales and throughout the Union of South Africa for skilled building trades the standard week of 44 hours has been adopted, and I remember that even in my student days in England the employees worked reduced hours in some of the best organized industries in the United Kingdom. Amongst them were

Huntly and Palmer’s biscuit works and the confectionery factories controlled by Cadbury, Fry, and others. I approach with some diffidence the proposal to grant pensions to the judges, because four of the present members of the High Court bench I claim as dear friends. One I know to be the best father, husband, son, and brother that I have ever known. The judges accepted their appointments with a full knowledge that they would not receive pensions, and I protest against a variation of the terms of their contract in the way proposed. I would not mind if increased, pensions could be paid to the old and invalid men and women who are expected to live on a miserable stipend of JE1 a week, that is not-equal to the pension paid in Denmark 30 years ago, for at that time 10s. in Denmark was equal iu purchasing power to 30s. in Australia to-day. One old man has thus detailed to me his weekly expenses - Rent of room, 6s. ; firewood, 3s. per cwt. ; bread, ls. 9d. ; groceries, 5s. ; meat, 2s. 6d. ; light, 2s. ; total, £1 0s. 3d. His income is 3d. short of his expenditure. A sound economist has said that if a man saves 6d. in the £1 he will- be happy.- It logically follows that if he overspends his income by 3d. he must be unhappy. The applicant for an old-age pension has to answer .not less than 44 questions, and, if he is married, 70 questions. In addition, a friend must answer ten questions. The applicant has also to fill in a card in which he is asked to state his name in full, the date and place of his birth, his postal address, last occupation, number of children alive and dead, the name of his father, and the maiden name of his mother. Much of the information to be supplied on the card has already been given in the original application form. This inquisition is a survival of the old workhouse spirit; in England, and its continuance is positive idiocy. Would any honorable member have the audacity to say that the judicial pensioners should answer those insulting questions? Probably the judges will be pensioned at the rate of £5 a day; the old men and women, who have borne the burden and heat of the -day, do not receive £5 a month. If it is not right to ask a £1,500 a year pensioner to submit to an absurd interrogation, how can it be right to cross-examine in this way the men and women whose earnings have contributed to pay the judicial pensions? I do not think any honorable member

Would like his father or mother to submit to such an examination. Why in the name of common sense and justice do we place this brand of pauperism upon the invalid and aged ? Many of the old people do not care to apply for a pension because of the stigma that is placed upon them. That is the reason why, when I reached the age of 65 years, I applied for a pension. The then Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) referred me to the Deputy Commissioner of Pensions. Of course, the application was refused. The late Chief Justice Griffiths, after drawing from the taxpayers of the Commonwealth and Queensland £100,000 in salary, and God knows how much more in the form of expenses, held out his hand for a pension, and the majority of honorable members in the House voted in favour of a bill under which he received whathe asked. I opposed it, notwithstanding that I had admired him very much for his translation, into English vernacular of the verse of the works of that great Italian, Dante Alighieri. I said, when his pension was being discussed- in this House, that if he had lost his money by unfortunatespeculations. I was ready to contribute yearly, if other honorable members would do likewise, an amount equal to what I paid ‘in income tax. What honorable member would be prepared to contest with me an election on this one issue, that the people should be consulted before these pensions are paid. At the meeting I intend to address on Sunday night next, I shall submit this matter to a vote, and I doubt if one man or woman will hold up a hand in favour of paying such a large amount in pensions without the consent of the people. I would like to see the condition inserted in the bill that the pensions shall be paid temporarily, and that in conjunction with the next general election the people shall be asked, by referendum, whether they approve of these payments to wellremunerated officers of the Commonwealth. I am perfectly certain what their answer would be. With all its faults, this bill is welcome as a modicum of reform. It goes ‘ not as far as I could wish, but further than I thought any proposal from the present Government would go. Therefore, I thank the Attorney-General, and through him, the Government, for having introduced it.

Mr MAKIN:
Hindmarsh

.- I shall not presume to trespass upon the patience of the Chair and the House by following preceding speakers in their excursions into many and various polemical by-paths. But I intend to make a few observations which I hope will prove helpful to the House. Any person with even a passing acquaintance with the industrial history of Australia must acknowledge the great good that has been accomplished by the conciliation and arbitration system. It has done much to improve the conditions of our people, and promote the prosperity and progress of our Commonwealth. Some critics declare that the progress has not been real, and that the arbitration system has, in fact, imposed upon many of the rural industries burdens they should not be called upon to bear. I question the statements that have been made regarding the responsibility of the Commonwealth Arbitration Court for the disabilities of the rural industries. I listened with interest, this afternoon, to the speech of the honorable member for Gwydir (Mr. Abbott). Probably, if I attempted to reply in detail to his discursive remarks about rural matters generally, I should be called to order by the Chairman for irrelevance, but I feel justified in saying that improvements in mechanical implements, and the invention of time-saving and laboursaving appliances, represent gains to ihe producer that more than compensate for any increase in the wages paid to employees in the wheat-growing, dairy-farming, and pastoral industries. Although it has not been possible for me to tabulate the figures dealing with this phase of the subject, I promise honorable members opposite, and particularly honorable members of the Country party, that I shall take an early opportunity to produce evidence in support of that statement. The contention that the improvements in the conditions . of the workers has prevented the progress of rural industries is fallacious, for the employers have had more than an equivalent compensation. The improved conditions of the workers have, moreover, reacted beneficially on the whole community. There is a greater measure of prosperity, more comfort, a higher standard of living,- a truer conception of manhood and womanhood, and better citizenship because of the improved conditions of employment. I desire to pay a tribute to those engaged in administering the Conciliation and Arbitration Act for the wonderful work they have done in the face of great difficulties. When we remember that the court has not the power bo enforce its awards, or to impose penalties, the result is wonderful. For the court to obtain such respect for its judgments by those engaged in this form of litigation is a great achievement. T have recently read an interesting book written by Mr. Justice Higgins, who gives his readers an insight into the valuable work done by conciliation, as well as by arbitration. Many people do not realize what has been accomplished by conciliation. Only a very small percentage of the judgments of- the court have been disobeyed by -either of the parties affected by them. ‘The learned judge states that, of 1,647 dislocations in industry during a certain period, only three were in any way associated with the decisions of the court. That illustrates the extent to which the court is preserving industrial peace. The court, with all its difficulties, vexatious delays, and misfortunes, has redressed many industrial wrongs, and it has been accepted by both sides in industry as a means of determining disputes. The complaint of those concerned relates to the cumbersome procedure that has to be followed in the citation and presentation of cases. I have a list of the 9,683 respondents cited recently by the Carpenters’ Union. In the first place, a log had to be forwarded to each of them, and after that a summons. The cost of printing and posting the log was over £500. There can be no justification for involving a union in such heavy expenditure before the proceedings in court are commenced. I hope that under the limited powers provided in the Constitution the Attorney-General will go as far as possible in removing these difficulties. Before a case has proceeded far in court, and long before a judgment is given, the cost of living may so alter that the wage awarded by the court is not in accordance with the conditions prevailing at the time the award is made.

Mr Latham:

– That condition is met as a general rule by the quarterly adjustments.

Mr MAKIN:

– I agree that that is so, but not in every case. I hope that the Attorney-General will realize the desirability of removing the feeling of discontent and unrest that is caused -by the present protracted procedure. A barrister or solicitor is not permitted to appear as an advocate in the initial stages of a plaint before the court unless the parties mutually agree that he shall do so; but after that stage has been passed, counsel may be employed, with the result that they are employed to an extent that was never intended. .and “should not be permitted. I hope that at the committee stage an amendment -will be -made whereby the rule in the initial stages will -be applied throughout the proceedings. It is desirable that a board of reference should be created to deal with questions of interpretation. In many Commonwealth -acts wo have provided such boards. In taxation, matters, for instance, there is a board to which interested -parties who are dissatisfied with departmental decisions may appeal. “While this measure does not go nearly as far as honorable members on this side of the chamber wish,- it provides for some improvements, and to that extent it is acceptable. The Attorney-General may consider that he is. not able to do much more than this, because of constitutional limitations, but in my opinion he could have done a good deal more to eliminate anomalies that at present cause vexatious delays. It is undesirable that a life tenure should be provided for judges of the court; but it is undoubtedly essential that the court should have power to enforce its awards. If we are obliged by the Constitution to repose the exercise of our judicial powers exclusively in judges appointed for life I hope that we shall take early opportunity of amending that provision. We have had experiences with our judiciary that must surely convince us that life tenures are inadvisable. The honorable member for Grey (Mr. Lacey) referred this afternoon to the fact that the Liberal Federation - and I have no doubt that he had South Australia, in mind - had associated with the Single Purpose League with the object of abolishing compulsory arbitration, and the honorable member for Angas (Mr. Parsons) attempted this evening to reply, to his statements.

Mr Parsons:

– The South Australian Liberal Federation has nothing to do with the body mentioned by the honorable member for Grey.

Mr MAKIN:

– The AttorneyGeneral should make an announcement

Of the Government’s intention in the event of the referendum proposals being agreed to. To do so would assist to carry the proposals. In the absence of such an announcement, many people will vote against the Government’s proposals who otherwise would vote for them. The Attorney-General said that the Arbitration Court has been a success.

Mr.Scullin. - Does the honorable member want to starve the workers?

Mr SEABROOK:

– I do not. I am not opposed to unionism, and I am not opposed to the payment of high wages; but when high wages are paid, there should be an equivalent return. The honorable member for Yarra (Mr. Scullin) said that high wages did not prejudicially affect industries. Evidently the honorable member docs not know what he is talking about. The high wages and easy conditions awarded by the court are ruining the fruit industry. Most of the burdens placed upon industries generally are passed on to the man on the land. A pamphlet published by the Victorian Railways states that the increase in wages under awards of the Arbitration Court was £585,000 from 1921-22 to 1924-25. At the end of 1924-25 the Victorian Railway Department made a profit of £26,000, but the Arbitration Court has been responsible for a further rise in wages of £437,000. In order to make their railways pay the State Government must increase freights and fares, and thus pass the increased cost on to the man on the land. The people who use the railways have to provide £859,000 a year to enable the railways to carry on, A railway department is able to pass on the burden of increased wages, but the man’ on the land cannot do so. The meat industry, which has been spoken of, has been almost crippled by the high cost of production. The trades halls of this country, ‘as well as the trade union organizers, are responsible for a lot of trouble. I have received a letter, which I wish to place on record, from a plasterer whom I know well. He is a reliable tradesman, who left Hobart, because there was no work there, to seek work at Canberra. The letter reads -

I am writing to you to let you know how they do things at Canberra. I came straight through from Hobart looking for work, and, knowing they wanted plasterers at Canberra, went to the foreman, and asked for a job. He asked me where I came from, and I replied, Hobart, and he asked me if I had been do Trades Hall, Sydney. I told him, no. He asked me if I paid my own fare from Sydney, and I said, yes, and he, the foreman, told me I could not get a job, but if I went back to Sydney, and came through Trades Hall I would get a start, as they wanted plasterers. So I caine to Queanbeyan, and hunted around till I got a job, and here I am. How is it a National Government allows this? T thought when we got a National Government in power it would do away with the union bosses running the show, and that every man who wanted work and was willing to work would get work if there was work for him ; but it appears that no plasterer can get work on the National Government works unless he comes through Trades Hall, Sydney. Pretty rotten, isn’t it? I know of two other Tasmanians who were served the same. Then, again, I thought the National Government stood for 48 hours a week. How is it they only work 44 on Government works at Canberra? Something rotten somewhere ! And I might inform you they have got the goslow policy down to a fine art at Canberra. I would like to have the plastering of Parliament House for a third of what it has cost the Government. To give you an instance, I am informed on good authority that the foreman got on to two of the plasterers for not doing enough, and they reported him to the union in Sydney, and the union fined the foreman £20. Pretty hot, isn’t it? How can a foreman have any control of men when he has to submit to orders from the union, and poor Tasmania has to help pay for this. Can’t you do something, and have the control removed from Trades Hall, Sydney, and stop this 44 week fetish, especially as the . Government are pledged to a 48 week? These nien work five days at Canberra, and then come to Queanbeyan on Saturday, and take contracts, and work Saturday and Sunday from daylight till dark. In fact, no man can get a job at Canberra on the Government works unless he can show a union ticket, and is in with the union bosses. If you can do anything to stop the waste of money that is going on you will be doing good for Australia in general and Tasmania especially, as Tasmania is hard hit, as it is’ losing her best men as fast as they can get away. I hope you will stir things up a bit, as I can tell you honestly they are rotten, and they are just shovelling money away in the Federal Capital. Trusting you are well and in a good fighting mood.

This man is not a unionist, and he was debarred from getting work at Canberra.

Mr SPEAKER:

– How does the honorable member connect with the bill the letter he has read?

Mr SEABROOK:

– I am using the letter to show the effect of the Arbitration Act upon industry in Australia. Had this man been a unionist he could have secured employment, but because he was not a unionist he does not come under the Arbitration Court. The Arbitration Act is full of penalties for strikes and lockouts. Yet the AttorneyGeneral (Mr. Latham) tells us that the Arbitration Court cannot enforce any of these penalties, and that proceedings to recover them must be taken through other courts. To place penalties in the act which cannot be enforced makes the whole thing a farce. The honorable member for Yarra (Mr. Scullin), who has declared that high wages do not affect the fruit-growing industry, knows nothing about the matter. High wages have increased the costs of everybody concerned, from the saw-miller to the shipper. It is impossible for shipping companies to reduce freights while they are obliged to pay heavy labour costs. On. one occasion when- the wharf labourers worked overtime on holidays at Hobart, the cost of loading fruit on to a steamer was 5$d. a case, and that did nob take into account the wages of the tally clerks. The go-slow policy and that sort of thing is operating in Australia, and no arbitration court can alter that condition of affairs. I agree with everything the honorable members for Wannon (Mr. Rodgers) and Wakefield (Mr. Foster) have said. I am opposed to the system of arbitration as we have it at the present time, but I shall support the bill because it may tend to bring about an improvement. Mr. Justice Higgins, to whom the honorable member for Yarra paid a tribute, may have been a good president of the Arbitration Court, but some of his awards caused industries to close down.

Mr Yates:

– Where?

Mr SEABROOK:

– In Tasmania. His award in the saw-milling industry, fixing the rate of the wages of the men at £6 a week, whether they worked or not, so affected the industry that mills had to shutdown, and many of them were not operated for two years, and until the award was altered. A president of an arbitration court who would bring in an award like that is not fit to occupy the position he holds. We have heard a great deal about the 44-hours week from honorable members opposite, but they are most inconsistent in their attitude. They claim that we cannot compete against the cheap labour in other parts of the world. To make matters still more difficult they now want to reduce the working week from 48 to 44 hours. In some industries 48 hours may be too long for men to work, but, speaking generally, I consider 48 hours a fair thing. If we reduce the hours of work, and retain the present wages, we shall ruin the country. I agree with the views of the honorable member for Wannon (Mr. Rodgers) as to the value of the wages board system. I am not a believer in arbitration, but I am forced into the position of supporting the bill.

Mr YATES:
Adelaide

. This bill is designed to improve the methods of industrial arbitration that we have been developing in Australia for so many years to provide that the differences between employers and employees shall be adjusted on a scientific basis and to ensure a fair return from industry to all parties. It is proposed now to give the judges of the Arbitration Court plenary power to enforce their awards. In the debate on the measure honorable members have rambled over a very wide field, and some of them, notably, the honorable member for franklin (Mr. Seabrook), have expressed views on trades and callings of which they know very little. But that honorable member and I agree on one thing; we are both against life tenure for judges. In my opinion, it is highly desirable that those who preside over our arbitration courts shall be young, virile men in close touch with the world, and not academic theorists. I say that with all due respect to the gentlemen who may be appointed under the provisions of the bill. It cannot be denied that, even though suitable men are appointed in the first place, the time will come when they will lose their keenness. It is of vital importance that the Arbitration Court bench should be occupied by the ablest men available, for the affairs that come before it touch almost every part of our daily life. Industrial conditions, it must be remembered, change rapidly, and in order to deal with them satisfactorily a judge must be in close touch with them. A decade may totally alter the methods of production. We have not to go back very far to the time of the industrial revolution and the establishment of trade unionism ; and I suppose that we can all remember when the seeds from which the Arbitration Court has grown were first planted. To illustrate the changes that may occur in industry, I draw the attention of honorable members to the development of motor transport. I can well remember when the first motor car appeared in Adelaide. I speak of Adelaide, for I know it best. My only visit to Melbourne in my young days was when the Earl of Hopetoun, afterwards Lord Linlithgow, was Governor of Victoria. At that time very few people owned even bicycles, and there was much talk about how long it would take for the horseless carriage, as the motor car was then known, to supersede horses. That time has almost come, for marvellous developments have occurred in motor transport. In order satisfactorily to determine industrial conditions the occupants of the Arbitration Court bench would need to take full cognizance ofthat revolution. Then, again, the introduction of labour-saving machinery and altered methods is continually changing the circumstances of a particular trade or calling. In all these circumstances it is imperative in my opinion that our arbitration court judges shall be in close touch with every-day affairs. I have seen judges who, although they might be able to assess facts and give sound judgments, appeared, when sitting on the bench with rugs over their knees, as though they would be better at home playing bowls or croquet to keep themselves warm. I certainly think that the judges should retire on reaching a reasonable age. I agree with the honorable member on the Government side who suggested that the retiring age observed in. the Public Service generally should apply to them. I shall strenuously oppose the proposal for pensions for them. It is true that judges possibly give up opportunities of advancement in private practice ; but the salary provided is known when they accept positions on the bench, and is calculated on a basis to meet any sacrifice they may make. Pensions are ordinarily understood to be provided to meet the exigencies of illness and old age, as does the Federal old-age and invalid pension. Derogatory statements such as those made regarding union organizers should not be heard in this chamber unless those making them can produce evidence in support. When I was an official in a labourers’ union the men received 4s. 6d. a day. They had to work in water up to their knees, and provide their own tools and tents out of their miserable pittance. Naturally they resented such treatment. I remember a strike in connexion with road reconstruction in Bundle-street, Adelaide. Instead of the executive of the union controlling the men, they simply met on the job, and .decided upon their own course of action, advising the executive afterwards as to what they proposed to do. The conduct pf the strike then devolved upon the union officials, who carry out the work that they are paid to do. The honorable member for Franklin (Mr. Seabrook) stated that union organizers did no work and never desired to do it. I challenge him to mention one organizer who has not risen from the ranks of the unions. I suggest to some honorable members opposite that they should try to do hard work, and join a union. They would then discover that it is not easy to obtain a “ soft “ job as a union official. The honorable member tor Franklin stated that arbitration had been a ghastly failure: but he furnilied no evidence in support of his argument. In my opinion, it has been of the greatest possible benefit to the community, and the “golden rule” has been observed more closely by employers and employees than it would have been under other circumstances. I cannot agree with those honorable members who contend that it would be advantageous to adopt the piecework system. I worked in a factory prior to the introduction of wages boards, and arbitration courts, and I have known young men work themselves to a standstill in order to get the maximum amount of wages; but the eventual result was a reduction in the rates paid for particular jobs. Men employed at piece-work rates in the making of buggy lamps for instance found that they were below the breadline, because earlier in life they had exhausted their energy under that system, and as a result the price had been reduced. I have seen a man similarly wasting his strength, again on the piece-work system in the making of stoves. To ensure a greater output, one man was in the habit of using a small sledge-hammer to clinch his rivets. Other men using ordinary hammers were unable to equal his output. As a result of the operation of this system, piece-work rates were lowered and the men were shamefully exploited, until finally there was not a sufficient margin to enable them to earn a decent living. The Arbitration Court has brought about uniformity in working conditions, and whilst in some instances the minimum . award has become the maximum, at all events that gives the worker a’ living wage. The late Judge Gordon, a most estimable gentleman, who died full of honours, made one of the first awards of the Arbitration Court in ‘ South Australia. That was in connexion with an application by brushmakers. On that occasion the wives of workers had to give evidence as to the amounts spent weekly on meat, groceries, and other household commodities, as well as state the amount allowed the husband for personal expenses. As I have said on another occasion, they had practically to strip themselves naked before the court to justify the rate asked by their union. In making a.n award of 7s. 3d. a day, the judge stated that it was the irreducible minimum, and that it was only equivalent to the amount allowed for the maintenance of prisoners in the stockade. Criticisms of the awards are an affront to the judge, suggesting that he does not understand his business. The union organizations are put to great expenditure to present their claims, but invariably they convince the judge of the justice of their cause. The honorable member for Franklin (Mr. Seabrook) ‘ this evening mentioned a number of anomalies, especially directing attention to the fact that awards are made on the basis that a worker has a wife and three children. Many years ago Mr. Piddington was appointed by the Commonwealth Government to collect data to determine what would be a fair basic wage in industry. It is true that whilst some young men, and possibly young women also, benefit from the application of the basic-wage principle,other men with families of more than three children are, to that extent, penalized. Parliament might very well be employed in adjusting this anomaly. I am in complete accord with the system of arbitration. I am satisfied that, if it is properly applied, it will be for the lasting benefit of the people. It is perhaps too much to expect that it will lead to the millennium, but, at all events, it confers substantial benefits on the workers. Many misstatements have been made by honorable members opposite. They have complained that the awards of the Arbitration Court have adversely affected the wool and wheat-growing industries. I suggest to them that they should examine the statistics of production, which show that, notwithstanding what has been said on the contrary, the wealth of Australia is accumulating in the banks and other public institutions.We see everywhere indications of affluence. The only conclusion that I can come to is that the wool and wheat-growers are far too wealthy.

Mr Gibson:

– It is all right while the prices remain as they are.

Mr YATES:

– Then while they remain high I ask honorable members behind the Government not to squeal. They have formed the habit of squealing whether prices are up or down. The following paragraph appeared in the Register of the 6th February, 1925:-

page 3264

BENEREMBAH SOLD

£340,000 Realized.

Melbourne, Thursday

Mr Mann:

– Not yet.

Mr LATHAM:

– I understand the honorable member’s position. It is intended to make the court as effective as it can be under the Constitution as it stands.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a. second time.

In committee :

Clauses 1 and. 2 agreed to.

Progress reported.

page 3267

ADJOURNMENT

Leagueof Nations

Mr BRUCE:
Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT

– In moving -

That the House do now adjourn,

I desire to acquaint honorable members with the names of the gentlemen chosen to represent Australia at the forthcoming meeting of the Assembly of the League of Nations, which is held every year on the first Monday in September. The meeting this year is of the greatest importance.Honorable members will recollect that, during the present year, a special meeting of the Assembly was held to consider the admission of Germany to the League, with a permanent seat on the Council. That matter, and the. composition of the Council generally, and, in particular, the number of permanent seats, are questions that were fully discussed, and created grave differences of opinion, so that the Assembly arrived at no decision regarding them. These matters will, therefore, be again taken into consideration at the September meeting. It is imperative that the Commonwealth should have the best and fullest representation possible in the

Assembly, and it has been suggested that the Prime Minister should attend; but that is impossible. It is, however, regarded as essential that a Minister should bc present, and the Government, therefore, proposes that the Attorney-General (Mr. Latham) shall be the principal representative of the Commonwealth, and that the other two representatives shall be the High Commissioner (Sir Joseph Cook) and the honorable member for Macquarie (Mr. Manning), who is leaving for England in the near future, and will be on the other side of the world when the Assembly meets. The substitute delegates whom the Government has selected are Sir Arthur Rickard, of Sydney, and Miss Freda Bage, who is ‘the principal of the Women’s College in tho University of Queensland. Honorable members will agree that the representation which the Commonwealth will have at the Assembly is such as to inspire the confidence of the people of Australia.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned at 1.23 a.m. (Friday).

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 17 June 1926, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1926/19260617_reps_10_113/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives17 June 1926

CONSTITUTION ALTERATION (INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE) BILL

Mr GREGORY:SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr LATHAM:Attorney-General · KOOYONG, VICTORIA · NAT

Mr HUGHES:NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LATHAM:

QUESTION

ELECTORAL OFFICIALS

Mr MAKIN:HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

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

QUESTION

APPLE-GROWERS

Mr SEABROOK:FRANKLIN, TASMANIA

Mr ATKINSON:Vice-President of the Executive Council · WILMOT, TASMANIA · CP

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH BONDS

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

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

QUESTION

AEROPLANES

Sir NEVILLE HOWSE:Minister for Defence · CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Mr BRUCE:Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT

Mr BRUCE:

PAPERS

CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION BILL

Second Reading

Mr CHARLTON:Hunter

Mr Brennan:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr Fenton:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr Coleman:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr Watkins:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr Latham:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr Coleman:

Mr CHARLTON:

Sir Elliot Johnson:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr Gregory:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr Brennan:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr Bruce:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr RODGERS:WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr Latham:

Mr CHARLTON:

Mr ABBOTT:GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr Cook:

Mr ABBOTT:GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr Brennan:

Mr ABBOTT:GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr RODGERS:WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr ABBOTT:GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr Forde:

Mr ABBOTT:GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr Forde:

Mr RODGERS:WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr Forde:

Mr ABBOTT:GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr Fenton:

Mr ABBOTT:GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

ECONOMIC LAWS

Queenslander Says High Wages Destroy Industry

Mr SPEAKER (Hon Sir Littleton Groom:DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND

Mr ABBOTT:GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

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

Mr ABBOTT:GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr RODGERS:WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr ABBOTT:GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr Fenton:

Mr ABBOTT:GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr Forde:

Mr ABBOTT:GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr SCULLIN:Yarra

Mr ABBOTT:GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

House of Representatives
17 June 1926

Mr GREGORY:
SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr LATHAM:
Attorney-General · KOOYONG, VICTORIA · NAT

Mr HUGHES:
NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr MAKIN:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

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

Mr SEABROOK:
FRANKLIN, TASMANIA

Mr ATKINSON:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · WILMOT, TASMANIA · CP

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

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

Sir NEVILLE HOWSE:
Minister for Defence · CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Mr BRUCE:
Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs · Flinders · NAT

Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr SPEAKER (Hon Sir Littleton Groom:
DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

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

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr ABBOTT:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr MANNING:
Macquarie

Sir ELLIOT JOHNSON:
Lang

Mr LACEY:
Grey

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr WEST:
East Sydney