House of Representatives
24 April 1928

10th Parliament · 1st Session



Mr. Speaker (Hon. Sir Littleton Groom) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 4323

ASSENT TO BILLS

Assent to the following bills reported : -

Customs Tariff Bill.

Customs Tariff Validation Bill.

Excise Tariff Bill.

Financial Agreement Bill,

Defence Equipment Bill.

Radium Appropriation Bill.

Petroleum Prospecting Bill.

Parliamentary Allowances Bill.

page 4323

PETITIONS

Federal Capital Territory: Parliamentary and Civic Representation

Dr. NOTT presented petitions from the residents of theFederal Capital Territory, praying (1) for representation in the Commonwealth Parliament by a member elected by themselves, and (2) for representation on the Federal Capital Commission by a representative elected by themselves.

Petitions received and read.

page 4323

QUESTION

NEW SOUTH WALES COAL-FIELDS

German Development Project

Mr CHARLTON:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Some weeks ago I asked a question of the Prime Minister regarding requests from Mr. J. Fanning, of Sydney, for the consent of the Commonwealth Government to introduce £2,000,000 of German capital into Australia for the purpose of developing the coal-fields and erecting a coke by-product treatment plant. The prospective German investors asked for a guarantee of protection against possible measures of confiscation and liquidation under the Treaty of Versailles. The right honorable gentleman informed me that the request had been submitted to the Development and Migration Commission for investigation and report. Has he yet received that report? If not, in view of the large amount of distress in the coal-mining districts in consequence of unemployment, will he request the commission to act expeditiously’?

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

– I have conferred with the Development and Migration Commission on this matter, and it is now being considered by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research. I hope that some conclusion will be reached at an early date, when I shall promptly inform the honorable member of the Government’s decision.

page 4323

QUESTION

INACCURATE HANSARD REPORT

Mr JACKSON:
BASS, TASMANIA

– In the proof issue of Hansard containing the report of the proceedings in Parliament on the 29th March, a short speech I made on the Parliamentary Allowances Bill was incorrectly reported. This, I admit, is unusual. But at the end of a session or when Parliament adjourns for a few weeks and members disperse to go to their homes, they have now too little opportunity to peruse the proofs of their speeches. When I reached my home in Tasmania I received a proof of my remarks, but the corrections I made on it did not get back to Canberra before the proof number containing the debate in which the speech occurred had been issued. The report had been amended to some extent, but not sufficiently to present my views accurately. I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to take steps to ensure that in future honorable members shall be given an adequate opportunity to correct the proofs of their speeches before the Hansard number is issued.

Mr SPEAKER:

– The Hansard staff is always eager to meet the wishes of honorable members, so as to ensure an accurate and satisfactory report of their speeches. When, however, members disperse to go to their respective States the return of revised proofs is often considerably delayed, but I am sure that the Principal Parliamentary Reporter does all that is practicable to meet the convenience of honorable members in these circumstances. I remind the honorable member for Bass that the weekly number of Hansard is only a proof issue, and the, inaccuracy of which he complained has been already corrected for the permanent volume.

page 4323

QUESTION

NEW POST OFFICES

Mr WATKINS:
NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Will the Post master-General inform the House when. the finances of his department are likely to be in such a condition as will enable him to proceed - with the erection of urgently required new post offices throughout the Commonwealth?

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

– The construction policy for the immediate future will largely depend upon the state of the finances at the end of the currentfinancial year.

page 4324

QUESTION

REPEAL OF NAVIGATION ACT

Mr SEABROOK:
FRANKLIN, TASMANIA

– In view of the continued irritating and humbugging tactics of the seamen, cooks, and stewards employed in Australian shipping, will the Government, in the best interests of trade and commerce, and Australia generally, take into immediate consideration the repeal of the Navigation Act?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– The question concerns the policy of the Government, and, as the honorable member knows, it is not usual to give information on that subject in reply to questions.

page 4324

QUESTION

WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION

Mr NELSON:
NORTHERN TERRITORY, NORTHERN TERRITORY

– Will the AttorneyGeneral indicate when he intends to bring down to this House an amending Workmen’s Compensation Bill, and also an amending Workmen’s Compensation Ordinance for North and Central Australia ?

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

– It has already been announced that a Commonwealth Em-‘ ployees’ Compensation Bill will be brought before Parliament at as early a date as other Parliamentary business will permit. The part of the question relating to North and Central Australia should, in the first instance, have been addressed to the Minister for Home and Territories.

page 4324

QUESTION

ANZAC DAY

Statement by “Workers’ Weekly.”

Mr PARKHILL:
WARRINGAH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– In view of the fact that the issue of the Workers’ Weekly for Friday, 20th April, contains the statement “Forget Anzac Day; Prepare for May Day,” will the Prime Minister, remembering the insult contained in those words, consider the advisableness of cancelling the registration of this publication as one which can be transmitted through the post as a newspaper?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– I have not seen the newspaper to which the honorable member has referred, but I am certain that’ the suggestion to “forget Anzac Day and to remember May Day “ is abhorrent to the overwhelming majority of the people, including the workers of this country. I do not know whether the Government has power to take action to prevent such statements from being published, but I assure the honorable member that if there is such power I shall certainly exercise it.

page 4324

QUESTION

BUNDABERG SERUM TRAGEDY

Mr FORDE:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

– In view of the great interest that is being taken in the findings of the royal commission appointed to inquire into the Bundaberg serum tragedy,and the anxiety of the residents of that town to know the real cause of the disaster, will the Minister for Health inform honorable members when the report of the commission will be made available ?

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

– I believe that the report will be made available at an early date.

page 4324

QUESTION

GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY

Mr BLAKELEY:
DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES

– With regard to the proposed visit of experts to carry out a geophysical survey of Australia to try to discover potential mineral deposits, will the Prime Minister make the services of those experts available in the area surrounding the Broken Hill mineral deposits ?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– Obviously the Government would not dictate to an expert body of this character the exact localities in which to carry out its prospecting work. Its operations will be of an experimental nature, and will be directed to the ascertainment . of the results of this new method of prospecting.- While I cannot give any assurance as to the conduct of the investigation in any particular district, I promise to bring the honorable member’s question under the notice of the experts referred to.

page 4324

QUESTION

PERFORMING RIGHTS

High Court Judgment

Mr THOMPSON:
NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES

– In view of the decision of the High Court regarding the Australian Performing Rights Association and the privileges of proprietors of halls in respect of copyright items, has the Attorney-General formed any opinion whether the proprietors of halls, many of whom are municipal or shire councils, are now free of the liability to ascertain whether an item is copyright before allowing it to be performed in a public hall ?

Mr LATHAM:
NAT

– The honorable member is doubtless aware that it is not the practice of Parliament that the AttorneyGeneral should give legal opinions in reply to questions. I realize, however, that in view of the general interest in this important matter, it may be advisable for me, when I have had an opportunity to read the full text of the judgment, to make, by leave of the House, a statement of the law, as I understand it, as expounded in that judgment.

page 4325

QUESTION

FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY

Trial by Jury.

Mr.WEST. - I have, on the business paper, a notice of motion respecting the deprivation of residents of the Federal Capital Territory of the right to trial by jury in certain cases. I wish to know when I am to be given an opportunity to move that motion, or whether the Government has decided that the residents of the Territory shall not have the right of trial by jury, which is enjoyed by the residents of all other parts of Australia?

Mr LATHAM:
NAT

– It is impossible for me, as Attorney-General, to answer questions respecting the order in which the business of the House will be taken.

page 4325

QUESTION

MARIBYRNONG MUNITION FACTORY

Mr FENTON:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

– Will the Prime Minister explain why the Government has decided to approach the Arbitration Court respecting the working of certain machines in the munitions factory at Maribyrnong? If such action is taken, will the union concerned in the case be called upon to defray its own expenses?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– Twelve or eighteen months ago, a difficulty arose in the Maribyrnong factory. That factory is designed for the mass production of munitions, and the difficulty arose because it was claimed that for the work of the repeating machines only engineers should be employed. To have adopted that course would have made the cost of running the factory prohibitive, and accordingly, after some discussion, it was arranged that the matter should be determined by the Commonwealth Arbitration Court. I am not in touch with any action that may have been taken since, but I shall have inquiries made to ascertain the present position.

page 4325

QUESTION

PEACE PACT

Mr COLEMAN:
REID, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I desire to ask the Prime Minister whether a communication has been received from the Government of the United States of America, regarding the proposed peace pact, and if so what course of action is proposed by the Commonwealth Government, and whether any intended action will be taken in conjunction with the British Government or otherwise ?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– What is now known as the proposal to outlaw war had its origin in April of last year when M. Briand made certain suggestions to the United States of America. The matter then lapsed, but in December last the Secretary of State for the United States of America took up the French suggestion; but whereas the French proposals were for a treaty between France and the United States of America, the American proposals were for a general treaty among the greater Powers. These proposals have now been submitted to the various Governments concerned, and were transmitted by the British Government to the Commonwealth Government. We are being kept fully informed of all the developments that are taking place, and the whole question as to what action should be taken in regard to the FrancoAmerican proposals is now receiving the consideration of the various governments concerned.

page 4325

QUESTION

IMPORTATION OF COCAINE

Mr THEODORE:
DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Minister for Trade and Customs if, in view of the report of the New South Wales Police Department, that the cocaine habit is increasing at an alarming rate, and that this drug is coming into the Commonwealth in large quantities from eastern countries, he will consider if more effective control cannot be exercised, possibly by a closer co-operation with the police departments of the States?

Mr PRATTEN:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– A little time ago I issued some particulars to the press concerning the regulations in force governing the importation of cocaine, which is prohibited except for medicinal purposes, every penny-weight imported being under the control of the Customs Department The whole quantity imported for medicinal purposes is policed and watched. No doubt there is some illicit traffic in this drug, owing to the ability of people to carry it concealed about their persons. It is desirable that this should be checked as far as possible, and recently I have been looking into the penalties imposed upon those found guilty of illicitly importing the drug, and I have decided that they shall be made the same as those imposed for the illicit importation of opium, in which case imprisonment is the penalty. I shall take into consideration the possibility of closer co-operation with the police authorities in the various States. New SouthWales has recently passed an act to control the traffic more effectively, and I am hopeful that the other States will follow the good example which that State has set.

page 4326

QUESTION

TOBACCO GROWING INDUSTRY

Mr THOMPSON:

– I ask the Prime Minister whether the committee appointed by the Government in conjunction with the British-Australasian Tobacco Company to investigate the tobacco growing industry in Australia will present an interim report, and, if so, whether that report will be made available to Parliament ?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– I have no information as to the exact position of the committee’s investigation, but I shall ascertain it, and let the honorable member know the result.

page 4326

QUESTION

IMPORTATIONS OF BUTTER FROM NEW ZEALAND

Mr FORDE:

– In connexion with the increased duty of 6d. per lb. on importations of New Zealand butter, imposed by this Parliament in December of last year, I should like the Minister for Trade and Customs to indicate, if, during his recent visit to that Dominion, he made representations to the New Zealand Government to have the six months’ notice waived, and if so, with what result?

Mr PRATTEN:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– The net result of my negotiations on the butter duty so far is that the duty will come into operation on the 10th June next, which is six months from the date on which notice was given to the Government of New Zealand.

page 4326

QUESTION

NORTH AUSTRALIA RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION

Mr NELSON:

– I ask. the Minister for Home, and Territories if there is any truth in the statement recently published in the North Queensland Register, to the effect that the Commonwealth intends to bring out Maltese to work on railway construction in North Australia in the near future?

Sir NEVILLE HOWSE:
NAT

– I have no knowledge of any such intention.

page 4326

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH PUBLIC SERVICE

Mr LAZZARINI:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Treasurer if it is true that he has issued the instruction to all departments in the Commonwealth Public Service that positions rendered vacant by the retirement or dismissal of officers shall not be filled during the current financial year?

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

– Honorable members are aware that at present there is a certain financial stringency, and that every effort is being made to enable the Public Service to work with the greatest possible efficiency at the lowest possible cost.

page 4326

QUESTION

RIVER MURRAY WATERS SCHEME

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– In view of the report that the Government proposes tocurtail work at the Hume reservoir, in connexion with the River Murray waters scheme, and that the New South Wales Government - realizing the seriousness of the position - has offered to advance a certain sum to this Government to . ensure that the works be kept going will the Treasurer state if anything has been done in regard to this matter?

Dr EARLE PAGE:
CP

– The statements of the honorable member are incorrect, as no money is being advanced by the New South Wales Government . to this Government. The Murray River waters conservation is being carried out by a commission, on which the Commonwealth and three States interested are represented. The money for the necessary works is provided by the Commonwealth and the States concerned, in equal proportions. At a meeting of the Loan . Council held in December of last year, it was agreed by the representatives of the governments attending that there should be i certain definite curtailment of the loan programme. After discussion it was definitely understood that there should be a curtailment of £172,000 in the amount to be expended on the Murray waters scheme this year. Provision had been made for the expenditure of £1,172,000, but now £1,000,000 will be spent. All the governments concerned were in agreement as to the wisdom of the action proposed.

page 4327

QUESTION

IMPORTATIONS OF PETROL PUMPS

Mr COLEMAN:

– Prior to the last meeting of Parliament, and during the absence of the Minister for Trade and Customs in New Zealand, I asked whether it was a fact that 500 petrol pumps were being imported into Australia, and if so, whether action would be taken to have an inquiry made into the petrol pump manufacturing industry in Australia. I should like to know whether the information then sought is available?

Mr PRATTEN:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– I was not aware that the information was sought by the honorable member in the form of a question. If the honorable member will place his question on the notice-paper and state the angles from which he desires information I shall see if it can be supplied.

page 4327

QUESTION

KATHERINE RIVER TO DALY WATERS RAILWAY

Mr NELSON:

– I ask the Minister for Works and Railways if it is a fact that instructions have been issued that all work on the Katherine river to Daly Waters railway is to cease on the 14th May next, and that most of the employees will be paid off on that day? In view of the recent statement by the Minister to the effect that it is contemplated that construction work will be recommenced early in the new financial year, I should like to know whether he will endeavour to retain the services of the men for the short period between now and the date on which work will recommence, and thus avoid inflating the pathetic unemployment situation which exists in North Australia to-day?

Mr HILL:
Minister for Works and Railways · ECHUCA, VICTORIA · CP

– I am unaware that notice has been” given as suggested by the honorable member. I shall, however, confer with the Commonwealth Railways Commissioner to see if it is possible to employ the men during the period he has mentioned.

page 4327

QUESTION

COTTON CROP

Mr FORDE:

– I ask the Minister for Trade and Customs whether the statement prepared by the Queensland Cotton Control Board and submitted to his department five or six weeks ago, asking for an increased duty on imported cottonpiece goods to enable Australian manufacturers to buy raw cotton from Queensland, has been brought under his notice, and what action he has taken in regard thereto ?

Mr PRATTEN:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– The report was, I think, received in the department about a fortnight ago. I gave it some little attention last week; the matter is now under consideration.

page 4327

QUESTION

BROADCASTING COMPANIES

Mr FENTON:

– I ask the PostmasterGeneral if it is true that an ultimatum has been issued to the broadcasting companies throughout Australia to the effect that unless they co-ordinate their work and give better programmes he will either on or after Monday next take action to bring about some other arrangement ?

Mr GIBSON:
CP

– A communication has been sent to all A class broadcasting companies asking them to inform me how far they have advanced in their negotiations in regard to co-ordination.

page 4327

QUESTION

LEAGUE OF NATIONS

Appointment of Woman Delegate

Mr PARSONS:
ANGAS, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– I ask the Prime Minister if the appointment of a woman delegate to the next Assembly of the League of Nations has been considered by the Government, and if the right honorable gentleman will take into consideration the claims of Mrs. J. G. Macdonald, of South Australia, as a suitable delegate, particularly in view of the fact that the largest branch of the League of Nations Union is in South Australia?

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– It is the intention of the Government to send a woman delegate again this year to the League of Nations Assembly in September, but no decision has been reached as to who that delegate shall be, although a great number of names have been submitted to the Government by women’s organizations for consideration.

page 4328

QUESTION

FILM. CENSORSHIP

Mr PRATTEN:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– On the 28th March, 1928, the honorable member for Melbourne (Dr. Maloney) asked the following questions: -

  1. What censor or censors passed the “ Callahan and Murphy “ film ?
  2. Were some of the alleged “ cuts “ exhibited without permission?
  3. Has any action been taken against the exhibitors ?
  4. What censor passed the film “What Price Glory?”

I am now able to furnish the honorable member with the following information : -

  1. The film censor, Sydney, passed the film after extensive cuts. Portion of the film was referred to the Chief Censor. 2 and 3. The exhibitors did not commit any wilful act contrary to the censorship. Owing to some misunderstanding, the “cuts “ intended by the Chief Censor were not fully given effect to. The office was overburdened with work at the time, and steps have since been taken to make the staff more adequate to the important requirements of the censorship.
  2. The then Chief Censor, Professor Wallace.

page 4328

QUESTION

COTTON PRODUCTION

Mr PRATTEN:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– On the 28th March, 1928, the honorable member for Capricornia (Mr.Forde) asked the following questions : -

  1. What was the total weight of last year’s cotton crop in Queensland?
  2. To whom was it sold, and at what price?
  3. What quantity was used?
  4. What quantity is still held by manufacturers ?
  5. Is this due to the ineffective tariff on cotton piece goods from other countries?
  6. What was the value of importations of cotton piece goods from (a) England, (b) Japan, and (c) other countries, for 1925, 1926, arid 1927?
  7. What action is being taken by the Minister to increase the duty on imported piece goods in order to safeguard the Australian manufacturer ?
  8. Is it a fact that unless something is done immediately the Queensland cotton industry will be threatened with extinction?

I am now able to furnish the honorable member with the following information : -

  1. 7,069,312 lb. of seed cotton.
  2. The lint produced from this seedcotton, viz., 4,824 bales (each about 485 lb.), was sold to various Australian manufacturers. The average selling price was11.6d. per lb.
  3. Approximately 1,424 bales.
  4. Approximately 3,400 bales.
  5. I do not think so.
  1. Substantial duties are already imposed on the classes of cotton piece goods commercially made in Australia.
  2. The industry has been liberally treated by the Government and Parliament, and yet many pessimistic utterances are made by interested parties regarding its position now. It should be mentioned that owing to floods and pests in the United States of America the price of cotton abroad is high in the world’s market.

It is the desire of the Government, and I am sure of Parliament, that the industry should prosper, and the position is receiving consideration.

page 4328

QUESTION

MEDICAL RESEARCH

Sir NEVILLE HOWSE:
NAT

– On the 22nd March, 1928, the honorable member for Herbert (Dr. Nott) asked the Minister for Health the following questions : -

  1. . Whether he will intimate the total sum of money that has been allocated by the Government for scientific research in medical subjects, apart from money devoted to the purchase of radium?
  2. Whether it is the intention of the Government to allocate further sums of money for research in medical subjects?
  3. Whether the money already allocated has been divided into definite amounts over fixed periods of time for the investigation of specific subjects ?
  4. Whether he will state what subjects are now being or are to be investigated, and at whose instigation?
  5. Whether the research investigations are to be confined to the activities of Australian research students?
  6. Whether an advisory board has been appointed to guide the Government on questions of research; if so, will he state the qualifications and personnel of the board?
  7. Whether he will indicate what powers are vested in the board in regard to the choice of subject to be investigated and the appointment of research students?
  8. Was the advisory board appointed after consultation with the Dean of the Faculty of Medicine at the various Australian Universities and the British Medical Association? 9.Whether the Commonwealth Serum Laboratory is a commercial enterprise rather than a laboratory for scientific research?
  9. What amount of money has been expended in connexion with the Tropical Institute in Townsville since its inception?

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

  1. £34,241 from 1921 to date.
  2. Yes.
  3. Yes.
  4. Cancer, snake venoms, hydatids, poliomyelitis, infantile diarrhoea, and other subjects incidental to the work of the Commonwealth Serum Laboratories. In most of these cases it is not possible to say from whom originated the suggestion that the research should be carried out.
  5. It is not proposed to subsidize research work outside Australia; a small annual grant of £400 is, however, made to the Tropical Diseases Bureau.
  6. No. A small committee was, however, invited in 1926 to discuss certain questions relating to medical research ; no action resulted. A cancel advisory committee is in existence which deals with such questions of research in relation to cancer as are referred to it.
  7. See No.6.
  8. See No. 6.
  9. The Commonwealth Serum Laboratories carry out scientific research as well as the production of biological remedies for sale.
  10. By reason of changes of administration it is impossible to state an exact amount, but probably the total sum of £100,000 expended during the years 1909-1928 is a reasonably accurate estimate.

page 4329

QUESTION

CITRUS FRUITS

Sir NEVILLE HOWSE:
NAT

– On 28th

March, 1928, the honorable member for Macquarie (Mr. Manning) asked me the following questions : -

  1. Will he see that steps are taken to prevent citrus fruit, the importation of which is prohibited under Quarantine Proclamation No. 174, being brought into Australia by passengers ?
  2. What quantity of citrus fruit has been imported into Australia since the 1st July, 1927?
  3. In view of the seriousness of the danger of the possible introduction of “White Fly,” will the Minister consider the advisability of totally prohibiting the importation of citrus fruits?.

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

  1. A strict watch is kept, and the utmost care is taken by officers ‘of the Department of Health and of the Department of Trade and Customs at ports of . debarkation to- prevent the illegal importation of citrus fruits by passengers.
  2. The total quantity of citrus fruits imported into Australia from 1st July, 1927, to the end of February, 1928, was as follows: -
  1. In drafting the quarantine proclamation relating to the importation of citrus fruits, the question of preventing the introduction of “ White Fly “ was borne in mind, and it is considered that the restrictions at present in force will adequately protect the Commonwealth.

page 4329

QUESTION

CLAIM OF EX-STOKER H. M. JENSEN

Sir NEVILLE HOWSE:
NAT

– On 9th March, the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Makin) referred to the case of ex-Stoker H. M. Jensen, who was discharged invalided from the Royal Australian Navy. I have had inquiries made in this case, and desire to inform the honorable member that ex-Stoker Jensen was invalided from the Service on account of his suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis. The responsible naval medical authorities have decided that the disease in this case is not attributable to naval services, and as compensation is payable only where disease is so attributable exStoker Jensen’s claim for compensation cannot be approved. In regard to the question of granting* a compassionate allowance, as suggested by the honorable member, I find that, although sympathy is felt with Jensen in his unfortunate condition, grounds do not exist that would justify the payment of a compassionate allowance, and if any exception to the usual practice were made in this case, a very undesirable precedent would be formed. I may state, for the honorable member’s information, that ex-stoker Jensen will receive £297 19s. 8d. payment in lieu of extended leave and deferred pay.

page 4329

QUESTION

PORT KEMBLA RESERVES

Sir NEVILLE HOWSE:
NAT

– On the 27th March, the honorable member for Werriwa (Mr. Lazzarini) asked the following question:- -

Will the Minister representing the Minister for Defence inform me whether the Defence

Department is selling military reserves at Port Kembla, and, if so, under what conditions ?

I am now in a -position to inform the honorable member that the Defence Department does not propose to sell any part of the military reserves at Port Kembla, but that certain areas are being subdivided with a view to leasing.

page 4330

QUESTION

PUBLIC SERVICE APPOINTMENTS

Mr McGRATH:
BALLAARAT, VICTORIA

asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

  1. How many officers over the age of 30 years have been appointed or transferred, with continuity of service, from the Public Service of the various States of the Commonwealth since the coming into operation of the Superannuation Act?
  2. Taking into consideration the several dates of retirement of these officers, what would be the total amount of their contributions to the fund -

    1. on a rate for age basis; and
    1. assuming that they were allowed the concession of the cheap contributions for the first four units men? tioned in section 13 (5.) of the Superannuation Act?
  3. What is the total sum involved’ in the difference between the amounts shown under (a) and (6) of paragraph 2 of this question?
Dr EARLE PAGE:
CP

– The information is being obtained, and will be furnished as soon as possible.

page 4330

QUESTION

POSTAL OVERSEERS

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

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice - ].. What is the total amount of salary and allowance now being paid to Mr. D. Carver, Acting Overseer of Postmen, Melbourne?

  1. What is the amount of motor car allow- .ance that has been paid to this officer during the period 1st March, 1927, to 29th February, 1928?
  2. What is the average amount paid for taxi hire, train and tram fares, to other overseers of postmen employed at Melbourne, for the same period?
  3. What is the amount of motor car allowance paid to the District Line Inspector, Warrnambool, during the period 2nd January, 102S, to 31st March, 1928, and what proportion of this amount has been expended upon journeys closely parallel to the railway system ?
  4. What check is instituted by the District Engineer, Ararat, to see that the Line Inspector, Warrnambool, adopts the most economical system of travelling?
Mr GIBSON:
CP

– Inquiries will be made.

page 4330

MOVING PICTURE INDUSTRY

Report of Royal Commission - Government’s Proposals

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

– I lay on the table of the House the report of the Royal Commission on the Moving Picture Industry in Australia, and move -

That the paper be printed.

In submitting this motion I have pleasure in expressing the Government’s appreciation of the comprehensiveness and thoroughness of the labours of the commission. The results of its labours are embodied in a valuable and able report, which impinges on practically every aspect of an industry that, by virtue of its varied activities, is capable of exercising a potent influence for good or evil on the well-being of our people. Honorable members will recall that originally a select committee, consisting of representatives of all parties in this Parliament, was appointed to inquire into the industry. Probably it is unique in the history of such investigations that the recommendations of the royal commission contained in the report which has been placed in the hands of honorable members are unanimous, indicating clearly that this question is above parties, and that Parliament desires to do everything possible to deal with the industry in the interests of the whole of- the citizens of the Commonwealth.

As Minister of the department administering the film- censorship, it has fallen to my lot since the report has become available, to devote, with my departmental officers, a great deal of time and thought to its recommendations and their implications; and the Government recognizing the essential importance of the problems involved, has given the report special consideration. In view of its importance, I propose, for the information of honorable members, and with the consent of the House, to deal in some detail with the whole question. In doing so, I shall set forth the administrative policy hitherto followed and, on behalf of the Government, announce the policy it proposes to adopt in the immediate future regarding the matters which form the subject of the commission’s recommendations.

As honorable members a’re aware, the censorship is administered by the Department of Trade and Customs, by reason of the powers contained in the Customs Act relating to the importation and exportation of commodities generally, included in which, of course, are picture films. In view of this position, it will be recognized that the Commonwealth’s powers are subject to rigid constitutional limitations. Beyond those limitations, certain powers are exercised, or are exerciseable independently in the State arena ; but no power inheres at present in the Commonwealth, except that arising out of its control of importation and exportation. For many years there has been a growing feeling in the Commonwealth synchronizing with the growth of the industry, that a uniformly organized and complete film control is an important social and moral necessity. The development of the moving picture industry, particularly in the last decade, has been phenomenal. This is indicated by the fact that there are in Australia 1,250 picture theatres, employing over 20,000 persons, in which the amount of capital invested approximates £25,000,000, and the annual attendance at the picture shows is estimated to exceed 100,000,000 persons. Picture shows can now be said to provide the principal recreation and relaxation of the people, and although censorship control has been rigidly exercised by the Commonwealth Government within its powers, these have been found lacking with regard to some very important aspects of the industry. There has also been practically a unanimous desire among honorable members and the public that reasonable and complete control of films should be exercised by the Commonwealth, and, from time to time, questions have been asked in this House as to the measure of such control. As far back as August, 1924, there was a complaint that our own pictures - the “Know Your Own Country” series - were banned by picture exhibitors or corporations. I promised the House at the time to do what I could, and though I had no legal power to compel exhibitors to follow any course of action, I was glad to be of service in influencing, soon after the question arose, the exhibition of these pictures throughout Australia through the ordinary trade channels.

Many honorable members have from time to time asked questions as to the basis and standards of censorship. On this matter I made a full explanation to the House in September, 1924. The basis and standards then set out, within the limits of the constitutional power of the Commonwealth, have remained the same ever since and have, I hazard the opinion, gained the approval of the recent royal commission.

From time to time I have issued instructions designed to sustain, and, if possible, improve those standards. It has been pointed out in this House by many honorable members, and I myself have drawn attention to the fact, that owing to the restricted constitutional powers of the Commonwealth, advertisements and other matter printed in Australia cannot be censored, because the Federal legislature has not legal power to exercise such control over them. By conference with the importers, however, we have, somewhat materially, perhaps, improved the position. When a threat was made to judge the pictures by the advertisements, and advertising matter relating to them, an improvement occurred in the general position; but only moral effort could be made in that direction, because of the restricted powers with which we were armed. I think that honorable members know that considerable attention has been given to the administration of this difficult branch of the Customs Department. When I took office, the position was not satisfactory. Practically my first administrative act was to establish an efficient censorship, and the standards then prescribed have been adhered to ever since. In pursuance of a policy of publicity I inaugurated the practice of having annual reports by the censorship submitted to this Hou3e. These reports have attracted world-wide attention on the part of persons connected with the industry. Although the importers here have now practically accepted the standards laid down, there still remains much to be done. No real improvement in the standard of the pictures sent to us by producers is as yet apparent, possibly because the films are made for world consumption, and. the Australian market is not an important factor from the production point of view, although in the financial aggregate it is a market of considerable extent. From time to time many honorable members who have shown a keen interest in this subject have made suggestions for the improvement of the control over the industry in the Commonwealth, and they have drawn attention to the restricted powers under which the present censorship is exercised, but, until the whole position was exhaustively dealt with, the Government could not do much more than exercise a rigorous censorship over imported and exported films and imported advertising matter.

Much attention has also been given by the Government to the question of the encouragement of British films. It is pleasing to see that, as compared with the position three years ago, Great Britain now realizes to a greater extent the importance of the industry. This recognition has perhaps been helped a little by the tariff alterations made by this House in favour of British films, and by the oft-expressed sentiment of the Government and the Parliament in their favour. Undoubtedly the position here with regard to British films to-day, as compared with three years ago, has materially changed for the better. As will be seen from the latest censorship report, the importation of American films has diminished from 88.2 per cent, in 1925 to 78.1 per cent, in 1927, while the importation of British films in the Commonwealth has increased from 8.2 per cent, to 12.6 per cent, over the same period.

Last year the Government considered that the time was fully ripe for the creation of some body that would be able to conduct an investigation into the whole subject. There were many angles from which it was considered that it should be thoroughly examined, among them being the co-operation of Federal and State authorities, the harmonizing of the present diversified methods, regulations, and powers of the States, the alleged combines, taxation, profits, local production and other matters apart from the censorship.

A general desire has been expressed on the part of the women of the Commonwealth that one of their sex should have a part in the censorship, as the matter comes very closely home to family and child life. There was also the unsatisfactory position that a mixed Commonwealth and State control was neither one thing nor the other, being incomplete in both arenas. Consequently a Select Committee was appointed by this Parliament to investigate the whole subject. It commenced its inquiries in April of last year, and it was subsequently created a royal commission, armed with the necessary powers to thoroughly investigate all matters relative to the industry. The report, as far as I have considered it, practically endorses the present standards of the Commonwealth censorship, and I hazard the opinion that the royal commission has found that the control anc administration, under the guidance of the Chief Censor, Professor Wallace, left little to be desired, due regard being paid to the limits of Federal authority. Other important subjects had to have the illumination of publicity, and the concentrated attention of the members of the commission, and I venture the opinion that the report of the commission will arouse very great interest not only in Australia, but also throughout the film world. The claim may be made that it should be regarded as a most important document in regard to this world-wide industry. In placing the report before the House I again draw attention to the fact that as the members of the commission were unanimous in their recommendations the matter can in no sense be regarded as a party one. The Government desires the co-operation of the Parliament as a whole. With that co-operation it confidently hopes to achieve, in due course, a result that will serve as an example of what a progressive young democracy can do for the well-being of its citizens, and one that will enable the Commonwealth to continue in the forefront of progress in its handling of a world-wide problem. The Government has carefully examined the report and recommendations of the commission, and, on its behalf, I desire to inform the House of the policy that it proposes to adopt in connexion with the recommendations submitted.

The report of the commission contains many suggestions to which, it is considered, effect should be given. In particular, the recommendation that there should be uniformity throughout the Commonwealth in regard to the laws dealing with the motion picture industry is cordially endorsed by the Government. This suggestion, it is considered, forms the essential basis of the effective control of the industry, and is the real key to the complete solution of our present difficulties.

On many other points, too, the commission has made suggestions which may be successfully worked out later. As I have already mentioned, the fundamental fact at present is that the Commonwealth’s powers of control over the industry are limited to importation and exportation. The two questions for con-‘ sideration, therefore, are -

  1. Whether steps should be taken by the Commonwealth to acquire wider powers; and, if so, in what way;
  2. What action should be taken immediately to strengthen the censorship pending the acquisition of such larger powers.

The State of Victoria has already authorized an agreement with the Commonwealth empowering the Commonwealth censor to act as censor for that State, and it appears quite possible that all of the States, as an initial step, would agree to at least a similar arrangement. Uniformity of control has much to be said in its favour from every point of view. The following recommendation of the commission has, therefore, been adopted by the Government -

That . . . the Commonwealth Government request the States to meet them in conference for the purpose of arriving at an agreement whereby the States would enact legislation under section 51 (xxxvii) of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, and would give the Commonwealth power to control the motion picture industry as indicated in this report.

Section 51, paragraph xxxvii, provides that the Parliament of the Commonwealth may make laws with respect to “ matters referred to the Parliament of the Commonwealth by the Parliament or Parliaments of any State or States, but so that the law shall extend only to. States by whose Parliament the matter is referred, or which afterwards adopt the law.” The precise meaning and effect of section 51, paragraph xxxvii, of the Constitution has long been a matter of controversy, and opinions have differed as to whether a reference made by a State statute in pursuance of this power is revocable or not. There is no doubt that a direct amendment of the Constitution conferring increased legislative powers upon this Parliament with reference to the regulation of the film industry in all its aspects would be, from the legal and constitutional point of view, a more satisfactory procedure than an endeavour to act under section 51, paragraph xxxvii. Such a procedure also has the advantage, in a matter of this character, of involving a direct consultation of the people. It is proposed by the Government to take up these questions in consultation with the States. In this way the views of the States can be ascertained upon this and many other important issues raised in. the report and definite action for the future can be decided upon by all the parties concerned.

Honorable members have in their hands the report of the commission. If they will turn to pages 28 to 31 they will find there summarized 50 recommendations. With the indulgence of the House, I propose to deal seriatim with those recommendations, and to announce the policy of the Government with respect to them. Recommendations 1 to 4 deal with the existing censorship. On that point I have to say that the existing arrangements, owing to the growth of the work and the responsibility, were found some time ago to be inadequate and consequently somewhat unsatisfactory. The leakages referred to by the royal commission were entirely due to the shortage of staff. When I reviewed the position some time ago I found that it called for immediate action, and additional responsible help for the Sydney censor was secured. A suitable person not being available in the Customs Department, I secured the services of Colonel Hurley, on loan from another Governmental activity, until more permanent arrangements could be made. Honorable members, I am sure, will realize, as I do, that it is difficult to obtain, for the purposes of a reliable censorship, a person of the necessary judgment and breadth of view, coupled with tact, education, and a’ knowledge of the world. I am informed that the new arrangement in Sydney, which is controlled by Mr. W, C. O’Reilly with the assistance of Colonel Hurley, is working, most satisfactorily to all the parties concerned, and the complaints of delays and overwork which were made formerly have ceased. A further strengthening of the censorship is suggested by the’ royal commission.

The Government favours ihe commission’s recommendation of a censorship of three persons, one of these to be a woman. There is, and has been, practically a unanimous desire amongst all the women’s organizations throughout the Commonwealth that one of their sex should be associated with the censorship. Picture films, being so popular, affect to a great extent, the character of their children, the well-being of their families, and that social and moral atmosphere that is so very dear to the hearts’ of the women of the Commonwealth. The claim which is almost universally made by the women of Australia, that they should have a share in the responsibilitiy for, and in the creation and administration of the standards of censorship, is recognized and agreed to by both the commission and the Government. The censorship in Sydney therefore, will be added to at an early date by the appointment of an additional censor from among suitable, capable and experienced women applicants, thus completing the censorship of three persons recommended and decided upon. As to how, and on what conditions, this representative of the women of Australia shall be appointed, has not yet been decided; but I shall endeavour to co-operate with the Public Service Board in this matter and see that without fear or favour a suitable appointment is made.

Recommendation 5 is to the effect that the Censorship Board shall have added powers ; but, obviously, this question must await common action by the States of the Commonwealth.

Recommendation 6 is that more commodious premises should be provided in Sydney. This has been considered very necessary for some time past. Action will be taken by the Government to provide on the forthcoming Estimates the additional amounts necessary for the purpose of carrying out the suggestions made by the commission, thereby giving greater facilities for efficient and effective administration. As a corollary of the foregoing action, the Government proposes to close the Melbourne office of the censorship. Professor Osborne is at present acting as locum tenens for Professor Wallace, who was granted leave of absence, and has resigned. Professor Osborne has given a good deal of valuable service even during the last two or three months. In view of the fact that 98 per cent, of the films which are imported into Australia are landed in Sydney, the Government considers that if is desirable to concentrate there the whole of the activities of the censorship.

This proposal will effect some savings, which will to an extent offset the additional expenditure on larger premises in Sydney. It will also result in much greater convenience to the trade.

With recommendations 7, 8, and 9, which relate to the creation of a Censorship Board of Appeal, the Government agrees, and it will in due course appoint such a board, the members of which will be remunerated by fees, and not by way of salary. It is considered by the Government that for the time being the board should consist of three persons, and not five as suggested by the commission, as the latter number may at present prove unwieldy and unnecessary. The Government will also in this case provide that one of the members of the board shall be a woman. The establishment of the board will be proceeded with by regulation pending the settlement of the larger question of joint Commonwealth and State control. It is obvious that the duties of this board of appeal will ‘supersede for the present the functions of the Chief Censor now located in Melbourne, but with the developments hoped for regarding film production in Australia and uniform control throughout the Commonwealth, the duties of the members of the board of appeal will be important and far-reaching. Subject to the approval of the Senate of the University of Sydney, of which he is now vicechancellor, the Government proposes inviting Professor Wallace, whose term as Chief Censor in Melbourne covered a period of nearly five years, to accept the appointment of chairman of this board. The Government greatly appreciates the services Professor Wallace has rendered to the community in the creation of suitable and satisfactory standards of censorship. His experience of this subject, which is almost unique, and his excellent service in this difficult branch of administration, together with his high educational standing and personal independence of political considerations, especially fit him in the opinion of the Government to fill this important position. The period of appointment which the Government proposes is up to three years for each member of the board of appeal. The Government also agrees with the commission’s conclusion that there should be no trade representation on the censorship or on the board to be set up in connexion therewith.

Recommendation 10 deals with the powers of the proposed Censorship Appeal Board. It is clear that for a while the board would deal principally with appeals from the censorship, and with the development of recommendations 20, 21, and 22 regarding awards of merit. The other suggested functions must, of course, await concerted action by the Commonwealth and States.

With regard to the marking of films as suggested in recommendation 11, under an amendment of the Commerce Act which the Government proposes to introduce in connexion with other matters, the marking of films imported may be required. Some of the film? imported into the Commonwealth are now marked with the name of the country of origin. The Government is sympathetic with this recommendation, but if it should determine to insist upon the country of origin being exhibited compulsorily, it would require wider powers from the States.

The suggestion contained in recommendation 12 regarding control over importers, cannot be legally adopted without additional powers. The Government agrees with the view that some stringent power should be given over those few traders who have in the past bought or imported films without regard to the standards of censorship set up. They arevery few so far as I know. It is proposed to carry into effect the suggestion made as far as the present limited powers of the Commonwealth permit.

Recommendations 13, 14 and 15, relating to the distribution of films, and recommendations 16, 17, 18 and 19, dealing with exhibitors and the exhibition of films, must necessarily await the result of the contemplated conference with the States.

The Government agrees, in principle, with recommendations 20, 21 and 22 regarding film production in Australia, and careful consideration will be ‘given to the best means of giving effect to them, as well as to any other similar method by which film production in Australia may be stimulated. I have already given figures showing the large percentage of films imported into this country, and there is no possible doubt that by means of the film, there is an infiltration of ideas that tend to break down rather than build up that distinctive national sentiment which it should be the object of all well-wishers of this young nation to cultivate. Australia, bountifully and beautifully endowed by nature in so many ways, is undoubtedly one of the finest countries in the world for outofdoor picture production. With the right direction and leading, which it is the aim of this Government to give, it should be possible to foster an industry essentially Australian in sentiment, outlook and character, and one which will further cultivate our national sentiment and ideals, and make Australians a factor of still greater importance in the progress of the British race.

Recommendations 23 to 32 deal with the quota system. This has formed the subject of legislation in Britain, and also in the State of Victoria. The Government accepts the recommendation in principle, but the detailed developments of any definite scheme must await the acquisition of wider powers by the Commonwealth.

Recommendation 33, regarding “ the film and native races,” the Government will take up at once, and do whatever it is possible for it to do within its existing powers pending the co-operation of the States. Communications will be sent to the States with regard to what the Government considers is an important matter, and the views of the Government will be communicated to the administrators of the various territories of the Commonwealth. The Government believes that this recommendation is important, and is whole heartedly in agreement with the commission, but it may be some time before its effect is discernible owing to the number of films still available for exhibition which have passed the censorship without classification as to their suitability for exhibition to audiences of natives. This difficulty may to some extent be overcome, but the complete control of this matter can only be effectively exercised” at the source, that is when films are reviewed by the censor. Inquiries will be made as to what can bn done to carry out some form of immediate control, even if only partial.

Recommendations 34, 35 and 36, refer to children in connexion with the exhibition of picture films. One of the most frequent causes of complaint regarding the character of certain pictures which are shown on the screen is their unsuitability for the. child mind, and their detrimental effect upon the young people of the community. “While the evidence as to the directly harmful effect of certain types of films doc3 not seem to have sustained the jeremiads of the extremist, the report of the commission gives prominence to the indirect, but still gravely demoralizing influence, which is exercised over children by films only suitable for the mature adult with a discriminating and balanced mind. On this subject, I direct the attention of honorable members to the weighty words of the commission in paragraphs 136 and 137 of its report. While the compulsory enforcement of these recommendations requires wider powers than the Commonwealth at present possesses, the Government will inaugurate an instalment of reform at the earliest possible date by classifying films in the manner suggested. This, with the cooperation of the distributors and exhibitors, should be a valuable guide to parents and those in loco parentis as to the films that are suitable for universal exhibition. Effective action requires c operation with the States, and the Government will consult with the States and endeavour to arrange co-operation. We have no more important duty to discharge than rightly to direct the character of and carefully cultivate high ideals in the childhood of the nation, and the Government welcomes this opportunity of taking immediately a step in bringing about this desirable reform.

The Government is also in accord with recommendation 37 on the subject of educational films, and it proposes to instruct the censors to give any assistance necessary to the educational authorities in the various States which are willing to take an interest in the educational films that are available for exhibition. It may be noted that the censors have already done some work in this direction.

Recommendation 38 refers to taxation, a matter with which my colleague, the Treasurer, is concerned; but I understand that attention to it is awaiting the conclusion of judicial proceedings.

As to recommendations 39 and 40, which refer to British films, I point out that the question of establishing British agencies in Australia has been dealt with at length in the annual reports of the censors, and has had wide publicity. The result of this has been that recently at least two British agencies have been established in the Commonwealth for the distribution of British films. As there is no official censorship in Great Britain it is difficult to make effective representations on the general standard of British films to any voluntary censorship established there, but this Government proposes to make representations on this matter to the British Government.

The Government approves of the proposal contained in recommendations 41 and 42, that the present duty of -1-Jd. per lineal foot under the General Tariff be increased to 2d. per lineal foot, in order to provide the funds necessary to carry out the recommendations made for improving the administration by obtaining more suitable premises, increasing the staff, and stimulating the production of Australian pictures. British films will remain free, and it is hoped that an additional incentive will thus be given to the importation into, and exhibition in, Australia of suitable films of British origin.

Recommendations 43 and 44 suggest that reciprocal tariff preference be sought in Great Britain and other parts of the Empire, and with this the Government agrees. A great deal has already been done in this direction, but we will take further steps to endeavour to carry out the suggestion made.

The attention of the Development and Migration Commission will be called to recommendations 45, 46 and 47 of the report, which concern the “ Know Tour Own Country “ series of Australian pictures.

With the proposals contained in recommendations 48, 49 and 50 the Government entirely agrees, and they have been referred to in the suggestions for a Commonwealth and States conference. The Government proposes to take practical and immediate steps to open up negotiations with the States, and it has invited the chairman of the commission, the honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. Marks) to consult and confer with me and thereafter to assist in conferring with the State Governments as to the steps to be taken to give effect to the recommendations made for Commonwealth and State co-operation. I feel sure that the experience that the honorable member now has of the whole subject will be invaluable in such negotiations with the States. The numerous amendments of existing regulations and the gazettal of the new regulations necessary for the immediate adoption of the proposals of the Government, pending the result of negotiations with the States, will, in due course, be framed and laid upon the tabic of the House in the usual way. The administration of the censorship will be responsible to Parliament, through the Minister for Trade and Customs, and should the successful co-operation of the States be achieved, as the Government sincerely hopes it may, consideration will be given to legislation on the whole subject.

The Government agrees in principle with recommendation 50, that legislation on this matter should be embodied in a separate act of Parliament ; but as, apart from present administration, the fundamental objective of the recommendations is the co-operation of the Commonwealth and the States, the introduction of legislation must necessarily be deferred until the whole position has been explored and unanimity and co-ordination achieved. Possibly the simplest way of dealing with the matter would be to equip the Commonwealth with complete power under section 51, paragraph xxxvii, of the Constitution, with regard to film control and allied matters. There should be little difficulty in obtaining this constitutional authority, particularly if the States, irrespective of party, are agreeable to the principle contained therein. It is satisfactory to note that very little, if any, exception has been taken by the commission, after a .most exhaustive inquiry, to the standards of the present censorship; neither has there been any criticism of the very fine work of the censors. The Government agrees also with the reasons given, for the proposal contained in paragraph 49 of the commission’s report for the creation of a board of appeal. The commission was appointed for the purpose of a complete investigation of the film industry in the Commonwealth. Nearly all the improvements in control suggested are dependent on the co-operation of the States. The chairman of the commission has been invited to assist me in this matter, and his enthusiasm, ability, and probity, ought to carry us a long way towards the objective desired. J have traversed the whole of the commission’s recommendations, numbering 50 in all. Of these, nineteen only can be carried out under the present constitutional powers of the Commonwealth. Some of the matters in question had already received consideration before receipt of the report, and action is being taken to bring about the desired results. The remainder of the nineteen recommendations will be dealt with by the Government along the lines I have indicated. The balance of the recommendations, however, which form the fundamental policy necessary for complete control, must necessarily await co-operation by and with the States.

I have given to the House a somewhat lengthy review of the whole position so as to afford honorable members the fullest possible information as to the attitude of the Government upon the question, which is of grave importance to the people of the Commonwealth, and to our race by reason of the powerful and pervasive influence which the film exercises on the idea3 and the ideals of an overwhelming proportion of our community. The importance of this matter justifies the utmost attention being given to all its wide aspects. The work of the commission has been comprehensive, thorough, and exhaustive. None of the recommendations are unreasonable or unfair, and the Government accepts the responsibility of carrying them out to the extent that I have indicated; and will take further steps towards the improvement of the industry while doing its utmost to safeguard what it believes to be the best interests of our citizens.

Debate (on motion by Mr. Forde) adjourned.

page 4338

AUSTRALIAN COMMONWEALTH LINE OF STEAMERS

Paper : Tenders for’ Purchase.

Mr BRUCE:
NAT

– I lay upon the table papers in connexion with the tenders for the purchase of the Australian Commonwealth Line of Steamers, and ask leave to make a statement.

Leave granted.

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

– In November last I informed the House that the Government proposed to invite tenders for the purchase of the Australian Commonwealth Line of Steamers. That announcement was made the subject of an unsuccessful motion of censure by the then Leader of the Opposion (Mr. Charlton). On more than one occasion, subsequently, the honorable gentleman asked me whether before any decision to sell was arrived at, the Government would submit to Parliament any tenders that might be received. I refused to give such an undertaking, and said that if any suitable tender were received the Government would sell the Line and would subsequently afford the House an opportunity to debate its action. Tenders for the purchase of the Line were invited on the 2nd January, and were returnable on the last day of February. The conditions laid down in the invitation to tender were in accordance with the statement I made to the House in reply to the motion of censure moved by the then Leader of the Opposition. The only absolute condition was that the ships should be retained upon the British register, but the Government indicated that it would require the maintenance of a service equivalent to that being given by the “ Bay “ and “ Dale “ steamers, that preference would be given to any tenderer who submitted proposals for safeguarding shippers to and from Australia, and/or made definite proposals for the expansion of the shipping services available to Australia over and above those given by the Commonwealth Line.

I remind the House that tenders for the purchase of the Line were first called in 1925, when the Government laid down certain specific conditions to be complied with by the tenderer. We required a service equivalent to that which was then being rendered by the steamers offered for sale, and the tenderer was to undertake to make no increase in the rates of freight and passage money then current, without reference to and approval by a committee comprising one representative of the purchaser, one representative of persons engaged in shipping produce and goods to and from Australia, and an independent chairman to be mutually agreed upon by the other two parties, or, failing such agreement, to be appointed by the Commonwealth Government; and to maintain the independence of the Line free from the control of any ring or combine. On that occasion no offers of purchase were received, and consequently the Government continued to operate the Line.

When the ships were again offered for sale in January of this year, the Government did not stipulate the same onerous conditions; but when the House has heard the terms of the contract that has been made, ‘ honorable members will recognize that they practically ensure the observance of all the conditions laid down in 1925. Yet, though we had modified our requirements in regard to the second tenders, we were assured .that there was still no possibility of selling the Line, and in many quarters my sincerity in calling for tenders was questioned. The suggestion was freely made that I knew perfectly well that no offer would be received for the ships even upon the easier conditions that the Government had offered. For instance, the Argus of the 5th January said in the course of a leading article -

The condition attached to the proposed sale of the Commonwealth steamers, that the purchaser shall conduct a service equal to that now provided by the Line for ten years, is so fantastic that the public may well ask whether the Government is in earnest in its professed desire to rid itself of the ships. It is highly questionable whether the vessels of the existing fleet have an economic life of ten more years, in view of the faster and larger and betterequipped vessels which arc now being built, and will continue to be built.

The London Times in its trade supplement said -

page 4339

COMMONWEALTH LINE SALE TERMS

At the same time it is clear that no shipping company could afford to buy the ships unless it saw its way not only to avoid such losses, but also to earn interest on the capital invested. The difficulties confronting possible purchasers -are undoubtedly enhanced by the conditions with which the terms of sale are hedged about. The purchasers arc required to maintain the ships, or similar vessels, in service for a period of at least ten years, and the Joint Committee of Public Accounts, in its recent report, commented on the surplus tonnage already in the trade. No relief in this direction is, therefore, to be given by the sale of the fleet.

The Melbourne Age said -

London, 3rd January

The conditions of tender for the purchase of the Commonwealth Government’s steamers have been published in London.

The opinion is held in shipping circles that the Government’s insistence upon the maintenance of a service equal to the present for ten years may debar possible tenderers, as it is unlikely that they will tie themselves down for such a lengthy period to maintain a service which may result in a loss.

The Argus of the 6th January returned to the subject, and after dealing with certain facts with regard to the Line, said -

It would be surprising if any tender were received for the ships.

The Commercial, of London, said -

page 4339

AUSTRALIAN COMMONWEALTH LINE

It, is, however, open to question if even the amended conditions sought to be imposed are not too onerous. The Australian Commonwealth Line is suffering a loss of not less than £500,000 a year, and this is clearly not an attractive inducement to its sale as a- going concern.

All these gloomy prognostications have been falsified; the Government has been able to effect a sale upon the terms which I shall state to the House. Three tenders have been received, including one from the White Star Line. Its original offer was £1,850,000, but that was subsequently increased to £1,900,000, under circumstances to which I shall allude presently. Sir James Connolly, of 30 Cadogan-square, London, submitted an offer of £1,575,000 on behalf of the Australian Commonwealth Shipping Company of 1928, a company which it was contemplated would be formed for the acquisition of the Australian Commonwealth Line of Steamers, had that tender been accepted. The third tender was received from Runciman London Limited, the offer being £1,000,000, but by a communication dated 13th April, the amount was increased to £1,250,000, provided that the Commonwealth Government gave an option on the Line to that company for a certain period. I propose to analyse those tenders and to give the House a comparison of the various conditions that were stipulated by the prospective purchasers.

In considering these offers, it has been necessary to bring the financial position of the Commonwealth Line absolutely uptodate. The figures that have been compiled are accurate, although they have not yet been examined by the AuditorGeneral. They are truly indicative of the position up to. the 31st March of this year.

I do not now propose to give the past history of the Australian Commonwealth Line of Steamers, because that has been discussed in this House at great length, particularly in 1923. When the Line was placed under the control of the Commonwealth Shipping Board, its capital value was written down by approximately £8,000,000, and last November, when the House more or less reviewed the whole position of the Line, its financial results from its inception were stated. The only other fact which I desire to bring to the attention of the House is the position from the time when the board took over control. It. is as follows: -

The following statement compares the results of the operation of the fleet for the years ended 31st March, 1927 and 192S : - I now propose to analyse the three tenders that were received. The first was from the White Star Line. .Its original offer, as I have said, was £1,850,000; but ' was afterwards increased to £1,900,000. There is a reason for that increase. Under the conditions of tender it was provided that delivery of the ships should be at the terminal port of uncompleted voyages finished after the contract had been signed. As the fleet is trading between Australia and Great Britain, that meant that half of the vessels would be delivered in Australia and half in Great Britain. The tender of the White Star line stipulated that delivery of all ships should be in Great Britain. We cabled to the company pointing out that that stipulation was a departure from the terms of the invitation to tender, and, if insisted upon, would involve the Commonwealth Government in the repatriation of all of the crews instead of half of them, as contemplated under the original invitation to tender. We indicated that the repatriation of all the crews would, mean an increased expenditure on the part of the Commonwealth of £85,000, and the company, in view of that circumstance, agreed to increase its offer from £1,850,000 to £1,900,000. lt also agreed to assist the Commonwealth in repatriating the crews from Great Britain. It undertook to employ as many of the officers and engineers of the Line as practicable, and subsequently, in response to a cable from the Commonwealth Government, agreed to employ the personnel and seamen who desired to remain on the vessels provided that they were suitable. The papers submitted to the House set out the conditions of tendering, the tenders as they were received from the different tenderers, and the subsequent correspondence that has taken place, mainly, of course, with the White Star Line. By examining those papers, honorable members will be able to follow the trend of the transactions. Certain cables were exchanged between **Mr. Larkin,** the chairman of the Commonwealth Shipping Board in Australia, and **Mr. Eva,** the London representative of the Line, and they are set out in the papers in their original form. When the communications reached the point at which they were taken up by the Government, they became official, and are therefore shown in the papers in the form of a summary. I give my absolute assurance to the House that that summary expresses the purport of the cables. It is quite impossible for the Government to make public the exact wording of the cables exchanged. They are in the Government official cypher, and if actual copies of them were made public it would necessitate an alteration of the cypher. The offer of the White Star Line is £1,900,000, the terms of payment being £250,000 cash, in *pro rata* sums on delivery of each steamer, and the balance in ten equal yearly instalments thereafter, bearing interest at 5£ per cent. Whilst the original tender contemplated a cash payment of £250,000, it was to be made when the ships had been handed over, which would have meant that the Government would not have received that amount until the whole of the ships had been delivered. We, therefore, asked the White Star Company to agree to a cash payment on a *pro rata* basis as the ships were handed over, and to this it agreed. It will also be found that in the original tender the rate of interest upon the payments was set down at 5£ per cent. We suggested that that rate was too low; that the rate should be *5i* per cent., and that, too, was agreed to. The balance of the purchase money will be secured by debentures as a first floating charge over the ships and over the assets of this particular portion of the White Star Company's business. In addition to the debentures, there is an obligation and liability for the payment of the balance by the White Star Company, some particulars of which I shall give to show that the security is satisfactory. The first suggestion put forward was for debentures over the whole of the assets of the White Star Line, and, while that would have been most satisfactory security, I was a little surprised when I heard that such terms were being offered. Apparently, however, when the solicitors for the company went into the matter, they pointed out the obvious impossibility of giving such a security, and submitted counter proposals. We accepted floating debentures as a first charge over the assets of this portion of the business of the White Star Line. Honorable members will find in the paper presented the cablegrams exchanged and other information relating to the terms and conditions. The offer by Runciman, London, Limited, that they were prepared to form a company was not an offer from Runciman, the ship-owners, but from them through a firm of ship-brokers which Runciman control. The offer was not for the purchase by an existing company. They were prepared to form a company with a capital of £1,500,000, of which Messrs. Runciman and their Australian friends would take up not less than £75,000 of 1,000,000 ordinary shares of £1 each. Their original offer for the fleet was £1,000,000, which was subsequently increased in their letter of the 13th April to £1,250,000. This offer contemplated the payment of £500,000 in cash and £750,000 in 5£ per cent, debentures redeemable by a sinking fund of not less than 3 per cent, per annum. Honorable members will see that Runciman's offer was for a larger cash payment than that proposed by the White Star Company, but the period for the redemption of the debentures was longer in their case than in that of the White Star Company. The Runciman payment was to be made on the basis of £100,000 cash on signing the agreement, £40,000 in cash and £80,000 in debentures on taking over the first steamer, and £60,000 in cash and £70,000 in debentures on taking over each subsequent steamer. Runciman's offer was made subject to the company securing underwriting for ordinary shares and in anticipation of a firm offer of the fleet for 72 hours. The increased amount offered by Runciman Limited is £650,000 less than that offered by the "White Star Company. There are also certain conditions in the Runciman offer to which I shall refer later, which made it quite impossible of acceptance, I -suggest, even if the price were right. Another point is that it is only an offer of willingness to form a company. It is not an offer by a company in being, with the necessary capital to acquire the fleet. The third tender was from **Sir James** Connolly offering £1,575,000; £75,000 of which would be paid in cash on the "signing of the contract, and the balance of £1,500,000, to be in the form of ordinary shares, or £950,000 in ordinary shares and £550,000 in 5 per cent, preferred ordinary shares in a company which it was proposed to form. The only cash that the Government would have received under that offer would have been £75,000. In addition to these payments there was a contemplated payment of £500,000 worth of ordinary shares to the company which was to be responsible for the balance of the ordinary shares. It was contemplated that eventually a company with a capital of £2,000,000, or £2,500,000, would be formed, and that certain additions to the Line would be made by that company. There were two alternative suggestions. One was that within five years the company should build and put on the Australian service six 22-knot steamers of 24,000 tons, and if that were found impracticable it would, within two years, construct and place in service from three to eight 18-knot steamers. This offer related to future expansion, but there was not sufficient evidence of the possibility of its being carried out to justify its consideration. I think the House will recognize that it would be quite impossible for the Commonwealth to sell the Australian Commonwealth Line of steamers, for which we have received a definite offer of £1,900,000, for a cash payment of £75,000, the balance to be represented in ordinary shares in a company yet to be formed, with the further proviso that the ordinary shares should not carry any dividends until such time as the enlarged fleet, with 22-knot or 18-knot steamers, had been brought into existence. All the details in connexion with this offer are set out in the papers which honorable members have before them. The second condition upon which we insisted was that tenders must be submitted by natural-born British subjects or from companies that would give an assurance that they would remain under British control. The White Star Company has a capital of £9,000,000, £5,000,000 of which is represented by preference shares, practically all of which are held by British subjects. As honorable members will see, the Government has had the share register searched to ascertain by whom the shares in the company are held. Ordinary shares, representing £4,000,000 are held, £1,000 each by Lord Abercorn, Lord Kylsant, **Mr. Sanderson,** and **Mr. Clark.** The Union Castle Company, Elder Dempster, and the Royal Mail Company, each hold 1,000,000 and the Pacific Steam Navigation Company and the Nelson Company, approximately 500,000 each. The Government is, therefore, satisfied that the White Star Company is a company which can comply with the condition laid down that the ships shall be sold only to a British company. The Runciman offer did not contain a declaration that the majority of the shares would be held by British subjects, and definitely stated that no guarantee would be given to maintain the ships on the British or a Dominion register. But although there was no definite undertaking, I think the reputation and standing of the Runciman interests are such that, had their offer been acceptable in other respects, the Government would, no doubt, have received an assurance that would have enabled it to accept that offer as complying with this particular condition. The offer from **Sir James** Connolly undertook that the condition would be complied with. The third condition was in regard to taking over the insurance policies, unbroached stores, fuel oil on hoard, and other similar matters, and with that the three tenderers were prepared to comply. The fourth condition was in relation to taking over all the unexpired liabilities of the Line, and also the office furniture, fittings, &c. In this respect the offer of the White Star Company was that the matter should remain in abeyance until the tender had been accepted, when an effort would be made to agree on this point, and also to take over all suitable officers and engineers. I indicated earlier that, in the matter of taking over the personnel of the ships, the position has advanced a good deal since the tenders were sent in. The White Star Company has already indicated that it proposes to maintain the organization in Australia, but states that it can retain only the personnel which, in its opinion, is necessary for the efficient running of the service. I think that is a necessary condition. In any case, office furniture, fittings, &c, are all valuable assets, and even if the company does not take them over they can be disposed of elsewhere. The Government is more concerned about the taking over of the organization, so that those men who have served the Line extraordinarily well, shall be given a further opportunity of employment if they desire it. I suggest that, if an arrangement is not made for taking over the officers when the terms are finalized, the Government will have to give consideration to the position of those on the administrative staff of the organization. The Runciman tender reserves the option of taking over all, or any part of, the unexpired rights, titles, leases, contracts, &c. **Sir James** Connelly's offer provides for compliance with that provision. The next point is in regard to the delivery of the vessels in London. The Government provided that the vessels were to be trans f erred to the purchaser upon the completion of unloading at their final port of discharge in the United Kingdom orAustralia. As the White Star Company has sought the right to discharge the crews in Britain, we have arranged that they shall pay an additional amount of £50,000, which will cover the cost of repatriating the crews. Runciman Limited also laid down that delivery should be in London, but no further negotiations have taken place with them. **Sir James** Connolly agreed that the provisions would be complied with. The sixth provision in the tender form was as follows: - Tenders should include an undertaking to enter into an agreement and provide satisfactory guarantee or security to - In the original offer of the White Star Company that undertaking was given, but honorable members will see that we exchanged a number of cablegrams with them subsequently in which we pressed them to give some undertaking as to an expansion of the service, and as a result of those communications a cablegram was received on the 4th April, in which the White Star Company stated - Subject to prompt acceptance our tender we will as soon as possible after entire fleet at our disposal and we are in a position (to) fix new itinerary say within six nine months and provided trade justifies guarantee inaugurate fortnightly service from London via Suez supplementing present fleet . with suitable vessels. That is what the White Star have agreed to in regard to this invitation to tender. They have undertaken to maintain the ships on the British register for a period of ten years, and to maintain an equivalent service. Honorable members will remember that in the press commentsI have read it was stated that the requirement that the tenderer should maintain the present service was such an impossible condition that nobody would ever agree to it. The White Star Company, however, has agreed to do that, and has given a further undertaking in regard to a supplementary service. Runciman Limited gave no guarantee to maintain the vessels on the British register, but they stated that it was intended to maintain the service under the British flag. They offered to maintain a service for refrigerated and ordinary cargo between Australia and Great Britain equivalent to the present one, and stated that their intention was to improve the service, and to consider re-building and replacement schemes. They would not give a definite undertaking in regard to the maintenance of the ships on the British register, nor would they undertake to maintain the present or an equivalent service; but I have no doubt that if we had been able to accept their tender they would, as efficient shipmasters, have taken steps in regard to those matters. **Sir James** Connolly agrees to the provision in regard to the maintenance of an equivalent service, and makes a suggestion in regard to a 22-knot service, or, alternatively, an 18-knot service, with additional ships. Condition 7, which really links up with condition 6, asks for detailed proposals as to the services which tenderers would provide. Condition 8 states - >Preference will be given to offers containing proposals for safeguarding the interests of Australian exporters and importers in regard to freight rates. In its original offer the White Star Company said that it was its intention as far as possible to continue the policy of the Australian Commonwealth Line, but there was no definite statement as to how the interests of the Australian shipper would be safeguarded. A number of cablegrams were exchanged on this point ; but at the moment I shall deal only with the actual position that was arrived at after the negotiations. In its cablegram of the 4th April, the White Star Company said - >Problem freight has been fully explored by Imperial Shipping Committee formed at the request of Australia and on which .Australia directly represented. Imperial Shipping Committee decided that cargo interests on each trade route should form representative committee and that shipowners should consult these committees before varying rates or conditions (stop) Such committee already exist outward in Australian trade and is satisfactory (stop) Similarly and in order to meet your request we agree no general increase homeward freights will be made without reference to responsible authority in Australia representative of interests concerned somewhat on the line of Australian Merchants' Association here or the existing Dried Fruits and Dairy Produce Boards in Australia constitution of such authority to be agreed upon here with you later on. In the cablegram of the 7th April, when the Government indicated the terms on which it would be prepared to accept the tender of the White Star Company, we inserted this condition - >Buyers to guarantee to inaugurate a fortnightly service via the Suez Canal supplementing present fleet with suitable vessels, as soon as possible after delivery, say within six months, provided trade justifies it; the establishment in Australia of a responsible body representing all interests concerned, and no general increase in homeward freights to be made without reference thereto. Such body to be selected by the Government and "the buyers. The position, therefore, is that, in the contract now signed, a provision of that character will appear, and the Government and the purchaser will then have to decide on the constitution of the board. The Government felt that there was no need to determine the personnel of the hoard until there had been full opportunity for discussion, and time to come to a wise decision, because the contract says that there can be no general increase in freight until the matter has been referred to this board. It is obvious that it is in the interests of the purchasers of the Lin.e to do nothing to obstruct the constitution of the board, because until it is constituted they have no power to raise freights. The Runciman tender makes no suggestion on the point, but they undertake not to join the conference, but to work with it. **Sir James** Connolly says that he will not enter into any agreement with the present Australian shipping conference; the management is to be in the hands of the company, but the Government is to have the right to nominate two directors. The White Star Company makes no suggestion in regard to the next condition, namely, that preference will be given to any proposal supported by Australian capital. The Runciman offer suggests that not less than £75,000 of the ordinary capital of the company to be formed will be subscribed by them " and their Australian friends." **Sir James** Connolly indicates that it is his intention to afford facilities to induce 50 per cent, of the capital to be subscribed in Australia. In compliance with condition 10, which stipulates that a cash deposit shall be made, the "White Star Company lodged a deposit with its tender ; none of the other tenderers did so. The only condition which the White Star Company put in was that there should be accorded to it by the Commonwealth Government the same treatment as was received by the Commonwealth Shipping Line. We have agreed to that, and it will be inserted in the contract of sale. The only privilege the Commonwealth Line enjoyed as against other lines was that it was given preference in regard to the carrying of Government goods and cargo provided there was a ship available, and the rates of freight were the best obtainable in the market. That is not a very big concession to give to the White Star Company. The Runciman tender embodied a number of new conditions, one of which was as follows: - >Tenderers stipulate that the Government should agree to - > >In event all or any steamers being blacklisted by Australian labour and held up in one or more Australian ports for more than five days in all within three years from delivery of last vessel, vendors to pay a rate of demurrage to cover total cost of upkeep of each vessel, and forgo interest on debentures for a minimum of six months irrespective of time vessels held up. Honorable members will realize that no Government could agree to a condition of that kind being inserted. Such a condition amounts to this - that if during any period of six months a five-days' hold-up occurred, the Commonwealth Government would not only pay all demurrage costs, but would forfeit six months' interest. It seemed to me that this was such an impossible condition that the tender could not be accepted even if the price had been satisfactory. Further conditions required the Government to The tender of **Sir James** Connolly contains this condition - >Government to undertake ' to give utmost possible guaranteed support, such as mail contracts, Government cargo and passengers, migrants, and in such other ways as may from time to time suggest themselves. Government to guarantee not less than 50 per cent, of the migrant traffic with a minimum of 22,000 persons per annum for ten years at £30 net - this contract to commence immediately the existing Line is taken over. Government to grant a guaranteed mail subsidy for ten years when the Line is extended to provide a fortnightly service. Apparently, that would also apply in the event of the increase in the Line being to an 18-knot service, or a 22-knot service. The Government gave the fullest consideration to these tenders, and, as a result, determined to accept the offer of the White Star Company as being incomparably the best of the offers made for the purchase of the Line. But it is not sufficient to show that we are selling for the best offer of three tenders received. We had to consider whether the amount offered was a reasonable price for the Line. The Government gave full consideration to this matter, and came to the conclusion that the price offered was, on the whole, a fair and reasonable one. When the proposal to sell the Line was first under consideration, the chairman of the Commonwealth Shipping Board, **Mr. Larkin** informed me that, working on the basis of voyage results and all factors that would have to be taken into consideration, including the altered circumstances that would be brought about through a reduction of the capital expenditure upon which interest would have to be earned, he had arrived at the conclusion that a genuine offer in the region of £2,000,000 would give the purchaser an opportunity to operate the Line with a reasonable chance of success. Of course, there are other factors that have to be taken into consideration. The man in the street may possibly hold the view that, because of the heavy losses that have been incurred in recent years, which the taxpayers of Australia have had to make good, the Line is of no value at all as a commercial proposition. But other considerations suggest that in certain circumstances the vessels of the Line may be of substantial value to a purchaser. In the first place it was not laid down in the conditions of tender that the Line must be kept on the Australian register. That is' important. I shall have a few words to say about this phase of the transaction before I resume my seat. The report of the Public Accounts Committee, which inquired into this matter sometime ago, indicated that, if the vessels of the Line had been on the British instead of on the Australian register, there would have been an annual saving in operating charges of about £220,000. On this point the committee stated - >It is estimated that the additional cost of running the seven steamers now in commission as compared with a similar number and class of vessels on British articles would approximate £220,000 per annum; if, therefore, the Commonwealth Line had operated with British rates of wages and conditions, its anticipated loss of £189,905 for the year 1920-27 would have been converted into a profit of £30,000. This would be a starting point for any prospective purchasers. The next factor is the price offered. The new purchasers will be called upon to earn interest on a capital expenditure of £1,900,000. Even after there had been a drastic writing down of approximately £8,000,000 in the capital value of the ships in 1923, the Commonwealth Shipping Board still had to find interest upon a capital value of £4,725,000. As a governmental activity it would possibly be more expensive to operate. But a tenderer would have to set off against this reduction of capital the fact that if the ships were taken off the Australian register and placed on the British register he would lose revenue from coastal trade, which has been earned by the vessels under Commonwealth control. Then, every day the ships are becoming older, and the obligations with regard to depreciation in value are constantly increasing as time goes on. Many other factors could be mentioned, but I do not propose to delay the House by referring to them. While some people may hold the view that the Line has no value, we have to remember that if the vessels are placed under British articles by the new purchasers there should be a possibility of a reasonable return on a reasonable capital outlay. The next angle from which I think we must view the position is that of price. What price is being paid to-day for vessels of equivalent tonnage? When we were discussing the future of the Line in 1921, it was easy to make comparisons of costs, because ships then were selling almost every day. The position to-day is different. Not many ships are now being sold, and therefore it is difficult to make any comparison of prices. But taking the offer of the successful tenderer I think we may estimate the price that is being received for the five "Bay" liners as £300,000 each, and for the two "Dale" ships *£200,000* each, making the total of £1,900,000. The only record of comparative sales which the Shipping Board was able to obtain relates to two Italian vessels that were sold recently, and the *Ormuz,* one of the vessels of the Orient line. The gross tonnage of the *Ormuz* is given as 14,588, and the net tonnage as 8,082. The figures for the "Bay" steamers are 13,856 tons gross, and 8,415 tons net. The passenger carrying capacity of the *Ormuz* is 1,181 persons, as against a passenger carrying capacity of 738 in the case of the " Bay " steamers. The speed of the *Ormuz* when fully laden is from 15 knots to 15^ knots and that of the "Bay" steamers 15 knots. The Commonwealth steamers, with one exception, were built in 1921 and 1922 and the *Ormuz* in 1914; so the Orient Company's vessel is considerably older. The price received for that vessel was £257,500, but it included brokerage, which is a fairly heavy charge, whereas the "'Commonwealth Line vessels are being sold free of brokerage. The two Italian ships which have been sold recently are much smaller. Their gross tonnage is 9,700, and their net tonnage 5,900; but their passenger carrying capacity is high. Both have accommodation for 1,265 passengers, as against 738 in the case of the " Bay " steamers. Their speed also is greater, 15 to 16 knots, against 15 knots for the Commonwealth vessels. These Italian vessels were built in 1914 and 1915, and they were sold in December last for £175,000 each. One other factor which has to be borne in mind when making comparison of prices is, that the passengercarrying capacity of the three ships referred to is high, and that passenger accommodation is most expensive to provide. Another consideration that should not be overlooked is the fact that the vessels have to be retained in the Australian trade. This was not laid down as a condition of sale by the Government. What the Ministry stipulated for was an equivalent tonnage of similar ships. But these vessels are really suitable only for the Australian trade, and would, have little market value for any other trade route. All these facts should be considered when comparing the successful tender price for the Commonwealth Line and the prices received for the three other ships to which I referred. The Government, after giving the fullest consideration to the whole of the circumstances, came to the conclusion that the offer was fair and reasonable, and accepted it. We notified the tenderers accordingly, and the contract has been drawn up and signed. An incidental matter is the control of the Cockatoo Island dockyard. Honorable members will recall that when the Shipping Board was constituted, not only was the Commonwealth Line of Steamers placed under its control, but also the Cockatoo Island dockyard and its activities. At the present time this yard is under an act of Parliament controlled by the Shipping Board; but obviously it is unnecessary to keep the board in existence merely to carry out one of the functions for which it was created. The Government has fully considered the matter, and has decided to invite tenders for the leasing of the dockyard, proper safeguards having been taken to ensure that it will be available, if necessary, for defence purposes. I have seen various statements in the press concerning the sale of the Line. Many of them emanated from the honorable member for Yarra **(Mr. Scullin),** who complained bitterly that I was keeping back from the public something which the people were entitled to know. The honorable member said that I should have made a statement long ago with regard to the sale of the Line. I suggest to the honorable gentleman that even if the sale of the ships had been effected a week ago, in view of the fact that Parliament was about to re-assemble, it would have been an act of courtesy on the part of the Government to make an important announcement of this character to Parliament rather than through the press. Unfortunately for the honorable gentleman, the facts do not support his complaints. The Line was not sold last week. The contract was not. signed^ until Saturday night. On Sunday I received a cablegram stating that the contract had been completed. I venture to suggest that if, before the contract had been actually signed, the Government had announced to the world that the Line had been sold, it would have been open to severe censure by Parliament. It would have been wrong to make any statement concerning the transaction until it had been absolutely settled. That is the position. The contract was signed on Saturday last, and the Line has now been sold as a deliberate act of policy, for which the Government is prepared to take the fullest responsibility. As soon as a statement was made in regard to the sale of the Line, several attacks were made upon the Government. One was a very spirited onslaught by the honorable member for Yarra. He suddenly announced that the vessels would not be able to trade round the Australian coast, and he accused me of misleading the people of Australia. I think it is necessary that I should give some of the facts in regard to this matter. A statement was made by the honorable member, apparently on the 13th April, because it was published on the 14th April, and I gather that he does not repudiate it ; at all events, I have not seen a correction of the statement in any newspaper. Expressing his indignation because the vessels would not still be available for the Australian coastal trade, the honorable member said - >According to *Hansard* **Mr. Bruce** said - " The Government, after most exhaustive consideration, considers that the proper course is to dispose of the Australian Commonwealth Line of Steamers, if a reasonable price is offered. Such a step would be subject to the condition that the Line is maintained on an Empire register, and that the purchaser undertakes to maintain, for a period of at least ten years, at least an equivalent service in regard to passenger, cargo and refrigerated space." Further, the honorable member for Yarra quoted me as having said - >It is much better that the tenderers should be invited to submit to the Government proposals for the service they are prepared to give than that we should stipulate the services we require, but the absolute minimum acceptable is an equivalent to the existing service. He then went on to say - >The " existing service " provided by the Commonwealth Line included the carrying of interstate passengers and cargo, and **Mr. Bruce** was endeavouring to get away from a very definite declaration by saying that his remarks did not apply to " interstate services." It is clear that the honorable gentleman sought to give the impression to the public that I had not indicated that if the Line were sold the vessels could not continue in the interstate trade. He suggested that I had deceived the House when making my statement, and that he had now found me out. He went on to say- > **Mr. Bruce's** latest statement indicated that the " Bay " boats would be removed from the Australian coastal trade, the object being to evade Australian conditions of labour, which were laid down by the Navigation Act. The honorable member proceeded to deal with the effect of the removal of those vessels from the coastal trade; but I shall deal with that matter in a moment. When the honorable member's statement was brought under my notice, I replied through the press in these terms - >It was made perfectly clear that there would not be any restriction placed upon the sale of the Line which would compel the purchaser to maintain it in the Australian register. Under the Navigation Act it is necessary that any ships carrying passengers and freight round the coast must comply with the provisions of the act, and it was well-known to everybody that if the Line were purchased and placed upon another register, the ships would be in the same position as other overseas trading vessels. Nobody would be better aware of these facts than **Mr. Scullin,** and it is amazing that he should now suggest that he did not understand, from the statement which I made in the House, exactly what the position was. In a rejoinder the honorable member for Yarra further said - >Confronted with unanswerable facts, the Prime Minister invariably assumes the role of injured innocence, and complains that he is misrepresented. Will he claim that *Hansard* misrepresented him in reporting his speech on the conditions laid down for the sale of the Commonwealth ships? Hero are his own words, recorded in *Ilansard* No. 10, page 1028: - "That the purchaser undertakes to maintain, for a period of 10 years, at least equivalent services in regard to passenger, cargo and refrigerated . space." Again at page 1029 **Mr. Bruce** said - "The absolute minimum acceptable is an equivalent of the existing services." " Existing services " include the carrying of interstate passengers and cargo. These services cannot be maintained if they arc abolished. Denials or protestations will not alter that stubborn fact. The honorable member suggested that he did not know that the ships would go out of the coastal trade. He said that I had only now made known that fact, and that, when I made the statement that that was known all along, I misrepresented the- position. Let me read what I said on this matter in the House. I point out that the honorable member quoted my remarks several times, in order to lead the people to believe that I had misrepresented the facts; but he did not quote that part of my speech that would have shown that he, and everybody else, knew what I intended. The words which I used in the House, but were not quoted by the honorable member, were - >We are told that the Commonwealth ships operating under Australian conditions are of tremendous advantage in the interstate trade, There have been one or two instances in which the Commonwealth Line of Steamers have been of assistance in that direction, but they certainly do not offer a solution of the problem presented to us by the interstate trade. That is generally recognized. The Navigation Royal Commission went fully into the subject, and the minority report signed by **Senator Duncan** and **Senator Elliott** stated - I then set out what that report showed, namely, that the overseas ships did not enter largely into the coastal trade. I then went on to quote a supplementary memorandum by the honorable member for Bourke **(Mr. Anstey),** another member of the commission, showing to what extent those vessels entered into that trade, and what would be the effect of taking them out of the service. I concluded by saying that wc could not "justify this Line, either for the sake of the Australian mercantile marine, or as a means of solving the interstate shipping problem, which is one of the most difficult we have to face." Every word that I uttered was clearly directed to meeting the argument that if the ships of the Commonwealth Line were sold and allowed to go on any other register, the vessels would be deprived of their coastal trade. The criticism of the honorable member for Yarra was a gross misrepresentation of what I said, and it was made worse by the quoting of some passages but the leaving out of the particular part of my speech that clearly demonstrated that that position had to be recognized by the House in arriving at its decision. *[Extension of time granted.]* The honorable member for Yarra, on various occasions, dealt with the disastrous results that he thought would accrue to the passenger traffic and the shipping services round the coast if the ships of the Commonwealth Line were put upon another register. Exaggerated statements have been made on this subject. One gentleman, writing to the press over the name " Traveller," said that the coastal passengers carried by the vessels of the Commonwealth Line represented 50 per cent, of the total coastal passenger trade of Australia, and if the first-class passengers were excluded, the " Bay " liners carried 80 per cent, of the total coastal passenger traffic. I asked the Government Statistician to inquire into those figures, and I was informed that the interstate arrivals by sea and departures by sea in and from each State and in and from the Northern Territory for the year 1926 totalled 362,148. Those are the latest figures available, and the statistics so far to hand for 1927 indicate a similar position. Of those passengers the "Bay" liners carried 12,350, or 3.4 per cent. of the total number. I suggest that the statement by the honorable member for Yarra - {: #debate-36-s0 .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr BRUCE:
NAT -- I suggest that the statement made by the honorable member for Yarra to the press on the 13th April, drawing a most gloomy picture of the effect on the coastal traffic of Australia if the ships were withdrawn, was grossly inaccurate, and, to say the very least, it misrepresented the position. We were also told that the withdrawal of the ships would have a serious effect on the freightage position round the coast. We were informed that the "Bay" liners were carrying a good deal of the freight. The actual position is that, for the year 1927, the Commonwealth Line of Steamers carried 4,283 tons of coastal freight, made up as follows: - General cargo, 1,085 tons; meat, 1,590 tons; butter, 1,513 tons; flour, 50 tons; and fruit, 45 tons. For the last five years the total tonnage carried by coastal vessels was as follow: - {: #debate-36-s1 .speaker-KYI} ##### Mr PROWSE:
FORREST, WESTERN AUSTRALIA -- What percentage did the 4,283 tons carried by the "Bay" liners represent? {: .speaker-F4B} ##### Mr BRUCE: -- A percentage of .06. Should the necessity arise, as a result of the withdrawal of these vessels, licences to engage in coastal trading can be granted to oversea companies. During the last two years 174 such licences have been issued, and the cargoes carried, consisting principally of meat, amounted to 13,398 tons. It cannot, therefore, be said that we are aiming a fatal or an irreparable blow at the Australian coastal service. There is only one other point with which I need deal, but it is of paramount importance to this Parliament. The Melbourne *Argus* of the 13th April last contained a statement by **Mr. O'Neill,** the secretary of the Victorian branch of the Australian Seamen's Union, to the effect that, from the time that crews were signed on for these vessels at English rates of pay, the ships would be declared black at all Australian ports, and not a stick of cargo would be handled or a line touched when they were being berthed. Then, yesterday, a newspaper published a paragraph which contained the following threat : - >It is stated that the Maritime Transport Group in Sydney has decided to declare black all ships of Lord Kylsant's Line that visit > >Australia if, as is reported, the Lord Kylsant interests have purchased the Commonwealth Line of Steamers. That is an aspect of this matter which most seriously affects this Parliament. Once an issue has been placed before the elected representatives of the people of Australia, and a majority of those representatives have decided upon a certain line of action, it does not matter whether an individual member agrees with or dissents from that decision, it is his responsibility to see that the will of the people, as expressed through its representatives, is not thwarted by any outside body possessing no authority from the people. The action which the Government has taken in this matter has been taken 'with the approval of a majority of honorable members. Any attempt to prevent effect being given to the expressed will of this House is not only a violation of a contract, but an attack by irresponsible persons upon the very basis of our constitutional government. All members of this Parliament, including honorable members opposite, are concerned in this matter because, as representatives of the people, they are under a solemn obligation to maintain and uphold the democratic institutions of this country. I appeal to them to do all in their power to dissuade these persons from taking the action they are said to contemplate. But if such an attempt is made the Government , will use every means within its power to ensure that the will of the people is not thwarted. Should we find that we have not sufficient powers, the Government will bring down to the House any necessary measure required to deal with the position. If such a situation were allowed to pass unchallenged, it would disgrace the good name of this Commonwealth, and bring our governmental institutions into contempt. It is necessary that I should make clear at this stage the attitude of the Government in this matter, so that misunderstanding may not arise in the future. I move - >That the paper be printed. Debate (on motion by **Mr. Scullin)** adjourned. {: .page-start } page 4351 {:#debate-37} ### PAPERS The following papers were presented- Defence Act - Regulations Amended - Statutory Rules 1928, Nos. 27 and 28. Inscribed Stock Act - Regulations Amended - Statutory Rules 1928, No. 29. Land Tax Assessment Act- Applications for Relief from Taxation during the year 1927. Public Service Act - Appointment of C.E. Andrew, Department of Markets. *Sitting suspended from 6.9 to 8. p.m.* {: .page-start } page 4351 {:#debate-38} ### CUSTOMS TARIFF {:#subdebate-38-0} #### In Committeee of Ways and Means: **Mr. PRATTEN** (Martin- Minister for Trade and Customs) [8.0]. - I move - >That the schedule to the Customs Tariff 1921-1928 be amended as hereunder set out, and that on and after the Twenty-fifth day of April, One thousand nine hundred and twenty-eight, at nine o'clock in the forenoon, reckoned according to standard time in the Territory for the Seat of Government, duties of customs be collected in pursuance of the customs tariff as so amended. , > >That, excepting by mutual agreement or until after six months' notice has been given to the Government of the Dominion of New Zealand, nothing in this resolution shall affect any goods the produce or manufacture of the Dominion of New Zealand entering the Commonwealth of Australia from the Dominion of New Zealand. The amendment, it will be noticed, refers only to one sub-item of Item 320, that which deals with feature films and others of that type which is now imported. My motion is really a corollary to the re port of the Film Commission, which contains the unanimous recommendation that the foreign duty on films be increased by1/2d. per lineal foot. The idea of the commission is that the revenue derived from the increased duty should be utilized to assist in developing the moving picture industry in Australia. Prior to 1914, films were imported into the Commonwealth free of duty, but in that year a tariff of 1-^d. per foot British, and 2d. per foot general, was imposed. In 1917, the rates were revised and fixed at Id. British, and general. In 1920 an intermediate duty of Hd. per foot was adopted, making the rates Id. British, lid. intermediate, and *lid.* general. In the following year the intermediate and general rates were increased to 3d. per foot, whilst the British rate remained at Id. The 1920 rates of Id., l£d., and 1½d. were reverted to later on in 1921. The present duties under Tariff Item 320 (c) are - Free, British; Id., intermediate; lid.. general, per lineal foot; but by this amendment the rate. under the general tariff will be increased to 2d. per lineal foot, British still remaining free, and the intermediate rate at Id. It will be remembered that under the Customs Tariff Act of 1925 some rather important changes were made by this Parliament in the direction of making British films free of duty. Educational and scenic films are also free of duty irrespective of the country of origin, as it was thought by Parliament that the screening of films of this type was of benefit to the community. These films are not interfered with by the present motion; they will still remain free irrespective of their country of origin. The duty collected on dramatic films during the year 1926-27 was £134,310, and on this basis the increase of ½d. per lineal foot under the general tariff should return £44,770 additional revenue. But it must be borne in mind that, if this amendment appeals to the House, it will give an increased preference to British films, and if these make progress in the Australian market, the amount estimated to be collected as additional revenue will be proportionately diminished. I have already said that in 1925 this Parliament made alterations to the tariff, and honorable members will remember that, following an inquiry by the Tariff Board, the British duty of Id. per lineal foot on cinematograph films was abolished, whilst the duty under the general tariff was not increased. I pointed out this afternoon that British producers have taken a little advantage of this encouragement to their industry, and the effect of the Government's action in this respect has been a slight increase in the importation of British, if not Empire, films with a consequent reduction in the proportion of foreign films into Australia. Another effect has been the recent establishment in the Commonwealth of at least two British agencies for the distribution of British films throughout the Commonwealth. It will interest honorable members to note that in the years 1906 and 1907 the importations of exposed cinematograph films of all descriptions, which were then free of duty, were less than 1,000,000 feet. In 1915-16, and again in 1916-17, over 11,000,000 feet of films were imported, whilst in 1925-26, and 1926-27 the importations had grown to approximately 30,000,000 feet and 36,000,000 feet respectively. In 1925, foreign films represented 91.7 per cent, of the total number imported, while the United Kingdom sent us 8.2 per cent. In 1927, the importation of foreign films had declined to 87.3 per cent., while that of British films had increased to 12.6 per cent. "Whilst the present proposal may be in accord with the unanimous recommendation of the Film Commission, it is a still further extension of the Government's policy of Empire film preference, and it is sincerely hoped that the British Government and British producers will appreciate and take advantage of the opportunities now afforded to them. Britain can, and does now, produce films second to none, and that production is increasing. It will also be noticed by honorable members that in the motion the intermediate duty of Id. per lineal foot has not been altered, and as I stated this afternoon, the Government will take steps to endeavour to obtain reciprocal preferences within the Empire, as recommended by the commission. Apart from the encouragement which an increased duty on foreign films will give to British productions, I draw the attention of honorable members to paragraphs 188 and 189 of the Film Commission's report. These suggest that an increased revenue from customs duty should be used for the purpose of - {: type="a" start="o"} 0. Encouraging and stimulating production; 1. Providing for - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. The cost of censorship and the appeal board, and accommodation and equipment therefor. 1. Awards of merit. 2. Assistance with educational work, if desired. The method by which this assistance may be given has yet to be decided. The Government will pursue the principles of the policy recommended by the Film Commission; but the real reason for the commission's recommendation for an increase in the foreign duty is to encourage and stimulate Australian productions. {: #subdebate-38-0-s0 .speaker-K1J} ##### Mr PRATTEN:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT -- While the revenue derived from the proposed increased duty cannot be specifically appropriated to the objects suggested by the commission, the commission's recommendations are in principle the adopted policy of the Government. Better facilities for administration and the development of Australian production are such great advantages that they easily outweigh the almost negligible increase in duty that is proposed. It might be argued, however, that the extra duty will be passed on to the public by increased prices of admission. Examination of the figures shows how un justifiable such a contention would be. The ordinary feature or dramatic film averages about 6,000 feet in length, and estimating the average number of screenings at 75, which I think is a very low figure, especially as in suburban theatres the film may be shown three or four times, the extra cost would be 3s. 4d. for each screening, or about one-tenth of a penny per person if 400 were the average attendance. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr Forde: -- The picture showmen would not be justified in increasing the rates of admission. {: .speaker-K1J} ##### Mr PRATTEN:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT -- Those figures give no justification for the scare cry that the increased duty would involve higher fees for admission to picture shows. The additional £75 of duty for all six copies of a film of 6,000 feet is negligible when compared with the huge sums spent on the average film for exploitation purposes. {: .speaker-JVT} ##### Mr Nelson: -- Would that duty be collected on negative films imported for printing in Australia-? {: .speaker-K1J} ##### Mr PRATTEN:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT -- I cannot answer that question off-hand, but I think the Minister has administrative power to encourage the creation of work of all sorts within Australia. I submit this motion to the favorable consideration of honorable members, and I hope that it will help to achieve the object we all desire, namely, the distribution and exhibition, on an ever-increasing scale, of British, Australian, and other dominion films throughout the Commonwealth and the Empire, and eventually an export trade in films made in Australia. Progress reported. {: .page-start } page 4353 {:#debate-39} ### COMMONWEALTH HOUSING BILL {:#subdebate-39-0} #### Second Reading Debate resumed from 28th March *(vide* page 4271), on motion by **Dr. Earle** Page - >That the bill be now read a second time. {: #subdebate-39-0-s0 .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN:
YARRA, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936 .- The original Housing Bill was discussed at considerable length last year, and the purpose of this measure is merely to put a few patches on a statute that has been inoperative for five months. The housing scheme outlined by the Prime Minister in his policy speech two and a half years ago was one of the most illusive proposals that I recollect in many years of political life. The right honorable gentleman definitely promised that £20,000,000 would be made available to provide houses for the people, and literature was broadcast stating that any person who wanted a home would be able to gratify his wish under the very liberal scheme that the Federal Government proposed to bring into operation. That was one of the promises upon which the pact parties were returned to power; the housing scheme was one of the much vaunted mandates of the Government. But this particular mandate was allowed to rust for two years before the Government introduced a measure which purported to embody a housing scheme, but actually did nothing of the sort. It was accompanied by another bill for the amendment of the Commonwealth Bank Act by dividing the bank into two sections, and appointing three commissioners who would be entrusted with the administration of an onerous house-building scheme which the Treasurer assured- us would' be too greatsi burden for the directors of the Commonwealth Bank. "When the two billa were examined1 we found that' the Government was putting forward,- not a housing scheme, but merely a proposal that any building authority requiring money for its purposes should be able to borrow from the Commonwealth Savings Bank- at whatever rates of interest the money wag costing thai! institution. We refused to believe that the directors of the Commonwealth Bank had declared that they could not operate such a simple borrowing and lending scheme, and that the appointment of three new commissioners to control the savings bank branch would be necessary. We asked for the appointment of a selectcommittee to ascertain the views of the directors. The -Treasurer **(Dr. Earle Page)'** said that we were only trying to waste time; that we did not want houses to be built, or the Government's scheme to be brought into operation. An investigation by a select committee need not have occupied more than a week ; but so urgent and insistent was the Treasurer with regard to this scheme that had been allowed to remain dormant for two years, that he begrudged a Week for the purpose of obtaining essential information. However, the directors came to Canberra and made their wishes known so plainly that the Treasurer was obliged to back downin the House, and the three new commissioners who were to control the Commonwealth Savings Bank have not been, and are not likely to' be, appointed. I mention this little *bit* of history in *order to* show the make-believe that characterizes this scheme. The act which the Treasurer considered last year of urgent importance has been on the statute-books for five months, and before one house has been built under its provisions we are asked to consider an amending bill. I believe a government housing scheme. The State Governments are carrying out very good house-building policies, although they might do much more than they are doing. Under the War Service Homes Act the Commonwealth Government also is operating a housing scheme, and it is a remarkable fact that while the Government submits to the country a proposal for the expenditure of £20,000,000 on a scheme to supplement the housing endeavours of the States if has been unable to build enough houses to satisfy the applications from- returned soldiers alone. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr Coleman: -- That shows the sham and humbug of this policy. {: #subdebate-39-0-s1 .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- It does. And- 1 sug-gest that if there is a- shortage of money, as the Treasurer assures us from day to day there is, any houses built . for civilians under this scheme must mean a reduction of the number of houses to be built for returned soldiers under the War Service Homes Act. In reply to a question asked by the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Coleman),** the Minister for Works and Railways told the House that on the 1st July, 1927, £1,728,000 had been made available by Parliament for the. construction of War Service Homes, but the amount provided in the Estimates had been reduced by £19,500. That reduction, we were told, represented only 25 homes; nevertheless, the Government is providing money for 25 homes less than were approved by Parliament. I assume that the excuse is the shortage of money. We were told that 1,041 applications by returned soldiers will be approved this year and carried forward to next year. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr Coleman: -- God knows when they will get their homes ! {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- If is reasonable to suggest that before the Government proceeds to accelerate the speed of the State house-building authorities, it should operate fully the War Service Homes Act and meet the demands of those for whom this Parliament made special provision. Failing that, there is nothing sincere or genuine in this scheme. As propounded last year, it was merely a belated pretence at honouring a flamboyant election promise. Two years of inaction was followed by the passing of the Housing Bill; now, after- it has been in abeyance for five months, we are asked to pass this amending bill, and full effect is not being given to the provisions of the War Service Homes Act. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Sir Elliot Johnson: -- Why should we riot proceed with both schemes ? {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- My complaint is that the Government is not proceeding with either. Applications under the War Service Homes Act are being deferred on the ground that the Government is short of money, and the promise made by the Government two and a half years ago to provide homes for civilians is not being redeemed. Not one house has yet been built in fulfilment of that undertaking. I am emphasizing the hypocrisy of the Government in this regard, and I invite the honorable member to support my demand that the existing statutes should be put into operation. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Sir Elliot Johnson: -- "We are putting the house-building scheme into operation. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- The present generation will have passed away before any benefits accrue from the scheme. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- Already, this year 1,455 war service homes have been built. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- One thousand and forty-one approved applications are being held over until next year. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- And 704 additional applications were made this year. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- The Treasurer cannot cloud the issue that way. His reply given in this House on 28th March this year is not out-of-date information. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr Theodore: -- The reason given to me by the department for deferring the construction of those houses was that funds were not available, and therefore applicants must wait. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- This is the reply that the Treasurer gave - >The total amount available for allocation to the States, including cash on hand in the State institutions on 1st July, 1927, was £1,728,445, representing a net reduction of £19,555 only on the amount provided in the Estimates for the current financial year. This net increase of £19,555 would provide approximately 25 homes only. After re-arranging the funds to equalize the position of applicants in all States, it is estimated that the following applications will be approved this year and carried forward to next year. . . , And here are applications from the various States totalling 1,041 throughout theCommonwealth which are to be held over until next year. Yet this Government tells us that it is earnest in its desire to assist the State authorities to build more houses for the people. I refuse to believe that the Government is in earnest, particularly in view of the fact that during the last two and a half years not one stick has been erected under the £20,000,000 housing scheme which the Government promised the people at the last elections. I wish now to draw attention to one or two clauses of the bill, which I shall ask the Treasurer in committee or at some later stage of the discussion to explain to the House. Clause 3 simply provides for advances to enable houses to be enlarged. That was not made clear in the original act, which to me seems remarkable. I have no objection to clause 3. Another provision, as I read it, enables a person under the housing scheme to obtain two houses, or rather a second house. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- When a man shifts from one district to another and has to sell his original house, he will now have the opportunity to obtain a house in his new locality. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- I cannot see in the bill any provision to compel that person to sell one house before he obtains another. The clause as I read it provides that if a man has a house in one locality and he removes to another, he can obtain an advance for the erection or purchase of an additional house provided that he has repaid the money due on the first house. The clause does not say that he must sell his original house. A man may therefore have a house in one locality, and after he has paid for it, obtain under this scheme an additional house in another locality. I suggest that that is not the intention of a government housing scheme. It should be the Government's policy to make advances on liberal terms to enable every' man to obtain one house only, and particularly should that be so when there is a shortage of funds and homes cannot be provided for returned soldiers. It is strange that we should be amending legislation to provide two houses for one section of the community when we cannot provide homes for a more deserving section. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- The Government is prepared to safeguard the position in whatever way the honorable member desires. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- It should be made clear that until the requirements of the people are met no person shall be allowed. to obtain a second home under this scheme. The Treasurer's ' explanation is as follows: - >Frequently a person who is buying a house through a State authority changes his place of residence to some other quite different district. Provision is, therefore, made that in the case of such a person fully repaying the amount advanced to him in respect of a house in one locality, he may obtain a new advance to enable him to secure a home in an altogether different place. {: .speaker-JMG} ##### Mr Atkinson: -- There is nothing very wrong about that. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- There is everything wrong about it. Until Ave have provided a home for every person who requires one, Ave should not amend the Commonwealth Housing Act to provide a person Avith two homes or a second home. The honorable member's opinion of a housing scheme is not mine. Clause 4 of the bill omits sub-sections 3 and 4 of section 10 of the act, and not one word of explanation has the Treasurer given for this amendment. In his second-reading speech he said - >The method of repayments by the housing authorities of the State to the Commonwealth Bank, arid thence to the Treasurer, as set out in the principal act has been found not to suit every State. Accordingly, by clause 4, section 10 of the principal act is amended by omitting sub-sections 3 and 4, and substituting other sub-sections in lieu thereof with a view to providing greater elasticity in the dealings between the Commonwealth Savings Bank and the State housing authorities, and between the Treasurer and the Commonwealth Savings Bank. There is no information contained in that statement, and I should like to know why sub-sections 3 and 4 of section 10 are to be omitted. I find that they are important provisions. Sub-section 3 provides - >In respect of each loan by the Commonwealth Treasurer to the Savings Bank, the Savings Bank shall pay - *[a)* to the Treasurer, half-yearly, interest on the amount of the loan, the rate of such interest being such rate as is certified by the Auditor-General for the Commonwealth, as representing the cost of the money to the Commonwealth, after allowing for discounts on the issue of loans and the expenses of flotation. The amendment deliberately does away with the Auditor-General's certification of the rate of interest to be charged. I wish to know the reason for this alteration. Another paragraph of that sub-section is also to be omitted, and I regard it as of still more importance. The act was passed only last year, and it seems strange that it should already require alteration before any attempt has been made to put the housing scheme into operation. There may be a good explanation for the deletion of sub-section 3 of section 10, but it is not contained in the secondreading speech of the Treasurer. It is essential to establish a sinking fund when advancing moneys for the erection of houses, but under this bill that is to be dispensed with. The original provision reads - >In respect of each loan by the Commonwealth Treasurer to the Savings Bank, the Savings Bank shall pay (6) to the National Debt Commission, half-yearly, .on the first day of January and the first day of July in each year, such sum as is agreed upon between the Treasurer and the Savings Bank, not being less than 10s. per centum per annum of the amount of the loan. What is wrong Avith that provision, and why is it to be deleted from the bill? {: #subdebate-39-0-s2 .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- I suppose the Government will later introduce another amending bill. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- That is quite possible. I expect the Treasurer to reply to the points that I have raised. He said in his second-reading speech that the bill provided for a few minor amendments, but I suggest that the deletion of sub-section 3 of section 10 is an important amendment, requiring a full explanation. {: #subdebate-39-0-s3 .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN:
Reid .- I cannot allow this occasion to pass without associating myself with the honorable member for Yarra. **(Mr. Scullin)** in protesting ' against the treatment that the Government is meting out to return'ed soldier applicants for homes, in contrast Avith its lavish and illusive housing scheme. Evidently, as has already been suggested, this scheme is to be dangled before the eyes of the electors indefinitely. Extensive amendments are now to be made to the Housing Act which has not even been put into operation, and in view of the treatment of applicants for Avar service homes, we are surely justified in saying that there is a good deal of sham and pretence and humbug about the housing scheme of this Government. As the honorable member for Yarra has said, on 28th March last, I asked the Minister for Works and Railways how many applications for war service homes had been deferred. To my astonishment, and also to that of every member who accepts the responsibility of this Parliament to provide homes for soldiers while the War Service Homes Act remains on the statute-book, the Minister replied that 1,041 applications had been deferred until the next financial year. This calls for an answer from the Government. My protest is not an isolated one; the soldiers' organizations throughout Australia are also protesting against the Government's procrastination in this matter. The - Government's breach of faith and its failure to fulfil its promises are bitterly resented. The newspapers in Sydney and elsewhere contain numerous complaints by deluded persons who have made applications for homes as a result of the propangandist methods of the War Service Homes Commission. In New South Wales the commission conducted an intensive propaganda by means of wireless, the press, and printed pamphlets in which ex-soldiers were invited to come along and obtain the homes which a " beneficent, kindly disposed, and patriotic " Government wished to provide for them. As a result of this' propaganda there are in New South Wales alone 536 ex-soldier applicants awaiting advances. At the end of February last in New South Wales there were 118 - no doubt the number since has been materially increased - who desired to buy existing properties, 195 who wished to build new homes, and 223 who wanted additional accommodation to meet the housing requirements of large families. Only a year or so ago this Government amended the War Service Homes Act to enable advances to be made to " diggers " who wished to provide additional accommodation for their growing families, and it is positively immoral to refuse to grant these advances. In 1919 or 1920, provision was made in the act for an advance of £800, but those who received such an advance and built homes at that time have to-day possibly four or five children who are growing ' up and have to be accommodated in dwellings of two or three rooms. It is not in the interests of good citizenship to confine these men to such habitations when their families have outgrown the accommodation. The Government should not economize at the expense of these men whom they exploit so often at election time. Altogether there are 536 applications awaiting settlement in New South Wales, 203 in Victoria, 139 in Queensland, 75 in South Australia, 67 in Western Australia, and 21 in Tasmania. There are 276 waiting to purchase existing properties, 424 who wish to build houses, and 341 who desire to increase their accommodation to meet the require-, ments of growing families. {: .speaker-KZ6} ##### Mr Lacey: -- There are hundreds of others who have been discouraged by the delay in granting applications. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN: -- Yes, and who consequently have not lodged applications. It is quite likely that at the end of the financial year, if the present increase is maintained, there will be 1,500 or more applications awaiting settlement. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- Possibly 2,000. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr COLEMAN: -- Yes. Surely it is not using extravagant language to characterize as mere pretence and humbug a scheme under which £20,000,000 is to be spent upon the general housing requirements of the community, when the Government will not carry out its own housing responsibilities to returned soldiers. If it is not prepared to do this it should repeal the War Service Homes Act, instead of liberalizing its provisions and making lavish promises, and then telling the returned men, "We cannot do anything for you." This is a matter which concerns every honorable member of the House, and all should join with me in asking the Treasurer for an explanation of why economy proposals propounded by the Government should affect the building of soldiers' houses. The War Service Homes scheme is operating satisfactorily in New South Wales; the ex-soldiers there appear to be fairly well satisfied with it, and it should not be affected by the position in which the Government finds itself to-day as the result of its extravagance in other directions. The building of a home not only provides a necessary utility, but is a productive expenditure, and the cutting down of a housing scheme designed to benefit ex-soldiers calls for the strongest possible protest from honorable members on both sides of the House. "Will advances up to £1,800 under the general housing scheme and the further liberalization set out in the bill now before us compare favorably with the meagre advance of £800 or possibly £950 to meet the requirements of returned soldiers and their families? The curtailment of expenditure necessary to meet the housing requirements of struggling returned soldier workers savours of unwarranted discrimination of the worst kind. As the Acting Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Scullin)** has suggested, this measure can be more effectively debated in committee; but I trust the Treasurer will not again talk of lack of funds. When the Minister for Works and Railways **(Mr. Hill)** replied to the question I submitted on the 28th March last, he made many excuses for the delay in providing homes for returned soldiers. Those excuses do not satisfy me. The real trouble is the inability or the refusal of the Treasurer to make the necessary funds available. That is the real 'reason. It was suggested by the Minister that there was difficulty in securing draftsmen, supervising officers, contractors and workmen. I regard that as so much nonsense. In Sydney at present there is a comparative depression in the building trade, in the different branches of which there are thousands of men unemployed. I challenge the accuracy of the Minister's statement that the Government cannot get contractors or workmen. The real reason for the Government's attitude is obviously the failure of the Treasurer to make funds available. I leave the matter there and trust that before the debate closes the Treasurer will indicate what he proposes to do, particularly if it is seriously suggested that this £20,000,000 is to be raised. Some statement should be made showing why the money required to meet the necessities of 1,041 soldiers' claims cannot be met. I trust honorable members will recognize the strong case which has been made out for these applicants. {: #subdebate-39-0-s4 .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE:
Dalley .- The Treasurer **(Dr. Earle Page);** has made this his own particular scheme. We understand that he was largely responsible for its inclusion in the Government's policy speech at the opening of the last election campaign. He claimed a good deal of credit for it when on the hustings. Since then, we are told, he has devoted much attention to the formulation of the scheme, and to the drafting of the necessary legislation, and he has certainly given a lot of time to the piloting of the enabling bills through the House. We cannot, however, congratulate him upon the success of his efforts. He has not yet succeeded in building one house under the scheme, and apparently has not even succeeded in perfecting any legislation to give effect to it. This is about the third attempt which the Treasurer has made to put the statute into acceptable form. Two measures with which we dealt last year were the direct outcome of the Government's housing proposals. Prior to the introduction of this bill one or two amending bills were passed, and this is really the fourth attempt to finalize the legislation to give effect to the Government's housing scheme. Even if this measure is passed there will be, so far as we can judge, no finality. I charge the Treasurer first of all, and, indeed, the Government, with lack of candour in this matter. It would appear that the Prime Minister, in outlining the policy of his Government prior to the last general elections, was more anxious to make political capital than to satisfy the needs of the people, otherwise he would have shown more earnestness in going on with a really practical scheme. In introducing the original measure last year the Treasurer showed great lack of candour. I do not desire to be too harsh, but obviously the honorable gentleman did not fully report the negotiations that had proceeded between the Commonwealth Bank's directors and himself, and' what had been settled. He got himself into a most unenviable position, with the result that he had to make to the House an explanation somewhat humiliating to himself. During the course of the discussion on the Commonwealth Housing Bill last year the Treasurer, in answer to an inquiry from 'this side of the chamber, said that he was acting in co-operation with the State authorities, who had the right to build houses, and that he had consulted with the State Governments. He was not candid. I do not doubt that he had discussed the matter with some State Premiers, although I judge that the discussions were of the most casual character. He did not enter into negotiations with the State Governments to ascertain the extent to which he could rely on their co-operation, or the method of that cooperation; and the fact that he has now to amend the original act to meet the requirements of the State authorities shows that when that measure was passed nothing could have been settled, or even fully discussed. If the original negotiations had been properly conducted, the present position would not have arisen. In considering the wisdom of the Commonwealth Government entering the field of home building, we touch the important point referred to by the Acting Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Scullin)** and the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Coleman).** We have to consider, first of all, whether the Government has fully discharged its obvious duty to provide homes for returned soldiers, and, secondly, whether the Commonwealth Governmentought to enter the field of providing homes for civilians in which the States are already' operating. If we decide that the Commonwealth should enter this field of activity, we have then to determine whether it should do so by providing the State authorities with better facilities for raising their funds, and in no other way. In every State there is a complete housing scheme. It is possible that these could be amended and extended in certain directions, but the State authorities have been concerned with housing schemes for the last twenty years, and during each succeeding year have been perfecting them. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- The States have amended their schemes. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- Yes, after their schemes had operated, and many homes had been built; but' that is no reason why the Commonwealth should amend its legislation before the scheme has operated. The States have amended their schemes after experience in building homes; whereas the Commonwealth Govern ment has already amended its scheme not once, but on several occasions, although it has not built a house or spent one pound for this purpose. The State authorities have housing schemes to meet varying circumstances ; in fact, they have schemes of a varying nature to apply to different classes of borrowers. In some cases these are conducted under more than one authority, and they are endeavouring to cover -the whole field. It is true, and we have to recognize, that many, if not all, of the States have been restricted in the carrying out of this work by lack of funds. The Commonwealth could no doubt aid the States in that respect. It may be necessary to assist the State authorities, but there is no necessity to duplicate State schemes. {: .speaker-KXQ} ##### Mr Parkhill: -- Who has suggested anything of the kind? {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- That was the suggestion of the Treasurer when he brought down the scheme last year. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- That is not so. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- The Treasurer said that the State authorities would go on with this scheme, would lay down the exact nature of the conditions, and determine the kind of houses which were to be built. The honorable member for Warringah **(Mr. Parkhill),** surely forgets the literature which he circulated, during the 1925 electoral campaign, describing the beautiful homes that were to be built by the Bruce-Page Government. {: .speaker-KXQ} ##### Mr Parkhill: -- Those homes would have been built had not the necessary legislation been delayed by the Opposition. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- Two years elapsed during which no homes were built, and before we were even given an opportunity by the Government to consider any legislation on the subject. I wish this matter to be considered temperately, and I am discussing it without any desire to make political capital. {: .speaker-KXQ} ##### Mr Parkhill: -- This is something new. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- It may be something new from the point of view of the honorable member. He has been so much a partisan while circulating literature to influence votes that he is unable to appreciate a desire to consider a matter such as this quite impartially. This is a subject which ought to be so considered. The provision of homes is a national matter. The people need homes, and if they have not the financial means to build them for themselves, it is a matter for the intervention of the governing authorities. Every State Government has recognized that, Nationalist as well as Labour. There are schemes operating to-day which make the necessary ' provision, and they afford sufficient facilities. {: .speaker-KXQ} ##### Mr Parkhill: -- They do not, because the States have not enough money. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- That is granted, and the Commonwealth Government can assist the States by making loans; but that is no justification for the Commonwealth Government bringing in a bill lo settle every detail under which the advances shall be made, to set up machinery for the supervision of the erection of the buildings, or to state the conditions under which the houses shall be built. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- Does the. honorable member disagree with the Acting Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Scullin),** with regard to the need for machinery clauses ? {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- The honorable gentleman must misunderstand me. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- The Acting Leader of the Opposition blamed us for not going far enough in the provision of machinery clauses. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- In the bill at first introduced provision was made for sinking funds, and certification by the Audi- tor-General as to the rate of interest to be paid, and now without any adequate explanation, it is proposed to abandon those provisions. That is a matter which the honorable gentleman should explain. The Government apparently found such difficulty in administering the War Service Homes scheme that it asked the State authorities to take over the work, and provide for administering the fund. All the States except Queensland and New South Wales are now administering the provisions of the War Service Homes Act. Is that not an admission that the States have adequate machinery, and probably many facilities which the Commonwealth does not possess for doing this work' and for building dwellings? If that is accepted, what is the necessity for the Commonwealth Government to come forward with a gigantic home building scheme involving an ' expenditure of £20,000,000? {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- That is not its business. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- I do not think that it is. It may be its business to assist the States to carry on their schemes, but that is all. {: .speaker-L4X} ##### Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP -- But this scheme does not mean anything. {: .speaker-KVS} ##### Mr THEODORE: -- The whole scheme is a sham, and I regret that the Treasurer, who has made this his pet project, has contrived nothing better than what appears on its very face to be mere sham and hypocrisy. The thing that was promised to the people in 1925 has not yet been given to them. The gift is only on paper, and it will probably still be merely a promise when the next appeal is made to the people. The Treasurer cannot point to a solitary house which has been built under this scheme. That is a poor record, and one ' of which the honorable gentleman cannot be proud. If he can show that the scheme is anything more than a device to catch votes, it is time that he did so. {: #subdebate-39-0-s5 .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · Cowper · CP -- The House has witnessed an extraordinary *volte face* by the Opposition in this matter. The charge levelled against the Government in November last was that it was not going into the housebuilding business itself, that it was merely asking the States to do work for it by means of their own machinery. That was the chief charge then levelled against the Government, and it was advanced at that time as evidence of our hypocrisy. Now the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Theodore),** having forgotten to read up the *Hansard* report of his own speech, and of those of other honorable members on that side, asks why we do not use the State instrumentalities, which is exactly what this bill proposes to do. Never before have we seen such remarkable lack of memory, or such wonderful inconsistency, as has been displayed by the members of the Opposition over this matter.' Honorable members opposite have said that there is nothing behind this scheme at all.- We are asking the States to do this work, as Ave always intended they should do it. If honorable members will read even the curtailed statement of the New South Wales budget delivered last week, they will see that it contains a definite provision for the alteration, of legislation to enable that State to act in accordance with the provisions of our housing law Discussions have taken place - beginning almost from the very day on which this measure was passed by Parliament - between the officials of the Commonwealth Savings Bank and the officials of the various State building schemes. Three State housing authorities - Victoria, South Australia, and New South Wales - have stated that they are prepared to recommend the alteration of their legislation in the direction desired, to come under this housing scheme. They have stated that if certain alterations were made in the act they would be able to carry out the scheme Avith a minimum amount of alteration to their own legistion. In accordance with those representations to the Commonwealth Savings Bank, the Commonwealth Government now proposes to make the alterations which are before the House. They are of a very minor character, and do not affect the principle of the act. They are being proposed to ensure that the requirements of the Commonwealth Act shall be, as far as possible, in line with the requirements of the various State acts. That is the position, and I may state for the benefit of the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Theodore)** that the New South Wales Government proposes to avail itself of the opportunity to obtain money for housing from the Commonwealth Savings Bank before the conclusion of this financial year. Its only regret, I am assured, is that it will not have an opportunity of availing itself to a greater extent of the facilities provided for home building. Nearly every home building authority in Australia agrees that the provisions of the act are desirable, and that it meets cases with which it has not been possible to deal up to the present time. I now come to the charge which has been made that this act is going to do something to defeat the War Service Homes Act. The honorable member for Reid says that we are going to pro- ride £20,000,000 under this scheme, yet Ave have cut down the Avar service homes- {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- The Government is doing nothing. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- This year we have already built 1,455 war service homes, and 704 more will be completed. That is a substantial con. tribution to the home building that is being carried on in Australia. What I pointed out before, however, and what I now repeat, is that the money for Avar service homes is obtained from a different source altogether from that for which the money which will be used under this scheme will be obtained. The money for this home building scheme Will be obtained from the Commonwealth Savings Bank. Only a small percentage of the funds of the savings banks throughout Australia was being used for the purpose of building homes, and an especially small percentage of the funds of the Commonwealth Savings Bank was being used for this purpose. One of the objects of the original bill was to ensure that a greater proportion of those funds should be used for this purpose. The savings of the people Will be utilized for home building, and the money obtained from that source will be supplemented by other funds raised by the Government. The money used for building war service homes, however. is obtained from the public loans of the Commonwealth. The war service homes authorities do not draw money from the Commonwealth Savings Bank, the funds of which are under the control of the directors of that institution. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr Scullin: -- Will not the bulk of this money come from loans? {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- No. **Mr. Scullin.** - Where will the Government get its £20,000,000 ? {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- The £20,000,000 will not all be spent in one year. From investigations already made by the directors of the bank, it is evident that they will be able to get considerable portion of the money required from the deposits in the Commonwealth Savings Bank. It has been said that we are reducing the total amount of money spent On war service homes. The average amount spent over the last five years on war service homes has been from £1,700,000 to £1,800,000. This year it "was proposed to spend £1,748,000. It lias been found, as the result of many years' experience by the "War Service Homes Department, which is operating in certain States through the Government Savings Bank or home building authorities of the States, that there is a certain definite number of homes which can be built with the maximum efficiency, the minimum cost, and the least dislocation of labour and market conditions. That number is being increased each year. The Minister pointed out the difficulty which was already being experienced in finding draftsmen for this work, and the efforts that were being made to ensure that returned soldiers should be employed. ' Even then it was found necessary to obtain juniors from the technical colleges in order to help out the work. There is no reason for the suggestion that anything is being done which will retard the amount of war service homes building that can be done this year. It is worth while examining just what is the exact cause of the delay in the erection of war service homes. First of all, it has been found that it is wise to have three months' work in hand in order to make certain that the staff can be kept going, both on the houses themselves, and in the offices charged with the administration of the work. It has been found also that there are a certain number of cases which will have to be carried over for some time, and that makes it impossible for the War Service Homes Department to proceed with the erection of all the homes first applied for before any others are built. The commission considers it necessary always to have under construction in New South Wales 50 houses a month, so as to keep its staff engaged to its fullest capacity. At the present time in New South Wales there are 140 cases under consideration. These houses could be commenced if the applicants had complied with the act. The cases are classified as under-- Whilst the policy is to deal with the applications in their order of priority, approval has been given to take later applications so as to fill up any gaps in the building programme while the commission is waiting for the 140 applicants to what is necessary before the erection of their homes can be undertaken. This is a complete reply to the statement by the ' honorable member for Yarra. The complaint which the honorable member made with respect to the deletion of subsections 3 and 4 of section 10 of the principal act, can, I think, be dealt with more satisfactorily in committee. It involves a close and technical examination of the whole of the borrowing clauses. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. *In committee:* Clause 1 agreed to. Clause 2 (Commencement). {: #subdebate-39-0-s6 .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong -- This clause reads - " This act shall commence on the same date as the principal act." I presume this is a confession that up to date nothing has been done under the principal act? {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE Page: -- The principal act will be proclaimed as soon as the authorities are ready to undertake the work. In every case an alteration of existing State legislation will be necessary. Clause agreed to. Clause 3 (Conditions precedent to any advance). {: #subdebate-39-0-s7 .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · Cowper · CP -- Section 9 of the principal act which this clause amends provides in paragraph 6 that an advance shall not be made by the savings bank to an authority until the commission is satisfied that the schemes administered by the authority contain provisions under which no loan is made by the authority to any person who already owns a house, except for the purpose of discharging a mortgage upon one dwelling house of which he is the owner. The amendment provides that advances may be made for the enlargement of a dwelling house of which the applicant is the owner. This will enable the same method to be adopted in connexion with the operation of this act as is observed in the administration of the War Service Homes Act. Paragraph c contains the provision to which the honorable- member for Yarra directed attention. It seeks to amend sub-paragraph iii, paragraph *b* of section 9, which provides that advances shall not be made - to any person who, or whose wife or husband, has already received a loan; The amendment provides that loans shall not be made to any person who has not repaid a loan in full. These alterations are being made at the request of the various State governmental institutions engaged in the building of homes. I explained the position in my second-reading speech. Unless these conditions are made, it will be possible for a person obtaining a . loan under the act to be in possession of two homes, and I understand that the various State home-building schemes do not allow of this. I can assure the honorable member for. Yarra that these amendments to the original act are being made after considerable discussion betweenthe Commonwealth Savings Bank authorities, the Treasury,, and, the various State authorities. The question he raises is really one of administration, and I think it may be dealt with by regulation. I am not quite satisfied as to the wisdom of making the alterations suggested by the honorable member for Yarra. I urge him not to press for unnecessary amendments, but to see if we can arrive at an agreement by other means. {: #subdebate-39-0-s8 .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra .- The Treasurer's explanation differs somewhat from that which he offered in his secondreading speech. I have no objection to a second advance under a housing scheme if the person who makes the application, has disposed of his home and wishes to build another in a different locality. Surely the committee does not contemplate sanctioning a loan for the building of a second house for any person. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- It is presumed that if a person makes a second application his previous home will have been purchased. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- Under paragraph c it is possible for a person to obtain a loan for the erection of a second house. {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr Lazzarini: -- That is equivalent to financing speculation. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- Of course, it is. I am not quarrelling with a person who wishes to acquire a second home, but I object to any Government scheme being availed of for that purpose when there are not sufficient funds to provide one house for every applicant. Surely the committee does not stand for that. I certainly will oppose this provision in the clause unless the Treasurer, can make it clear that what I am complaining of is not contemplated. {: .speaker-KRD} ##### Mr McGrath: -- It is . not allowed under the State acts. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- Under the State acts it is not possible to get a second loan for the building of another house ; but under this bill an applicant is entitled ' toa second loan after he has repaid his first loan. That may be all right if the applicant has sold his first house, and utilizes the proceeds of the second loan for the purchase of or for building a second home. I can understand the position of an applicant who, having acquired a small house under this scheme desires to secure a better home to meet the increasing needs of his family; but the principle to be observed should be that only one house will be provided for every applicant. I have stated the position in order that honorable members may vote on this provision with a full knowledge of all it means. {: #subdebate-39-0-s9 .speaker-KXQ} ##### Mr PARKHILL:
Warringah -- I cannot see the least objection to this proposal. Many school teachers and railway employees may acquire homes under this scheme and subsequently be transferred to another locality. Through the exigencies of their employment they may be compelled to leave the district in which they have built and settle in an entirely different part of a State. What objection can there be to a man who has already paid off the loan on his house and is transferred to another district obtaining a second loan for theerection of another home- in that district? This scheme will do much to relieve the house shortage which exists in practically all the metropolitan cities of the Commonwealth. For my part, I would liberalize it by permitting a man to obtain a loan for the erection of two semi-detached houses, so that he could rent one and live in the other. {: .speaker-JZK} ##### Mr Coleman: -- That would be encouraging landlordism. {: .speaker-KXQ} ##### Mr PARKHILL: -- It would not be a bad idea if we could encourage landlordism amongst a certain section of the community. The last thing that the Labour party wishes to do is to allow the workers to own their own homes. They know that a man who owns his own home is impervious to the pernicious doctrines promulgated by some honorable members opposite. A basic difference between the Nationalist party and the Labour party is that, while the former desires to enable men to own the freehold of their own homes, the Labour party has always opposed their doing so. Every writer on socialism states that once a man becomes the owner of the freehold of the block of land on which his house is built, he rids himself of his socialistic ideas. The Nationalist party has a legitimate interest in providing homes for the people. The clause before the committee has no objectionable features. There is no reason why a man should not own two houses. If the possession of two homes is something to be deplored, let honorable members opposite say so. If, by the sweat of his brow, or by reason of his brains, a man can secure two houses, let him get them, because the community will be the better for it. I strongly support the clause as it stands. I would go further and liberalize the scheme by permitting the building of two semi-detached houses, the owner to live in one and let the other. This would not only be a means of enabling a home-seeker to obtain a house for himself, but it would also help to overcome the. general shortage of houses, {: #subdebate-39-0-s10 .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa .- The honorable member for Warringah **(Mr. Parkhill)** reminds me of the story of an Irishman who believed in everybody having a house of his own and one to let. The honorable member said that the States were not building a sufficient number of houses, because the State governments had not sufficient money, and now he desires that the money available under this scheme should be used in providing more than one house for an individual applicant. No guarantee is given that the provisions of the bill will not be used to allow applicants to build two or more houses, provided that those applying for loans have discharged all obligation in respect of previous loans. I take it that this scheme is based on the principle of working-men's homes that are provided on the rent-paying system. If that is not so, the Government is not carrying out the promises that it made to the people at the last election. If the scheme is to be used to enable an applicant to build semi-detached cottages, it is a wonder that the honorable member for Warringah does not advocate the building of terraces of houses. But there are not many semi-detached cottages in Warringah, arid when the honorable member charged the Labour party with not wanting workmen to own their own homes, he was merely indulging in the " sob stuff " with which his party wins elections. The honorable member's party has not placed a genuine issue before the people at any election of which I know. I shall certainly vote against the clause, unless it is clearly provided that all applicants for one home will be satisfied before any person is assisted in acquiring a second home. I do not think that the honorable member for Warringah will be thanked by the Treasurer for his speech. Either he has "let the cat out of the bag," or the Treasurer has misrepresented the intention of the Government with regard to the bill. Nobody should be allowed to acquire a second home under this scheme when there are hundreds of working-men anxious to obtain houses. {: #subdebate-39-0-s11 .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · Cowper · CP -- I desire to clear the matter up by pointing out that the conditions of the scheme in clause 9 paragraph (&) have been adopted *in globo* from the State acts, and were incorporated at the suggestion of the Government Savings Bank of New South Wales. It is proposed that no advance shall be made until the commission is satisfied that the scheme as administered by the authority contains provision under which no loan will be made by the authority to any person who already owns a house, except for the purpose of discharging the mortgage upon that house. The second condition is that a loan will not be made to any person whose wife or husband has already received a loan, except to buy or acquire another home, after the obligation in respect of the first has been met. In other words, if a man has disposed of his first home, and has repaid the authority what he owes in respect of it, he is still eligible to buy a home in another locality. I urge that the provisions be retained as. suggested by the State authorities. {: #subdebate-39-0-s12 .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra .- It is well for us to have the assurance of the Treasurer that under regulations to be framed the scheme will not operate as outlined in his second-reading speech, or as suggested by the honorable member for "Warringah. It is clear that under the original act nobody who already owns a house can obtain an advance under this scheme. Paragraph c is ambiguous, and we should not allow it to go unchallenged; but as the Treasurer has given an assurance that it will not be interpreted contrary to the spirit of paragraph *b, i,* of section 9, I am prepared to allow it to go. However, I suggest that an improvement could be made in the language of the amendment now before -the committee. {: .speaker-K99} ##### Sir Elliot Johnson: -- It is advisable ;to have the meaning made clear. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- Yes, and it cannot be clear in view of the considered explanation that the Treasurer gave in his second-reading speech. The provision, as amended, will read " A loan is not made to any person who, or whose wife or [husband, has already received a loan and has not repaid it in full." {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE Page: -- That should be :.read in conjunction with the other pro- - visions. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- But under every : State housing scheme loans cannot be advanced to persons who already have received loans for houses. The cheap gibes of the honorable member for Warringah rare entirely out of place in discussing a matter of this nature. I advise the hon.orable member to study the bill before he begins to lecture the committee. This is a proposal to provide homes for the homeless. Thousands of persons are in search of houses, and years will elapse before their wants can be supplied. {: #subdebate-39-0-s13 .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · Cowper · CP .- I desire to correct a wrong impression that is being formed by reminding honorable members of what I said in my second-reading speech. I remarked on that occasion - >It was also pointed out that quite frequently a person who is buying a house through a State authority changes his place of residence to some other quite different district. Provision is, therefore, made that in the case of such a person fully repaying the amount advanced to him in respect of a house in one locality, he may obtain a new advance to enable him to secure a home in an altogether different, place. That does not mean that a person is to have two homes. The provision must be read in conjunction with the rest of the bill, particularly sub-paragraph *i* of paragraph *b* of section 9. In regard to paragraph e it was felt by the State authorities that the advance of an amount for building or buying a house under the original act might not be held by the court to cover the rent purchase system of providing homes. In most States a small deposit, say 10 per cent., is taken, and instead of the person for whom the home is to be built receiving the title deed of his allotment, the State authorities retain it, and allow him to pay off so much a week until 30, 40 or 50 per cent." of the loan has been paid. Then the title is issued to him, and he executes a mortgage for the balance of the claim. It was felt that, if the question should arise at any time, it might be held that rent-purchase agreements were not provided for unless they were specificially mentioned. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr Scullin: -- Does that provision refer to purchases from private persons? {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- No. Take the case of a house that is to cost £1,000. A man makes a deposit of, say, £100, and provides the land. The State bank, or whatever authority undertakes to erect the house, retains the title in not merely the land, but also the house on the land until the purchaser has discharged a substantial portion of his indebtedness. It then allows him to hold the title and get a mortgage upon it. It was felt that the terms of the original act might be held by a court not to cover that particular case; consequently, this additional provision was asked for. Clause agreed to. Clause 4 (Power of Commonwealth to borrow moneys to grant to Savings Bank). Br, EARLE PAG.E (CowperTreasurer) [9.47]. - This clause deals with the provision of a sinking fund. Honorable m.embers may remember that when we were considering the original bill I informed them that the State Savings Bank of Victoria desired that any money which was- loaned to them for the purpose of carrying out a housing scheme should be for a fixed term, say twenty years, at the end of which time the . full amount would be repaid to the Commonwealth Savings Bank. . Provision was then made for- the establishment of a sinking, fund covering a period of twenty years, and for the . loan operations to be conducted in such a manner that when repayments were made to the State authority by borrowers the money could be used afresh in the erection of additional homes in the manner which is adopted by the Commonwealth with respect to War Service Homes repayments, The New South Wales Savings Bank,- however, said that it would prefer to make repayments to the- Commonwealth Bank as it received them from its clients, and to have a fresh transaction in connexion with loans for future building operations. The matter was discussed by the- Savings Bank authorities of the Commonwealth and the States, with a view to making the provision sufficiently elastic to embrace any method of repayment that . might be suggested by the different authorities. The Commonwealth desired to retain as much as possible of the wording of the original act, and asked the Crown Law authorities to suggest a form of words that would meet the position. I must confess that the first result of their efforts was unintelligible to me and the Treasury officials. We felt that there was a possibility of the language being misconstrued, because we could not say that it conveyed the meaning which was intended. Eventually the form which has now been adopted was suggested, making the matter one of agreement between the Treasurer and the Common wealth Savings Bank. Accordingly, it is proposed to omit sub-sections 3 and 4 of section 10 of the principal act and to insert in their stead other sub-sections. one of which reads - {: type="1" start="3"} 0. Advances made in pursuance of the last preceding sub-section shall bear such rate of interest and be subject to such terms and conditions of repayment as are agreed upon between the Treasurer and the Savings Bank. It -was felt that the relations between the Treasurer and the Commonwealth Sayings Bank would always be such as would ensure that the bank would receive th,e money at the rate at which it was raised, A certain amount of difficulty attaches to the certification of the rate by the Auditor-General, because money might be loaned to the bank . several months prior to its being raised, and considerable feeling or differences of opinion might be engendered if there should be an alteration in the rates and either the Treasury or the bank considered that it was not being treated properly. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- Will there need to be a separate agreement with each State? {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE: -- No. We shall deal only with the Commonwealth Savings Bank. Repayments by that institution will be made directly to the national debt sinking fund, because they come under the head of " recoverable moneys." Consequently, there is no possibility of an avoidance of any obligation. In addition to the provision that I have explained, it is proposed that - >Pending the borrowing of money in pursuance of this act, the Treasurer may, from time to time, advance to the Savings Bank, out of any moneys in the Commonwealth Public Account,- sums not exceeding the moneys which the Treasurer is authorized to borrow in pursuance of this act. The object of that provision is to enable the Treasurer to lend certain revenue moneys, if they are required by the Commonwealth Savings Bank, in anticipation of the flotation of a loan. I trust that I have explained the position to the satisfaction of honorable members. {: #subdebate-39-0-s14 .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra .- The Treasurer has explained the reason for the proposed change, but I fail to see what justification there is for it. The honorable gentleman said that the present system raised difficulties. I cannot see that there are any. The original act provides clearly and definitely that the Treasurer may float a loan and advance' the money to the Commonwealth Saving's Bank, so that it in turn may make advances to a house-building authority, and that it must pay to the Treasurer the rate of interest at which the loan is raised: The honorable gentleman said that some feeling might be engendered between the Savings Bank and the Treasury with respect to what was a fair rate of interest; because a, certain time might elapse between the lending of the money and the raising of the loan. I suggest that, with a view to preventing such a feeling from arising, the proper procedure would be to leave to the Auditor-General the decision as to what was a fair rate of interest. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- I did not mean " feeling " but rather a difference of opinion. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- That is the same thing. If a difference of opinion should arise between the Treasury and the directors of the Commonwealth Savings Bank, who is best able to give a decision regarding the rate of interest that should be charged? {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -if there is any difference of Opinion the matter will undoubtedly be submitted to the AuditorGeneral. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- The Treasurer says' that the matter will be submitted to the Auditor-General; yet he deliberately asks Parliament to remove that provision from the act ! {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- How can the rate of interest be fixed in connexion with loans out of the Commonwealth public accounts ? {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- They come within a different category, and can be covered by the provision in the bill. {: .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr Earle Page: -- That provision covers the two cases. If the Treasurer can be depended upon to behave reasonably in the one, why not in the other? {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr SCULLIN: -- Why was it originally provided that the question should be determined by the Auditor-General? I think honorable members will agree that a particular significance attaches" to the withdrawal of any provision from- an act. This is a slipshod 'method of conducting business. The manner in which the rate of interest shall be ascertained hasbeen definitely laid down. It is merely a matterof actuarial calculation; but; in the event of anydispute,thedetermina- tionrestswiththeAuditor-General.The procedure in relation to the calculation of the rate of interest, that ought to be charged on money loaned from the public accounts could be provided for in general terms. The Treasurer has said that the bulk of the money that will be used for this purpose will be taken from Savings Bank deposits. I contend that; if the 'scheme is extended so, as to cover a fund of £20,000,000, the bulk of. that money will he raised by way of loans. Surely,then,weshouldretaintheprovision whereby the Auditor-General is the person charged with the responsibility of determining the rate of interest that shall be charged ! It is not easy to suggest an amendment,, because rates of interest and repayments are dealt with compositely. I submit that there ought to be two separate and distinct clauses, one dealing with the rate 'of interest that shall be paid, and the other with the provision of a sinking fund. Both of those which appear in the, original act aresensibleprovisions, which received the unanimous approval of this Parliament. Now we are" asked to remove them from the act. It is not a right way to deal with' the financial relations of the various administrations of this country. {: #subdebate-39-0-s15 .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST:
East Sydney .I support the contention of the honorable member for Yarra **(Mr. Scullin).** I cannot understand what has actuated . the Treasurer in his proposal to make the suggested . alteration in the law. If the Auditor-General is what we believe him to be, he should continue to discharge this responsibility. So far as I know, he has' not done anything to forfeit the confidence which honorable members repose in him. Despite the serious nature of this proposal, members of the committee' are' treating it in an off-handed manner, their attitude giving one the impression that " everything in the garden is lovely." In financial affairs difficulties arise leading to enormous expense and creating a great deal of bad feeling. The Committee ought to know why the Auditor- General lias been removed from the position of arbitrator given to him by the original act. {: #subdebate-39-0-s16 .speaker-C7E} ##### Dr EARLE PAGE:
Treasurer · Cowper · CP -- The matter to which the Deputy Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Scullin)** has referred has been given a great deal of consideration by the Treasury, the Commonwealth Savings Bank, and the State Savings Banks. It was submitted that it was necessary for the State authorities almost at once to know the rate of interest they were to be charged; that as some of the money made available to them would come out of revenue, some from deposits in the savings bank, and some out of loans which might not at the actual moment have been raised, it was necessary to arrive at some means whereby we might closely approximate the position, although we might not in every case get the absolute amount of interest that it cost. After considering the matter very fully, including arguments identical with those used by honorable members to-night, the directors of the Commonwealth Bank, the Treasury, and the law officers of the Crown agreed that the method now proposed would be absolutely the best to adopt; because it would give a certain amount of elasticity, while at the same time the position would be amply safeguarded. It would be almost impossible to find forms of words intelligible to honorable members and at the same time not capable of being misconstrued, to cover all the circumstances that might arise. {: #subdebate-39-0-s17 .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong .- I quite agree with the contention put forward by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Scullin),** but I am prepared to let the matter go because the AuditorGeneral will not be absolutely shut out by the amendment. If the Treasury, or the Commonwealth Savings Bank, makes a mistake, I have not the slightest doubt the Auditor-General will have no hesitation in calling either of them to book for it. I see no reason for the proposed alteration, and I support the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in his attitude; but we have this pleasing feature that in the final analysis the Auditor-General, in his capacity as policeman over the public finances, will come down with the lash if errors are made. I shall not press the matter further; the responsibility rests with the Treasurer. {: #subdebate-39-0-s18 .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST:
East Sydney .- An ordinary individual would say that the best way to prevent friction is to utilize the services of an unbiased individual like the Auditor-General, who is controlled not by the Government but by Parliament, and whose sole interest it is to see that the assets of the Commonwealth are preserved, and that injustice is done to no one. We have already had instances of money advanced by the Commonwealth to the States for land purchases being lost, and we do not want any repetition of that in connexion with the present housing scheme. The proposal in the original bill displayed the aptitude of the Treasurer to deal with, transactions of this character, but now one would imagine that the provision he seeks to amend was inserted in the original measure for amusement. Any one associated with a commercial enterprise will admit that the best means of preventing frictionisto leave the decision of a difficulty to an arbitrator; but the provision for the appointment of an arbitrator in an important matter in which the Commonwealth and the States are concerned is now to be deleted, and the decision is to be left to the Government of the day, which may deal with it in a way that it thinks will prove of advantage to its own party. Disputes may arise as to what allowance should be made for depreciation. The whole thing is bristling with difficulties. But similar difficulties occur in the commercial world every day, and they are easily settled by the appointment of an arbitrator. I doubt whether the Government can interfere with the Auditor-General in this matter since it is his duty to audit all Government accounts. I see no reason for this amendment. The Treasurer has been very badly advised. I am sure he will live to regret his present proposal. Clause agreed to. Title agreed to. Bill reported without amendment. Message recommending appropriation reported. *Ordered -* >That the. message be taken into consideration in committee forthwith. > > *In committee* (Consideration of GovernorGeneral's message) : > >Motion (by **Dr. Earle** Page) agreed to - >That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purposes of a bill for an act to amend the Commonwealth Housing Act 1927. Resolution reported and adopted. Committee's report on the bill adopted. Bill,by *leave,* read a third time. {: .page-start } page 4369 {:#debate-40} ### SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT Motion (by **Mr. Bruce)** agreed to - >That the House at its rising adjourn until Thursday next, at half-post two o'clock p.m. House adjourned at 10.15 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 24 April 1928, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1928/19280424_reps_10_118/>.