House of Representatives
1 August 1934

13th Parliament · 1st Session

  1. House of Representatives
  2. 13th Parliament
  3. 1934

Mr. Speaker (Hon.G. H. Mackay) took thechair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 1010

QUESTION

EXPORTS OF MEAT TO GREAT BRITAIN

Mr HAWKER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Will the Minister for Commerce say whether the statement reported to have been made by thePrime Minister of New Zealand concerning the extent of the restriction upon the exports of New Zealand meat to the United Kingdom, which is entailed by the proposals of the British Government, indicates that those proposals have generally been made public in New Zealand? If so, will the honorable gentleman take steps to have them made public in Australia ?

Mr STEWART:
Minister for Commerce · PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– I have noticed in the press comments attributed to the Prime Minister of New Zealand regarding certain communications received by him from the Government of Great Britain. The communications forwarded to the Commonwealth Government are now receiving attention, but it is not considered desirable, in the interests of the industry itself, that they should be made public at the present time. I shall, however, consult with the Government with a view to seeing whether a comprehensive statement, on the mutter may be made before the House rises.

page 1010

QUESTION

TARIFF BOARD REPORTS

Mr WHITE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · BALACLAVA, VICTORIA · UAP

– I lay on the table the following paper: -

Tariff Board - reportand recommendation - Cotton Piece Goods; Blue Denims, Drills, Dungarees,&c. and move -

That thepaper beprinted.

This report was not received in sufficient time to enable printed copies of it to he circulated among honorable members. I shall make arrangements to have them circulated as soon as is practicable.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Mr WHITE:

– I also lay on the table the following papers: -

Tariff Board - reports and recommendations -

Citrus fruits

Copra

Cordage, rope, twines, &c.

Jute yarn, hemp and flax yarn

Waddings and cotton wool

Cotton towels and towelling n.e.i.

Ordered to be printed.

page 1010

QUESTION

ADMINISTRATOR OF NEW GUINEA

Mr JAMES:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Prime Minister if it. is a fact that the Government has approved of the appointment of the honorable member for Werriwa (Mr. McNicoll) as Administrator of New Guinea.

Mr LYONS:
Prime Minister · WILMOT, TASMANIA · UAP

– No such appointment has been made.

Mr Gander:

– Will it be made?

Mr LYONS:

– When an appointment is made, an announcement in regard to it also will be made.

page 1011

QUESTION

ADMINISTRATION” OE PENSIONS ACT

Mr HUTCHINSON:
INDI, VICTORIA

– Has the Assistant Treasurer read in the Labor Daily of yeserday’s date an article headed “ Grotesque Injustice of Pensions Act.” and goes on to state that a pitiful case is disclosed at Newtown, where the crippled daughter of a deceased pensioner has been called upon to refund to the Government the petty balance of £7 Os. lOd. remaining from an insurance policy of the deceased? Can the honorable gentle: man say whether the facts as stated are correct t

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Minister (Treasury) · CORIO, VICTORIA · UAP

– I have no knowledge of the case other than that gained from -the Labor Daily. If the facts are as stated, I should say that the action of the Deputy Commissioner was absolutely correct. I wish to add, however, that if the deceased pensioner’ has willed property’ to a child who also is a pensioner, the Government’s claim on the estate is waived. When a pensioner dies intestate and the property goes to the next of kin, other considerations apply. On the facts disclosed in the letter of the Deputy Commissioner, this is clearly a case in which hardship may be claimed. There are approximately 100,000 pensioners in New South Wales, and the pensions staff cannot possibly lie expected to know if a beneficiary is a pensioner or not, or whether hardship may properly he claimed.

Mr ROSEVEAR:
DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Is it a fact that the deceased mother was an old-age pensioner, and the crippled daughter an invalid pensioner? Is it also a fact that the department has obtained, by means of the questionnaire which applicants for pensions have had to fill in, a full knowledge of the circumstances of this family? That being so, does the Minister say that the Deputy Commissioner lacked necessary information in regard to hardship?

Mr CASEY:

– I can only repeat that I have no knowledge of .this case other than that which I have gained from the Labor Daily. I have already said that it is possible that this is a case in which the hardship provisions of the act should he invoked. It would appear from the letter published from the Deputy Commissioner that up to that stage such action had nor been taken. I give honorable members generally the assurance that if the facts are as stated, and hardship is claimed, the Government will waive its claim.

page 1011

QUESTION

DETENTION OE SOVIET LITERATURE

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA

– My attention has been drawn to the statement published in the press that certain books and pamphlets which a Mr. Goldsmith brought back with him from a visit to Russia, which he made in search of knowledge, were seized by customs officials. Will the Minister for Trade and Customs say whether they have yet been released?

Mr WHITE:
UAP

-These documents hare been retained merely for purposes of examination.

page 1011

QUESTION

WHEAT AND BUTTER

Import Duties in Europe.

Mr JENNINGS:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

-Can the Minister for Commerce inform the House as to the present rates of duty on Australian wheat and butter in Germany, Italy and France?

Mr STEWART:
UAP

– I have not the information before me, but I shall see that it is supplied to the honorable member in due course.

page 1011

QUESTION

CANBERRA HOSPITAL

Mr NOCK:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Was an inquiry held recently in connexion with the administration of the Canberra Government Hospital? Has the Minister for Health yet received the report of the inquiry, and, if sp, will he lay it on the table of the House before the close of the session?

Mr MARR:
Minister for Health · PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– I have no knowledge of such an inquiry having been held at a recent date, but about twelve months ago a retired officer of the New South Wales Department of Health reported on the administration of the Canberra Hospital for the information of the federal department. The recommendations submitted by him have, .to a certain extent, been adopted. An advisory committee of five Canberra residents has been formed, and it now advises the Minister and the department in connexion with the work of the hospital.

page 1012

QUESTION

WHEAT COMMISSION’S REPORT

Mr SCHOLFIELD:
WANNON, VICTORIA

– Has any report been received from the royal commission on the wheat industry? If so, when will it be made available to honorable members?

Mr LYONS:
UAP

– An interim report has been received, and I propose to table it in the House to-morrow. At the same time, I shall make a pronouncement as to the policy the Government intends to pursue in regard to the industry.

page 1012

QUESTION

DEPORTATIONS

Mr ROSEVEAR:
DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · LANG LAB; ALP from 1936; ALP (N-C) from 1940; ALP from 1941

– La st week I asked the Minister for the Interior how many of the 140 persons deported during the life of the present Government had been sent away from Australia because of their communistic or other political activities, and the Minister undertook to have the files searched. I now ask him whether any great difficulty has been experienced in obtaining the information sought by me, and when a reply may be expected?

Mr PERKINS:
Minister for the Interior · EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– A search through 140 documents is necessitated, and the work has not yet been completed.

page 1012

UNEMPLOYMENT IN CANBERRA

Formal Motion for Adjournment

Mr SPEAKER (Hon G H Mackay:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND

– I have received a communication from the honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley) intimating that he desires to move the adjournment of the House this afternoon for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, “ The existing unemployment in Canberra.”

Five honorable members having risen in support of the motion,

Mr BLAKELEY:
Darling

.- I move -

That the House do now adjourn.

My object is to draw attention to a public scandal in the Federal Capital Territory, duo to the disgraceful conditions allowed by this Government in regard to the 700 unemployed and their dependants, whose standard of living has been reduced to that of coolies. This position should not be tolerated for a moment in the leading city of the Commonwealth. For two and a half years the Opposition has been endeavouring to drive this Government to do something for the relief of the unemployed. W e have placed facts and figures before it as regards both the general position, and the predicament of the unemployed in federal territories. Up to now, however, the Government has either deliberately refused to acknowledge its responsibility in the matter, or is just as deliberately endeavouring to starve men out of Canberra. The care of citizens of the Federal Capital Territory and the Northern Territory is exclusively a matter for the attention of the Federal Government, which should and must ultimately carry that responsibility; but every means is taken to prevent the unemployed in Canberra from obtaining sufficient work to enable them adequately to feed and clothe themselves and the members of their families. I make this statement deliberately because in this city are to be found people who are living absolutely under coolie conditions. The policy of this Government is one of “ wait and see “. The Prime Minister (Mr. Lyons) has stated, probably a dozen times, that it is impossible for the Government to provide work for all the unemployed, and that it is necessary to bring about such conditions as would encourage private enterprise to absorb them. On another occasion he said that the Government had given relief to private enterprise, by a reduction of taxation and by other means, to make it possible for them to provide more work. This has been said so many times that every honorable member knows it by heart. It has probably been announced on 40 different occasions in many places. I now ask the Prime Minister if he can say in what direction private enterprise could be encouraged sufficiently in Canberra to enable it to absorb ten unemployed men, let alone 700.

This Government has not only miserably failed to deal with the unemployment position generally, but it has also callously refused to rise to its responsibilities in the Federal Capital Territory. Whenever unemployment has been discussed in the House, the Government and its supporters have said that all is well in Canberra, and that never under any Government, including Labour ministries, have the unemployed done so well. The Government points to sums of money placed on the Estimates for expenditure in this territory. This may have provided work for skilled artisans, but their numbers are small in proportion to the unskilled workmen in, for instance, the building trade. At the National Library, the War Memorial and similar jobs will be found a far larger percentage of skilled artisans than of unskilled workmen. In fact, various tradesmen have had to be brought to Canberra from elsewhere for some of the work on these undertakings. Jobs should be provided to absorb the 700 men who are now unemployed, and of whom very few are tradesmen. These men are skilled in railway construction, road building, dam sinking, and the like; but they have no trade at their finger tips. When, on a previous occasion, I said that the men then on the Canberra unemployment register were being worked for practically starvation wages, it was retorted, on behalf of the Government, that it was ridiculous to talk about starvation in Canberra. On that occasion the Minister for the Interior (Mr. Perkins) said, “I give the House an assurance that there will be no starvation, and that no one will go without adequate food and clothing in the Federal Capital Territory.” I throw that statement back in the teeth of the Government. Any one who says that the 700 men and their dependants, to whom I have referred, are adequately fed and clothed is either refusing to look a.t the facts or telling deliberate untruths. Plenty of work could be provided for these men in the Federal Capital Territory. The first section of the lake scheme could be put in hand, and the weir constructed at Yarralumla. The necessary road surrounds and plantations provided for in that section of the scheme could be put in hand. State-circle could be completed, and certain afforestation work could be done. All this work, and other operations of a similar character, which could be done by unskilled labour, would provide employment for the unfortunate unskilled workless men in this Territory. I challenge any one to rebut my statement that the Government is not doing a fair thing by these unfortunate people.

Although the Scullin Government was faced with bankruptcy almost every week of the first twelve months it was in office, in. consequence of the financial mess that the Bruce-Page Government had left to bc cleaned up, it provided enough employment for the unskilled workers of the community to keep them and their families iu moderate comfort. As the beneficial effect of Labour’s administration of the finances of the nation took effect, the amount of employment was increased from half time to three-quarter time- and, in the last six months of the Scullin Government’s regime, to full time.

Mr Archdale Parkhill:

– Because the unemployed were in the habit of ringing the Minister for Home Affairs up at night at his home.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– That remind* me that the party to which the Postmaster-General (Mr. Parkhill) belongs arranged for travelling unemployed men to make a demonstration in front of Parliament House at that time, purely for political purposes. Not one bona fide Canberra unemployed man participated in that demonstration, which was purely a political dodge. The PostmasterGeneral may sit opposite me and smirk while I am describing the existing scandalous conditions, but that will not assist the Government to avoid its responsibilities.

I have several pay envelopes before me which amply bear out the statement that I made some time ago, and that I repeat to-day - that the unskilled unemployed workers of Canberra are being paid starvation wages. These envelopes may be inspected by honorable members, though, for obvious reasons, I cannot divulge the names of the persons concerned. The first envelope is that of a man, with a wife and one child, who was permitted by this Government, which allegedly looks after the welfare of everybody, to work one week in three. His pay envelope shows that, for his one week’s work, he got £4 10s. 3d. But, after deductions had been made for back and current rent, electricity, and other things, he waa actually paid £3 16s. 9d. for the period, which works out at £1 5s. 7d. a week. The second envelope is also that of a man with a wife and one child He was allowed one week’s work in three, and the net financial result of his operations for the month, after deductions had been made, was £1 2s. 9d. a week. The third envelope is that of a married man with a wife and six children, making a household of eight. He was permitted one week’s work in two, and earned £4 8s. ; but the deductions amounted to £1 12s., which left him with only £2 16s., or £1 8s. a week. A second envelope of that man shows that he was left with a net pay of £2 14s. 5d., which was equivalent to a weekly wage of £1 7s. 2d. A third pay envelope for the same man showed that on that occasion his remuneration was equal to £1 9s. 6d. a week. On thu occasion when he received a pay equivalent to £1 7s. 2d. a week, his income allowed only 2d. a meal for each of the eight persons in the household. I do not think any one would suggest that, under those conditions, a man could spend anything whatever on clothing for either himself or his family. Surely all honorable members will agree that in such a case no deductions should be made from the money earned. If the Government is not able to provide enough work for these people, it should at least allow them to retain the full payment for the work they do. I do not think that any honorable gentleman will suggest that this man, who has a wife and six children, the eldest of whom is a girl of thirteen years, is being treated fairly.

When I was Minister in control of the Territory, during the term of office of the Scullin Government, I laid it down that no more than 5s. a week back rent should be deducted; but that policy has been abandoned by this Government. I also laid it down that no deductions should be made until a man had had six weeks’ constant work. My object was, of course, to allow the men to purchase necessary clothes for themselves and their families. I also directed that no deductions whatever should be made from pay envelopes for the three weeks prior to Christmas.

In view of the facts that I have stated, I submit that when the Minister for the Interior (Mr. Perkins) said some time ago that all the unemployed on the Canberra register would be assured of adequate food and clothing, he was either completely ignorant of the facts or else wished to mislead honorable members. The payments being made to the unemployed of Canberra are tragically inadequate. I ask the Government, even at this late hour, to accept its full responsibility for these people and do something to help them. It will, no doubt, be said in reply to my statements that all the unemployed are provided with sufficient work to enable them to reach the standard of the dole. The man with six children receives a payment which averages only 2d. a meal for the whole of the members of his family. That man will now be given work sufficient to enable him to earn up to the amount of the dole. While the dole standard is higher in the Federal Capital Territory than in the States, it is by no means adequate. It provides only for the bare food requirements of a man, his wife and children, and makes no provision for the purchase of clothing, boots, shoes, &c.

Mr Hughes:

– What is the amount of the dole paid in the Federal Capital Territory?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– About 6s. 5d. for a single man, and correspondingly higher amounts for married men according to the number of children. The figures may be found on reference to Hansard. The Government has nothing to be proud of in respect of them. Obviously, the unemployed of Canberra cannot be expected to bear much longer the callous treatment meted out to them. The Government says that no one is permitted to starve in Canberra or be short of adequate clothing. At the same time it proposes to subsidize the Canberra Relief Society to the extent of £1,000. The very fact that it is proposed to make available this sum of money to this society is an admission that the Go vernment has refused to recognize its own responsibility to provide the workers of Canberra with sufficient work to maintain them. The Government continues to mete out to the unemployed this callous treatment, relieved only by work which is made Available at times for periods of from one to three months. Since the Lyons Government assumed office continuous hardship has been imposed upon the workers of the Federal Capital Territory, and it is shameful and scandalous that such treatment should be allowed to continue.

Mr PERKINS:
Monaro- Minister for the Interior · Eden · UAP

– It is a constant surprise to me that all these attacks made on the Government with respect to its alleged failure to provide employment in the Federal Capital Territory come from the honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley). In replying to charges of this nature, it is necessary to make comparisons of the efforts made by this Government to relieve the problem with those made by the Government of which the honorable member was a member. We find that during the honorable member’s administration as Minister for Home Affairs, many of these men were receiving only one week’s work in twelve. It was only towards the end of his term of office that married men were receiving one week in three, and single men one week in five, and since this Government has been in office that average has been constantly maintained. In addition work has been provided at Christmas to ensure that the workers should receive some Christmas cheer, and in June for mid-winter relief. The problem of unemployment in Canberra assumes more serious proportions as the years go on. The number of unskilled workers is increasing at the rate of . 100 a year. They are unable to secure employment in the various States, and grave difficulty is experienced in finding work in the Federal Capital Territory for unskilled workmen, despite what the honorable member for Darling has said. Only a few weeks ago this Government, as an attempt to solve the difficulty in Canberra, proposed to send 100 men to South Australia to be employed on semi-permanent work on the EastWest railway. Objections, however, were raised, mainly by honorable members from South Australia and, as the result of the pressure they brought to bear the Government decided not to pursue that policy. But the important point is that although a call was made for 100 men for this employment, only 54 responded to the call despite the fact that the work to be provided was practically permanent - at any rate it was to be for a period of three years ; and of the 54 whe responded to the call, only 30 were able-bodied men. If the unemployed in Canberra had been in the desperate straits suggested by the honorable member, surely there would have been a greater response to that call.

Mr Archdale Parkhill:

– They were advised not to go.

Mr PERKINS:

– That is true; at any rate they were advised not to come to South Australia.

Mr Blakeley:

– Is that why it has been decided to starve them in Canberra ?

Mr PERKINS:

– No. These men are receiving work in the same ratio as formerly. A good deal of work of an unskilled nature, such as road work, will be made available when the Estimates’ are passed. In the meantime the men have not been allowed to suffer. As I have said before, the previous average has been maintained. The honorable member for Darling has said that as Minister for Home Affairs he introduced the policy of making a deduction from the pay of these men of 5s. a week for rent. That policy has been continued by this Government. I am assured by the officers that exactly the same conditions in this respect exist to-day as obtained when the honorable member was administering the department.

Mr Blakeley:

– The Minister has been deliberately misled.

Mr PERKINS:

– When the honorable member was in control ofthe Department of Home Affairs the number of registered unemployed in Canberra was 540. Today they number 716. Within twelve months, at the present rate of increase of population, due to young people growing up and qualifying for registration, it is estimated that this number will be increased by at least another 100. During the last year or two we have added materially to the plantations of the city, which has resulted in additional expenditure on maintenance. The Government is now seeking some form of remunerative work for the absorption of these men. In 1930-31, during the regime of the Scullin Government, the amount voted for expenditure on Canberra was £262,500; in 1933- 34, the amount provided was £321,198, and on the Estimates for 1934- 35 the very substantial sum of £493,828 has been provided. It is true, as was stated by the honorable member, that employment is now available for skilled workmen on such undertakings as the National War Memorial, the National Library and others, with the result that practically every tradesman is in work. This is in marked contrast to the situation which existed when the honorable member was Minister in control of the Territory. At that time, many skilled workers were unable to obtain work at their trades, but were given other rational unskilled employment. The present Government has also re-instituted the system under which loans are made available to private persons for building homes. The system was suspended a few years ago, but is now once more being availed of, and many persons are, by (bis means, building homes of their own in Canberra. Apart from this, additional employment is being provided by the erection of the two large blocks of flats now under construction. It is possible that, as the year advances, other works will be put in hand. We must remember that no provision was made in the Estimates last year for such works as the War Memorial or the National Library, yet they are now providing employment for many workers. I can assure the Coorabie member that this Government fully realizes its responsibility to the unemployed, and we shall discharge it equally as well as the previous government, if not better.

There is in Canberra a benevolent society presided over by Colonel Goodwin, the purpose of which is to help families which are in distress through sickness or other causes. It does not concert itself directly with unemployment, hut it is doing excellent work in the community. I am pleased to be able to say that the calls on this fund during the last six months have been fewer than for any corresponding period since this Government has been in office, which shows that the general situation has improved as a result of the policy which the Government is pursuing. We must ask ourselves what was the intention of the honorable mem ber for Darling in bringing this matter forward now ? He must know that the unemployed are being looked after quite as well as when he was in office. In fact, the probability is that if a Labour Government were in power again, the unemployed would fare worse.

Mr BEASLEY:
West Sydney

– Even the Minister for the Interior (Mr. Perkins) admits that the condition of unskilled workers in the Federal Capital Territory is worse to-day than ever it has been. It is, therefore, our duty to consider what can bo done to relieve the situation, rather than to indulge in recriminations, and in making comparisons between what was done by different governments. The honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley) dealt with the problem as it exists at the moment, and we are entitled now to make comparisons and to view the matter in the light of the promises so freely made by the members of this Government before the last election. The Minister claimed that the unemployed in Canberra were being treated generously, but only last night I was informed by some of the men that the deductions from their pay by this Government were heavier than those made by the last government. Whatever the position may be with regard to them, however, it cannot be denied that those who now form the Government told the public before the last elections that, if they were returned to office, the problem of unemployment would be solved. All that was lacking, they said, was confidence, and if their government were returned confidence would bc restored and prosperity would return. There is evidently something radically wrong with the policy which the Government has been applying when the unemployment situation is steadily growing worse even in the Federal Capital Territory, which is directly under the Government’s own control. The Minister referred to a “ call up” which had been made for unemployed men of the Territory to go to South Australia on railway work, and he said that, although applications were invited for 100 positions, only 54 men responded. Honorable members opposite cheered ironically, their idea being, apparently, that the men could not be so badly off here if they would not accept the offer of employment when it was made. Before condemning the men, however, we should consider the matter from their point of view. It is not always possible for a man, who has established a home in one place, to take up his belongings, and move away to South Australia at a moment’s notice. Circumstances might be such that he would be actually better off by remaining here on the dole.

Mr PERKINS:

– They were offered permanent employment.

Mr BEASLEY:

– There is no such thing as permanent employment to-day, either in tho service of the Government, or in private employment. There is not even permanent employment in the Public Service. The Minister tried to create an impression adverse to the unemployed, but they may have a complete answer to his suggestion that they deliberately refused employment. We should try to put ourselves in the position of the unemployed, and then we would feel more sympathy with them. How would any honorable member of this House like to have to keep himself and his family on £1 3s. 9d. or £1 5s. a week t

Mr Maxwell:

– The honorable member has not yet made a single practical suggestion.

Mr BEASLEY:

– Unfortunately, the honorable member for Fawkner (Mr. Maxwell) is so infatuated with the Premiers plan that he cannot visualize any other way of dealing with our problems. We, on this side of the House, have protested all along against the policy which the Government has adopted during the economic crisis, and that we were right has been proved by the Government’s failure to solve the problem of unemployment even in the Federal Capital Territory where there are only 700 men to deal with.

Mr E J HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944

– The honorable member should quote some figures regarding the amount of unemployment in New South Wales when Mr. Lang was Premier.

Mr BEASLEY:

– Figures will not fill empty stomachs. The Minister has not denied that the living conditions of 700 unskilled workers are of a very low standard. It is claimed that the circumstances to-day are very much worse than those that existed under the previous administration, and that heavier deductions are being made from the small pay they receive. I have obtained my facts from questions put to the men themselves last night. I accept their word, just as the Minister accepts that of his officials. The Government should at least give a lead in the alleviation of unemployment by caring properly for those who are in its own Territory. Within a few weeks it will be judged by the results of its efforts in the Federal Capital Territory, and there is not the slightest doubt arising out of the judgment of the people that there will be a change in the administration of this country.

Dr MALONEY:
Melbourne

.- When I first entered Parliament I recognized that the greatest trouble in Australia was that of unemployment. The first public meeting that I addressed subsequent to my election was held in the shadow of the Melbourne Gaol. I then said that although I had never felt the pangs of hunger, I had severely suffered from the agonies of thirst and that, if hunger was as bad as thirst, I would take what I wanted, let people call it theft if they would. I also said that if I had a wife and children dependent upon me I would do even worse. Neither this nor the last Government can be said to have done all that it might for the unemployed. It is estimated that the accumulated wealth of Australia amounts to-day to £4,300,000,000. That would enable £660 to be given to every man, woman and child in the community. Let us not make comparisons between what has been done by one government and another. Such an attitude is worthy of the remark made by Shakespeare “A plague on both your houses.” I speak on behalf of the unemployed, who, I believe, have the sympathy of every honorable member of this House. Unemployment is the greatest curse in the world, with the sole exception of war. The pangs of hunger may be staved off with a crust of bread and a little weak tea, but they will not build up the human frame. The cursed disease rickets is spreading in Australia because of the lack of proper food. All my life I. have sought by reading and study to garner from every corner of the earth knowledge that might be used for the benefit of Australia. I propose to quote from a work published by a woman who I believe has won the greatest honours conferred upon any woman in Australia. I refer to Suzanne Abramovich, a Bachelor of Arts of the only* free university under the British flag, the University of Perth, and a Bachelor of Medicine and Master of Surgery of the University of Sydney. The degree of Master of Surgery is one of the highest obtainable by either mau or woman. I had to take a much humbler degree when, by the kindness of a rich man in Victoria, I was given the opportunity to study. This lady worked in Russia for a lengthy period, ns a physician and surgeon, and had opportunities to see the manner in which the wonderful hospitals of that country are conducted. Her statements I have verified by my reading of the laws pertaining to the woman and the child. I speak to-day more on behalf of the woman and the child than on behalf of the man. She says -

In Mia So v lot Union a pregnant woman is

Hie guardian of a future citizen.

That is what I stated definitely when I pleaded for pensions for children. The child is the future unit of the State, and as such should have proper food, shelter and clothing, so that it may grow up a healthy adult, which is the greatest asset that any nation can have. She goes on to say-

She is going to fulfil the most splendid of all human functions - tho procreation of the race. The State immediately comes to her aid and places all the scientific and economic assistance possible at her disposal.

Further on she says -

Tn industry, special consideration is given to pregnant women. Two months before confinement they are “iven a holiday on full pay, and for the same period after the birth of the baby. A layette, special nursing allowances and other concessions are routine matters.

Many statements have been made both for and against Russia, but one thing which cannot be contraverted is that it has no unemployment. There is not a word of party politics in this pamphlet from which I have quoted. Under our present wonderful civilization, the cost of keeping a man in the Melbourne Gaol is 26s. a week; yet outside of that institution men are asked to live honestly on 6s. a week if they are single, and on 7s. 6d. a week if they are married. Is that a scientific system? Is it common sense? Is it Christlike? I believe that the last Ministry used its best endeavours to alleviate the unemployment situation, and that the present Administration is doing all that it can, but is hampered by the cursed policy of balancing budgets. I say, “ Hang the budget “ when human health and life are endangered. I hope that at the ensuing elections the dominant issue will be that of the right to work. God never meant that this world should be peopled by only millionaires and paupers. The intention was that any man or woman could take any vacant corner of the earth, cultivate it, and grow food for his or her own requirements. Australia has been blessed by nature with ten times more food than it needs, yet, in the midst of this plenty, men, women and little children lack proper and sufficient nourishment.

Mr SPEAKER:

– The honorable gentleman’s time has expired.

Mr JAMES:
Hunter

.- I support the motion that has been moved by the honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley). Much has been said regarding what the present Government has done for the alleviation of unemployment in different States. It is always claimed that unemployment is not the concern of the Commonwealth. I have disputed that contention from time to time; but even if it be accepted, the argument cannot bo used that unemployment in the Federal Capital Territory is not its responsibility. During the regime of the last Government, I criticized the mover of the motion that we are now discussing for having failed to do what I thought could have been done for tho unemployed at that particular time. I do not think it will be conceded that too much was done by that Government. But under the administration of the present Postmaster-General (Mr. Parkhill) the most brutal and callous treatment was meted out to the unemployed. Men who had come to Canberra from the States were moved on by the police. They had committed no crime, the only charge that could- he laid against them being that they were not in employment. The regulations were so altered that an unemployed person who came to Canberra from a State could receive only one ration coming in and another going out. I understand that they now receive only one ration, and when that is gone they must leave the Territory.

Mr Archdale Parkhill:

– Then my arrangement, which gave them two rations, was not so callous after all.

Mr JAMES:

– It was callous, because when the honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley) was Minister for Home Affairs, the unemployed were allowed to remain indefinitely. There was plenty of accommodation for them, and they were allowed the use of a lorry in which to gather firewood for themselves. They were treated as human beings. The PostmasterGeneral, when Minister for the Interior, had the camps pulled down, so that no accommodation would be available for this unfortunate section.

Mr Archdale Parkhill:

– I cleaned up the place properly, and made Canberra a decent city to live in.

Mr JAMES:

– The Minister certainly cleaned it up, hut I claim that No. 4 camp was kept in a scrupulously clean condition, and I resent the Minister’s suggestion that the unemployed in that camp were dirty in their habits of living. As a matter of fact, they were as clean in that camp as the Minister could be in his own home. This Government has actually shut the door to any visitor from another State who has the misfortune to be unemployed. It was said that under federation State boundaries would be forgotten; yet this Government is trying to make the Federal Capital Territory a select area from which unemployed from the States shall be excluded. The authorities in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria do not adopt this attitude, for the unemployed have the right to move freely from one State to another. Irrespective of their political beliefs, they are at least given sustenance, which is denied them in Canberra if they remain for more than one week.

The care of the unemployed is the concern of all governments, Federal and

State. At present we are merely tinkering with the problem and using it from time to time for political propaganda. The people are sick and tired of being fooled. Prior to the last elections the Government placarded the whole of Australia with the legend “Vote for the United Australia Party and secure for yourselves a good job and steady wages When does it intend to redeem that promise? The previous Ministry at least placed a camp in Canberra at tho disposal of the unemployed, so that they could obtain food and clean shelter; but the present Government pulled down that shelter and put the police on the tracks of these unfortunate men in order to force them to leave the Territory. Nobody can seriously suggest that that is humane treatment, but apparently this Government considers it good enough for the unemployed. If more Government money has been expended in the Territory by this Government than by the previous administration, it has been used in providing work in lieu of the dole. The previous Government practically reached the same figures as its successor by giving the dole for no work at all. The present Ministry has inserted the thin end of the wedge which has led private employers to ask for similar labour conditions to those forced on the unemployed under the government relief scheme.

Mr JENNINGS:
South Sydney

– It is always admitted, when the subject of unemployment is raised, that it ‘ is the greatest unsolved problem and that no nation has yet been able to find a solution. As unemployment is a national ill it was refreshing to hear the honorable member for Hunter (Mr. James) suggest that this matter should be approached from a non-party point of view. I have previously stated in this House that this is a subject which should be approached as one calling for the co-operation of all parties and of all interests, in which we can all play a part irrespective of party. The people outside look to us to act in a truly national way for the good of the whole of the people of the Commonwealth. Therefore to the suggestion that we should attack this question from a nonparty stand-point I fully subscribe. This is. a problem equalling in importance the problems of the world war crisis. There are some things in which we should he able to act as a united body without seeking to make party capital. With both sides of the House fighting each other on this question it is simply chasing’ a shadow in endeavouring to settle the problem on political rather than economic lines. I believe that a parliamentary committee representative of all sections in the chamber making a survey of the problem from all angles and making a recommendation to the House would undoubtedly make greater progress towards its solution than is possible by continuing party bitterness on this our greatest national issue.

Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley

.- I suggest that the honorable member for South Sydney (Mr. Jennings) should put his argument to the test at the next elections, and run as a non-party candidate. His party definitely promised the people that it would put all the unemployed back to work, and required no assistance from other parties to do it. The budget speech contained a reference to unemployment, alleging that there had been a general revival of trade throughout Australia, and that the unemployment figures had improved, owing chiefly to the confidence which had been restored as a result of the administration of the present Government. While all these desirable things are supposed to have happened in other parts of Australia,, we are faced with the fact that this Government has a skeleton in the cupboard in Canberra in the shape of 700 unemployed for whom practically no provision has been made. It is scandalous that a Ministry that can hand back to its wealthy friends £9,000,000 by way of reductions of taxation, and boasts this year of a surplus of £1,000,000, has so starved public works in the Federal Capital Territory that in this small community no fewer than 700 persons are unable to obtain means of livelihood. Does the Government claim that in the cases mentioned by the honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley) adequate provision has been made? Can a married mau with a wife and child live on £1 5s. 7d. a week? What of the unfortunate married man with a similar family who receives only £1 2s. 9d. a week? Does the Minister- for the Interior (Mr. Perkins) allege that the married man who has six children can keep them in decency on a wage of £1 8s. a week? If these deplorable conditions indicate the nature of the “ real prosperity” that we have heard so much about, I am afraid that the vast majority of the people will not be convinced that prosperity has been restored. The Minister has made a great show about the expenditure of £1,000 as a charitable vote. The Government has the -effrontery to say that, apart from the dole ration to the unemployed, it will distribute. £1,000 among the 700 unemployed families in necessitous circumstances in this Territory, although it gave its political supporters £9,,000,000 last year by way of remissions of taxation, and this year has a surplus of £1,000,000 ! I am not concerned with what the Scullin Government did for the unemployed in Canberra ; but I am amazed to hear this Government talking glibly about a restoration of confidence and an increase of employment when, in its own territory, where the population is less than that of the average State electorate in New South Wales, 700 families are not adequately fed and clothed. This fact, in conjunction with the case of the 900 adult postal officials who have been working for boys’ wages, affords a charming example of what this Government regards as adequate provision for a family and a restoration of prosperity.

The honorable member for Darling has shown that the difficulty in the Federal Capital Territory is in relation to unskilled labourers. The volume of work for certain classes of tradesmen is greater than could be coped with by the tradesmen already here, and others have to be obtained elsewhere. But, unfortunately, the unskilled labourers have been left lamenting. They have remained in the Federal Capital Territory in the hope, Micawber-like, that something would turn up.

The honorable member for Fawkner (Mr. Maxwell) said that no practical suggestions have been made. I remind him that the honorable member for Darling pointed out that work waiting to be done in the Territory would more than absorb these men, if it were put in hand. He mentioned the first section of the lake scheme, with the associated beautification works, and also other undertakings. It will be seen, therefore, that not only are the men here, but the work is also waiting to be done. In view of the fact that the Government has boasted that it has a surplus in excess of £1,000,000, it is hard to understand why the needs of these men have not been met. I do not know what more the honorable member for Fawkner wants in the way of a practical suggestion.

Mr Maxwell:

– That does appear to be a practical suggestion.

Mr ROSEVEAR:

– Yet the honorable member asked the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley), by interjection, to make some practical suggestion. Possibly he wished to set off the suggestions of the honorable member for Darling against others that might be made by the honorable member for West Sydney, and make that the basis of a speech in opposition to this motion. The plain fact is that the 700 families around whom this discussion has centred are not adequately provided with food and clothing. The mover of the motion has indicated clearly that work is available for them, and the Government has boasted that it has a surplus of more than £1,000,000. I therefore ask the Minister for the Interior to get on with the job.

Question - That the House do now adjourn - put. The House divided. (Mr. Speaker - Hon. G. H. Mackay.)

AYES: 14

NOES: 37

Majority . . . . 23

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

page 1021

FINANCIAL RELIEF BILL 1934

Assent reported.

page 1021

CUSTOMS TARIFF (SPECIAL DUTIES) VALIDATION BILL 1934

Motion (by Mr. White) agreed to -

That he have leave to bring in a bill for an act to provide for the validation of collections of special duties of customs under customs tariff proposals.

Bill brought up, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr WHITE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · Balaclava · UAP

– by leave - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this bill is to validate the special customs duties imposed by the previous Government, which still remain in force. It will be remembered that these duties were originally imposed as part of the plan to rectify our adverse trade balance. Originally, 74 items and subitems were affected. In February, 1932, when the present Government re-imposed the special duties on 55 of those items and sub-items, it made it clear that the duties would be kept under continual review, with the object of their entire removal. The Government has acted in accordance with that promise, and now the special duties apply to only six items, and in five oases they have a revenue significance. The bill provides that in these six cases the special duties shall remain in force until the 28th February, 1935, which will give the new Govern- ment sufficient time to determine whether they shall be continued in force. The affected items and the rates of duty pay able under the ordinary customs tariff, and those payable under the special proposals are as follows: -

Debate (on motion by Mr. Forde) adjourned.

page 1022

DEFENCE EQUIPMENT BILL1934

Message recommending appropriation reported.

In committee (Consideration of GovernorGeneral’s message) :

Motion (by Mr. Casey) agreed to -

That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purposes of a bill for an act to grunt and apply out of the Consolidated Revenue fund the sum of £4,160,000 for naval construction and for other defence purposes.

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended; resolution adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Casey and Mr. Archdale Parkhill do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill brought up by Mr. Casey, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Trea surer · Corio · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of the bill is to appropriate the sum of £4,160,000 from excess receipts of past years for defence expenditure of a capital nature. This sum will be paid to the credit of a Defence Equipment Trust Account, and will be required for (a) naval construction; (b) the purchase of arms, armaments, aircraft, munitions, equipment, machinery, plant and reserves of ammunition and oil fuel and (c) defence works and buildings and for the acquisition of sites therefor. The Government’s defence policy was outlined in the budget speech and is known to honorable members. A reference to pages 10, 11, 22 and 23 of the budget speech will place honorable members in a position to enable them to understand the purposes of this bill. The £4,160,000 now appropriated is being provided from accumulations of revenue during the past three years totalling £6,160,000 to form a fund for defence purposes, and will be drawn upon to meet capital expenditure arising out of the Government’s defence programme. The proposal to incur expenditure on the purchase of a cruiser has already been debated in this House. With regard to the programme for capital purposes other than naval construction the items on which expenditure is proposed in 1934- 35 are as f ollo ws : -Navy : reserves of stores and oil fuel; Army: modernization of coast defences, mechanization, ammunition and stores ; Air Force : new aircraft, stores and buildings; Munitions Supply

Branch : an additional capital expenditure of £20,000 on machinery, plant and buildings. Honorable members have already debated this matter in general terms and I suggest that no further discussion is necessary at this stage.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee :

Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.

Clause 4 -

The moneys standing to the credit of the Defence Equipment Trust Account may be applied -

for naval construction;

Mr.ROSEVEAR (Dalley) [4.11].- I move -

That after the words “ naval construction “ the words “ provided that any ships constructed be so constructed in Australia “ be inserted.

I take this step to ensure that the Australian ship-building industry receives the benefit from this proposed expenditure.

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– As honorable members are aware, in giving effect to its defence programme, the Government has laid it down that all work capable of being done in Australia will be carried out in this country, I suggest that it would be inappropriate to limit the Government in this way by a concrete amendment on the lines suggested.

Mr JAMES:
Hunter

– I support the amendment. Where possible the money to be expended should be expended in Australia, and the amendment moved by the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear) is designed to achieve this object. We have in the past constructed ships in Australia which have stood the test of time, and the strain of service. Australian workmen are as competent as workmen in any other part of the world. Some honorable members opposite have said that Australian workmen are not competent. That reflection on their ability should not be allowed to pass uncontradicted. We should not be prepared to give the Government authority to have this work done elsewhere; it should be laid down definitely that the money must be spent in Australia. The passing of this amendment would at least bring some measure of relief to the unemployed in the dockyard districts represented by the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear). The honorable member, however, is not parochial in submitting this amendment. He is moving it with the object of demonstrating his confidence in the efficiency of the Australian workmen. We have the right to expect that this money will be spent in Australia in order to give employment and further experience to those engaged in the shipbuilding industry. I hope that those honorable members who have cheered my remarks as to the efficiency of the Australian craftsmen will vote for the amendment.

Question - That the words proposed to be inserted (Mr. Rosevear’s amendment) be so inserted - put. The committee divided. (Chairman - Mr. Bell.)

AYES: 14

NOES: 34

Majority . . 20

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Clause agreed to.

Preamble and title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 1024

AUSTRALIAN SOLDIERS’ REPATRIATION BILL (No. 2) 1934

Second Reading

Consideration resumed from the 27th July (vide page S29), ou motion by Mr. Marr -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Mr HUGHES:
North Sydney

– I congratulate the Government on bringing forward this measure which is designed to remove certain hardships and anomalies associated with the existing act. The Minister for Repatriation (Mr. Marr) will agree that it is in the last degree desirable that the bill should make quite clear that which is now in doubt, and that those ambiguities which apparently exist in the present act should be for ever removed. 1 draw the attention of honorable members to clause 6 of tho bill, which provides for the payment of a pension to persons suffering from incapacity arising out of pulmonary tuberculosis, and particularly to proposed sub-section 2, which states -

Any such pension shall not be terminated or reduced below the rate so specified unless it is shown that the member was not suffering from that disease at the time when the pension was granted.

On the face of it, this cause gives statutory authority for the payment of permanent and irreducible pensions to exsoldiers incapacitated from pulmonary tuberculosis. But, as I shall show, there is grave doubt whether it actually docs so. In 1925, when an amending measure was before Parliament, the late Sir Neville Howse, who was then in charge of the Repatriation Department, in reply to a question by Mr. Coleman, who asked what would be the basis of a permanent pension, made the following statement: -

Ex members of the forces, approved to be suffering from tuberculosis as a result of war service, will bc paid a permanent pension of not less than two guineas per wenk, but will be required to present themselves for periodical medical examination, in order that they may bc advised as to the progress of the disease and necessary treatment. t There will be no right or authority for the pension to be reduced at any time, but it can be increased if the disability has become worse.

Mr. Coleman, then asked

Will they receive ?2 2s. a week for life whether they are cured or not ?

To this Sir Neville Howse replied -

Am I not speaking clearly enough ? Each of these men will receive at least two guineas a week independent of hia condition as disclosed on re-examination. He will only be re-examined for his own benefit, so that he will know what progress he has made, and to be told the line of treatment he should pursue. The pension will not be reduced under any circumstances, even if, as 1 said yesterday, he is one of the fortunate individuals who show some progress towards cure, nor will it be reduced when he is ultimately cured.

That that was the intention of the department and of the Government was further emphasized by the following letter sent out by tho Deputy Commissioner to soldiers suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis : -

I have to inform you that during your lifetime your war pension will not be reduced below .100 per cent, rate, i.e., 84s. per fortnight, but should your condition become worse or if you develop any additional complaints which YOU consider due to war service, you should at once apply to this office for further medical examination.

In 1!)2S, the Tubercular Sailors and Soldiers Association asked Sir Neville Howse whether a man who had been acknowledged by the Repatriation authorities to be suffering from tuberculosis at any time after his discharge from the forces, would be eligible to receive a permanent pension. In response to this inquiry Sir Neville Howse replied -

As promised, this matter was reviewed and some mouths ago the commission issued amended instructions. The effect of the amendment is that where, medical examination after 1st July, 1925, by a medical officer of the department and/or specialist appointed by the commission establishes the diagnosis that applicant on or after the 1st July, 1925, is disabled to a pensionable degree by the effect of present or past pulmonary tuberculosis and the commission accepts the disability as being due to war service, the case is to be accepted as one of proved pulmonary tuberculosis and a pension of not less than ?2 2s. per week paid permanently.

One would imagine that both the permanency of the pension, and its irreducibility, had thus been established so clearly as to preclude the possibility of any misunderstanding. But, notwithstanding those repeated assurances, it now appears that the pension has been reduced; that there is no assurance of permanency. In short, despite the very clear an,d. definite words of the late Minister and of the Commissioner, there is no finality, and these unfortunates who are marked out for death may be tormented by fear that their pensions will be taken from them. Even in regard to those who are recovering, every step towards recovery may be a step towards poverty, and as they reach the goal of health, they are haunted by the fear that their only means of livelihood will be taken away.

This bill, I presume, is intended to remedy that state of affairs, and to give to the soldier the absolute assurance that the pension will be permanent and irreducible, the amount of pension being that stated in the schedule; because, notwithstanding the opinion held by the late Sir Neville Howse and the commission, it appears that in practice it is neither permanent nor irreducible. But we want to be assured in the most positive terms that this measure will do what the principal act and the promises of the late Minister failed to do; and to set all doubts at rest on that point, we must know what the proposed sub-section 2 means. It reads -

Any such pension shall not’ be terminated or reduced below the rate so specified unless it is shown that the member was not suffering from that disease at the time when the pension was granted.

What exactly do those words mean? It is provided that a pension shall be payable only when a duly-qualified medical officer appointed by the department certifies that the applicant is suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis as the result of war service. Although not a medical man, I venture the opinion that there is no disease in the diagnosis of which there is less room for doubt or error than there is in the case of pulmonary tuberculosis. The symptoms of that disease, even in the early stages, are almost unmistakable. Medical science is now able, by an examination of the sputum and by the reaction to an injection to obtain convincing proof of the existence of tuberculosis. Each applicant has to run the gauntlet of a medical examination, and cannot receive a pension until it is proved to the satisfaction of the board and the medical specialists that he is suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis. It is nothing to the point that later he may recover either wholly or in part, because the act provides that the pension is to be permanent and irreducible. Pulmonary tuberculosis is a disease of a baffling character. As honorable members probably know, at least 95 per cent, of all human beings alive to-day have been attacked in their lifetime by it. It is one of the great scourges of mankind, and its victims are numbered in millions. Those who are stricken rarely recover unless the disease is tackled in its early stages. This bill is intended to give pensions to ex-soldiers suffering from this dread disease, and these pensions are to be permanent and irreducible. It says that the pension shall not be cancelled or reduced unless it can be shown that, when granted, the member was not suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis. But the pension ought not to have been granted unless he was suffering from that disease. It is granted only after examination by a specialist. The specialist, having certified that the applicant is suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis, that point is settled and the conditions, of the section apply; in other words, the pension is permanent and irreducible. We shall await with great interest the explanation of the Minister on this point. To my way of thinking, this sub-section ought not to be in the bill. There is only one set of circumstances under which a pension, having been granted upon the condition that it would be permanent and irreducible, ought to be rescinded; that is, if there has been fraud or impersonation. If Jones, a person who is not suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis, is impersonated by Smith, a person who is, that is a case of mala fides. The people of Australia generally would regard that as a proper case for the rescission of the pension. But in bona fide cases a pension has been granted upon the condition set out in tho clearest possible terms that, notwithstanding the favorable progress of the disease to the point where there are no symptoms whatever of it, the pension shall be permanent and irreducible, I cannot for the life of me understand why it should be reduced or rescinded.

Clause 12 deals with an entirely different set of conditions. It reads -

The second schedule to the principal act is amended by omitting the words “ in consequence of injuries to his spine “ and inserting iri their stead the words “ has been blinded, or who, in . consequence of injury or disease affecting the cerebro-spinal system, or of any injury or disease causing incapacity similar in effect to the incapacity resulting from an injury or disease affecting the cerebro-spin.il system “.

This is directed at a class of cases in which, the incapacity, for all practical purposes, is total. Where the individual has lost his power of locomotion, and is unable to perform the simplest acts for himself, either through blindness or in consequence of a disease affecting the cerebro-spinal system, he is entitled to an extra pension because of the services rendered by his wife or some other attendant. The object of the amendment is to extend to a much wider class of cases benefits that have hitherto been confined to a comparatively narrow class. But -the operative words are ambiguous. I direct the attention of the Minister to the phraseology. It says “has been blinded, or who, in consequence of injury or disease affecting the cerebro-spinal system, or of any injury or disease causing incapacity similar in effect to the incapacity resulting from an injury or disease affecting the cerebrospinal system “. When an application is made to a tribunal, that body will necessarily loot to this provision for guidance. In the case of a nian who is suffering from a cerebro-spinal complaint, it is not left without guidance; it ascertains from the specialist whether in fact the applicant is suffering from some cerebro-spinal complaint, and if so, whether his incapacity is such as to warrant the granting of the extra allowance. In such a case its course is perfectly dear. But when dealing wilh an applicant who is suffering not from a cerebro-spinal complaint, but from an injury or a disease causing incapacity similar in effect tq that caused by a cerebro-spinal complaint, it is without guidance. What is the incapacity which results from a disease or an injury to the cerebro-spinal system? Of what use are the symptoms of this disease? It is most important that we should consider these matters; otherwise we cannot know whether the incapacity resulting from other causes falls within the scope of the section. I should first like to tell tin: Minister that I have been informed that a qualified medical mau in Sydney has stated that he has never heard the expression “ cerebro-spinal system “. Cerebro-spinal complaints are quite common, but what does cerebrospinalsystem mean? I have spent a good deal of time in an investigation of the matter in the medical works in the Parliamentary Library, ‘and have been unable to find any reference to diseases of the cerebro-spinal system, although there are plenty of diseases which are cerebrospinal in their nature. I content myself by merely directing the attention of the Minister to that point. But I do ask that the tribunal shall not be left at large in this matter. I urge that it be given definite guiding principles. What is the injury which causes incapacity similar to that resulting from a cerebro-spinal complaint? We are left without information on the point. Take a case such as the one that I shall now cite. This is a case that I have brought before the Minister on several occasions. The man was severely wounded. A shell burst close to his head, fractured both of his .laws, dislocated the lower jaw, and so bruised tho jawbone ihat the organs adjacent to it had to be removed, leaving him without one eye and so affected in the nerves of hiE face that the slightest variation from mild weather is agonizing. The extent of his injuries makes him at certain times extremely sick and entirely helpless. ‘The position of that man is as pitiful as the position of one who is suffering from any cerebrospinal disease. We surely are not going to select injuries or diseases arising from one special group, and say that they ought to bc treated with more consideration than those causing similar incapacity which arise from another group ! For example, the bill makes no mention of incapacity that might arise from a tubercular disease other than pulmonary tuberculosis. A man may have tuberculosis in his joints or in his spine, or he may be incapacitated for the reasons I have mentioned in this particular case. His nerves may be so completely shattered as the result of shell-shock that he may be physically incapable of doing anything for himself, and must have an attendant.

Surely the Government does not suggest that because a man is not suffering from one of the group of complaints which come under the heading of cerebro-spinal diseases, he is to be denied the special pension for an attendant, which is essential if he is to live at all. If it is desired to widen the scope of this legislation, and if it is to be of real service, we must lay down a definite principle by which the tribunal can be guided. No medical specialist worthy of the name can mistake pulmonary tuberculosis, nor can any competent doctor fail to diagnose a cerebrospinal complaint.

We, in this Parliament, are not concerned with the nature of the disease from which an ex-soldier is suffering. It is enough for us to know that his incapacity, which has arisen from his war service, places him in a position that makes an attendant essential. The phraseology used in clause 12 is exceedingly vague. The phrase “ disease affecting the cerebrospinal system “ does not clarify the position. In saying “ any injury or disease causing incapacity similar in effect to the incapacity resulting from an injury or disease affecting the cerebrospinal system,” the clause does not carry us anywhere, because an injury affecting the cerebro-spinal system may take a hundred shapes. We are dealing with the effect upon the individual, and if the incapacity necessitates an attendant, the applicant ought to have the pension or allowance - call it what you will - that is given to the blind and to persons suffering from cerebro-spinal diseases.

If this bill is to afford comfort and relief to the unfortunate exsoldiers who suffer from tuberculosis, there must be an absolute and positive assurance that the pension shall be permanent and irreducible. There must be no going back on that. Under this provision, the soldier is told that, in some circumstances, the pension may be reduced, so this measure will not bring that help and comfort that these unfortunate men deserve. If there be a class of cases with which the Minister wishes specially to deal, they should be set down clearly so that an ex-soldier will know that if he falls within that group his case is settled definitely, and his pension is to be paid during his lifetime at an irreducible rate, whether he gets better or not.

As to the other set of cases which are covered by clause 12, I say, again, that the phraseology is unfortunate. I suppose one cannot expect a parliamentary draughtsman to be a medical specialist, but every word in these provisions is scrutinized from time to time by the Appeal Tribunal and the War Pensions Entitlement Tribunal. The injury or disease causing the incapacity must be similar to those arising from an injury or disease affecting the cerebro-spinal system. If I were a member of one of those tribunals I should ask, What do those words mean?” If a man is a physical wreck, and utterly unfit to go without a personal attendant, and, if, because he is not suffering from an injury similar to that arising from one affecting the cerebro-spinal system–

Mr Thorby:

– It is technical trickery.

Mr Marr:

– That is not a fair comment.

Mr HUGHES:

– Notwithstanding that the wording of the act makes it apparently quite clear that the pension shall be permanent and irreducible, that the department so intimated in the letter from which I have quoted, and that the late Sir Neville Howse in 1925 and 1928 declared that the pension was irreducible and permanent, even if a man be one of the few that are cured, the pension may be reduced or even cancelled. So we have a right to say in this case that the law shall carry out the principle repeatedly laid down by Sir Neville Howse and the department.

How many men are likely to find relief under clause 12 I do not know. Not long ago I visited the hospital at Grenfell, and saw cases that would arouse the sympathy of a graven image. Amongst others were men suffering from paralysis agitans, for which complaint there is apparently no cure. Whether that disease is one affecting the cerebrospinal system I cannot say, but I know that these men cannot get pensions. Another case may be quoted of a man who came to see me. He seemed healthy, and I asked him the nature of this trouble. While trying to explain he fell down and foamed at the mouth! He was an epileptic. Is epilepsy a disease of the cerebro-spinal system? I do not know. The law of the United States of America provides in a very definite way for the relief of cases which are set down in a manner that leaves no room whatever for misunderstanding. I draw the attention of the Minister to page 793 of the report of the 69th Congress, in which reference is made to an act to amend the “World War Veterans Act 1924. It provides, inter alia, that “ every enlisted man employed on active service on or before the 11th November, 1918, shall be conclusively held and taken to have been in sound condition when enlisted, except as to defects, disorders and infirmities put oil record at the time of his enlistment, provided that any ex-soldier or deceased soldier, prior to January, 1925, who is shown to have neuropsychiatry diseTa.se, spinal meningitis, active tuberculosis, paralysis agitans, encephalitis lethargicaamoebic dysentery, developing 10 per cent, disability or more, shall be presumed to have incurred the disease in active service “. These men are paid a permanent and irreducible pension. There is finality in the provisions of the American Act and there should be in ours. I suggest that the Minister should move to delete subsection 2 of the proposed new section 31a, or, at any rate, so amend it to make it perfectly clear that it provides for what these poor fellows have a right to expect, and which has been promised to them time and time again, both in this chamber and outside - that their pensions shall be permanent and irreducible. I also suggest that clause 12 be revised in order to lay down in the bill clear principles by which it can be determined whether the applicant is entitled to the benefits now confined to a comparative few. I have congratulated the Minister on the introduction of this bill, because I know that his heart is in the matter. I confidently appeal to him to see that the measure really does what we thought the acts did, but now find they have not done. We desire to remove all doubt, and give ex-soldiers, who are now sorely stricken, the assurance of comfort and help which they richly deserve.

Debate (on motion by Mr. Rosevear) adjourned.

page 1028

TARIFF PROPOSALS 1934

Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 5) ; Customs Tariff (Exchange Adjustment) Amendment (No. 2) ; Excise Tariff Amendment (No. 6)

In Committee of Ways and Means:

Mr WHITE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · Balaclava · UAP

– I move - [Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 5).] (1.) Tha tthe Schedule to the Customs Tariffs 1933 as proposed to be amended by the Customs Tariff proposals introduced into the House of Representatives on the twenty-fourth day of November, One thousand nine hundred and thirty-three. be further amended as hereunder set out, and that on and after the second day of August, One thousand nine hundred and thirty-four, 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 Tariffs 1933 as so amended.

[Customs Tariff (Exchange Adjustment) Amendment (No. 2).]

  1. That on and after the second day of August, One thousand nine hundred and thirty-four, at nine o’clock in the forenoon, reckoned according to standard time iri tho Territory for the Seat of Government, tho Schedule to the Customs Tariff (Exchange Adjustment) Act 1933-1934 bo amended as follows : -

By adding after “ 392(a) (4) “ the following :- “ 392(a) (5) “ and “ 392(a) (6) “. [Excise Tariff Amendment (No. 8).]

  1. That the Schedule to the Excise Tariff 1921-1933 be amended as hereunder set out, and that on and after the second day of August, One thousand nine hundred and thirty-four, at nine o’clock in the forenoon, reckoned according to standard time in the Territory for the Seat of Government, Duties of Excise be collected in pursuance of the Excise Tariff 1921-1933 as so amended.

Tho amending customs tariff resolution I have just introduced deals principally with the Government’s cotton policy. In my second-reading speech on the Raw Cotton Bounty Bill I indicated the trend of the Government’s proposals and that motion, combined with the Tariff Board’s report on cotton lint and yarns, should have given honorable members a further indication of the Government’s proposals with regard to cotton yarns, &c.

The Government has adopted the board’s recommendation in regard to cotton yarns that protection should be accorded to the following classes of yarns which are at present admitted at free, British, and 15 per cent., general, namely -

Cotton yarns for the manufacture of cordage and twines, to be dutiable at 3d. per lb. or 30 per cent. (British preferential tariff) and ad. per lb., or 50 per cent, (general tariff).

Condenser yarns for the manufacture of blankets, and yarns for the manufacture of cotton tweeds, denims, drills, dungarees, gaberdines and jeans, . to be dutiable at 4jd. per lb., or 45 per cent. (British preferential tariff), 7id. or G5 per cent, (general tariff) for 16 and lower counts, with higher rates for counts exceeding Iti count and less than 50 count.

With regard to cotton yarns n.e.i. less than 50 count, which are at present dutiable at cumulative rates ranging from 4d. per lb. to 9d. per lb., plus an ad valorem duty of 35 per cent. British and 7d. per lb. to 12d. per lb., plus an ad valorem duty of 35 per cent, general, the Government has adopted the board’s recommendation for alternative rates of 4£d. per lb. or 45 per cent. British, and 7id. per lb. or 65 per cent, general, for yarns up to 16 count, with increasing rates for the higher counts. On a typical 16 count undyed carded knitting yarn on cops cited by the Tariff Board in its report the proposed duties will mean a reduction of almost 4d. per lb.

The proposed duties on cotton yarns n.e.i. will not take effect until the 1st April, 1935, for the reason that it is not considered advisable to reduce the duty on these particular yarns during the cotton season as it is probable that such action would have a detrimental effect on the prices of this season’s cotton crop and result in the exportation of quantities of raw cotton which, because of the payment of the bounty, should be used in Australia.

It is essential also from the spinners’ point of view that the duty on these yarns should not come into operation immediately. The cost of production of the spinners is at present high, largely as the result of the purchase of Australian cotton lint under the present price arrangement. If the protection on cotton yarns n.e.i. were reduced at this stage, spinners would undoubtedly be confronted with competition from imported yarns selling at prices at which they could not profitably sell.

It should be explained that, under the terms of the Raw Cotton Bounty Bill, the manufacturers of cotton yarns will be able to obtain their lint requirements, whether from local sources or from abroad, at Australian import parity ; but this provision will not become effective until the 1935 crop. This new policy will enable spinners to reduce their costs of production and manufacture under a considerably lower protection than is at present accorded to cotton yarns n.e.i.

Increased cost will result from the use of yarns made from Queensland cotton in the production of cotton tweeds, cotton cordage and cotton twines, and as this will naturally be reflected in the costs of the finished product, tweeds, denims, drills, dungarees, gaberdines, jeans, cordage and twines, increased protection is necessary. The Government is therefore adopting the Tariff Board’s recommendations for higher duties on these goods. Consideration will be given to the admission of denims, drills, and the necessary yarns under by-law if the Australian manufacturers are unable to meet all demands and a shortage of them is proved to exist.

The present annual requirements of cotton yarns subject to protective duties are about 5,000,000 lb. The manufacture of this quantity of yarns would require 5,500,000 lb., or 11,000 bales, of lint, which under normal climatic conditions could be supplied from about 38,000 acres, whereas last year approximately 81,000 acres of cotton land was under crop. It is estimated that during the current year the area under crop will be 66,000 acres.

If, under the Government’s proposals, spinners obtain 90 per cent, of the market for yarns at present protected, and 70 per cent, of the market for the newly protected yarns, the quantity of lint required will be 8,415,000 lb. or 16,830 bales. The production of cotton in Queensland in 1933 was 11,000 bales. It may reasonably be assumed that the extended market granted to the cotton-spinners as the result of the protection on yarns for cotton tweeds, &c, should ensure the disposal of the major proportion, if not the whole, of future season’s crops, provided, of course, that growers do not plant greater areas than are necessary to meet Australian manufacturers’ requirements. A provision has been included in the Raw Cotton Bounty Bill to control overproduct.ion. Only the quantity of cotton equal to spinners’ requirements plus 20 per cent, will be eligible for the bounty.

Another change is the provision of a specific rate of lOd. per lb. on coloured towels, coloured towelling and jacquard towels under the general tariff. The present ad valorem general tariff rate of 60 per cent, will remain as an alternative. This duty should bring about the use of greater quantities of Australian preparation yarn.

Tho British rate of duty on cotton wool and waddings has been changed from an alternative fixed or ad valorem rate to a straight-out ad valorem rate, and action lias been taken to amend the item to close up a loop-hole through which certain overseas manufacturers were slightly medicating cotton wool in order to defeat the protective duties under item 1.23 (a). Medicated cotton wool is admissible at comparatively low rates of duty and by very slightly medicating their products some manufacturers were taking an unfair advantage of this provision.

The duties on rope and cordage, manufactured from hard fibres, such as manila and sisal, have been reduced by 10 per cent, ad valorem, and the duties on other cordage, excepting cotton to which I have already referred, have been increased by 5 per cent.

Consequent upon changes in the numbering of items in the Customs Tariff, it has been necessary to add two new items, 392 a, 5 and 6, to the schedule to the Customs Tariff Exchange Adjustment Act.

The principal alterations made by the Excise Tariff proposals are : -

  1. A reduction of duty on concentrated grape must exceeding a specific gravity of 15 degrees Beaumé

The duty is reduced from 5d. to 3d. per gallon for each degree exceed-‘ ing 15 degrees Beaumé. The rate of 5d. per gallon on concentrated grape must was determined when the duty on spirit for fortification was lis. per proof gallon. The Tariff Board reports that in consequence of the reduction of the spirit duty to 6s. 6d. per proof gallon the duty on concentrated grape must should be reduced to 3d.

  1. An amendment of the wine fortifying spirit, item to include spirit for fortifying Australian grape must.
  2. An amendment of the concentrated grape must item to include both fortified and unfortified concentrated grape must.

This alteration is intended to make it clear that the item covers both fortified and unfortified concentrated grape must.

  1. A provision for the admission free of excise duty, of beer, spirits, tobacco, cigars and cigarettes for use on fully commissioned sea-going vessels of the Australian Navy.

The grant of this concession will place the personnel of the Royal Australian Navy on the same footing as that of the Imperial Royal Navy, and the navies of other dominions and foreign countries.

Progress reported.

page 1033

PUBLIC SERVICE BILL 1934

Bill, received from the Senate, and (on motion by Mr. White for Mr. Lyons), read a first time.

page 1033

BILLS RETURNED PROM SENATE

The following bills were returned from the Senate without amendment: -

Income Tax Assessment Bill 1934. Appropriation (Works and Buildings) Bill 1934-35.

page 1034

AUSTRALIAN SOLDIERS’ REPATRIATION BILL (No. 2) 1934

Second Reading

Debate resumed from page 1028.

Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley

.- This bill implements the intention of the Government to remedy certain inherent defects in the principal act, and to make good some of the loss sustained by pensioners as the result of the operation of the financial emergency acts, and, I understand, is also designed to remove some of the anomalies found in the administration of the act. There is, however, a possibility that its effect will be only to create further anomalies and further confusion. I agree with the views expressed by the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) in regard to the pension payable to exsoldiers suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis. The right honorable gentleman recited the declaration of a former Minister in charge of Repatriation, the late Sir Neville Howse, that the pensions of these unfortunate men should be “ irreducible and permanent “. Subsection 1 of proposed new section 31a provides that the rate of pension payable under this act to a member of the forces in respect of incapacity caused by pulmonary tuberculosis shall not be less than the rate specified in column 4 of the first schedule opposite to the rate of pay of the member. That is quite clear and definite. Its meaning is indisputable. But, as the right honorable member for North Sydney has said, the next subsection will undoubtedly lead to great controversy and dissatisfaction. When the departmental doctors decide that an exsoldier is suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis, their examination is so exhaustive that there should not be the remotest doubt as to whether his disability was contracted as a result of war service. No doubt can exist as to his physical condition on first receiving the pension. But sub-section 2 deals in rather a mysterious way with certain persons who are not specified. It says that “ any pensions payable under the act shall not be reduced below the rate so specified unless it is shown that the member was not suffering from that disease at the time when the pension was granted.” I take it the reference is to the rate specified in the first schedule. Honorable members are all well aware of the difficulties that confront an applicant for a war pension. In the first place, he is required to produce positive proof that he is suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis, and, in the second place, he must connect his condition with his war service. The department requires clear and definite proof on these points. I think that in 100 per cent. of the cases once the Commissioner and the medical officers have declared that a particular soldier is suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis there is not the slightest possible risk of a future decision that the soldier was not suffering from that complaint at the time when the pension was granted. I am therefore at a loss to understand the need for subsection 2. It can only lead to further confusion.

Clause 4 is designed to amend section 27b of the principal act. That section as it stands at present provides that where the payment of a pension has been suspended and it is, later restored the restoration is made retrospective only to the date of application for restoration. This bill proposes to give the Commissioner power to date back the arrears of pension for a period of not more than three months from the date of restoration. In dealing with numerous pension cases, particularly in connexion with war pensions, I have found that there is a complete lack of knowledge among the recipients as to their rights under the law. It is possible that a soldier may have his pension stopped for some months. Not aware that he has certain rights conferred upon him by the act, he accepts the decision, acting possibly upon the advice of some one who informs him that he is not entitled to receive it. I suggest that the Government must have some reason for proposing to make this retrospective payment date back for only three months. If the principle is admitted, why stop at three months? Why should the pension not be restored as from the date of its cancellation? If a pensioner has his pension cancelled, and it is subsequently restored, it is obviously an admission on the part of the commission that the pension should not have been stopped in the first place; and in those circumstances it should be restored as from the date of cancellation.

I welcome the proposal under this bill to make provision for the continuance of the pensions of dependants in the event of the soldier not presenting himself for medical review. A case was brought under my notice of a wife with four children who was abandoned by her husband about eighteen months ago. At the time the husband was due to appear before a medical board for a review of his pension, and because the wife was unable to trace him, she was deprived of the whole means of sustenance for herself and her children. Later on, the department decided to extend the pension for a further twelve months, but because the wife has still been unable’ to trace her husband she and her children have to suffer. The proposal in the bill is to extend to the Commissioner the right to continue a pension payable to the dependants of a soldier under these circumstances provided that the soldier’s disabilities are of a permanent nature.

Clause 9 of this bill proposes to amend section 45 w of the principal act. By the alteration of a few words in the proviso to this clause the Minister may clear up much of the ambiguity which exists. The proviso reads as follows: -

Provided further that in the case of the death caused by an accident, of a member of the forces who is wholly or partially incapacitated as the result of wounds suffered during the period during which he was a member, the burden of proving that those wounds did not contribute to a material degree to the death of the member shall lie upon the commission. lt. is proposed in the bill to throw on the commission the onus of proof in cases in which the returned soldier makes a claim in respect of an accident which he suffered as a result of incapacity arising out of wounds received while on service. I suggest that this provision might be further extended so that instead of “ wounds “ the words “ war service “ might be inserted. Many returned soldiers who were never wounded are, as a result of their war service, in a worse physical condition than those who actually received wounds, and their physical condition might well lead to their becoming victims of accidents. If my suggestion is accepted, a further consequential amendment would be to the effect that the burden of proving that the incapacity of the member did not contribute in a material degree to his death would lie upon the commission, the word “ incapacity “ taking the place of the word “ wounds “.

The Government might also deal mo>‘o generously with the widows and mothers of deceased soldiers. One woman I have in mind lost three sons, but, because the Financial Emergency Act stipulated that the total income of such pensioners should not exceed 30.s. a week, when she became eligible for an old-age pension, her war pension was reduced to 12s. 6d. a week, which, with the old-age pension of l’7s. 6d., brought the total up to 30s. Now the financial position of the country is so much improved, the restriction upon income might well be removed.

Another anomaly which has baer, brought under my notice concerns the case of a returned soldier who was granted a pension of two guineas a week because of incapacity arising out of pulmonary tuberculosis. The case was under consideration for a considerable time, and, when the pension was finally granted, he was awarded retrospective payments of £40. While his appeal was pending, however, he had been in receipt of an invalid pension because of his total incapacity, and the amount of £8 2s. so received was deducted by the department from the retrospective war pension payment of £40. The man has a wife and three children to maintain, and the deduction was a serious matter to him. Moreover, if nien in his position were not married before 1931, they arc entitled to no pension in respect of their wives and children, which seems a most unjust provision. These men served their country during the war, and are now part of the wreckage of war, so that, whether they married before 1931 or after, they should be entitled to receive pensions in respectof their dependants. A man suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis requires “0 much special attention that he cannot maintain a wife and family on a pension of £2 2s. a week.

I am pleased that the onus of proof in regard to applicants for pensions is, in some cases at any rate, being thrown upon the commission. There are thousands of returned soldiers in Australia to-day who can demonstrate to the satisfaction of any ordinary person that their ill-health is attributable to war service, but they are unable to supply the necessary proofs to satisfy the commission. I know of one man who has actually preserved a document from his commanding officer in the line authorizing him to return to the base because he was suffering from trench feet, and to-day he is suffering from a disease which is practically the same as trench feet, namely, sluggish circulation, which causes his feet and legs to swell. He was wounded in both legs, and while the commission recognizes the injury to his left leg as attributable to war wounds, and pays him a pension in respect of it, it refuses to do the same thing in regard tothe right leg, although its condition is exactly the same.

Mr.ArchdaleParkhill. - Who made representations to the department in his behalf?

Mr ROSEVEAR:

– I did.

Mr.ArchdaleParkhill. - Why was his application refused?

Mr ROSEVEAR:

– Because the commission would not agree that the condition of his right leg was due to war injuries. Under the act, the onus of proof is thrown too much upon the applicant for a pension, and too little upon the commission. I trust that the Minister will give favorable consideration to these matters, and particularly to the matter brought up by the right honorable member for North Sydney, so that there will be no doubt in the minds of either the applicant or of the commission as to what the act means.

Mr NAIRN:
Perth

.- The general purpose of this bill is to liberalize the act for the benefit of returned soldiers. The measure has been subjected to a considerable amount of adverse criticism, and I think the soldiers might well ask to be protected from their friends. I am not now referring to those who have suggested that theact should be further liberalized, and indeed I commend the suggestion of the last speaker that, in many instances, the onus of proof is thrown too strongly on the soldier to establish that his incapacity is attributable to his war service. After the lapse of so many years it is very difficult to bring forward evidence which might have been produced readily enough had the examination been made earlier. In many cases honest men have suffered because, although their health might not have been of the best when they returned from the war, they were not actually incapacitated, and so refrained from applying for a pension. The more honest they were the more likely they were so to refrain. But with the passage of time many of these men have found themselves unable, through incapacity, to earn a living. It is impossible at such a late stage to prove that their condition is directly attributable to war causes, though there is no doubt that their constitutions have been undermined and that service at the front has operated very materially towards their incapacity. It is difficult to include in an act of Parliament precise directions to medical officers. I consider, however, that the difficulties arising from unfair decisions might be obviated if rather more discretion were given to medical officers so that they might give greater effect to the view that the war has undermined the constitutions of these men and rendered them more liable to disease and incapacity.

The criticisms of the bill, particularly in relation to clauses 6 and 12, are in my opinion quite unwarranted. I do not believe that the soldiers would benefit from the adoption of proposals which critics of the measure have advanced. Clause 6 relates to pensions granted on account of pulmonary tuberculosis. It appears that the late Sir Neville Howse made in a letter the promise that, a pension, having once been granted in respect of pulmonary tuberculosis, would be permanent. That promise, it is said, has not been honoured, and the purpose of clause 6 is to make it clear that in future a pension, having been granted on account of pulmonary tuberculosis, will never be reduced or terminated unless it be shown that the member was not suffering from that disease at the time when it was granted. If it is shown that he was not suffering from the disease when the pension was granted, it is not right that it should be permanent.

Mr Hughes:

– Why did the doctor so certify ?

Mr NAIRN:

– It may have been obtained by fraud, or as the result of a wrong diagnosis. There certainly are cases of soldiers having been granted a pension on the ground that they were suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis, and its having been found subsequently that another complaint was the cause of their incapacity.

Mr Hughes:

– The honorable member is suggesting that the doctor does not know his business.

Mr NAIRN:

– There may be cases of doctors having certified improperly.

The act provides that incapacity resulting from injuries to the spine shall qualify a soldier for a pension. That being regarded as rather limited, clause 12 proposes to extend the provision to include diseases of the spine. Spinal troubles which are attributable to disease are as frequent as those which are due to injury. This, therefore, is plainly to the advantage of the soldier. It is further proposed to substitute “ cerebro-spinal system “ for “ spine “. That extension also will benefit the soldier. I do not believe that any doctor will experience difficulty in understanding the meaning of the expression “ cerebro-spinal system “. In future, trouble that is attributable to anything connected with the cerebro-spinal system will entitle a soldier to a pension. There are cases in which it cannot be established that the incapacity is directly attributable to injury or disease affecting the cerebro-spinal system, but the effects are similar. The right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) cited the case of a soldier who had suffered grievous injuries to his face. Although that could not be designated injury to the spine, the effect was similar.

Mr Hughes:

– The incapacity might be the same, but the causes of that incapacity might be quite different.

Mr NAIRN:

– It is one of the cases that will be covered by the section when amended.

Mr Hughes:

– It will not.

Mr NAIRN:

– If the incapacity is similar to that resulting from injury or disease affecting the cerebro-spinal system, the pension may be granted. The right honorable gentleman also mentioned the disease known as paralysis agitans. I have no knowledge of the nature of that disease, but if the effect produced by it is similar to that resulting from an injury to the spine, it will come within the scope of this provision.

Mr Hughes:

– It is not similar.

Mr NAIRN:

– If it is not similar it has nothing to do with the case, and the right honorable gentleman must have mentioned it merely for effect. It is quite obvious that the purpose of the bill is to cure defects which experience has shown exist, and to improve the position of the soldier. For that reason, it should be heartily welcomed by everybody who desires to give injured soldiers a rather better deal than they have so far had.

Mr HOLLOWAY:
Melbourne Ports

– In common with previous speakers, I commend the Minister for Repatriation (Mr. Marr) for having made this effort to straighten out some anomalies. The special cases dealt with by this small measure are, I think, some of the worst types of cases that have come under our notice since the Repatriation Department commenced to function. For the moment, I am particularly interested in the partially blinded men, because I have been asked to keep in touch with the Minister in relation to their position. Probably the totally blind and the mental cases are the worst with which the department has to deal. I agree with all that has been said about the need for making permanent the pension granted in the partially blinded, tubercular, and spinal cases. I do not think that any honorable member would refuse such a request. The 50 per cent. pension granted originally to partially blinded men was found to be inadequate, and was supplemented by an allowance of 7s. 6d. a week, which was subsequently reduced. These men say that the intention was that these payments should be regarded as sacred, and never subject to any reduction. I agree that that should be the case, because the economic loss suffered as the result of the loss of sight in one eye is never recovered. They now ask the Minister to make sure that the amount of both the pension and the allowance shall be definitely fixed in the act, so that it cannot be reduced in the future. I believe that this provision is made by the bill.

Mr Marr:

– That is so.

Mr HOLLOWAY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · FLP; ALP from 1936

– If it is, they will be quite satisfied, and all of us will be pleased. I shall not exchange views concerning the interpretation that may be placed upon the language used in the measure, because I believe that the Minister will state clearly what it means. I can read into clause 6 a meaning that has not yet been mentioned, and that I hope is not the right one. A soldier who is now suffering from tuberculosis may not have had that disease when he was granted his pension. I trust that permanency will not be withheld from him on that account.

Mr Maxwell:

– The disease must be the result of war service.

Mr HOLLOWAY:

– Ex-soldiers who arc in receipt of pensions because of incapacity arising from war service may develop complications later, and the onus is imposed upon them of proving that they are entitled to an increase of the pension.

I recently raised a very hard case, in which an ex-soldier who had been suffering from tuberculosis disappeared, and no trace of him could be found. Officers at the Repatriation office at Victoria Barracks, St.Kilda-road, Melbourne, informed me that this man was doomed to die within a few months. On the last occasion when he called at the barracks for his pension he did not return to his home, and he has not been seen or heard of since. That was eleven and a half years ago. His widow has been refused the pension because she cannot prove when or how her husband died, or whether he is dead at all. There is not the slightest evidence of his having done anything to cheat his wife or the department, because no pension has been drawn since his presumed death. I propose to suggest a means by which provision can be made for cases of this kind. One clause enables the pension of a soldier’s wife to be made permanent, even if the husband has done something which he should not do; hut this does not meet the case. I claim that the wife in this case should receive a widow’s pension, which is much higher than a wife’s pension. Under this bill, she would continue to receive a wife’s pension of 24s. a week for herself and child; but if she could prove how her husband died she would be entitled to the widow’s pension. The Minister may be able to tell us whether such a case as that will be met by the bill.

I have under notice another case which, in my opinion, would not be covered by the bill, nor do I think it is provided for by the principal act. A widow who was drawing a soldier’s widow’s pension eventually married her deceased husband’s brother; but, after she had had children by the second husband, it was discovered that, owing to the fact that State laws vary, the second marriage was illegal. When the husband made this discovery, he deserted his wife. She had him brought before a police court, which held that according to the law of the State he was not legally her husband. She then desired again to receive the widow’s pension. If a woman is of good character, and can show that she has been cheated by a man of bad character, the department should deal sympathetically with her claim for the restoration of her pension.

Mr Hughes:

– Has the department adjudicated on the case?

Mr HOLLOWAY:

– Yes.

Mr Hughes:

– She would return, ipso facto, to her former status.

Mr HOLLOWAY:

– I should think so, and I still have the matter in hand. In regard to the other case I have mentioned, I tested the State law, and found that the husband could be presumed at law to be dead; but I was informed by the Repatriation Department that it would be necessary to show how he died, and whether death was due to his war injuries. I submit that in a case of this nature there should be an elastic provision to enable the Minister, or some authority, to exercise discretion and prevent hardship being inflicted.

Mr LANE:
Barton

.- I believe that serious injustice has been done to widows of ex-soldiers. While their husbands were alive they received a small pension, but when they became widows their pension was not increased. In many instances they have reached the age of 50 or 55 years, and should not then be forced to earn their living by undertaking office cleaning, domestic work by the day, or similar duties. Of course, if they re-marry, they are in a more fortunate position. I regret that members of the ministerial party were not notified that amendments of the act were contemplated. Cases requiring investigation are submitted to honorable members throughout the year, and one tribunal is not. sufficient to deal with all the applications that come before it.

Silting suspended from 6.15 to 8 p.m.

Mr LANE:

– I direct the attention of the Minister to clause 6 which provides that -

An Appeal Tribunal shall not give to any decision in respect of a pension retrospective operation for any period prior to -

the date of the commencement of the period of three months immediately preceding the date of the lodgment of the appeal to the Tribunal.

T submit that the period should be at least six months, for the Entitlement Tribunal sometimes takes a very long time to reach :i decision, lt travels principally between the three largest capitals of the Commonwealth and sometimes is as long as nine months in notifying a decision in particular cases. I direct the attention of the Minister to a case that was brought under the notice of the Deputy Commissioner of Repatriation in Sydney. On the 7th June last that officer forwarded the following letter to mc : -

With reference to the representations made on behalf of the above-named by you in January, ]0,”:t, I have now to bring under notice thu oil the 28th March, 1034, the War Pensions Entitlement Appeal Tribunal allowed the member’s appeal in respect of pulmonary tuberculosis, with effect from the 21st November, 1033. In view thereof, war pension was “ranted to the member at 100 per cent, rate (£4 4s. per fortnight) as from the date indicated.

Why should that soldier be denied the fruits of his appeal for so long a time? Tt is surely unreasonable that in the case a man who lodges an appeal in January of one year and does not get a decision until sometime in the next year, the retrospective effect of a decision favorable to him should be limited to three months.

It seems to mc that there is ample justification for establishing appeal tribunals in each State.

Mr Bell:

– The principal act gives power to do that, but so far it has not bean thought advisable to give effect to the provision.

Mr LANE:

– I cannot understand why that should be so, for I am informed that SOO appeals are pending, and that it will be impossible for the tribunals to deal with them in less than nine or twelve mouths. When it takes eighteen months for a soldier to obtain official recognition of his successful appeal, it is quite evident that the machinery set up for dealing with the appeals is inadequate. The tribunal may be working short-handed, or it may be incompetent; but it certainly is not giving satisfaction to the appellants. I have on frequent occasions spent hours! in the Repatriation Department in order to obtain information for various war pensioners who have approached me; but I have been informed that the documents necessary to provide the information are in the custody of the Appeal Tribunal or certain departmental officers, and are available only in the presence of an officer of the department who reads the portions required by the member.

Soldiers who develop pulmonary tuberculosis are often under a particular disability in seeking to obtain a pension. The case of a young man to whom I have already referred, may be cited. On. his return from the war, he was provided with light work by his father, and managed to carry out his duties for some time, but ultimately he developed pulmonary tuberculosis in such a serious form, that he was unable to do his work. He had a wife and children, and his case should have been regarded as urgent. But in consequence of his failure to obtain reasonably prompt consideration he and his wife and children were left without a pension for ten months. During that period they had to depend upon the generosity of the soldier’s father. I do not think that it was ever intended by the people of Australia or by this Parliament that that kind of thing should happen. Theoretically, the reference of those cases to the appeal tribunal might be justifiable; but practically the system has proved ineffective. Many men who appeared to be in reasonable health when they returned from the war, have on reaching the age of from 45 to 50 years, developed some of the most distressing symptoms of shell shock and strain. Their nerves have suffered, and they have become prematurely aged. I understand that in Great Britain pensions are granted to men who are able to produce hospital records between the date on which they returned from active service and that on which they have reported physically ill effects which they attribute to their war service, such as neuresthenia and the like, even if their complaints cannot be directly traced to their war service. That should also be the case in Australia. I trust that the Minister will give attention to the points that I have raised in this connexion. It was never intended that widows of soldiers who were enjoying good pensions should be compelled, on the death of their husbands, to continue to live on the very small pension that they received as wives; and 1 do not believe that honorable members will regard with any degree of equanimity, the fact that many widows of returned soldiers who have reached the age of 50 years or more are being forced, in these days, to go out to fight their way in the world. I hope that the Government will do its best to expedite the work of the appeal tribunals. If it finds that appeals cannot be dealt with by the existing tribunals within a reasonable time, it should increase the machinery available for handling them.

Mr WARD:
East Sydney

.- Even the passage of this bill wall not afford^ to many returned soldiers and their dependants, the degree of justice which they are entitled to expect from the Government and those who administer the Repatriation Act. Under the provisions of the financial emergency legislation many war pensioners and their dependants are suffering very severely at the hands of this Government. “Dependants “ is defined in the Repatriation Act as -

  1. The parents of any such person who are at any time after the occurrence of the event resulting in hisdeath without adequate means of support.

The regulations issued under the provisions of the Financial Emergency Act were framed in such a way as to cancel the entire pension of many mothers of deceased soldiers. I have had many “cases brought under my notice, in which the parents of deceased soldiers have had their incomes drastically reduced through unemployment and other causes. Parents were originally granted a pension on the basis of the son’s previous capacity to earn and their dependence upon him, but under the financial emergency regulations, the pensions received by them were discontinued. They were not merely reduced by 22 £ per cent., as was theoretically intended. The passage of this measure will not meet cases of that kind.

Another complaint I have is that there is no provision in this bill to meet the needs of wives and children, of returned soldiers who married after October, 1931. Surely no honorable member will deny that returned soldiers had just as much right as any other person to marry after that date; but those who did so have been, and are still being, denied the same treatment in respect of their dependants as is extended to their colleagues who married before that date. Such men and their dependants therefore have a right to expect very much more consideration at the hands of this Government than they are receiving. As a matter of fact this Government has robbed these people of rights which they enjoyed under previous governments.

It is proposed to insert in the principal act a new provision relating to pensions for men suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis. I regret, however, that provision is not being made to provide a pension for all men who, subsequent to their return from active service, developed this complaint. The pension is payable only to those who can produce satisfactory evidence that the complaint has been due to their war service. The right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) pointed out that the Government of the United States of America gives favorable consideration to the claims of all men who, at any time after their return from active service, develop this complaint, irrespective of whether they can actually prove that it was due to war service. The Commonwealth Government should at least go that far. It must be remembered that all the men who enlisted for active service were subjected to a rigid medical examination before they were accepted. A man had to be practically perfect physically and mentally before he was received .as a recruit. In this circumstance it is not unreasonable to conclude that pulmonary tuberculosis, which develops in such men after their return from the war, is due to their war service. Many men are only to-day beginning to feel the ill-effects of the hardships which they suffered during the war period. Some of these men have developed tuberculosis to such a serious extent that they have been obliged to leave their wives and children and enter public institutions for treatment. They, therefore, suffer the double disability of lack of pension and separation from their wives and families. They have to live an isolated life, which must involve a great deal of sacrifice. I urge the Government, to consider making a provision in this bill which will at least ensure that such men and their dependants are given adequate pensions, and are treated fairly by the Repatriation Department and the various tribunals to which returned men and their dependants have to appeal in order to obtain consideration. Many of these men have told me of their particular disabilities. One has only to examine the figures in respect to the deaths of returned soldiers from tuberculosis and compare it with the percentage of deaths among the civil population from that disease to realize that the men who served during the war, trudging through snow, working and fighting knee-deep in mud and slush, suffered greatly in health as a result. Many of them only realize now what the war years cost them. Over 40 per cent, of the soldiers who have died since their return from the waT have died from pulmonary tuberculosis, whereas the percentage of deaths from this disease among the civil population is between 3 and 4 per cent. It must be apparent that the soldier, as a result of his exposure to

I the elements, undermined his health, and the onus should not be placed upon him to prove that his present disability has resulted from war service. Prior to their enlistment, our soldiers were perfect physical specimens. I have been informed by returned soldiers suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis I that X-ray photographs used in thu I diagnosis of their cases and in the possession of the department are not made available to them when presenting their claim to the pensions tribunals. They also complain that they are not allowed legal representation before the tribunals, that .the inquiries of these tribunals are conducted in camera, and that when a decision has been arrived at they are not able to glean any information as to what has transpired. I hope that when the new Government assumes office - of course it will be a Labour Government - it will immediately set itself to the task of meting out to these men that treatment to which they are entitled. I would remind the returned soldier members who support the Government that although it has been in office for two years and eight months it is only on the last night of the sitting of the Parliament that any attempt is made to amend some of tho harsh provisions of the Repatriation Aci. I ask the returned soldier members opposite whether they claim that pressure of. business prevented them, from compelling the Government to introduce this legislation. What were those honorable members doing during the recent seven months recess? Long ago, they should have compelled the Government to give to the soldiers what now, in the dying hours of the Parliament, it admits to be their just due. But it will be apparent to all returned soldiers, and to all sections of the community that this Govern ment, after “ going slow “ in the 0 early days of its occupancy of office, is now. in the dying hours of the Parliament, working very rapidly in a. process of window-dressing to catch votes. Let the actual position be known ! This Parliament has sat only six weeks in twelve months. How can honorable members . justify the retention of the high salary which they receive?

This bill is designed to improve the lot of certain soldiers, but some sections are not provided for. I have already brought two cases under the notice of the Minister. Another case is one which bears out what the honorable member for Melbourne Ports (Mr. Holloway) has said - that the officers of the department act under the instructions of the Government in matters of policy. It is the case of a lady who married, or thought that she had married, a returned soldier. Two children were horn of the union, and, eventually, the soldier died. During his life time, she received a pension for herself and her children, but after his death the department ascertained that he had previously been married, that his first wife was still living, and that the second marriage Avas not legal. The pension was immediately cancelled. It was an inhuman action. No matter what the written word of the law provides, this lady had a strong moral claim on the Government for a pension for herself and children. It should have been continued. The returned soldier members of the Government say that they are anxious to help the soldiers. I say that it does not matter whether the unfortunate sufferers from pulmonary tuberculosis are soldiers or not; they should be cared for if they are unable to earn a livelihood. What honorable member opposite will deny that every person, whether he saw active service or not, who suffers from this dreaded disease and is incapable of earning a living should not be assisted ? When the committee stage of the bill is reached the members of the party to which I belong will give the Government every opportunity to demonstrate in a practical manner how far it is prepared to go to assist this deserving section of the community.

Mr JENNINGS:
South Sydney

– This is a measure of the greatest importance and the Minister for * Repatriation (Mr. Man) is to be congratulated for having introduced it. It h legislation which is years overdue and will be welcomed by all who are interested in repatriation matters. I have made representations to the Minister in regard to cases similar to those mentioned by the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear) and the honorable member for Melbourne Ports (Mr. Holloway), in which wives have been deserted by their husbands. One case which I desire to bring under notice now i”! that of a wife whose husband disappeared ten years ago. He was evidently- a mental case due to war injuries and his disappearance might possibly be ascribed to suicide. At any rate the department cancelled the pension payable to the wife and children, and, despite repeated representations, it has not been restored because of the legislative provisions. 1 should like to be assured by the Minister that this is a case which can be dealt with under this bill.

Another case is that of an unfortunate soldier suffering from tuberculosis sixteen years after his return from the war where he was gassed. His condition was such that for many years he had to wear a straight-jacket. He was examined by the departmental medical officers and because his condition showed some improvement his pension was reduced by 50 per cent. I should be glad to know if his case will be covered by this bill. The case cited is one, amongst others, concerning men who are helpless and unable to fight their claims as they could have done in their prime days of the war. If they had been able to follow their ordinary avocations, ho doubt they would have been in more or less a/fluent circumstances to-day, and living in comfort with their wives and families. It needs no emphasising that it is the nation’s duty to help these mcn in the maimer promised them during the war period. The officers of the department have given sympathetic consideration to these cases, but they are prevented from giving a favourable decision owing ta the existing legislative entanglements. If the Minister can open the door a little wider for these legitimate cases he will earn the gratitude not only of the soldier organizations, but also the approval of the people of Australia generally.

Mr MAKIN:
Hindmarsh

.- Alt-hough the introduction of this legislation has been somewhat delayed and it is regrettable that an attempt” has not been made to clear up the anomalies existing in the act long before this late hour, nevertheless I welcome the introduction of this bill for the good it will do to many who have suffered disabilities in the past. It by no means covers the full range of matters that certainly require immediate attention. The assisting of soldiers in their claims for repatriation benefits I regard as one of the most difficult public duties which I am called upon to perform, and it has not always been possible to secure the results which I feel the claims have justified. I do not blame those actually administering the act. I have received from the departmental officers very courteous treatment and consideration. They have not, however, the power to afford ready relief in a case where the applicant is suffering disability. If there is any unsympathetic treatment at all in connexion with the administration of the Pensions Department it is to be found particularly amongst the medical officers. Recently there has been a change in South Australia in the position of Chief Medical Officer, and the gentleman who now occupies that position, Dr. Mackay, has made a favorable impression upon those who have come under his care or review. But I feel that the policy in the past seems to have been one of relentless endeavour by the medical officers to deprive as many soldiers of repatriation benefits as possible. I” have fought the cases of certain of these men before the different tribunals dealing with pensions. I have been able to substantiate claims before those tribunals and to afford some measure of redress. -No provision was made in the Financial Emergency Act for the reduction of soldiers’ pensions; but it is a remarkable thing that, from the time that act came into operation, the department has lost no opportunity to reduce pensions, or to cancel them altogether. In fact, it would appear that a definite policy has been followed for the reduction of pensions wherever possible. For instance, in two cases which came under my notice, 50 per cent, pensions were reduced on approximately the same date to 33;V per cent., and some time later they were both again reduced to 25 per cent. Of course, it may have been a mere coincidence, but ii looked to me very much like part of a pre-arranged plan.

Mr White:

– The honorable member must know that there are periodical medical examinations.

Mr MAKIN:

– I know, but that in itself does not account for the remarkable similarity in treatment to which I have referred. It would be interesting to examine the files, particularly of South Australian pensioners, in order to see just how long is this arm of coincidence.

When an applicant is refused a pension, and goes before the Appeal Tribunal, the department has. been able to secure the report of some eminent medical specialist to support its case by reviewing the case largely from the departmental doctor’s viewpoint which comprises substantially the records on the cards; but tho applicant himself is seldom able to afford the consulting fee of a specialist of equally eminent authority. There are occasions when the department has sent men to specialists, but even then, justice is not always done. In one case which came under my notice an applicant was called upon to present himself to a Collinsstreet specialist. He went into this doctor’s consulting room, but, instead of seeing the specialist himself, was examined by one of his assistants, who took down his answers to certain questions. On (he strength of those answers the specialist himself, without even having seen the man, prepared his report.

Mr Thorby:

– And collected his fee.

Mr MAKIN:

– Yes. If it is right that a department should be able, at the expense of the public, to engage expensive medical experts in support of its case, the returned soldier should also have the right to obtain at the public expense medical evidence in support of his claim.

The honorable member for Barton (Mr. Lane) said that the repatriation tribunals moved very slowly when dealing with appeals. My experience has been that the tribunals have dealt conscientiously, and a3 expeditiously as possible, with the cases I have brought before them. If there is a long list of cases waiting for attention it is largely due to the action of the commission, particularly during the last two years in rejecting so many of the appeals and requiring the remission of so many applications to a tribunal for decision. Since the tribunals have been established the number of applications rejected by the commission seems to be much greater than before. The policy of the. commission seems to be to plam upon the tribunals the responsibility of assessing the merits of claims for pensions. If that policy is to bo pursued, the department should appoint more tribunals, so that work of hearing appeals may he expedited.

Under the present act the dependants of returned soldiers have not the right of appeal to any tribunal against the decision of the commission. I have in mind a case of the widow of a returned soldier who had her pension cancelled. This woman i.8 the victim of a family disagreement, with the result that suspicion has been thrown upon her character, and this suspicion has been accepted by the commission as proof of guilt. I submitted to the commission references of good character from most respectable citizens including a police officer, a clergyman who was personally acquainted with the woman, a storekeeper with whom she dealt, and a Justice of the Peace, but the commission still refused to alter its decision, and the injustice is that she has no right of appeal. I believe that if she had had access to an independent tribunal her character would have been vindicated and her claim established.

I have endeavoured to point out some of the anomalies to which the administration of the act in its present form has given rise. They indicate the need for amending the act so as to ensure that full justice shall be done to those returned soldiers who are broken in health, and to the dependants of those who have died as the result of their war service. “We are grateful for the improvements embodied in this measure, and we hope that Parliament will, at an early date, so improve the act as to render a full measure of justice to returned soldiers and their dependants.

Mr E J HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944

. -I congratulate the Minister for Repatriation (Mr. Marr) upon the introduction of this measure. I know that the honorable gentleman has the interests of the returned soldiers at heart, and I compliment him upon the proposal to give legislative effect to what has been the practice in connexion with returned soldiers suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis.

I am inclined to endorse the view of the honorable member for Perth (Mr. Nairn) in regard to the interpretation of clause 6. The proposed new section 31a will certainly give legislative effect to what is highly desirable and necessary. This country owes a definite obligation to ex-soldiers who are suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis. Successive governments have honoured that obligation, and the Minister is to be commended for deciding to give statutory effect to it. Sub-section 1 of the proposed new section makes the payment of the pension mandatory in- the case of any member whose incapacity is caused by pulmonary tuberculosis. That being the case, I submit that it is necessary to have a safeguarding provision. If a medical man were to certify that a soldier was suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis, that soldier would automatically be entitled to the pension. But we know that many medical men often give wrong diagnoses. I could cite cases dating back many years. One case is that of a man who was returned from Sutton Veiny in the tubercular ward of a hospital ship. After sputum tests had been taken in Melbourne, he was diagnosed as not suffering from that dreaded disease. Time after time he appealed to the Repatriation Department, stating definitely that outside medical authority had certified his case to be one of fibrosis, but it was not until about 1931, when he was told by the medical superintendent of the Sydney Hospital that he would have to enter that institution to have a major operation performed, that the department agreed that the fibrosis was a war disability, and honorably made amends. There is another case of a soldier who, for a period of from ten to fourteen years, received a pension on account of a wound in his knee caused by shrapnel. He recently had the bullet extracted, and tho diagnosis now is that he is suffering from osteoarthritis of the knee, and his pension has been cancelled. Either he had this complaint in the first place, or it was aggravated by the bullet. In one instance a soldier who received a pension for a long period on account of the loss of an eye, subsequently had his pension cancelled because of his inability to prove to the medical officers of the Repatriation Department that the blindness was the direct outcome of war services. The first diagnosis must have been correct; otherwise the pension would not have been paid. Sub-section 2 of the proposed new section is, therefore, a necessary safeguard against a possible mistake of a medical man.

I support the remarks of the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear), who has drawn attention to section 45w of the act, which clause 9 of the bill proposes to amend. The proviso to that section reads -

Provided that if the appellant or a representative of the appellant shall make out a prima facie case in support of his claim that the incapacity from which he is suffering or from which he has died was caused or aggravated by war service, the onus of proof that such incapacity was not in fact so caused or aggravated shall lie with the commission.

The bill proposes to add a further proviso, placing upon the commission the onus of proving that death caused by an accident to a member of the forces, who is wholly or partially incapacitated as the result of wounds, was not materially contributed to by those wounds. I submit that the Minister should accept the suggestion of tho honorable member for Dalley to omit the word “wounds”, and to insert in lieu thereof the words “war service.” I could cite cases of men who are suffering from neurasthenia and disorderly action of the heart, which may result in their collapsing at any moment. A man may collapse while walking across a street, and, in consequence, meet with an accident that causes his death. As the provision stands, I am afraid that there would be a difference of opinion as to the cause of death. If the Minister says that such cases are covered, then why the amendment, but if it is necessary, then no harm would be done if the suggested alteration were made. There is no need to limit the nature of the disability.

I commend the provision which places on the commission the obligation of proving that wounds or war disabilities have not materially contributed to the death of a member of the forces. The time has passed when the onus should rest on tho soldier of proving that his disability is the result of active service overseas. There was a time when that was necessary. On account of the long period that has elapsed since the termination of the war, however, relevant documents may have been mislaid, and contact may have been lost with those who could supply the necessary evidence. Therefore, in every case, the soldier should be given the benefit of the doubt. I have in mind a man whose pension was cancelled. He definitely states that, despite the- holding of a contrary opinion by the department, the loss of sight in one of his eyes was due to an accident that occurred in the

Jordan V alley. For a period of ten years, that view has been accepted by the department, yet his pension has been “cancelled, and he cannot secure redress unless he can make contact with those who witnessed the accident, and obtain evidence from them. It is grossly unfair to cancel a man’s pension without helping him in any way to prove his case. The attitude of the department, generally, is, “ Your pension is cancelled, and the onus is upon you to prove that your disability was caused by war service “. A lot of sympathy is shown with him, but he is not permitted access to the files. If he desires to communicate with a particular person of whom the department may have knowledge, it will merely forward a letter from. him. He is not allowed access to the reports, which were made at the time when his pension was granted. Some mention, of his “record of service overseas might help him to refresh his memory, or to get into touch with persons who could supply the necessary evidence. I plead with the Minister to make provision in an amending measure that he will have an opportunity to bring down in the next Parliament, to confer greater discretionary powers upon the bodies that deal with these matters. I feel that, knowing the sufferings of the diggers, they would be only too pleased to help if they were not bound hard and fast by legislation.

Clause 12 proposes to amend the second schedule of the act. The right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) pleaded for this provision to be made all-embracing instead of applying particularly to cerebro-spinal causes. The right honorable gentleman is somewhat exacting, and, being a legal man, realizes the value of having these matters stated clearly. I have no doubt that he would like it to be placed beyond all shadow of doubt that in cases of incapacity other than those affecting the cerebro-spinal system the men should be entitled to the comfort of an attendant. The clause states -

The second schedule to the principal act is amended by omitting the words “ , in consequence of injuries to his spine “ and inserting in their stead the words “ has been blinded, or who, in consequence of injury or disease affecting the cerebro-spinal system, or of any injury or disease causing incapacity similar in effect to the incapacity resulting from an injury or disease affecting the cerebrospinal system “.

I take it that those words clearly mean any injury or disease that causes an exsoldier to need an attendant.

Mr Hughes:

– Incapacity, no matter from what cause it has arisen, should be regarded as sufficient justification for the payment.

Mr E J HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944

– With the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes), I should like the matter to be placed beyond all shadow of doubt. If the Minister can secure a drafting amendment to make the meaning more clear, well and good ; but to me the intention appears to be obvious.

Mr Maxwell:

– In both cases, the effect is the same..

Mr Hughes:

– I think not.

Mr E J HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944

– When members with a legal knowledge fail to agree, it is not surprising that .laymen have doubts. I congratulate the Minister upon having brought these amendments forward, for I know that the subject is very close to his heart. I trust that the suggestions made by the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear) will be supported by all honorable members who are interested in welfare of returned men.

Mr THORBY:
Calare

– I regret that this measure has been introduced practically in the dying hours of the Parliament. It seems to me that the bill does not go so far as it should. Every honorable member could ‘bring forward a long list of specific cases in which much suffering has been inflicted on individual ex-soldiers and their dependants as the result of rigid administration by the department. In numerous instances, applications by men who are physical wrecks have been refused, simply because they have not met all the technical requirements of the law and of the various tribunals before whom they must appear. These unfortunate men have been cast adrift, and have no redress. It is heartbreaking to have appeals rejected, or to be granted a 20 per cent, pension. This actually happened to an unfortunate ex:soldier who could barely stagger into my office in Sydney. It was almost impossible for him to state his case. He has been asked to exist on less than 16s. a fortnight, yet the law declares that the tribunal may refuse him any further assistance.

In another typical case a man served for nearly four years at the front. For almost a whole year he was imprisoned in a German internment camp. He suffered severe privations, and, on his release,- spent eight or nine months in a British military hospital. He was invalided home, but did not apply for the pension at the time. He is a married man with several children. Although a nervous and physical wreck, he cannot obtain any compensation from the department. I challenge any medical tribunal to determine whether the disabilities of a soldier who suffered the privations of the war for four years are due to his experiences in France or have arisen since the war. Probably the strain whish this man endured in a German internment camp was quite sufficient to undermine his general physique.

Mr Makin:

– It is most difficult to induce the department to recognize neurasthenia as a disability arising from war service.

Mr THORBY:

– That is so. In numerous instances, returned soldiers who are now physical wrecks are confronted by a barrier of red tape and legal technicalities. Through no fault of their own, they are often not 100 per cent, mentally efficient. In scores of cases they are absolutely penniless and have to fight an army of well-equipped and highly-paid officials, who contend that their first responsibility is to protect the revenue and to administer the laws as they find them. Will the Minister for Repatriation (Mr. Marr) obtain a full report from the Repatriation Commission with a view to having the Government’s attention directed to the many obstacles that prevent these unfortunate men from receiving common justice?

Mr FAIRBAIRN:
Flinders

.- I have no wish unduly to delay the passage of the bill, because it has my hearty support. -I commend the Minister for Repatriation (Mr. Marr) and the Government upon the measure. As no doubt the Repatriation Commission has been consulted regarding it, I commend that body also upon its share in the introduction of these amendments which will liberalize the provisions of the principal act in the direction considered necessary by the Returned Sailors and Soldiers’ Imperial League of Australia. In the course of time, further liberalization of the act will be essential. As honorable members on both sides of the chamber have pointed out, the greatest amount of attention should be paid to those ex-soldiers who suffer from nervous disorders as the result of war service. Those who received sufficient grievous bodily injury to incapacitate them for further service, as many did, in the early days of the war, are beginning to realize, as the years roll ou, that comparatively they are among the lucky ones. Those of us who. after a month or two at the front, and a comparatively brief share of the strain imposed on the fighting forces, found our services terminated by injury, did not suffer the same nervous strain as those who, month after month, and year after year, escaped injury. In many cases the latter class cannot prove that their present disability is due directly to war service. Those returned men who are fortunate enough not to need to search for employment are not directly and selfishly interested in this bill. A man who lost an arm, or had it seriously injured while serving at the front, finds it easier to obtain some form of employment, because his disability attracts attention to his war service; but the unfortunate individual who, though apparently bodily sound, has frayed nerves, and perhaps finds it necessary to take stimulants to steady them, experiences great difficulty in getting work, and is not regarded with understanding and sympathy. I want to direct the attention of the House to the necessity for liberalizing the act to meet these special cases.

I hope that when the hill is in the committee stage no bitterness will he displayed in the discussion, and that no attempt will be made to secure political capital out of the difficulties of the exsoldiers. The Returned Soldiers’ League, whose affairs have been most ably administered ever since the war, has always set itself firmly against party political capital being made out of the troubles of the returned men ; therefore I strongly deprecate the bitterness displayed by one honorable member opposite. At countless gatherings of the Returned Soldiers’ League in all parts of Victoria which 1 have attended, it has always bee.n most noticeable that remarks of speakers savouring of attempts to make party capital in this way, have been greatly resented. If the honorable member to whom I have referred desires to gain the goodwill of returned soldiers, he had better keep his remarks on this subject free from bitterness and party bias. I do not wish to criticize in any way the honorable member to whom I have referred, because he did not serve during the war. It is not right for any of us to criticize without intimate knowledge those who did not serve. Some were too young, some were too old, and some others physically or mentally unfit for service. But I again emphasize that thi3 subject should be kept entirely free from bitterness or party political bias in any form.

Mr WATKINS:
Newcastle

.- I commend the Government for having introduced this bill. I do not wish to traverse the ground that has already been covered by other speakers, except to emphasize that it is necessary to afford additional help to mothers wholost their sons during the war. Ir* many cases the hoys who did not return from active service, or who have died since their return, were the sole support of their mothers. The pensions which these mothers enjoyed were in all cases severely reduced under our financial emergency legislation, and were also taken into account in determining the invalid and old-a.ge pensions that the recipients of them should be allowed to have. This was never intended to be so. When our young men enlisted, they were definitely promised that they and their dependants would be adequately provided for in case of such a need arising. I hope, therefore that, in the committee stages of the bill, the Government will agree to a liberalization of the provisions which bear upon the subject to which I have referred.

Mr SCHOLFIELD:
Wannon

.- I congratulate the Government upon having introduced this bill and the Minister for Repatriation (Mr. Marr) upon having shown true sympathy with returned men and their dependants generally- I am sorry, however, that this measure was not introduced earlier in the session, for I do not think that it is comprehensive enough, and there is now little time to give it adequate consideration. I do not think that Australia is treating her returned men as well as she should do. The Canadian Repatriation Act provides that any returned soldier who suffers from tuberculosis i3 deemed to have contracted it in consequence of his active service. The right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) has told us to-day that the Repatriation Act of the United States of America contains a ‘similar provision. I do not claim to have much medical knowledge, but I believe that the conditions under which our men served during the war were conducive to the contraction of this disease and others from which returned men frequently suffer. Many men who contracted slight ailments of one kind or another while they were on active service did not report sick, and so have no medical record to support any claim that they may now make for a pension. On the other hand, many men who reported sick when they should not have done so, are now able to produce a medical record which is of help to them when they apply for a pension. It is very difficult for returned men who are to-day suffering from various diseases to prove that their complaints are duc to war service. The act should be liberalized in this connexion so that such men may be given the benefit of the doubt. It is true that under section 45 of the Repatriation Act -

An appeal tribunal and an assessment appeal tribunal shall not, in the hearing of appeals, be bound by any rules of evidence, but shall act according to substantial justice and the merits of the case and shall give to an appellant the benefit of the doubt.

That provision sounds as though it would favour an appellant, but the Commissioner is, himself, sometimes an appellant. The wording of the section could, in my opinion, be advantageously altered to provide that the tribunals shall pay more regard to the rules of evidence. Many returned men who appear before these tribunals could produce evidence to the effect that, although they did not report sick, they suffered from ailments of one kind or another overseas, and that consequently there was ground for believing that their present disabilities were the effect of war service. In consequence of various cases that have been brought under my notice I have been forced to the conclusion that neither the officers of the department nor the appeal tribunals are as sympathetic as they might be to returned men who appear before them. I have made many requests to the commission and have frequently been distressed, because, although the granting of them would involve very little expense to the country, they have been refused. We should not pay too much attention to the cost to the country of providing adequately for our disabled returned soldiers, even though they may not be able to prove positively that their troubles are due to war service. I suggest that the proposed new section 31a (1), which deals with incapacity caused by pulmonary tuberculosis, should be deleted and a new sub-section incorporated to deal with active tuberculosis. The right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) has informed us that the word used in the American legislation is “ active “. Tuberculosis takes many forms and soldiers who suffer from any form of it should be granted relief. When I waa in France I had on many occasions to sleep for several nights in succession in a stable. I was billeting officer for some time and had often to ask that cows and other stock should be turned out of stables so that soldiers might have some shelter. Men who had to undergo such hardships were, in my opinion, very likely to become susceptible to tuberculosis. The knowledge of these facts should cause the Repatriation Department and the various tribunals that deal with returned soldiers to be more lenient and at least to give them the benefit of any doubt. As all the men who left on active service were deemed to be physically and mentally fit it would be just to assume that disabilities that

Lave overtaken then since their return from abroad are due, in some measure, to war service.

Mr JAMES:
Hunter

– I welcome this bill so long overdue, but it does not go nearly far enough. It does not, for instance, grant sufficient relief to soldiers and their dependants who were forced to suffer heavy disabilities under the financial emergency legislation, introduced in 1931 and in subsequent years. The restoration which will bc made to these people is not adequate. I am glad that additional consideration is to be given to returned soldiers who suffer from pulmonary tuberculosis, but, like previous speakers, I think that the time has arrived for Australia to provide a pension for all ex-soldiers who suffer from this disease regardless of whether they are unable to prove that it is due to war service. Many men who returned from the war with what seemed to he a slight cold or a more or less racking cough assumed that their trouble would be remedied on their return to normal life, but, as often as not, it became worse. Returned men who resumed their occupation as miners and workers in other industries bore their affliction patiently until they discovered, to their distress, that their lungs were badlyaffected. But so much time had elapsed that they found it difficult to prove that their trouble was due to war service. Provision is made in this bill to place the onus of such proof upon the Repatriation Commission and that is a desirable amendment. We could afford to liberalize the conditions applicable to war pensions, for the Commonwealth Statistician has informed us that returned soldiers are now dying at the rate of 5,000 a year. We must remember that a considerable proportion of the community who rendered no active service during the Avar invested their money in war bonds, the interest on which is still being paid. Apparently this indebtedness will go on for ever. It is high time that these payments were reviewed. Drastic action should bc taken to extinguish the liability on interest-bearing war bonds. If our expenditure under this heading could be reduced we could well afford to be more liberal in -our payments of war pensions. At present when a returned man makes up his mind to apply for a pension he has to submit himself to a veritable barrage of questions. After making his application he has to submit himself for examination by the local medical officer of the Repatriation Department. That, officer submits a report and the applicant)-, may then be called upon to present -him-., self to the medical board in the., capital city of his State. He., may then have to go before the. Repatriation Commission, and subsequently before the Entitlement Tribunal. If the case is turned down by the tribunal the soldier is not permitted to appear before it again until after the expiration of six months, .and then only if he can furnish fresh evidence. Many sad cases have been brought before ‘me, and I have had to bring them before the House in order to obtain redress. One case with which I now desire to deal is that of a man living at Cessnock, whose pension was suddenly withdrawn on the ground that his disability was not due to war service. Payment was suspended for two years. He was X-rayed, and finally was certified to be suffering from tuberculosis, which was subsequently proved to be a disability due to war service. Within three months of the restoration of hia pension the poor unfortunate man died, leaving behind him a wife and two children. This man was harassed not only by the Repatriation Department, but also by the Assistant Minister administering War Service Homes. He was threatened with eviction from hia war service home because of his inability to meet his obligations. What is the position of his widow to-day? The act has not .been liberalized to such an extent as to provide her with a full widow’s pension. She will have to fight for it. Our legislation should he liberalized to cover cases of that description, not only in regard to pensions, but also in regard to war service homes. Due to unemployment, or intermittent employment, and sickness, it is absolutely impossible for some of these men to redeem their obligations in respect to their homes. Remissions of taxation .to the extent of £9,500,000 have been made to the wealthier sections of the community, and we should give to the soldier the concessions to which he is justly entitled. I am sure that any liberalization of our social legislation in this respect would be approved of by the people as a whole, because, although .many years have passed since the war ended, 1 believe there ia still great public sympathy for returned soldiers. Whatever we can do to relieve the burdens placed upon them we should dd.’gladly. It is difficult for some soldiers iri ‘prove that their disabilities are due to war service. A case which I desire to bring under notice is that of a man who is at present in Kurri Kurri hospital. While a resident of Queensland he was in receipt of a war pension of £4 4s.; but the repatriation authorities in the State of New South Wales h ave now decided that his disability cannot be attributable to war service, and, although -.this man has been out of employment for three years, his pension has been reduced to 16s. a fortnight. On active service this man suffered either a wound or an injury necessitating an abdominal operation, and while in hospital he contracted a skin disease of such an irritating nature that he had to be bound from the fingertips to the elbow. He is unable to work, due to the fact that he is suffering from chronic bronchitis, as well as from the injuries to which I have referred. According to the law he is not entitled to bo admitted to the Randwick Repatriation Hospital. Who can say that this man’s disabilities are not attributable to war service? The skin disease was. contracted in a military hospital. If he had not gone to the war he would not have been in the hospital, and would not have contracted the skin disease. The case of another man was brought under my notice by a well-known resident in the West Maitland district. He is already in receipt of a pension for some minor injury sustained at the war, but his tuberculosis is not recognized as a war disability. He is anxious to become an inmate of the Randwick Military Hospital, but the Repatriation Commission has not yet decided that he is entitled to admission. In the meantime, according to urgent telegrams I have received, he is sadly in need of medical attention.

Another case which I desire to bring under the notice of the Minister is that of soldiers supplied with artificial limbs.

A number of mcn working in the mines in my electorate are supplied with artificial legs. In the mining industry it is absolutely essential for limbless men to have two artificial limbs. An artificial leg used while a man is engaged at his work becomes so filthy that it cannot be used with clean clothing. Consequently, it is necessary to have two artificial legs. An engine-driver, living in Cessnock, whose artificial limb becomes covered with grease, applied to the department for a new artificial leg, but was informed that the new limb could not be supplied until the old one had been returned. In consequence of this decision, he was put to the expense of going to Sydney in order to have the old artificial leg repaired.

I desire now to bring under the notice of the Minister the position of the de facto wife, for whom the act provides a full widow’s pension upon the death of the soldier with whom she has been living. Some of these women, owing to unfortunate circumstances, have not been able to become the legal wives of the soldiers concerned. A case which came under my notice is that of a widow of a returned soldier who lost her pension owing to the fact that after her husband died she took up with another man who promised to marry her, but subsequently callously deserted her. When the department became aware of this, her pension was cancelled, and it has now been withdrawn for two years. I think that that i3 too groat a punishment to impose on this poor and unfortunate woman, who has repented and regretted her net of indiscretion. I have already brought this case before the Minister, and also before the Deputy Commissioner. Action was taken by the department under section 37 of the principal act to stop tho payment of the pension.

Mr SPEAKER (Hon G H Mackay:

– The honorable member has enjoyed the privilege of giving a number of illustrations, but he must recognize that there is a limit which the Chair may permit. I ask the honorable member to confine his remarks more directly to the provisions of the bill.

Mr JAMES:

– I have felt it necessary to cite these cases in order to support my contention that the bill does not go far enough. It does not cover the cases which I have mentioned. It certainly does not make provision for the restoration to the soldiers of what was taken away from them by the Financial Emergency Act. This bill is introduced merely for the purpose of windowdressing for the elections. Some honorable members opposite have accused us of endeavouring to make political capital out of our efforts to assist these men. 1 can never be accused of endeavouring to make political capital out of the sufferings of any section of the community. I have merely advocated the remedying of injustices suffered by these men. I have always done that irrespective of the party to which I belong. Those who profess to be so concerned over the welfare of tubercular and disabled soldiers will have an opportunity during the committee stage of this bill to show their sincerity. I trust that we shall not be treated to a similar exhibition of hypocrisy to that which we witnessed when the Invalid and Old-age Pensions Bill was shelved by the Government, because it had not the courage to deal with an amendment moved from this side. of the House.

Mr. E. F. HARRISON (Bendigo) [9.4C. - I join with the honorable member for Flinders (Mr. Fairbairn) in deprecating the attempt to make party capital out of the sufferings of those who sacrificed- their health in the service of their country. I believe that the Government, by means of this bill, is making an honest attempt to remove anomalies which have become evident in the administration of the existing act. It is now sixteen years since the termination of the war, and it is almost impossible for a soldier Who, through failing health and the stress of economic circumstances, finds himself obliged to apply for a pension, to obtain medical evidence regarding the onset of his illness. I know of many returned soldiers whose exit from the army was like my own. Upon demobilization, I signed off without any medical examination in order to get clear of soldiering. After I disembarked, some one asked me whether I was fit, and I said that I was fit enough to sign any paper put before me. Every man, before he was accepted for service, had to undergo a rigorous medical examination and during the period of his service a full record regarding him was kept, lt has happened, however, that the medical history of many soldiers has inadvertently been mislaid, so that the evidence necessary to establish their claim to a pension is not available. Also, many returned soldiers, through lack of educa-tion, or for other reasons, are not able to” search for the necessary evidence, or toappreciate what evidence is really’ needed; yet on such men is thrown the onus of proving that their disability is due to war service. I know of many cases regarding which I am not at all satisfied that the department has given the benefit of the doubt to the applicant as the act requires.

Another source of complaint is the delay that occurs before the appeal, tribunals give their decisions. Admittedly, the number of appeals has increased recently as was to be expected during these hard times, but cases have been piling up before the entitlement and appeal tribunals to an extent that constitutes a definite hardship on those who are seeking relief. When an applicant, after waiting for months to have his case decided, is granted a pension^ he is surely entitled to more than three months’ back pay. He should be given hack pay to the time when his application was first made. The help that returned soldiers are able to get from the Returned Soldiers’ League, through its advocates, and through the experts who are stationed in all capital cities, is inestimable. Sympathetic and helpful treatment can be relied upon, and the applicant is informed what kind n ‘ evidence is necessary, and how it may be obtained. This help is available whether the applicant is a member of the league or not.

I should like to join with the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear) and the honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. E. J. Harrison) in suggesting thai clause 9 of the bill be amended so that there may be substituted for the word “ wounds “ a term much more embracing. An accident need not cause death, but it may be the forerunner of a state of incapacity which leads directly to the man’s death. Again the man who meets with an accident may have been in a neurasthenic condition which need not be attributable to wounds. I have every confidence that the Government will accept the suggested amendment.

I again appeal for more sympathetic treatment of applicants by the commission”.” I have in mind the case of an excellent front-line soldier with a good record, who was wounded in the shoulder with shrapnel. After his discharge he went about his work and did not apply for a pension. Last year, a malignant growth was discovered on the site of the shrapnel wound, but the Repatriation Department, despite repeated requests, has refused to admit that the growth, from which the man died very quickly, was attributable to war injuries. This is a case in which the benefit of the doubt might well have been extended to the applicant by the commission or by the Appeal Tribunal.

Let us now consider the cases of men who, before the war, were nomads, having never settled down in any place to any one job. They enlisted, served overseas, and upon their return resumed their former nomadic existence. One such man arrived at a country town, obtained temporary employment, and made himself known to the sub-branch of the Returned Soldiers’ League. After his bona fides had been verified as far as was possible in conversation, he was accepted as a returned soldier. He died suddenly, and the league suggested to the local undertaker that, in accordance with the Government’s policy, he should be buried as a returned soldier at the Government’s expense. Subsequently the undertaker applied to the Repatriation Department for reimbursement for the work -done, and was requested to send in the man’s name. This was done, and it was found that two men of that name had enlisted and had served in more or less the same capacity. The undertaker was then asked to give particulars of the man’s family, where they resided and where the man’s wife was. But this he was unable to do. He said that the man had simply been vouched for by the local branch of the Returned Soldiers’ League. He was then asked to forward any medals or war decorations which the man had left in order that identification might be completed, but no such articles were available. This correspondence has been going on for two years, and no settlement of the claim has yet been reached. T ask the Minister for Repatriation (Mr. Marr) whether, having regard to the few case3 in which such doubts can arise, it should not take a risk on the few pounds necessary to carry out the burial in accordance with the Government’s promise. We owe an enormous debt of gratitude to the men who fought overseas, a debt which cannot be measured in mere money. It seems to me that we are lavish in certain respects, and parsimonious in other directions that do not reflect much credit on those who, since the war, have been responsible for the conduct of the Repatriation Department.

Mr COLLINS:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

.- As with other honorable members, my sympathy goes out to those who gave their services or their lives to the cause of freedom. I have no doubt that it is because of the appeals that have been made from time to time by members of this House that the present bill is now before us. I could quote numerous cases of men who. because of their pride, refused to apply for pensions until their disability became practically complete. I have had one case before the department for two years. The man went to the war a model of physical fitness, but was wounded in action, and, in addition, suffered a breakdown in health as a result of the hard living condition’s to which the soldiers were subjected. He did not apply for a pension when he returned, but after some years was compelled to relinquish his occupation and seek assistance from the department. I brought the case before the commission, and was told time after time that the man’s condition could not be attributed to his war service. On each occasion when I brought the case forward the same reply was given. That man followed the occupation of a bushworker, and I produced on his behalf the testimony of station-owners, titled men who would not exaggerate the position or make a wrong statement. The case is now again before the Minister, who has kindly promised to give consideration to the appeal. Those for whom the man worked have testified to the fact that before enlisting he was a model of physical fitness and did not know his own strength. It was definitely proved that his mother, who suffered from asthma, and died at the age of 90 years, had never had any sign of the trouble from which the son is now suffering. I join with other honorable members in asking that greater consideration be given to these cases, and that the act be administered more sympathetically. I am satisfied that the administration has been harsh. t welcome the opportunity to contribute these few remarks to the debate, and congratulate the Minister upon the introduction of this measure.

Mr MARR:
Minister for Repatriation · Parkes · UAP

– Most of the matters that have been raised have uo relation to the bill. It is quite impossible to deal with individual cases, but if they are submitted to the department they will receive the sympathetic consideration which has always characterized its treatment of returned soldiers. If one were to judge by the remarks of quite a number of honorable members, one would conclude that very little sympathy is shown with returned soldiers. I point out that every man in the Repatriation Department is a returned soldier, and that I have found nothing which would lead me to believe that anything but the most sympathetic consideration would be shown by them. When a man or his dependant first applies for a pension, the application is dealt with by the Deputy Commissioner, who, if not satisfied, refers the matter to the State Board, which comprises three returned soldiers, of whom one is nominated by the Returned Sailors and Soldiers’ Imperial League of Australia. If the decision of that body is opposed to the wishes of the returned soldier, he has the right to appeal to the commission, which consists of three returned soldiers, of whom one is the nominee of the league. I have yet to learn that the representative of that body does not give sympathetic consideration to any case upon which he adjudicates. I ask those honorable members who were in this House at the time to cast their minds back to 1925, when Sir Neville Howse was Minister for Repatriation. I say emphatically that no one connected with repatriation gave to returned soldiers more sympathetic consideration than was given by that gentleman, yet they asked tor the constitution of a tribunal to which they would have the right to appeal from the decisions of the commission and the State boards. Honorable members confuse the issue when they say that a greater number of tribunals ought to be established. These tribunals do not deal with the application in the first place, but are merely appellate bodies and must decide on the evidence placed before them.

Statements that have been made by a considerable number of honorable members would lead one to conclude that this bill has very little to commend it. I thank those who have referred to it in eulogistic terms. I have as much sympathy a3 any other honorable member of this House with the returned soldier. The assertion that the bill has been introduced in the dying hours of the session discredits those honorable members who have made it.

Mr BAKER:
OXLEY, QUEENSLAND

– That is what has been done.

Mr MARR:

– How could a bill that is dependent on the budget have been introduced at an earlier date?

Mr James:

– It could have been associated with the previous budget.

Mr MARR:

– Last year, when we were not on the eve of an election, the Government restored to the dependants of returned soldiers £300,000 of what had been taken from them under the financial emergency legislation. Honorable members who sit in the corner know full well that last week the measure originally introduced was withdrawn and re-drafted to include suggested improvements. If any honorable member has further suggestions to make, they will receive sympathetic consideration at the earliest possible date. In the proposals that are now before the House, and in those contained in the Financial Relief Bill which was passed last week, there is provision for the restoration to the dependants of returned soldiers of an additional £150,000 of the amount, taken from them under the Financial Emergency Act. Surely that is evidence of the Government’s sincerity! As a private member, I handled as many of these cases as any other honorable member, and it hurts me as Minister to be compelled to sign letters stating that it is impossible to accede to applications for increases of pensions.

Most of the matters that have been raised may be more appropriately dealt with in committee; but there are some statements to which I must reply at this stage. The preparation of an amending bill causes a tremendous amount of work and worry. After the honorable member for Henty (Sir Henry Gullett) has expressed certain doubt with respect toa clause referred to to-night by the right honorable member for Worth Sydney (Mr. Hughes), I prepared with his help an amendment designed to meet his wishes. The proviso to section 45w of the act reads -

Providedthat if the appellant or a representative of the appellant shall make outa prima facie case in support of his claim that the incapacity from which he is suffering or from whichhe has died was caused or aggravated by war service, the onus of proof that such incapacity was not in fact so caused or agrravated shallbe with the commission.

Tins honorable member for Henty did not think that that was sufficient, and we now propose to add the following proviso : -

Provided further that in the case of the death caused by accident, of a member of the forces who is wholly or partially incapacitated as the result of wounds suffered during the period during which he was a member, the burden of proving that those wounds did not contribute to a material degree to the death of the member shall lie on the commission.

The commission, has accepted as due to war service the deaths of soldiers which have been caused by accidents. One man who had contraction of the muscles collapsed, and a harvesting machine passed over and killed him. In another case, a man was drowned while fishing in a boat off Maroubra. On many occasions he had shown himself to be an excellent swimmer, but because he could not remove a wooden leg, he was unable to save himself. In a third case, the lurch of a steamer caused a man with a wooden leg tobe thrown overboard and drowned. Surely the House can accept my assurance that the commission deals sympathetically with all these cases!

Mr E F HARRISON:
BENDIGO, VICTORIA · UAP

– Are there cases of illness having caused accidents?

Mr MARR:

– If a man had a disease or a faulty heart which caused him to collapse in the street in front of a motor car, surely that would be accepted as due to war service.

Mr E J HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944

-Will not the mere fact of narrowing the provision by specifying “ wounds “ definitely indicate that it applies only to wounds?

Mr MARR:

– I have widened the provision because the honorable member for Henty did not consider that wounds were covered by the proviso in the act.

Mr Lane:

– Does not the Minister think that the suggested amendment further widens it?

Mr MARR:

– I do not think that it alters it. The proviso as proposed is as wide as the concession which previously existed.

Sir Henry Gullett:

– It is an entirely new principle.

Mr MARR:

– I assure the House that in the last two days I have spent five hours in the Crown Law Department on this particular clause.

Mr Lane:

– The clause is not clear yet.

Mr MARR:

– It is the best the draftsmen can supply. I admit that legal members of the House have differed to-night regarding it, but it can be discussed further in committee.

Take the class of cases in which the right honorable member for North Sydney has shown special interest. I refer to the men suffering from tuberculosis. I believe that he said that the pension had been granted to them, and that . provision for it was already contained in the act; but that is not so. I was a member of the BrucePage Government, in which the late Sir Neville Howse was Minister forRepatriation, and the Cabinet then decided that an ex-soldier who suffered from tuberculosis should be granted the full pension. This has been paid since 1925 as the result of ministerial action ; but no statutory authority has been received. Every year since that time the AuditorGeneral has pointed out that the Government is paying money to tubercular soldiers without parliamentary authority. I am sure that no honorable member would like to see that payment stopped. Every government that has followed the Bruce-Page Administration has continued the payment by ministerial act. The present bill contains a clause giving these soldiers the right to the full pension. In addition to the remarks attributed by the right honorable member for North Sydney to the late Sir Neville Howse, that Minister said that, where a man was subsequently proved not to be suffering from tuberculosis, the pension would be cancelled. It is the opinion of the Solicitor-General that if the Government or the commission discovers that an ex-soldier has obtained the pension by fraudulent means, the Government or the commission has power lo cancel it. In two instances that h:i vearisen in the last month or six weeks, fraud has been discovered, the sputum of tubercular ex-soldiers having been sold to others to enable them to receive the pension. No honorable member would suggest that the Government should not have power to cancel a pension in a case of fraud such as that.

Doubt has been expressed regarding thewisdom of giving the commission the power to call ex-soldiers up for review. Sir Neville Howse declared that in his own interests a soldier should present, himself periodically for review, not so that the department might, reduce or abolish his pension, but that it might see what progress he was making, and have .an opportunity to help him further in regard to the treatment being received by him for his- complaint-

Mr Lane:

– What does the Minister say regarding the length of time taken by the tribunals in considering .applications?

Mr MARR:

– At the present time delays are unavoidable. In normal circumstances the applicants for the pension are not so numerous as in times of depression. The tribunals were not established to hear the original claims. I could quote cases in which men have appeared ‘before the commission a couple of dozen times.

Mr Lane:

– Why not appoint a tribunal in each State to deal expeditiously with applications?

Mr MARR:

– As Minister, I am bound to observe the law as it stands; I cannot override a decision by a tribunal. I repeat that if I were at liberty to decide numbers of cases according to my own views regarding them, I should award the pension. But I may not be aware of ail the facts. When an application has been considered by four boards, each consisting of returned soldiers, I do not consider that a Minister should have power to override the decision of those bodies. Every quarter I am furnished with particulars as to the number of cases that come before the tribunals, and these are being disposed of as rapidly as further applications arc lodged. Probably, as members of the Australian Imperial Force become older, more applications for the pension will be received. I defy anybody to say that any returned mau is 100 per cent, efficient, in view of the severe mental and physical strain that war service imposed upon him. In the opinion of the returned soldiers’ organizations, the age at which the old-age pension should be granted to -a returned soldier should ‘be reduced from 65 to 55 years. If I had the power to do that, and if money were available for the purpose, I should be one of the first to carry out that policy. If, in the committee stage, it can he shown that the wording of the bill can be altered to make the intention of the Government more clear, I shall be prepared to consider amendments.

From time to time, the honorable member for Melbourne Ports (Mr. Holloway) and others, have raised the case of partially blinded soldiers. Provision was made in the act that they should receive a pension of £1 ls. a week. In 1925. when Sir Neville Howse was Minister for. Repatriation, the Government provided an additional allowance of 7 s. 6d. a week, and when the cuts were made in the pensions of soldiers’ dependants three or four years ago, that 7s. 6d. was reduced by 20 per cent. This year, it is proposed -by the Government to restore the full amount of 7s. 6d. Provision for this is being made in the fifth schedule, so that this payment will be classified as an allowance, and will not be” subject to future cuts if, unfortunately, they have to be made, and it will not be removable by regulation. A number of such allowances have been made under regulation?, without, statutory authority other than the power given to the commission f o make regulations. During the last twelve or eighteen months, with the co-operation of tho Assistant Minister for Defence (Mr. Francis), I have thoroughly examined the regulations with the commission, and have abolished many which were either ultra vires or superfluous. If I continue to act as Minister for Repatriation, I shall clean up the regulation’s completely, in order to have the powers of the commission, the State boards, and the tribunals, clearly defined, so that satisfaction may be more readily obtained by applicants for the pension.

Our hearts go out to widowed mothers who now have to struggle along on a few pounds a year. If it were possible to increase their allowance, I should be one of the first to help in that direction.

The bill also deals with, the case of deserted, wives of ex-soldiers. The Parliament never intended a woman, who had a family, and had been deserted by her husband, to be deprived of her income by way of pension. It is proposed under the bill to reserve to such a woman the right to draw the fixed disability pension.

Mr HUGHES:
NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT; IND NAT from 1929; UAP from 1931; LP from 1944

– Will the wife get what ner deserting husband formerly received i

Mr MARR:

– If the husband has been receiving a 50 per cent, pension for a fixed disability and the wife has been paid 50 per cent, of the allowance for a wife on the disappearance of the husband, her pension is now discontinued. As the honorable member for Melbourne Ports mentioned, in one instance, the husband disappeared over eleven .years ago. His death cannot be proved, although it is considered likely that a court would presume the husband to be dead. Even if a court would declare that the man was presumed to be dead, that would not prove that he had died from a war disability, and the unfortunate woman would not be entitled to more than she is getting at. present. As the man is not drawing his own pension, personally I should be willing for it to be paid to hia wife, but that cannot be done.

Mr Holloway:

– Why should she not be paid a widow’s pension ?

Mr MARR:

– It is not possible for us to go that far under existing conditions. If a man died of disabilities other than war disabilities, a wife’s pension is continued to his widow; but if he dies of. . war disabilities, the wife is paid a widow’s pension. If we were to provide that on the husband’s death all wife-pensions should be converted to widow-pensions, the total war pensions expenditure would be considerably increased. I regret that we cannot go that far at present, but I hope that before very long we shall be able still further to liberalize the act.

The case referred to by one honorable member of the ex-soldier who had lost two legs but whose pension is only at the rate applicable to a man who has lost one leg will be investigated.

I wish to make it clear that, the onus does not rest upon a soldier who applies for a pension to prove that lm disability was occasioned by the war. All he has to prove is that he is suffering from a disability. The onus is then on the commission to prove that the disability is not due to war service. I think it will be agreed that that is as far as we could reasonably go. I also point out that the department provides soldier applicants with the assistance of an officer to help them to submit their case to the tribunals to the best advantage.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2 -

Section twenty-two of the principal act is amended by omitting the proviso to the definition of “ Dependants “ and inserting in its stead the following proviso: -

Provided that any such wife married, or child born, to a member of the Forces after thai date shall, if the member has died or dies from the results of an occurrence happening during the period during which he was such a member, be deemed to be a dependant.”

Section proposed to be amended -

In this part of the A.ct, unless the contrary intention appears - , “ Dependants “ means - but does not include any wife married, or child born, to a member of the Forces after the first da// of October, One thousand nine hundred and thirty -one:

Provided tha,t. any such child- horn after that dai-e whose father dies from the ‘ results of an occurence happening during the period he icas a. member of the Forces shall be deemed to bt a dependant;

Mr WARD:
East Sydney

.- I move -

That al! the words after ‘‘omitting” be omitted witU a view to insert in lieu thereof the following words: - “ from the definition of Dependants’ the words but does not include any wife married, or child born, to a member of the Forces after the firstday of October, One thousand nine hundred and thirty-one,’ and also by omitting the proviso to the definition.” As I pointed out in my second-reading speech, the wives and children of returned men who married subsequent to October, 1931, are at present denied a pension in consequence of legislation introduced by the previous Government and supported by members of the present Government to implement the infamous Premiers plan. In view of the changed financial position, I submit that it is entirely unfair to continue to impose the existing hardship upon the wives and children of returned men who have married since October, 1931. These objectionable provisions should now be removed. The wives and children of such men should be placed upon the same footing as the wives and children of returned men who married prior to October, 1931. No one can justify the existing discrimination. It has been said on behalf of the Government during this debate that an amendment of the Repatriation Act could only be introduced after the budget had been presented ; but that is not the case. The returned soldier members who support this Government could have forced it to bring down this bill long ago if they had desired to do so. There was no need to delay the introduction of it until practically the last night of the session. I hope that the amendment will be agreed to.

Mr MARR:
Minister for Repatriation · Parkes · UAP

– It is true, as the honorable member for East Sydney (Mr. Ward) has pointed out, that under the financial emergency legislation no pension is payable to the wives of returned men who married after October, 1931, or to children born subsequent to that date; but I point out that in the case of the death of the father of such children they immediately became orphans and are entitled to the pension.

Mr Ward:

– But no pension is payable in respect of them during the father’s lifetime.

Mr MARR:

– That is so. The amendment now being made to the act will provide that upon the death of the returned soldier husband from awar dis ability, who married after October, 1931, his widow will become entitled to a widow’s pension. I regret that I am unable at present to go as far as the honorable member for East Sydney wishes. The liberalization of the conditions applicable to war pensions that is now being made will involve an expenditure of £150,000 a year, and that is as far as the Government can go at present.

Mr HOLLOWAY:
Melbourne Ports

– I understand that after the passage of this bill a widow’s pension and children’s pensions will be payable to the widows and children of returned soldiers who married after October, 1931, but that no pension will be payable to the wives and children while the husband and father is still alive.

Mr Marr:

– That is so.

Mr HOLLOWAY:

– I earnestly ask the Govenment to reconsider its decision in this regard, and to place all the dependants of returned soldiers on the same footing.

Question - That the words proposed to be omitted (Mr. Ward’s amendment) stand part of the clause - put. The committee divided. (Chairman- Mr. Bell).

AYES: 33

NOES: 11

Majority . . . . 22

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment negatived.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 3 to 5 agreed to.

Clause 6 -

After section thirty-one of the principal act the following section is inserted: - 31a. - (1.) The rate of pension payable under this act to a member of the forces in respect of incapacity caused by pulmonary tuberculosis shall be not less than the Tate specified in column four of the First Schedule opposite to the rate of pay of the member. (2.) Any such pension shall notbe terminated or reduced below the rate so specified unless it is shown that the member was not suffering from that disease at the time when the pension was granted.

Mr WARD:
East Sydney

– I move -

That the word “. pulmonary “, proposed new section 31a (].), be omitted.’

This amendment is in conformity with the wishes of many honorable members expressed during the second-reading speeches delivered on the hill. Honorable members have said that returned soldiers suffer from forms of tuberculosis other than pulmonary tuberculosis. This amendment has already been suggested by the honorable member for Wannon (Mr. Scholfield) and I move it in order to give honorable members an opportunity to liberalize the measure.

Mr MARR:
Minister for Repatriation · Parkes · UAP

– I am assured by the medical officers of the department that the word “ pulmonary “ was inserted in the bill because it has been in the actever since it was first drafted. The Government is prepared to accept the amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr HUGHES:
North Sydney

, - I move-

That all the words after “ that, first occurring”, sub-section 2, proposed new section 31a, beomitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the following words “the pension was obtained by fraud or impersonation “.

A pension is granted to the applicant because he is suffering from tuberculosis and has been certified as suffering from that disease. It is now proposed to give statutory authority to the ministerial policy enunciated by the late Sir Neville Howse of making that pension permanent and ir reducible. It is suggested, however, that exception should be made in cases where it. is shown that the parson to whom the pension was granted had never suffered from this complaint at all. The honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. E. J. Harrison) went to some trouble to show that doctors sometimes make mistakes. Many of t heirmistakes arc buried, so we hear little of them. In my second-reading speech on this bill I endeavoured to make clear to the House that tuberculosis is a disease very easily diagnosed. If a doctor is unable to say whether an applicant hastuberculosis to an extent that is pensionable it is clear that he has mistaken his profession.

Mr E J HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944

– What about the case of fibrosis which I mentioned that extended over several years’?

Mr HUGHES:

– I am directing my argument now to the point that it is said that the pension should be permanent and irreducible. It can only be paid to a person suffering from tuberculosis. A. case of incipient tuberculosis other than pulmonary tuberculosis should not be pensionable because, according to the argument put forward by the honorable gentleman, it has not disclosed itself. Once having said that a man is suffering from tuberculosis and having decided that he is entitled to the pension it cannot be said that because be gets better it is an act of God. To do this would be to say, in effect, to the pensioner. “ If you do get better God help you “. There must be some finality about this matter. These unfortunate men, having been certified as suffering from tubercolosis, have the comforting assurance that the pension will remain with them until their death, which may be a few weeks hence, and may not be for a few years. I remind the Minister, who has himself been a soldier, and who has emerged from the great struggle in comparative good health, that these poor unfortunate men deserve the greatest sympathy. Having granted them the pension, it should be put on a permanent basis unless it can be shown that it was obtained by fraud or impersonation. This amendment is desired by the men suffering from this complaint, and it will afford them great relief.

Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley

.- I realize the force of the honorable gentleman’s contention ; but I am still unable to see the need for sub-section 2. .Subsection 1 deals with a very positive position, and contains no ambiguity. Its intention is very clear. As now amended, it provides that the rate of pension paya’ble under the act to a member of the forces in respect of incapacity caused by tuberculosis shall not be less than the rate specified in column four of the first schedule opposite to the rate of pay of the member. Once the department accepts the physical condition of the pensioner as being one of tuberculosis in any shape or form, and is convinced that the disability was due to his war service, pension is fixed in accordance with the schedule. The Minister for Repatriation (Mr. Man-) informed us, when introducing this bill, that it was to w he clearly understood that pensions in such cases should be irreducible and permanent. In view of the exhaustive inquiries conducted by the medical officers of the department, I fail to see why there is the slightest necessity fo’r sub-section 2. Let us examine the procedure followed when an application for pension is made. First, the applicant visits his own doctor, who informs him that he is tubercular ; he then approaches the department, and has to undergo examination at the hands of the departmental doctor, who, if he suspects that the man is tubercular, passes him on to the departmental specialist. Then he has to appear before a medical board. The average returned soldier who secures a pension must run the gauntlet of about seven separate medical examinations, including one by the department’s own specialist. I agree with the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) who said that tuberculosis was one of the easiest diseases to trace, and that once the condition becomes established it remains positive, except in the very few instances in which cures have been recorded. The intention of the act is clear, namely, that once a man has been granted a pension in respect of a disability arising out of pulmonary tuberculosis, that pension shall be permanent and irreducible. .

Mention has been made of the possibility of fraud, but it seems to me that, in view of the precautions taken to identify those applying for pensions, and the exhaustive medical examinations that arc made, there is not one chance in a million of fraud being perpetrated. Seeing that such a possibility is so extraordinarily remote, it does not seem worth while to throw every man who is receiving a pension, because of his tubercular condition, into a state of uncertainty about the permanency of his pension. Therefore if the amendment now before the Chair is temporarily withdrawn I shall move -

That proposed new sub-section 2 be omitted.

Mr E J HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944

– I desire to make quite clear just where I stand in regard to the amendment. Possibly the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear) was not in the House when the Minister for Repatriation (Mr. Marr) replied to tho remarks of honorable members. Had he been here, he would have heard the Minister state that there were actually cases on record in which fraud had been peretrated, cases in which affected persons ad sold their sputum to others so that they might take advantage of the tubercular provisions of the act. The right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) went to some pains to prove that what I said in regard to wrong diagnoses by doctors was merely superficial. He- said that fibrosis did not manifest itself until it was so far advanced that the case was pensionable. In the case in question, a man was returned from England as a tubercular patient. The recognized test is the sputum test, and this was administered. Although he had been diagnosed as tubercular in England, he was not recognized as such on arrival in Australia. Eventually, after opinions had been obtained from other doctors, the department’s own medical officers had to admit that they were mistaken, and that the man was suffering from tuberculosis. That was a case of mistaken diagnosis. In other instances there might be actual collusion between doctors, as there was between the two men in the instances referred to by the Minister. The inclusion of a provision to deal with such cases would not injure the “dinkum” applicant, and would guard the department against fraud. I am all for liberalizing the act so as to give returned men the benefit of whatever doubt may exist, but we should take whatever steps are necessary to prevent fraud.

Mr GREGORY:
Swan

.- I hope that the Minister will accept the amendment of the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) whose arguments were most impressive. The honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. E. J. Harrison) mentioned the case of a man suffering from fibrosis, who obtained a pension. That man might have engaged in mining before he went to the war, and it is almost certain that life in the trenches would aggravate his complaint. Even if an error did occur, surely the honorable member would not say that the man’s pension should be taken away from him.

Mr E J HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944

– I would not be likely to say that, seeing that I fought the man’s case for years, and was responsible for his obtaining a pension.

Mr GREGORY:

– We must, of course, guard against possible fraud or misrepresentation, but, in our efforts to do that, we should not throw all the bona fide tubercular pensioners into a state of uncertainty regarding their pensions.

Mr MARR:
Minister for Repatriation · Parkes · UAP

– In section 23 of the act, those persons are specified who may receive pensions, and section 44 provides that any person who obtains a pension by making false statements, &c, shall have his pension cancelled. If a soldier is granted a pension in respect of a certain disability, and it is afterwards established that, at the time the pension was granted, he- was not suffering from that disability, the pension is automatically cancelled.- I know of cases in which mistakes have been made both in favour of the soldier and against him. There was the case, for instance, mentioned by the honorable member for Wentworth in which the applicant had fought his claim for nine years, and only when, at his own expense,, he went into hospital for an operation was it disclosed that he was suffering from fibrosis. That was accepted by the commission, which decided that, as he had the disability in 1925, his pension should date back to that year. It has adopted the widest interpretation in the treatment of cases of tuberculosis.

Mr Hughes:

– A man may have a tubercular affection in his spine, or fibrosis, which may evade diagnosis ; but there can be no mistake in the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis.

Mr MARR:

– There must be provision for the rectification of any mistake that may be made in the granting of a pension, on behalf of either the soldier or the commission.

Mr HUGHES:
North Sydney

– I quite see and appreciate the honorable gentleman’s difficulty. But .the point that I want to make is this: Pulmonary tuberculosis is at any rate arrestable, and in a few cases curable. ‘Cures have been effected. To my certain knowledge the son of a very great friend of mine who is attached to one of the departments came to Canberra and remained here for fifteen months, by which time all traces of the bacilli had disappeared. Suppos- ing he had been a returned man who, upon his arrival in Canberra, was certified - as he could have been - a tuberculosis case. Under sub-section 2, his pension could be cancelled after he had been here for fifteen months, because there was then no sign of the tubercle, on the ground that the original diagnosis was mistakenly made. There must be finality somewhere. Every principal is responsible for the acts of his agent, don« within the scope of his authority. If the medical officer says that Jones has tuberculosis to a pensionable extent, the department must abide by his decision.

Mr Marr:

– Would the right honorable member be satisfied with the withdrawal of sub-section 2?

Mr HUGHES:

– Of course not; but I should have no objection to its stopping at the word “ reduced “. The object of my amendment is to provide for cases of fraud and impersonation. Without sub-section 2 the provision would lack something which the tubercular men regard as vitally important. They want to know that the pension, once granted, is permanent and irreducible.

Sir LITTLETON GROOM (Darling

Downs) [11.21]. - In connexion with the questions raised by the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear) I point out that the proposed new section distinctly states that “such pension shall not be terminated or reduced below the rate so specified.” Those words must remain to preserve the pension. That would not affect-the case mentioned by lbc right honarabic member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) of recovery after a pension had been granted.

Mr HUGHES:

– The section says “Any such “ pension. He must have had pulmonary tuberculosis before he could get the pension.

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:
DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND

– The pension is granted on account of pulmonary tuberculosis, and that section distinctly states that it shall not be terminated or reduced unless it is shown that the member was not suffering from that disease when it was granted. The amendment of the right honorable member for North Sydney proposes that the pension shall not be terminated unless it has been obtained by fraud or impersonation. I suggest that the Minister might accept that.

Mr Marr:

– - I am prepared to do so if the right honorable member is agreeable to the addition of the word “mistake “.

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:

– Although in isolated instances, recovery may take place, it must? be a serious case when the pension is granted. The number of recoveries is comparatively small.

Mr PROWSE:
Forrest

.- Will, the Minister state what would happen if a returned man suffering from tuberculosis was absolutely cured ? There are cases of cures having been effected of some forms of tuberculosis. Would the pension be continued?

Mr Marr:

– Yes. Having been declared a case of tuberculosis, there are no means by which the pension can be withdrawn.

Mr PROWSE:

– The clause appears to rae to be absurd. It predicates, either that the member of the force was not suffering from tuberculosis when the pension was granted, or that he was subsequently cured. If he did not have it in tho first place, but afterwards contracted it. would the pension be withdrawn ?

Mr Marr:

– A man may apply for a pension at any time if he is suffering from tuberculosis.

Mr PROWSE:

– If the pension is granted to him, and a year afterwards his is not a case of tuberculosis, the question is, did he have it in the first place? Then there is the case of the man who d’d not have it when the pension was granted, but has it now. Would the pension be cancelled in such a case? The whole point is, whether the man is suffering from tuberculosis or not.

Mr BLACKLOW:
Franklin

– I support the amendment submitted by the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes), and I trust that he will not give way to the Minister by including the word “ mistake “. I am not a lawyer, but I can take a commonsense view of the matter. If the word “ mistake “ were inserted, it could bc said that an error had -been made in the first place by a doctor on whose report a pension had been granted. Proof that a mistake had not been made might not be forthcoming ten years after a case had been diagnosed.

Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley

.- Will the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) temporarily withdraw his amendment to enable me to submit a prior amendment to have all the words after “ specified “ struck out ? The object of this amendment would be to make the pension permanent and irreducible.

Mr Hughes:

– I prefer that my amendment should be tested first.

Mr MARR:
Minister for Repatriation · Parkes · UAP

, - I should like the right honorable gentleman to accept my suggestion to make the proposed new subsection provide that the pension shall not be terminated or reduced below the specified rate unless it is shown that it was granted in error or obtained by fraud or impersonation.

Mr Hughes:

– If a man is cured, is there not an assumption that there was an error ?

Mr MARR:

– It is necessary to safeguard both the ex-soldier and the public.

Mr Hughes:

– The point I make is that the Government must accept responsibility for the acts of its agents.

Mr MARR:

– A mistake might he made by a doctor on whose report a pension was originally granted. A tribunal might find that the man had never suffered from tuberculosis. In such a case do honorable members maintain that a member of the forces who is proved not to have suffered from the disease at all should be paid the pension for life?.

Mr Rosevear:

– The procedure followed by the Department would not permit of a pension being granted on the advice of one doctor.

Mr MARR:

– Hundreds of pensions have been granted under such circumstances, but not particularly to ex-soldiers suffering from tuberculosis.

Mr Rosevear:

– Can the Minister point to any case in which a tubercular soldier has received a pension on the advice of one doctor?

Mr MARR:

– I cannot say whether pensions have been granted on the advice of 3, or even 6 doctors. I am prepared to accept any amendment which will safeguard the public as well as the soldier.

Mr LATHAM:
AttorneyGeneral · Kooyong · UAP

– The amendment submitted by the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) provides that, in the cases such as those mentioned in the clause, the pension “ shall not be terminated or reduced below the rate so specified unless it is shown that it was obtained by fraud or impersonation.” That means that if in the case of a member of the forces suffering from tuberculosis a pension had been once granted, it could never be terminated or reduced below the specified rate unless there was fraud or impersonation. Suppose a complete mistake had been made. A man might believe that he had suffered for years from this disease, but the fact might be that he was not so suffering at the time when the pension was granted. If the amendment were accepted, the pension of this man, even if it was admitted that he had not suffered from tuberculosis, could not be reduced or terminated. I am sure that honorable members do not desire to bring about that result. The amendment could only apply in such a case. Suppose, however that an ex-soldier is suffering, not from tuberculosis, but from another disease. If the disease is due to war service, and the other conditions laid down in the act are satisfied, the man gets a pension in relation to that damage or injury. Under the proposal of the Government a man who has been granted a pension by mistake on account of what was supposed to be tuberculosis, but in reality was not, will fall within another category if the disability from which he is actually suffering be due to war service’. It is a reasonable proposal and is in accordance with the practice which obtains to-day. In 1924, I think, a regulation was passed to that effect. It was almost certainly ultra vires, but every Government has paid the full rate to tubercular ex-soldiers, although the Auditor-General for some years has called attention in his report to the fact that it has been paid without legislative authority. An easier course for the Government to follow would have been to refrain from raising this thorny subject, but we desire to validate these pensions. They will then become irreducible, unless it is shown that the member of the forces was not suffering from tuberculosis when his pension was granted. Obviously, if one ex-soldier produces a sample of sputum which really comes from another member of the forces, and the pension is obtained fraudulently, it should be possible to take it from him.

Mr Rosevear:

– Would that be possible in an examination ofan applicant supposed to be suffering from tuberculosis ?

Mr LATHAM:

– I am informed on the authority of the Minister fur Repatriation that one applicant for the pension produced as his own a sample of sputum obtained from another person. The proposal of the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) does not provide for cases of mistake. He is seeking to ensure that pensions granted in cases of tuberculosis shall be irreducible; but if it is shown that any such pension was granted originally by mistake and that the person concerned did not suffer from tuberculosis, can there be any reason why the pension should remain irreducible? Obviously, there can be none. I therefore suggest that the clause as drafted be agreed to.

Sitting suspended from 11.47 p.m. to 12.15 a.m. (Thursday).

Thursday2, August 1934.

Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra

.I am not so much concerned about the logic of the argument of the AttorneyGeneral (Mr. Latham) as I am about the possibility of ex-soldiers suffering from tuberculosis being subjected to continual medical overhauls. If we adopt the Government’s proposal there would he a danger, I think, that men who had been drawing a full pension for nine or ten years on the ground that they were suffering from tuberculosis, might be brought under review by some smart young doctor anxious to win his spurs or try out, new experiments. Such menmight be faced with a declaration, not only that they were not suffering from tuberculosis at the time, but also that they had never so suffered. I had brought under my notice not long ago the case of a soldier who was subjected to a new blood-test with a negative result. The doctor then took a blood-test from his spine, and made a declaration that the man did not suffer from tuberculosis. The continual overhauling of men who are suffering or have suffered from this complaint would be extremely harmful to them, and they should be relieved of the possibility of having to bear it. Surely a man could not obtain a pension on the ground that ho suffered from tuberculosis unless a positive test had at some time been obtained from him. If the pension were granted in the first place by error and continued for some years, the Government should accept the consequences of the error. Our experience is that many sufferers from tuberculosis have made a gallant fight for their health, and if they have made some progress towards recovery, they deserve praise for the successful struggle that they have made. I do not accuse the Government of having introduced any new principle into our repatriation practice by including this provision in the bill ; but I think that there is no need to take a step of this kind. The only effect of it will be to increase the anxiety of people who should be relieved of all possible anxiety. If it can be proved that a pension has been obtained by fraud, the pension should certainly be cancelled.

Mr Prowse:

– But what about persons who are granted a pension by mistake?

Mr SCULLIN:

– I repeat that if a mistake was made by some medical officer years ago the Government should bear the consequences of it. Very few such mistakes could have been made. I understand that in only two cases have the pensions of men suffering from tuberculosis been reduced. The applicants for pensions have to submit themselves to a very close examination and after they have been granted a pension they should be relieved of all further anxiety in connexion with it. If only two cases of error have been found in several thousands it is scarcely worth while worrying about it.

Sir HENRY GULLETT:
Henty

– I hope that the Government will accept this amendment. I regret that I find myself in disagreement with the Attorney-General (Mr. Latham) on this subject. The right honorable gentleman was inclined to treat the medical examination in cases of tuberculosis as somewhat ordinary in character; but, as a matter of fact, it is an exceptionally severe examination. The diagnosis is first made by the general practitioner permanently employed by the department, and in every instance where indications of the presence of the disease are discovered the case is referred to” the specialists frequently consulted by the department. A sputum test or a blood test, or possibly both, are taken and it would surely be impossible for an applicant to obtain a pension on the ground that he is suffering from tuberculosis unless a distinctly positive test has been obtained. If such a positive test has been secured, and a pension granted, the Government shouldstand by it. The only exception that, could possibly be considered would be that in which a mistake has been made by taking the papers of one man as being those of another, and such a mistake would not be likely to occur more than once in a million cases. As the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes) has said, the Government should he prepared in such eventualities to take the responsibility for the action of its agents. If, as has been admitted, it is practically impossible for a man to obtain a pension for tuberculosis unless he suffers from it, except in the case of fraud, the Government could very well accept the amendment. I should be sorry to see pensioners who suffer from tuberculosis finding themselves liable to continual medical overhauls. New doctors using new tests might be brought into contact with cases, and it is conceivable that they might say, in particular instances : “ There is no tuberculosis in this case and never has been any “. The honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear) spoke of the anxiety that would be engendered in the minds of these people if they knew that they were to be subjected to frequent overhauls. There would be taken away from them any incentive to feel well. Possibly provision should be made in the amendment to deal with possible cases of fraud; but I sincerely trust that the Government will sec its way clear to accept the general intention of the amendment.

Mr MARR:
Minister for Repatriation · Parkes · UAP

.- As there seems to be a general desire on the part of honorable members to narrow the provision of the bill in the way suggested by the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes), I am prepared to accept the amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses7 and8 agreed to.

Clause 9-

  1. Section 45 w of the principal act is amended -

    1. by omitting from the proviso to subsection (2.) the word “too”; . and
    2. by adding at the end of that subsection the following proviso: - “ Provided further that in the case of the death caused by an accident, of a member of the forces who is wholly or partially incapacitated as the result of wounds suffered during the period during which he was a member, the burden of proving that those wounds did not contribute to a material degree to the death of the member shall lie upon the Commission.”
Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra

. This amendment has doubtless been drafted to meet the case brought under the notice of the Government by the honorable member for Henty (Sir Henry Gullett), and I agree with the object of it ; but I fear that it is so worded that it may actually defeat the very purpose it is intended to serve. The proviso deals with the case of an accident to a returned soldier wholly or partially incapacitated by wounds; but a man might meet with an accident due to incapacity incurred in war service but not through wounds. I suggest that the words : “ wounds suffered during the period during which he was a member “ should be altered to “ war service “, and that the subsequent words, “ those wounds”, should be altered to “ such incapacity “.

Sir HENRY GULLETT:
Henty

– I was responsible for the insertion of the specific word “wounds,” because I did not desire to broaden my amendment to cover all war service disability cases, realizing that, if I had done so, the proviso would become so general that it would not carry nearly as much weight with the commission as it would if it were confined to specific cases. If it covered all classes of pensioners, as it would if broadened as suggested, every pensioner who suffered death by accident would come under the new provision. It should simply be put down as a war disability. A great deal would be gained if it were provided that, if a pensioner met his death by accident, the burden of proving that his wounds had not contributed to a material degree to his death should lie upon the commission. However, I have no pronounced views on the matter ; I am prepared to leave it to the committee.

Mr MARR:
Minister for Repatriation · Parkes · UAP

.- While the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Scullin). was absent from the chamber, I explained a case which occurred within the last few weeks of a man who had suffered a contraction of a muscle in his leg. He collapsed in front of a harvester and the machine ran over him and killed him. His death was accepted by the commission as having been brought about on account of war service disability. The honorable member for Henty (Sir Henry Gullett) has suggested that the position would he made sufficiently clear if the word “wounds” wereused. I am advised by the officers of the department that the most suitable phrase to use is “ any occurrence happening “, but as it appears to be the opinion of the committee that every man whose death can be said to have been contributed to by a war disability should get the full benefit of the proviso, I move -

That the words “ wounds suffered “ in paragraph (6) be omitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “ war service “.

If this amendment is agreed to, I shall later move to substitute for the words “ those wounds “ the words “ such incapacity “.

Mr DEIN:
Lang

– I am in accord with the amendment accepted by the Minister for Repatriation (Mr. Marr), but at the same time I should like to mention a case which was brought under my notice, of a soldier who during his three years active service suffered a severe gunshot wound in the shoulder, returned home, and some time afterwards, undoubtedly as a result of his wound, became mental. He drew a small pension. For some time he was confined to one of the mental hospitals. After his release from the hospital he committed suicide. Shortly afterwards his wife died leaving two children, aged 8 and 10 years respectively, in the care of their grandmother. Those children were receiving a pension of about ls. 9d. a week each, but as the grandmother has reached an advanced age she is anxious as to what will- happen to them after her death. She took their case to the Appeal Tribunal, ‘but as the onus of proof lies on the claimant, she was not able to prove that the death of the father of the children could be attributable to war wounds. To my mind it was clearly ti case of death resulting from war wounds.- The man lost his mental balance and then committed suicide. It is essential that cases such as these which, fortunately, are rare, should be provided for. I brought the facts under the notice of the Minister, and the reply received from the Commissioner was that death was not attributable to war service. The condition of this man’s health after his return from the war was such as to convince any reasonable person that his death was directly connected with his war injuries. Something should bo done for these unfortunate children.

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:
Darling Downs

.- The use of the phrase “ any occurrence happening “ would bring the proviso into line with section 23 of the principal act which reads as follows : -

  1. Upon the death or incapacity -

    1. of any person, to whom paragraph a or 6 of the definition of “ Member of the forces “ applies, whose death or incapacity -
    2. Results or has resulted from any occurrence happening during the period he was a member of the forces ; the Commonwealth shall, subject to this act, be liable to pay to the member or his dependants, or both, as the case’ may bc, pensions in accordance with this act.
Mr HAWKER:
Wakefield

– I suggest that if this proviso is to be made general the simplest method of achieving that object would be so to amend the act as to obviate the necessity for the dependants of ex-soldiers making out a prima facie case that the pensioner’s war injury contributed towards the accident, which resulted in his death. The proviso as printed, following upon the suggestion of the honorable member for Henty (Sir Henry Gullett), would have the effect of making the drawing of a pension for wounds distinct from that in respect of other injuries. It would leave the position of the dependants of the soldier with regard to any other incapacity the same as it is at present, namely, that they are under an obligation to establish a prima facie case that the incapacity contributed to the accident. If, however, it is desired to include all war service, the simplest way to achieve this end would be to remove all reference to establishing a prima facie case, so that if an exsoldier who draws a pension for any incapacity whatever is killed in an accident, that fact shall be regarded as a prima facie evidence that the accident was contributed to by his war disability.

Mr MARR:
Minister for Repatriation · Parkes · UAP

– I think it is clear now what is the desire of the committee, and the best procedure would be to agree to the amendment before the Chair, which embraces the words suggested by the Leader of the Opposition, and let what further amendments may be necessary be made in the Senate.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment (by Mr. Marr) agreed to-

That the words “ those wounds “ be omitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “ such incapacity “.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 10-

  1. by omitting the proviso thereto and inserting in its stead the following sub-sections : - “ 2. An appeal tribunal shall not give to any decision in respect of a pension retrospective operation for any period prior to -
  2. the date of lodgment with the Commission of a claimfor pension which the Commission rejects, or the date of termination of a pension by the Commission, which rejection or termination (as the case may be) has been appealed from to the tribunal; or
  3. the date of commencement of the period of three months immediately preceding the date of lodgment of the appeal to the tribunal, whichever is the later date.”
Mr LANE:
Barton

.- I move -

That the words “ three “, paragraph 6, proposed new sub-section 2, be omitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the word “’ six “.

Owing to the way in which cases have piled up before the appeal tribunal, applicants sometimes have to wait as long as twelve months before a decision is given in their cases. Therefore, the Government should either appoint more appeal tribunals, or allow the retrospective period to be extended to at last six months.

Mr MARR:
Minister for Repatriation · Parkes · UAP

– At the present time the Commission and the entitlement tribunal have no power to order retrospective payments, though the appeal tribunal may, in certain circumstances, do so. This clause has been inserted in the bill for the purpose of bringing the assessment tribunal into line with the entitlement tribunal in this respect. Cases have occurred in which a soldier has applied for a pension, and his application has been refused. He has appealed to the entitlement tribunal which granted him entitlement from the date of appeal, but that did not give him a pension. The case then went back to the commission, which said that, although entitlement was proved, the disability was not such as to warrant the payment of a pension. The case then went before the assessment tribunal, which granted perhaps a 50 per cent. or 25 per cent. pension. Under the act the pension can be paid only from the date upon which the case goes before the assessment tribunal, and it is proposed in the bill to give power to date payments back three months beyond that time.

Mr Lane:

– My proposal is that both tribunals should have power to make payments retrospective for six months.

Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley

– It seems to me unjust that payments should be made retrospective for only three months. An applicant’s case may possibly be held up for twelve months before a decision is given in his favour. Under this clause he would be entitled to retrospective payments for only three months, though it would be clear from the decision of the tribunal that he was really entitled to a pension from the date upon which he made his application. It ought to be made clear in the bill that successful applicants shall receive pensions from the date on which their applications are lodged.

Mr BLACKLOW:
Franklin

– There seems to be a good deal of misunderstanding with regard to this clause. It is set out quite clearly that pension payments may be made retrospective for a period of three months from the date upon which the appeal is lodged with the appeal tribunal. Surely there is nothing wrong with that !

Mr Rosevear:

– But the original application for a pension might have been made twelve months before.

Mr BEASLEY:
West Sydney

– Within the last month a case has come under my notice of a man who was declared by the entitlement tribunal to be suffering from a war disability, but who was nevertheless refused a pension. One would have thought that when he was declared to be suffering from a war disability he would have automatically become entitled to receive a pension.

The entitlement tribunal found in his favour, but the commission reviewed the case, and determined that his disability was not pensionable. Yet he was under treatment at Randwick Military Hospital and, on account of his condition, had beenunable to continue the relief work on which he was engaged. The next step he had to take was to appeal against the decision of the commission. This is a most protracted procedure, and a large number of men become distracted by it. One can appreciate the feelings entertained with respect to the administration by a man who is suffering from an obvious disability who has the approval of the entitlement tribunal, and is then refused a pension by the Repatriation Commission. The Minister has stated that if, upon appeal from the determination of the commission, the decision is in favour of a soldier, the pension will be ante-dated three months. It is quite possible, however, that this particular case will not reach the official tribunal for a much longer period than that; thus, not only would the man not be compensated in full, but he would also be deprived of the sustenance at a period when it is so vitally needed. Until this case was brought under my notice, I admit that I was not aware that one body could reverse the decision of another. I argued the matter pretty strongly with an officer of the department in Sydney, and was told that disabilities are assessed by the Repatriation Commission on a percentage basis, and are not pensionable below a certain percentage. In fairness to those whom I have interviewed, I must say that they have done everything possible to have the appeal held at an early date. I thank them for their efforts in that direction, and recognize that they cannot disregard the course which the act says shall be followed. But other soldiers may not be so forunately placed that they can have representations made which will lead to their cases being dealt with expeditiously.

Mr MARR:
Minister for Repatriation · Parkes · UAP

– In order to clear up the point raised by the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley), I shall explain the procedure. A man applies for a pension, first to the Deputy Commissioner in the State. If he is not satisfied with the decision of that gentleman, he may appeal to the commission itself. That body considers the ease, and cither grants the pension or rejects the claim. If the man still thinks that he has a disability, hi? nextstep is to appeal to the entitlement tribunal. At the express wish of the returned soldiers, there are no medical or legal gentlemen on that body; it merely inquires as to whether there is a disability which is due to war service. The decision is sent to the commission, which assesses the amount of the disability. It may say - as it has said - “ Entitlement accepted ; disability nil “. The next appeal is to the assessment tribunal, which is composed of medical men who have been specially selected. They make an examination and assess the disability, and there is no appeal from their finding within a period of six months.

Mr E J HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944

– Can the commission upset it?

Mr MARR:

– The commission may appeal to the tribunal, just as the soldier may.

Mr Maxwell:

– Canthe Minister explain how a pension can be refused by the commission after the entitlement tribunal has found that, the disability is pensionable?

Mr MARR:

– I have said that the matter goes to the entitlement tribunal, which has to find whether in its opinion the soldier has a disability.

Mr Maxwell:

– Which ispensionable ?

Mr MARR:

– I am not saying that.

Mr Maxwell:

– What is the meaning of “entitlement” - entitlement to what?

Mr MARR:

– All that the soldier has to prove before the entitlement tribunal is that, he has a disability of some sort due to war service. The onus is then on the commission to prove that the disability was not caused by war service. Let me take an extreme case. A man says that the loss of an arm occurred on active service. The entitlement tribunal finds that the case has been proved. The matter then goes to the commission, which may say “ the disability is accepted by the tribunal, but in our opinion the pensionable incapacity is nil “. It may say “ This is a case for a 25 per cent. pension “. If the soldier holds the view that his disability warrants a greater pension, he mayappeal to the assessment tribunal, which may uphold his claim for a 50 per cent. pension.

Mr Beasley:

– My point is, that if the entitlement tribunal declares in a soldier’s favour, he is entitled to a pension.

Mr MARR:

– In the case that I have mentioned, the disability which was said to be nil would be infinitesimal. It is not for me to say whether the judgment of the commission is right or wrong. If the soldier concerned is not satisfied he appeals to the assessment tribunal. I cannot accept an amendment providing for the dating of the pension back six months. I have consulted the returned soldiers’ organizations in regard to this matter.

Mr.Ward. - Not all of them.

Mr MARR:

– I am prepared to consider suggestions from any of their organizations.

Mr MAKIN:
Hindmarsh

– In the last case in which I represented an applicant before the entitlement tribunal, I was able to secure a favorable decision, but it was a remarkable one. The ex-soldier to whom I refer suffered from otisis media, or ulcerated middle ear. He also had a condition of neurasthenia which was regarded as consequent upon the ear trouble. I next endeavoured, but unsuccessfully, to secure justice for this man through the department, and I consider that my failure was largely due to a maliciously prejudiced report submitted by one of the chief medical officers. The decision given ultimately by the entitlement tribunal was that insofar as the neurasthenia was due to war disability it was deemed to have arisen from war service. The State board of commissioners was then requested to determine the degree of neurasthenia that was due to war service, and it replied “nil”. The assessment tribunal is now to have a hand in the matter. Unfortunately, there is no record whatever of the argument which I submitted before the entitlement tribunal, but the assessment tribunal will have on the file the report of the eminent medical authority which I regard as prejudiced. If the entitlement tribunal regards the disability as due to war service, surely some pension should be paid.

Mr E J HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944

– I particularly direct the attention of the committee to the terms of proposed new sub-section 2 -

An appeal tribunal shall not give to any decision in respect of a pension retrospective operation for any period prior to -

  1. the date of lodgment with the commission of a claim for pension which the commission rejects, or the date of termination of a pension by the commission, which rejection or termination (as the case may be) has been appealed from to the tribunal ; or
  2. the date of commencement of the period of three months immediately preceding the date of lodgment of the appeal to the tribunal, whichever is the later date.

That sub-section gives the right to a returned soldier to have his appeal upheld and dated back to the period of the lodgment with the commission of his claim for the pension, provided that he lodges it with the tribunal within the period of three months of the rejection of the claim with the commission. For instance, if the lodgment of the claim with the commission was made on the 1st January, 1933, and rejected on the 1st March, 1933, and if the appeal was lodged on the 1st June, 1933, and the decision arrived at by the tribunal on the 1st June, 1934, the pension could be dated back to the time when the claim was lodged with the commission, namely, the 1st January, 1933. I suggest that the Minister should confer with the draftsmen to ascertain whether that is not the position.

Mr Lane:

– The sub-section is governed by the words “ whichever is the later date.”

Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley

– The contention of the honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. E. J. Harrison) would fall to the ground if a period of twelve months elapsed before a final decision was reached. The Minister has stated that the soldiers’ organizations are prepared to accept the period of three months. There may have been very satisfactory bargaining, from the Minister’s point of view, but has justice been done to the members of the forces? I maintain that if an appeal lasts twelve months, or any other period beyond three months, and it is ultimately decided that the applicant is entitled to a pension, it should be granted from the time when the original claim was lodged. Perhaps the soldiers’ organizations were given the” option of accepting the period of three months or nothing at all. Justice would not be done to the applicants if delays in the department prolonged the hearing of their claims for periods varying between three and twelve months, so that the pension was made retrospective for only three months prior to the date when the final decision was reached.

Question - That the word proposed to be omitted (Mr. Lane’s amendment) stand part of the clause - put. The committee divided. (Chairman - Mr. Bell.)

AYES: 29

NOES: 13

Majority . . 16

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment negatived.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 11 agreed to.

Clause 12:

The second schedule to the principal act is a mended by omitting the words “in consequence of injuries to his spine “ and inserting in their stead the words “ has been blinded, or who in consequence of injury or disease affecting the cerebro-spinal system, or of any injury or disease causing incapacity similar in effect to the incapacity resulting from an injury or disease afflicting the cerebro-spinal system.”

Schedule proposed to be amended -

In the case of a member of the forces, who in consequence of injuries to his spine, is deemed bp the commission to bo in need of an attendant, an allowance of £2 per fortnight may be granted, except for any period during which he is maintained in an establishment at the public expense.

Mr HUGHES:
North Sydney

– I should like the Minister to make the meaning of this clause a little clearer. I set forth my views at some length on the second reading, and I should now like to ask him whether this clause, as drafted, will cover cases such as that of Mr. Price, with which I made him familiar. I am advised that the matter, having been brought to the notice of the department by the league, the opinion was offered that this amendment did not cover the case of men who, like Mr. Price, need an attendant, although they may not be suffering from a disease affecting the cerebro-spinal system or he blinded. As the man to whom I referred this afternoon has had his face horribly disfigured, one eye has been taken out, andhe is suffering from neurasthenia. He needs an attendant. I suggest that if the department or the Minister can, under this clause or some other amendment, give discretionary power either to the department or the Minister to deal with special cases on their merits, the position will be met. Otherwise the clause should he amended to cover cases of this description.

Mr HAWKER:
Wakefield

– I should like to know if the clause provides for completely disabled and helpless ex-soldiers whose injuries are due to some other form of disease or wounds. To clear up any possible misunderstanding or anxiety, the definition could be altered by inserting after the word “ effect “ the words “ or in severity “. I am informed by the Crown Law officers that, in its present form, this amendment does not widen the definition, or, on the other hand, narrow it. In the circumstances, I hope that the Minister will accept an amendment to make it clear that the commission will not only have discretionary power, but also be under an obligation to provide an attendant allowance for all ex-soldiers who are equally as helpless as those who have been blinded or are suffering from disease affecting the cerebro-spinal system. I understand that it was the intention of the Government to do this, and that the bill was drafted with that purpose in view. Therefore I hope that the Minister will accept the very small verbal amendment which I have suggested to remove any possible misunderstanding.

Mr MARR:
Minister for Repatriation · Parkes · UAP

– The points raised by the right honorable member for North Sydney ‘ (Mr. Hughes) in his second-reading speech, and by the honorable member for Wakefield (Mr. Hawker), have been noted by the Government. It is intended to include cases such as those that have been mentioned. If the advice received by the honorable member for Wakefield is correct, that the clause in its present form does not provide for such cases, I am prepared to accept an amendment that will cover them. As the clause stands at present, the commission will provide an attendant for men who are suffering from severe ailments or disabilities. For some time past it has been recognized that exsoldiers suffering from diseases other than those affecting the cerebro-spinal system require an attendant, and it was for the purpose of making this provision that the amendment to the second schedule was made in this clause.

Amendment (by Mr. Hawker) agreed to -

That after the word “ effect “ the words “ or in severity “ he inserted.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 13- (1.) The fifth schedule to the principal act is amended.

Amendment (by Mr. Marr) agreed to-

After paragraph (d) insert: - “, and (e) the amount payable to a member under this schedule in respect of loss of vision in one eye shall not exceed such amount as will make the total pension payable to him under this act equal in amount to that of the pension which would be payable to him under the first schedule if he were totally incapacitated.”.

Clause also verbally amended and, as amended, agreed to.

Title consequentially amended and, as amended, agreed to.

Bill reported with amendments and with an amended title.

Motion (by Mr. Marr) agreed to -

That the bill be now recommitted for the reconsideration of clauses 0 and 10.

In committee (Recommittal) :

Clause 9- (1.) Section forty-five w of the principal act is amended -

  1. by adding at the end of sub-section

    1. the following proviso: - “ Provided further that in the case ofthe death caused by an accident, of a member of the forces who is wholly or partially incapacitated as the result of war service during the period during which he was a. member, the burden of proving that such incapacity did not contribute to a material degree to the death of the member shall lie upon the commission.”.
Mr MARR:
Minister for Repatriation · Parkes · UAP

– When this clause was under consideration, earlier this evening the committee agreed to eliminate certain words from the proviso. I am now advised by the draftsman that the words “during the period during which he was a member “ should also be omitted. I therefore move -

That the words “ during the period during which lie was a member “ be omitted.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 10-

Section forty-five x of the principal act is amended -

by omitting the proviso thereto and inserting in its stead the following sub-section: - “ (3.) An assessment appeal tribunal shall not give to any decision retrospective operation -

in any case where an appeal has not been so made and the appeal to the Assessment Appeal Tribunal is from a decision of the commission or a board whereby a pension has been refused, cancelled or reduced - for any period prior to -

the date of commencement of the period of three months immediately preceding the date of the appeal to the Assessment Appeal Tribunal, whichever is the later date.”.

Mr LANE:
Barton

.- I move -

That the word “three” paragraph b (ii), proposed new sub-section (3), be omitted with a view to inserting in lieu thereof the word “ six “.

I feel confident that although a similar amendment that I moved earlier in relation to the appeal tribunal was defeated, honorable members were not fully aware of the purpose that actuated me in moving it. I was interviewed last week by the general secretary of the Returned Sailors and Soldiers “Imperial League’ of Australia in regard to this very matter, and he told me that his organization was under the impression that under this clause as it stood it would be possible for a pension granted on appeal to have a retrospective operation for twelve months. I cannot understand how that can be so in view of the wording of these proposed new subsections. Honorable members have already been informed that an exsoldier has the right to .approach six tribunals before his claim for a pension can be finally determined for or against him. If he were to occupy onlyone month in his negotiations with each of those tribunals it would take him six months to obtain a decision. I therefore submit that my proposal to provide that a pension granted after appeal to the assessment appeal tribunal should he retrospective for six months is not unreasonable. In a previous speech I directed attention to the case of a man who lodged an appeal before January, 1933, and I quoted a letter from the department dated the 29th May, 1934, which stated that a decision favorable to the applicant had been given on the 28th March, 1934, fourteen months from the date on which the application was lodged. I appeared before an appeal tribunal in connexion with the case of a man named Knight whose claim was disallowed. He was nut notified of the decision to disallow his claim for twelve months. This frequently happens where there is a difference of opinion among the members of the tribunal. In the two cases I have mentioned injustice has been done to bona fide returned soldiers. In the other case, the tribunal arrived at its decision on the 28th March, 1934, and the pension was dated back to the 28th of November, 1933. All that I ask is’ that the pension should be dated back six months, instead of three months. I was inclined to move an amendment to date the payment of tho pension from the date of the lodgment of the application as suggested by the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear), but was deterred from doing so because of the possibility that if the pension were dated back to the date of the application, many abuses might occur. It would enable soldiers whose applications had been delayed for four or five years to claim sums varying from £600 to £800. The Minister knows that under the present system, as a result of a Cabinet decision, one returned soldier recently received about £500, owing to a delay in the admission of his claim for five or six years.

Mr MARR:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT; UAP from 1931

– It wa3 not a Cabinet decision ; it was a decision arrived at by the commission.

Mr LANE:

– I believe that that is- so. The point I am making is that if the commission is empowered, under certain circumstances, to make a retrospective payment of four or five hundred pounds, injustice is being done to bona fide applicants by the provision which permits of only three months retrospective payment. Some returned soldier members of this House have said that because I am not a returned soldier myself; my sympathy and judgment in these matters are not equal to theirs. But no honorable member has greater sympathy with these men, and my judgment in these matters is, I consider, perfectly sound. Unless the soldier is able to get a member of parliament to beard the Commissioner and demand that his rights shall be preserved, his application is invariably turned down. If my health had not broken down during the last six months, I should have appeared before one of the tribunals as an advocate for the soldiers. Only by this means would I have been able to . gain access to documents in the files of the department. I have here no less than” six written authorities from soldiers and dependants authorizing me to look into the documents in the official files concerning their cases. On numerous occasions I have gone to the department, and have spent two or- three hours in ascertaining the facts. “Whether or not the soldiers should be entitled to see their files, the whole system under which the tribunals are working is wrong. I submit that my amendment is fair and reasonable. If the Minister will speed up the work of the tribunals, a decision could be arrived at with a minimum of delay. I submitted this amendment to one of the legal, advisers of the Minister and he informed me that if it were carried, certain abuses might result. The necessity for this amendment could be obviated if the work of the tribunals was speeded up. The Minister has power, under the act, to appoint more than one tribunal. My suggestion in that direction is well worthy of consideration, because officers of the department have admitted that eight hundred cases are now pending examination by the tribunals, and that if the present system were retained it would be impossible for the tribunals to complete the arrears of work within twelve months. I ask the committee to agree to the amendment.

Mr MARR:
Minister for Repatriation · Parkes · UAP

– The honorable member for Barton (Mr. Lane) stated that Cabinet had approved of the payment of hack pay to a pensioner to the extent of £500 or £600. In my speech on the second reading of the bill to-night, I stressed the necessity for safeguarding not only the appellant, but also the public, and in the course of my remarks I instanced a case mentioned by the honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. E. J. Harrison) of a man named Clark who was suffering from tuberculosis. This man’s disability was not accepted by the Co1111111al 011 as being due to war service, but he was eventually successful in proving his own case after undergoing an operation in one of the Sydney hospitals which showed conclusively that his case was genuine. As this mau had been fighting his case from prior to 1925, in which year the Government of the day had decided that any man who was suffering from tuberculosis should be entitled to a full pension, and as this man’s claim was a just one, the commission resolved that he should he entitled to draw a pension in respect to the whole period. Under certain circumstances power is vested in the commission to ante-date pensions, but this is not the general rule. The honorable member for Barton has complained of the delay in the work of the tribunals. I assure the committee that the tribunals are working at high pressure, and I am sure all honorable members will agree that they are doing excellent work. The Government cannot accept the amendment. _Question - That the word proposed to be omitted (Mr. Lane’s amendment) stand part of the clause - put. The committee divided. (Chairman- Mr. Bell.)

Ayes . . . . . . 25

Noes . . . . . . 12

Majority . . . . 13

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment negatived.

Clause agreed to.

Bill reported with a further amendment; reports - by leave - adopted.

Bill - by leave - read a third time.

page 1073

DEFENCE EQUIPMENT BILL 1934

Bill returned from the Senate without amendment.

page 1073

SUPPLY BILL (No. 2) 1934-35

Bill returned from the Senate without requests.

page 1073

WAR PENSIONS APPROPRIATION BILL 1934

Message recommending appropriation reported.

In Committee (Consideration of GovernorGeneral’s message) :

Motion (by Mr. Casey) agreed to -

That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purposes of a bill for an act to grant and apply out of the Consolidated Revenue fund a sum for war pensions.

Resolution reported. Standing Orders suspended; report adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Casey and Mr. Francis do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill brought up by Mr. Casey and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This bill does not deal with rates of pension, or with the conditions under which they are granted. The object of the measure is to appropriate a further £10,000,000 with which to pay those pensions which have been, or may be, granted under the sections of the Australian Soldiers’ Repatriation Act relating to war pensions. The total expenditure to the 30th June last on war pensions was £109,431,194. Of previous appropriations, the balance unexpended at the close of the financial year was £6,191,438, which will be insufficient to cover payment of pensions during the current year. Further appropriation is therefore required, and the usual practice of asking Parliament to vote a lump sum of £10,000,000 has been followed.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 1073

STATUTE LAW REVISION BILL 1934

Second Reading

Mr LATHAM:
AttorneyGeneral · Kooyong · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

There is an obligation resting upon the Government of the Commonwealth, and upon this Parliament, to present the statute law of the Commonwealth in a convenient, accessible and readily intelligible form. . We try to do that as the legislation is drafted, and as it is passed through Parliament from time to time; but as the years go by it becomes evident that there is a great deal of obsolete matter on the statute-book. The object of this bill is merely to cut away the dead wood on the statute-book. It is not a consolidation of the statutes, but a Statute Law Revision Bill. There are various circumstances which make acts no longer useful, and which justify their removal from the statute-book. This bill is designed to remove obsolete and useless matter, and will correct a few mistakes that have been discovered inthe legislation passed by the Commonwealth Parliament during the last 34 years.

In introducing this, the first Statute Law Revision Act of the Commonwealth, I refer to the common practice in England of passing such acts. Since 1861, on no fewer than 37 occasions similar acts have been passed by the Parliament of Great Britain, the object being to keep the statute-books of the country in a proper state. Many acts apply only to a sot of circumstances temporarily existing at the time the legislation was enacted. I refer to the annual supply acts, and annual appropriation acts; to acts providing for the payment of bounties for a limited period; to acts appropriating money for the granting of a fixed sum to one of the States; and to acts validating action already taken. All such acts become obsolete with the passage of time, yet, although it should be no longer necessary to include them in editions of the statutes, they still remain there. It is the purpose of this bill to repeal such obsolete and unnecessary acts.

In addition to those acts which are wholly obsolete, there are others which have served their purpose and which, owing to the effluxion of time, or to subsequent events, have no longer any force or effect. For example, section 45 of the Judiciary Act, dealing with certain actions pending in the State Courts at the time the High Court was established, is obviously unnecessary in 1934, or at any future time. Also, part 12 of the Judiciary Act has been declared invalid by the High Court, andwill be removed by this bill. There are, in addition, a few- errors in the statutes which will also be removed by it.

It is proposed in 1935 to bring out a reprint of the Commonwealth statutes which will contain all the legislation actually in force, the obsolete matter being removed. Honorable members are accustomed to use the many volumes containing legislation passed during the last 33 years. We hope to bring out in a few volumes an up-to-date edition containing all the statutes still in force. Honorable members know the difficulty of ascertaining the state of the statutes, of knowing whether amendments have been made to them, and whether they are still applicable to present conditions. We must remove the obsolete matter, not only for convenience of honorable members, and to discharge our duty to the community as a whole, but also - and here I run the risk of incurring irreverent interjections - for the convenience of the legal profession.

I shall indicate shortly the nature of the legislation that is being dealt with. Honorable members will see that there are several pages of schedules. The first schedule simply alters the citation of certain acts which have been amended. It is desired to bring the citation uptodate, by substituting 1934 as the second date mentioned in the title.

The second schedule has the effect of repealing a large number of acts. In Part I. honorable members will see two pages of supply acts. There is no need whatever for the retention of those acts upon the statute-book. Division 1 of Part II. repeals appropriation acts of past years, because they are no longer a part of the effective law of the Commonwealth. ‘Careful provision is made, both in this bill and in the Acts Interpretation Act, to preserve any rights that have accrued and any obligations which have come into existence under the repealed acts, as well as the validity of any acts done in pursuance of them. Division 2 of Part II. relates to a series of special appropriation acts. For example, in 1914 a special grant was made to Belgium. The money having ‘ been paid, it is no longer necessary to include that act in an edition of the Commonwealth statutes.

The operation of tho Governor-Generals Establishment Act, 1902, is completely exhausted, and similar considerations apply in the case of various other appropriation acts. By Part III. it is proposed to repeal a number of validating acts. As honorable members Know, from time to time it is necessary at the end of a Parliament to validate a tariff until the new Parliament has assembled, when a fresh act is passed which takes the place of the temporary validating measure. It is proposed to repeal those validating acts, and at the same time preserve the validity of anything done under or in pursuance of them. Part IV. consists of various acts which in past years have made grants to the States. These grants have been made, from the year 1912 in the case of Tasmania, from 1926 in the case of Western Australia, and from 1929 in the case of South Australia; the moneys have been paid, and there is no need to have those acts permanently on the statute-book. Part V. consists of a large number of loan acts which have fully performed their functions and need not bc repeated in an edition of the Commonwealth statutes. Part VI. consists of a series of bounty acts, the operation of which has expired by reason of tho expiration of the period to which they related.- Part VII. consists of a number of miscellaneous acts which it is proposed to repeal because they are obsolete. Some of them were passed for a specific purpose: for example, the Commercial Activities Act of 1919, which wound up certain transactions iri wool, wheat, metals and the like. All relate to the past, and there is no need to preserve thom on the statute-book.

Mr Prowse:

– The Committee of Public Accounts Act, 1917, is included in the list. I understood that the operations of the committee were merely suspended. Might not that act be needed again? Will it have to be re-enacted?

Mr LATHAM:

– This is not the general act, but one which relates to the appointment of an additional member of the committee only during the term of the seventh Parliament. The miscellaneous acts relate to all sorts of matters, and in every case are exhausted.

In the third schedule there is a rather remarkable set of acts, the proposals with regard to which are absolutely formal’ Tlie position in respect to the acts in this schedule is as follows: There is a principal act, and subsequently an amending act. The amending act commences with the words: “Be it enacted.” It is then enacted that certain amendments shall be inserted in the principal act. The principal act is afterwards repealed, and all that remains of the amending act are the words: “Be it enacted,” &c. This schedule consists of a series of such acts which are all head and have no body or tail. It is proposed to get rid of these lifeless surviving portions of dead legislation.

In the fourth schedule other considerations arise. It amends particular provisions in certain specified acts. As to those amendments, and in regard to the whole of the bill, I give the House the assurance that, with the exception of two matters which I shall specifically mention, no alteration of the substance of the law is made. Overlapping provisions, which occur in more than one act, verbal mistakes, and obviously unnecessary words, are corrected or removed as the” case may be. Take the case of the Audit Act. It is proposed to omit a provision in that act which refers to the reserve held by the Treasurer in gold coin in relation to the Australian Notes Act. The Treasurer no longer holds a reserve in either gold coin or anything else, and the Australian Notes Act has been repealed. It is, therefore, proposed to repeal that provision in the Audit Act. Take another case- the amendments of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act. The provisions relating to proclaimed organizations were repealed in 1930, but the heading was left in. It is proposed to remove the heading and other references to proclaimed organizations. The Commonwealth Public Service Act contains provisions for the first re-classification of the Service upon tho appointment of the Public Service Board in, I think, 1922. That rc-classification has been made, the board has discharged its functions in accordance with the law, and there is no longer any need for, nor any object in, the reference to this reclassification. The Defence Act provides for the taking over of State defence forces existing at the time of the passing of the first Defence Act in 1903. That has all been accomplished, and it is no longer necessary to encumber the act with provisions which have no application to either existing or future facts. In certain acts that refer to the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Court, there are references to the president of the court. For some years there has been no president. Such references are to be removed, and replaced by the word “ judge “, which includes the Chief Judge.

I have said that there are two amendments of the law. Shortly, they are these : At first, this Parliament legislated with respect to regulations by placing at the end of every act a provision dealing with regulations and the possible disallowance of them. Various provisions find a place at the end of many acts relating to the regulation-making power and the disallowance of regulations. “When the Acts Interpretation Act was passed, however, a general provision was inserted in it relating to such matters as the method of making regulations, and particularly as to the disallowance of regulations. That act applies to all the regulation sections except where a contrary intention appears, and under it a motion for disallowance may be moved in either House within fifteen sitting days of the regulations being laid on the table. The times when they must he laid on the table also arp fixed. In some acts, however, the period is 30 days, which, in practice, is shorter than fifteen sitting days. It is proposed that what is already the general rule shall be the universal rule. That is an improvement, because in future there will be no risk of any one making a mistake. Some provisions which are rather irregular compared with the general practice are thus altered.

Another alteration is this: The PostmasterGeneral has power to enter into contracts for the conveyance of mails, by land or by sea. In fact, he has been making contracts for the conveyance of mails by air. The Government proposes to insert the word “air”, and to provide the necessary statutory authorization for what has been done for several years.

Every honorable member will agree that the Postmaster-General must have that power.

A number of income tax rates acts are repealed by the fifth schedule, and there is a necessary saving clause validating collections and justifying the collection of amounts that have not yet been paid. The sixth schedule deals with certain forms which have unfortunately been lost in the statute-book. They belong to an amending act, the sections of which refer to these forms, but they were not incorporated in the principal act. We are now putting these forms, which are still necessary for the Parliamentary Committee of Public Accounts, into the act to which they really belong.

I give the House the assurance that the Crown Law officers have examined the bill carefully. It is the result of several years’ work, and it contains no political matter whatever. It is purely a legal bill in the strictest sense.

Mr Maxwell:

– It is not a consolidating measure.

Mr LATHAM:

– No. I have examined the bill myself, and I can give honorable members the assurance of the Crown Law officers, as well as my own, that we believe that no changes are to be made in the substantive law apart from those which T have mentioned. This is a very useful work, and 1 hope that the House will accept it. I add the further assurance that if it can be shown at any time that any alteration has been made other than those mentioned’ by me, in a matter affecting the substance of tho law, this Government will be prepared to resubmit it to the judgment of the House. I am unable to give an absolute undertaking that there are no alterations other than those to which I have referred, hut I believe that that is the position. In view of what- 1 have said, I think that the House will be performing a useful public service by passing this measure.

Debate (on motion by Mr. BAKER adjourned.

page 1076

RAW COTTON BOUNTY BILL 1934

Message reported recommending an appropriation for the purpose of amendments to be moved by the Minister for Trade and Customs (Mr. White) in this bill.

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

Mr. WHITE (Balaclava- Minister for

Trade and Customs) [2.52 a.m.]. - I move -

That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purpose of amendments to be moved by the Minister of State for Trade and Customs to a bill for an act to provide for the payment of bounty on the production of raw cotton, and for other purposes.

The Cotton Industries Bounty Act 1930-32 will be repealed, and an amendment will bo proposed to section 6 to alter the date, the 13 th day of September, to the 13th day of November. The object is to provide for a later harvesting of cotton in the far north of Queensland. Consequential alterations will be necessary in other sections, and a new section is included, which I indicated in my second-reading speech, to provide that any amount of bounty payable under the provisions of the act shall be subject to the reductions specified in section 52 of tho Financial Emergency Act 1931.

Question resolved in tho affirmative.

Resolution reported and - by leave - adopted.

Second Reading

Debate resumed from the 13th July (vida page 536), on motion by Mr. White -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Mr FORDE:
Capricornia

– I agree with the Minister for Trade and Customs (Mr. White) that many difficulties are associated with the solution of the problems of the cotton industry. It is not an easy matter to do justice to an industry with such wide ramifications as that of cotton production. The Minister’s task was made more difficult by the Ottawa agreement, which prohibited any increase of duties against imports from Britain beyond the rates recommended by the Tariff Board. That supports the remarks of the Labour party regarding the iniquitous Ottawa agreement. While I cannot agree with this measure in some aspects, I do not intend to oppose it. It is the best hill which the industry can obtain from this Government at the present time. After the general elections, the new parliament will have an opportunity to amend it in any way which the government of the day may consider desirable. An all-round protectionist policy would have been much more satisfactory than that proposed. In my opinion, the cotton industry will not be developed on natural lines until bounty payments cease, and it is given reasonable tariff protection as is ‘ afforded to other industries. If, instead of protecting other industries, we set out to assist. them by means of bounties passed by parliament, the whole scheme of protection would break down. I do not believe that the Minister would say that we should protect the woollen industry as it is now proposed to deal with the cotton industry. Tho placing of a sum of money on the Estimates each year for a bounty payment puts the industry in a false position. It leads the parliament and the public to believe that every year it is receiving special assistance not given to other industries, the suggestion being that it is in receipt of a dole and cannot stand on its own feet. But both branches of the cotton industry realize that half a loaf is better than no bread, and, consequently, they do not desire that the bill should be opposed, although I propose to submit suggestions as to how it may be improved.

I am concerned principally with the primary producers in the industry, for there are 4,000 of them in Central Queensland, and the great majority are in my electorate. One opinion expressed on behalf of the industry in Central Queensland i3 -

It is difficult to understand why governments cannot place cotton on the same basis as wool and other industries. If they would give us reasonable protection we do not want bounties or any other form of assistance.

Another representative man has said: -

The cotton-growers indignantly protest against the inadequacy of the cotton bounty, and ask for a guaranteed price of 5d. per lb., including the present crop.

These are typical of the opinions expressed by men in the industry in Central Queensland. I realize, of course, that it is difficult to introduce a measure that will please all sections.

Mr White:

– I have received messages of appreciation of the bill from all quarters.

Mr FORDE:

– Some honorable members will oppose the granting of assistance to this industry. Probably they are geographical protectionists, and will object to assistance being given partly by bounty and partly by protection ; but they should bear in mind that Australia is the only country where cotton is grown by white labour. In practically all foreign countries, the industry is wholly conducted by natives. In America the labour is supplied mainly by negroes and Mexicans. In Queensland, however, the labour employed is 100 per cent. white, and all the growers are Australians, or at any rate British. I remind honorable members that after careful consideration the Tariff Board came to this conclusion -

The Board realizes that cotton growing in Australia was deliberately encouraged by the Commonwealth Government, and that to unduly expose the industry at a time when the world price of cotton is so low would jeopardize it, after heavy costs, both public and private, have been incurred.

This industry is of importance not only to Queensland, but also to Australia as a whole.

Although the growing of cotton in Australia dates back to 1860, the cottonspinning industry, in which 1,700 persons are employed in factories in the southern States, is only ten years old. The raw material for the spinning mills is grown in Australia, so it cannot be argued that this is an unnatural industry dependent upon raw materials imported from other countries. The raw material is produced in the tropical parts of Queensland, and the finished product is manufactured in the southern States. I was first able to render some assistance to this industry when I was a member of the Queensland State Parliament. At that time a number of members of that Parliament prevailed upon the State Labour Government to guarantee a fixed price of 51/2d. per lb. for seed cotton. This action gave the industry its first practical encouragement, with the result that the area under cotton increased from 160 acres to 35,000 acres in three years. When subsequently an effort was made to deal with the industry on an Australian-wide basis, and provide it with assistance through the Commonwealth Parliament, the BrucePage Government failed adequately to protect the two branches, primary and secondary. It was not until the Scullin Government came into office that a comprehensive protectionist policy for the encouragement of both branches was adopted. That Government afforded protection to many new lines of cotton manufactured goods, including knitted and other piece goods, blouses, coats, costumes, dresses, robes, knitted apparel, sox, stockings, cotton wool linters and cotton seed oil. Encouragement was also given to the spinning mills with the result that in January, 1931, mills were established in Melbourne which have progressively developed until to-day they provide employment for 700 people. I found in 1930, when I became Acting Minister for Trade and Customs, that there was a great divergence of opinion among those interested in the different sections of the industry as to what action was necessary to stabilize it. Accordingly, I convened a conference at which all those sections were represented. The delegates met in Canberra in January, 1930, and before disbanding, agreed upon a general stabilization policy. A new bounty act was subsequently passed which provided for the payment of a bounty on seed cotton and cotton yarns on a sliding scale, extinction point to be reached in September, 1936. The result of the stabilization policy then put into operation is seen in the following figures, which show the progressive increase of the acreage under crop : -

Production increased from 1,400,000 lb. in 1928-29 to 5,841,000 lb. in 1931-32. The members of the Scullin Government held the view that bounties were only justified in the initial stages of an industry and should be replaced as soon as possible by protective duties. I still hold that opinion. The Scullin Government held that its plan of gradually reducing bounties would be largely offset by growers and spinners enjoying lower overhead costs by reason of greatly increased output. It decided that bounty losses not so covered were to be recompensed by further extensions of protection on yarns and manufactured goods. This it undertook to give from time to time as it became necessary. The Scullin Government also provided an extra 6d. per lb. duty on other yarns, mainly to prevent foreign dumping. In all these arrangements it extracted a binding undertaking from the spinners that they would not exploit the bounties or duties by charging higher prices to users without first obtaining the permission of the Minister, who had to be satisfied that any increases of prices were justified by increased wages. The whole industry was thus put on a good footing and was making satisfactory progress until an unfortunate change of government brought about an equally unfortunate change of policy. The Scullin Government’s object in gradually superseding the bounty by a definite customs duty was twofold. It- sought first to reduce budget charges and then to promote the security of the industry. Bounties always cause a degree of insecurity because the amounts expended in this way appear separately in the budget and arc thus more noticeable and more likely to cause criticism. Just as the Scullin Government abolished the bounty on galvanized iron and substituted a definite duty for the protection of the industry, so it intended to abolish the bounty on cotton and substitute for it a definite protectionist duty. The field of protection in this industry was to be widened from time to time according as the spinners were able to place new yarns on the market. The Scullin Government felt that the substitution of bounties by duties was desirable because every proposal to pay a bounty excites opposition in Parliament from members who object to large sums of money being expended in that way. In any case, it was felt that bounties should only be paid in the initial stages of an industry, and should not be looked to as a permanent means of maintaining an industry on a substantial basis. Even the present Government has made a definite declaration on this point, for Senator McLachlan, the VicePresident of the Executive Council, who represents the Minister for Trade and Customs (Mr. “White) in the Senate, said in that chamber on the 9th November last that -

The bounty system o£ protection was designed to assist local industry until it could supply the major portion of the domestic requirements, When an industry has reached the output necessary to supply the Australian demand, there is no sound reason for continuing the bounty, and the necessary protection is then afforded by means of customs duties. To revert to the bounty system in tho case of galvanized iron would be to break a well-established principle; the logical conclusion of such action would be the substitution of bounty assistance for all the protective items in the tariff schedule, which, of course, is impracticable.

Mr White:

– That statement had no reference to a scheme such as that which the Government i3 now submitting to honorable members.

Mr FORDE:

– It very definitely set out the Government’s views on the bounty system. It is most unfortunate for the cotton industry that the stabiliza-1 tion scheme that, I put into operation in 1930, which provided for a diminishing bounty and progressive tariff protection, should have been interfered with by the present Government. The first action in this connexion was taken by the honorable member for Henty (Sir Henry Gullett.) when he was Minister for Trade and Customs. My scheme could have operated progressively until the whole of the Australian market had been obtained for the Australian spinners and the Queensland cotton-growers. The first two things that struck me when I read the Tariff Board’s latest report and heard the present Minister’s speech on this subject, were that there had been considerable delay by tho board in furnishing its report to the Government, and that there was additional delay on the part of the Government in reaching a decision after receiving the report. According to the report, this subject was referred to the Tariff Board for investigation and report on tho 15th May, 1933, but I remember a very definite announcement early in 1.932 by the honorable member for Henty, when he’ was Minister for Trade and Customs, that the whole matter would be referred to the Tariff Board immediately. The report of the board was not presented until November, 1933, six months after the subject was referred to it by the present Minister, but actually eighteen months after the reference by the honorable member for Henty. The Government received the report a month before Parliament went into recess in 1933. There was a six-months’ recess during which no action was taken to assist this industry. So we find that the Government did not reach a decision until two years after the subject was referred to the board, eight months after the hoard submitted its report, and less than two months before a general election was to be held. My complaint is that there has been unjustifiable delay in dealing with the whole subject. I realize that the Tariff Board is an overworked body. In that circumstance, is it any wonder that the Scullin Government found that it could not wait for the board to report on all the items in the tariff schedule before it took action to protect Australian industry in a time of great crisis? If two years’ delay was necessary before a decision could be reached in connexion with this industry, I suggest that the delay that would have occurred in dealing with other Australian industries by this method would have been disastrous. The definite and prompt action taken by the Scullin Government ‘to protect Australian industry generally had beneficial results immediately in providing employment for many people who were at that time out of work. The honorable member for Bendigo (Mr. E. F. Harrison) may laugh, but if he will consult those engaged in secondary industries in his own electorate, he will find that the laugh is against him. Since this Government has been in office it has made at least six different decisions affecting various branches of the cotton industry, and its variability has left the industry in a position of great uncertainty as to the future. The first decision made by the then Minister (Sir Henry Gullett) on the 25th February, 1932, two months after the Government took office, resulted in the abolition of the extra 6d. per lb. duty which the Scullin Government had imposed on yarns. The second decision, made on the 17th March, 1932, resulted in the imposition of a fixed duty of 3d. per lb. in addition to the ad valorem duty then in force. The third decision, which took effect from the 4th

April, 1932, provided for the addition to the list of yarns admitted under by-law of yarns for cotton moleskin piece goods. The fourth decision resulted in the reduction of duties under the Government’s exchange adjustment plan. The fifth decision, made in July, 1932, resulted in the abolition of the bounty on yarn. The sixth decision has been the introduction of the measure we are now considering under which it is proposed to abolish the existing duty on seed cotton and substitute for it a bounty on raw cotton.

Mr White:

– Those were all progressive measure’s.

Mr FORDE:

– In my opinion, they show that the Government has been making successive stabs in the dark at this industry. It has been clearly demonstrated, not only that the honorable member for Henty did not understand this industry, but also that he was actively hostile to it. I am pleased that the present Minister has visited Queensland and inspected the areas in which cotton is being grown. I believe that he now realizes that this industry is valuable to the State and the Commonwealth. The cotton industry is one of the greatest in the world, and I believe that it is destined to become one of the greatest of Australia’s industries. If it had been adequately and progressively protected according to the sound plan of the Scullin Government, it would not now have been in the doldrums. This industry asks for similar protection to that given to the: woollen industry. When the duties on woollen textiles were doubled and extended to lightweight woollen dress materials the prices to the consumers were reduced by 38$ per cent. Similarly in regard fo the cotton industry, as protection expands the overhead cost will be lower and the price to the consumer will be reduced.

Under the scheme outlined by the Minister in his speech, the bounty on raw cotton is limited to spinners’ annual requirements of raw cotton, plus 20 per cent., whereas the former seed cotton bounty was paid on the whole production of the growers. It is most difficult to_ control primary production of this kind. Seasonal conditions in the cotton industry play a tremendous part in the production of crops, and for this reason the 20 per cent, margin is very small indeed. In any case, it is unwise to restrict production with’ such possibilities as the cotton industry presents. In dairying districts like Callide, Dawson and Monto, where rainfall is uncertain, farmers have also entered into the production of cotton, which is a drought resisting crop; and the return from the cotton has enabled them to pay rents, rates and taxes. As a matter of fact, if it were not for the production of cotton there would be no prosperity in those districts because of the uncerain rainfall.

The new raw cotton bounty is to last for five years, but the principle upon which it is based, namely, the supply of raw cotton to spinners at import parity prices, would necessitate an indefinite continuance of the bounty as a charge upon the Commonwealth budget. As against this, the Scullin Government’s policy provided for the early permanent extinction of the bounty payments, and adequate protection in their place. I hope the Minister will agree to make provision in the present bill, as was mad( in the two previous cotton bounty measures, that in the event of the whole bounty for which provision has been made not being expended owing to shortage of crop in any one year, the balance unexpended will be made available in subsequent years should production be in excess of the estimated figure. I should like to quote section 52 which I had inserted in the Cotton Industries Bounty Act of 1930. It read as follows -

When the maximum amount of bounty which may be paid in any year in respect of seed cotton or cotton yarn, as the case may be, has not been paid in that year, the unpaid balance, or any part thereof, may be paid in any subsequent year in respect of seed cotton or cotton yarn, as the case may be, in addition to the maximum amount for that year.

I suggest to the Minister that, subject fo the necessary verbal alterations, a similar provision might be inserted in this bill.

With regard to the protective duties recommended by the Tariff Board, I urge the Minister to be particularly careful that they are adequate. I have noticed that the Minister has adopted the recommendation of the board in every case. According to the spinners the duties are inadequate. I am not in a position to check their figures, but they have made a request to the Minister to amend the duties reading: “ 3d. per lb., with a sliding rise of margin of 30 per cent, ad valorem “ to “ 4d. per lb. flat rate, with a rise of margin or 40 per cent, ad valorem.” The reason advanced for this’ request is because of the difference in the wages paid in the “industry between the 3rd July, 1933, the date of the Tariff Board inquiry, and July, 1934. In 1933 adult males received 63s. 9d., as against 66s. in 1934, the figures for adult females being 33s. 2d. and 34s. . 3d. respectively. In 1933 the industry was working 48 hours, but in 1934 the hours of labour were reduced to 44. The increase of the basic wage as at the 3rd July, 1934, was equivalent to 12.6 per cent. The new margins show average wage increases which have just come into operation for the cotton industry on the first pay day after the 11th July, 1934, amounting to 8.75 per cent., so that the total direct wages increase from the 3rd July, 1933, to the 11th July, 1934, amounted to 21.35 per cent. I hope that the Minister will sec that the recommendations of the Tariff Board provide for adequate protection allowing for the wages rates and conditions of employment in the various States.

Some of the subsidiary tariff schedules introduced by the Minister provide for protection on a number of items. I consider that the industry engaged in manufacturing towels has been inadequately protected. It uses the raw product of the cotton farms. The imports of towels from the United Kingdom were valued at £205,000 in 1931-32, and £247,000 iti 1932-33, whereas the imports from Japan during the two years mentioned were valued at £21,000 and £54,000 respectively. The increase of duty applies to the products of foreign countries only, and I ask the Minister if hp intends to increase the protection on the imports from the United Kingdom, as the great bulk of the imports come from that country, and have practically paralyzed the Australian towel industry. The manufacturers of New South Wales have asked for the imposition of a specific duty of 10s. a dozen on coloured towels under the general tariff as an alternative to the existing duty of 60 per cent, ad valorem. Victorian manufacturers have asked for a duty of 10s. a dozen on coloured towels and Ss. a dozen on white towels. I am making special reference to the towel manufacturing industry, because it is a large user of yarn spun by the spinners from Queensland-grown cotton and is in a parlous: condition to-day. The new schedule, contains no increase of duties on? imports of towels from the United Kingdom, and only a small increase of 10d. per lb. in the general tariff; but the bulk.: of the imports comes from the United Kingdom and not from Japan.

Notwithstanding its shortcomings, I have no intention to oppose the measure. It offers the best that can be expected at the present time, but it might be improved in many ways, and no doubt Parliament, realizing the great importance of this industry to Australia, will take whatever steps are necessary in the future to give adequate protection to both branches of the industry, because the encouragement of industries that permit of closer settlement is of the greatest importance. In Queensland there are large tracts of country that can be thrown open for closer settlement, but the difficulty is to select a crop of which there is not already an over-production. I believe that those who founded the cotton industry in Australia were wise in their choice. I am glad that the Minister lias made a personal study of this industry. I do not attach to him any of the blame for the actions of his predecessor (Sir Henry Gullett). Although this measure provides a bounty to assist the primary section of the industry, it doe3 not go far enough. I would prefer to sec a policy of all-round protection instead of bounties which are subjected to criticism every time they appear in the budget. The proposed method of assisting the industry leaves the persons engaged in it in a state of anxiety and uncertainty. That is the great weakness of tho measure, but as the Government will do nothing more we perforce must accept it.

Mr PROWSE:
Forrest

.I was surprised to hear the honorable member for Capricornia (Mr. Forde), after criticizing so severely this measure and the efforts of this Government to deal fairly with this industry, say that he would not oppose the bill. The honorable gentleman evidently forgets that during the regime of the Scullin Government one man lost his job in every four minutes. This Government has reduced unemployment, in this country. I hope that the cotton industry can be made of great service to the community. I hope that it will be possible to make it prosperous without penalizing other industries.

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:
Darling Downs

– If there is any industry natural to the State of Queensland, it is undoubtedly the cotton industry. This fact has been recognized from the time it was first established in Australia. The suitability of its climate for the production of cotton is well known, and the soil conditions are ideal. It was realized from the early beginnings of settlement in Queensland, that the problem of Australian national development was to ascertain by what means its tropical and sub-tropical areas could be suitably developed for settlement by white people. This* fact was recognized by Dr. Lang in the early ‘fifties. That gentleman said that it was the mission of our race to show that the development of subtropical countries could be carried out successfully by Europeans. Our experience of the Queensland cotton industry clearly indicates that it is natural to its surroundings and that, given reasonable conditions, there is every prospect of its becoming one of the greatest industries of Australia. As regards this particular measure, I do not think that wo can blame the Government for delay. The matter was referred to the Tariff Board, and we know the intense concentration of Parliament last year when completing the tariff schedule. The board conducted its investigation, and the Minister for Trade and Customs (Mr. White) made good his promise to go to Queensland, study conditions for himself, aud bring down a definite proposal for Parliament. It is realized by those engaged in the industry that in order to give prosperity and stability to it they will have to rely mainly upon tho home market. Anyone who has read the report of the board must come to the conclusion . that it has given a great deal of consideration to the problem. The Minister has followed the expressed policy of the Government that it will be guided in the matter of the protection of industry by the recommendations of the Tariff Board.

The honorable member for Capricornia (Mr. Forde) criticized the Government’s proposals as being inadequate, and quoted the opinions of certain anonymous growers and others in opposition to the scheme. I have here an opinion expressed by Mr. J. B. Webster, general manager of the Queensland Cotton Board, in the course of which he says -

What we do require is an Australian market for the bulk of our product. For the spinners to be able to operate they must have a reasonably protective duty on the cotton yarns which they turn out.

Then, as regards the provisions of the measure itself, he says-

The whole scheme appears to be fairly well balanced, has been well thought out and thi growers should benefit materially, provided always that the protection given to spinners is sufficient to enable thou to obtain the hulk of the Australian yarn market.

That is the opinion of the manager of the board itself, and I do not suppose that anyone has had more experience in the industry than he possesses. Being in Queensland he is primarily concerned with tho interests of the growers, and he is of opinion that the scheme will assist the growers and at tho same time build up the secondary industry. The honorable member for Forrest (Mr. Prowse) and others have said that they favour protecting industries natural to the country, and it has been established beyond doubt that the cotton industry is a natural one. I have also seen a telegram from Mr. D. C. Pryce, chairman of the Queensland Cotton Board, in which he urges the Minister to proceed with this measure as quickly as possible so as to have it placed on tha statute-book before the expiration of the present Parliament. In another telegram, Mr. Kajewski, a .member of the Cotton Board, states that the cottongrowers have urged the Minister for Customs (Mr. White) to put the bill through this session. Honorable members may therefore rest assured that, in passing this bill, they will be doing something to carry out the desires of the growers, and to establish a natural industry which will promote the prosperity of Australia.

Mr WHITE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · Balaclava · UAP

– The honorable member for Capricornia (Mr. Forde) read some criticisms of the Government’s scheme emanating from unnamed organizations. The honorable members for Darling Downs (Sir Littleton Groom) has furnished us with general appreciations, ‘ ‘6f the scheme, some of which,- ‘and others as well, are contained in :the Queensland Producer, a newspaper which is not always flattering to this Government. The Brisbane Courier-Mv.il, in. .a leading article published recently, referred enthusiastically to the scheme.

The honorable member for Capricornia asked why the cotton industry could not be placed upon the same basis as the wool industry, which is protected merely by a duty on imports. I reply that wool and cotton are entirely different commodities. While Australian wool can command a payable price on the markets of the world, Australian cotton has to compete with cotton grown by black labour. If we were to pay a bounty which would enable growers to dispose of their product profitably in the markets of the world, the cost would be inordinate.

The honorable member also complained of the delay in bringing down the scheme. I am sorry he mentioned that, because he must realize the difficulty of the task with which the Tariff Board was confronted. He must know that witnesses came from as far away as Great Britain to give evidence, and that the last report of the board was made available only this week. He also asked why it is proposed to curtail planting. The answer is that we have already had experience of the trouble which can arise from over-production, and this is one of the few occasions upon which we can take steps in time to prevent it. Therefore, we are paying a bounty only on the actual requirements of manufacturers, plus 20 per cent. If we did not do that, we should very soon have the same trouble as was encountered in the tobacco industry, when inexperienced and unsuitable persons were encouraged to rush into production. Tha honorable member for Capricornia also asked why the bounty was not to be paid on carry-over cotton that could not be used in this country. I have already given the reply to that; the Government desires to encourage the production of cotton for the home market, and does not propose to subsidize exports.

The honorable member also asked for information regarding wage rates paid in the various States. In Victoria the spinners were working under a Victorian wages board award while the New SouthWales spinners are working under a federal arbitration award. Now, however, under a general federal award, wages and conditions have been made uniform throughout the whole industry. I have here a telegram received from Ponds Industries Limited, and the Bradford Cotton Mills Limited, in which they conjointly state -

We consider suggested duties with world parity cotton giving much increased scope for yarns covering cotton tweeds, denims, drills, dungarees, &c, are far preferable to high duties with limited market, and for this reason quite satisfied Government proposals regarding cotton lint and yarns. In arriving at this decision we assume cotton piece goods enumerated above will be protected.

Therefore, the Victorian mill that is complaining has no further cause for complaint. As regards the honorable member’s complaint about towels, I have to inform him that, in a report of the Tariff Board brought down to-day, there is a recommendation for an increase of the specific duty on the particular line that is seriously undercutting the Australian industry.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clauses 1 to 2 agreed to.

Clause 3 verbally amended, and, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 4 and 5 agreed to.

Clause 6-

The bounty under this act shall be payable . . .

On or after the date of the commencement of this act, and on or before the thirteenth day of September, 1939. .

Amendment (by Mr. White) agreed to-

That the words “ thirteenth day of September,” be omitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “ thirtieth day of November.”

Clause 7 agreed to.

Clause 8 -

The maximum) amount of raw cotton produced in any year ending on the thirtieth day of September, upon which bounty may be paid under this act, shall be such quantity as the Minister determines as being the quantity of raw cotton, required during the year ending on the thirty-first day of March next following that year, for consumption by users in Australia of raw cotton, plus twenty per centum of the quantity so determined.

Amendment (by Mr. White) agreed to -

That the word “ September “ be omitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the word “ November.”

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 9 consequentially and verbally amended, and, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 10 to 18 agreed to.

Amendment (by Mr. White) agreed to-

That the following new clause be inserted: - “ 14a. Any amount of bounty payable under the foregoing provisions of this Act shall be subject to the reduction specified in section fifty-two of the Financial Emergency Act 1931.”

Bill reported with amendments; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 1084

CUSTOMS TARIFF VALIDATION BILL 1934

Motion (by Mr. White) - by leave - agreed to -

That he have leave to bring in a bill for an act to provide for the validation of collections of duties of customs under customs tariff proposals.

Bill brought up, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr WHITE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · Balaclava · UAP

– by leave - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This measure is required in order to ensure that the duties set out in the customs tariff resolutions introduced on the 24th November, 1933, relating to tobacco, and on the 1st August, 1934, relating principally to tie cotton industry, will operate until after the new parliament assembles. It provides for the validation of the duties until the 28th February, 1935. That will allow sufficient time for a schedule to be introduced into the new parliament. The duties may then be fully debated.

Mr FORDE:
Capricornia

– I direct the attention of the Minister to the fact that the revenue collected from the tobacco industry increased from £6,159,000 in 1.930-31 to £8,097,000 in 1933-34, a difference of nearly £2,000,000. The excise revenue increased in the same period from £3,200,000 to £4,800,000, a difference of £1,600,000. In view of those very substantial increases, would it not be wise to reduce the excise duty on all tobacco? I submit that a balance could be struck by increasing the import duty on unmanufactured leaf coining into Australia. The industry, I contend, is being asked to contribute too greatly to the revenue, with the result that there has been a falling off in the consumption of tobacco. I ask for a definite assurance that the matter will be given consideration. The industry is pressing for the reduction of this huge taxation. It was said that not more than £6,000,000 per annum would be drawn from it, and for a number of years the average was something under that amount, but the collections have now advanced to £8,000,000.

Mr WHITE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · Balaclava · UAP

– An increase of the import duty such as the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Forde) suggests would merely have the effect of raising the already high price of tobacco, which I do not think that honorable members desire. Tobacco that is imported and sold in Australia now pays an import duty of 3s. 6d. per lb., and an excise duty of 4s. 6d. per lb., whereas only 4s. 6d. per lb. is paid on Australian leaf by way of excise duty. The Government has endeavoured at all times to ease the burden of taxation. The budget for 1933-34 made provision for remissions amounting to something like £7,000,000, and further relief is being afforded under the excellent budget delivered this year.

This bill merely validates the extra duty of 6d. per lb. imposed last year, partly to help the wheat-growers. The Government considered that it might also assist the tobacco-growers, and it now wishes to validate it so that they may have the benefit of it.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and reported from committee without amendment or debate; report adopted.

Bill - by leave - read a third time.

page 1085

CUSTOMS TARIFF (EXCHANGE ADJUSTMENT) VALIDATION BILL 1934

Motion (by Mr. White) - by leave-

Agreed to -

That he have leave to bring in a bill for an act to provide for the validation of adjustments in duties of customs under Customs Tariff (Exchange Adjustment) proposals.

Bill brought up, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr WHITE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · Balaclava · UAP

– by leave - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This measure is required in order to ensure that the exchange adjustment shall apply to the protective duties included in the customs tariff resolution of the 1st August, 1934, which related principally to the cotton industry. It validates those exchange adjustment proposals for the same period as the cotton duties are validated, that is, until the 28th February, 1935. This will allow the incoming Government sufficient time to introduce a new resolution, which may be fully debated.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and reported from committee without amendment or debate; report adopted.

Bill - by leave - read a third time.

page 1085

EXCISE TARIFF VALIDATION BILL 1934

Motion (by Mr. White) - by leave - agreed to.

That he have leave to bring in a bill for an act to provide for the validation of collections of duties of excise under Excise Tariff proposals.

Bill brought up, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr WHITE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · Balaclava · UAP

– by leave - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This measure is required in order to ensure that the duties set out iu the Excise Tariff resolution introduced on the 1st August, 1934, relating to fortifying spirit and concentrated grape must, will operate until after the new Parliament assembles. It provides for the validation of those duties until the 2Sth February, 1935, which will allow sufficient time for a schedule to be introduced into the new Parliament. The duties can then be fully debated.

Mr FORDE:
Capricornia

– I offer no objection to item 13 a2, because the Government proposes to do what I urged should be done when I spoke on the Wine Export Bounty Bill. I am, however, opposed to the removal of the excise duty from ale, porter and other beer, brandy, whisky, rum, gin, liquers. tobacco, cigars and cigarettes for consumption by the personnel of sea-going vessels of the Royal Australian Navy, when such vessels are in full commission, and when consumed on them.

Mr SPEAKER (Hon G H Mackay:

– Order! The honorable member may not discuss items. The bill merely proposes to validate collections.

Mr FORDE:

– I wish to know whether wc shall have an opportunity to discuss the i tems.

Mr White:

– Yes, after wo are returned on the 15th September next.

Mr FORDE:

– The h’onorable gentleman will not be a member of the new Government. I strongly object to the gentlemen of the navy being made a privileged class and being given concessions that are not enjoyed by other branches of the Public Service. For that reason I shall vote against the measure.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and reported from committee without amendment or debate; report adopted.

Bill - by leave - read a third time.

page 1086

CUSTOMS TARIFF (SPECIAL DUTIES) VALIDATION BILL 1934

Second Reading

Debate resumed from the 1st August, (vide page 1022), on motion by Mr. White -

That the bill bc now read a second time.

Mr FORDE:
Capricornia

– This measure refers to the 50 per cent, surcharge which was imposed to help to rectify the adverse trade balance. I do not intend to oppose it.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

Bill - by leave - read a third time. Sitting suspended from 4.8 a.m. to 11 a.m.

page 1086

THE LATE HONORABLE SYDNEY SMITH

Mr SPEAKER:

– I have to announce that I have received from the widow of the late Honorable Sydney Smith a letter thanking the House for its resolution of sympathy in her bereavement.

page 1086

ASSISTANCE TO WHEAT INDUSTRY

First REPORT of Royal Commission.

Mr LYONS:
Prime Minister and Treasurer · Wilmot · UAP

– I lay on the table the following paper : -

Wheat, Flour and Bread Industries - Royal

Commission - First report. and move -

That the paper be printed.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Mr LYONS:
Prime Minis ter and Treasurer · Wilmot · UAP

– by leave - The Government has had an opportunity to consider the first import of the Royal Commission on the Wheat Industry and has decided to accept the recommendation contained in it that, on the basis of a price of 3s.- a bushel for wheat, f.o.r. at principal shipping ports,’ assistance or relief to the extent of £4,000,000 is necessary for the coming season. This amount would increase if prices fell below 3s.- f.o.r. at principal ports, and decrease if prices rose above that figure.

The commission, in recommending the payment of a bounty, makes the following statement: -

In view of the present uncertainties as to the coming harvest, particularly in some States, and as to the price likely to be realized, the commission is not prepared at this stage to recommend either the proportion of such total amount which should be applied to the payment of the bounty or the methods which should be adopted for the distribution of the remainder. A further recommendation will be submitted later.

The commission also states that it will make a final recommendation as to the amount which, on the basis mentioned, will bo necessary, before the next crop is harvested.

When the volume of the harvest is known and information is available as to the prices likely to be realized for the crop, the Government will be in a position to deal with the method of providing the necessary money and distributing it. It is clear that at present it would be a mistake to try to make final decisions upon these matters. The Government, however, desires to make it quite plain that it accepts, and will give effect to, the main recommendation of the commission as to the amount necessary upon the basis mentioned.

page 1087

QUESTION

LEAGUE OF NATIONS

Fourteenth Assembly : Report op Australian Delegation.

Mr LATHAM:
AttorneyGeneral · Kooyong · UAP

– I lay on the table the following paper: -

League of Nations - Fourteenth Assembly, 25th September to 11th October, 1933 - Report of Australian Delegation, and move -

T1 at the paper be printed.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 1087

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Lands Acquisition Act - Land acquired at Bacchus Marsh, Victoria - For Defence purposes.

Postal Congress - Universal Postal Congress, Cairo, February -March, 1034 - Report by the Honorably Archdale Parkhill, PostmasterGeneral, and Mr. M. B. Harry, together with the convention adopted at the Congress.

page 1087

NORTHERN TERRITORY

Marriage oe Hale-caste Wosiek to White Men.

Mr PERKINS:
Monaro- Minister for the Interior · Eden · UAP

– by I care - On the 2Sth J une, during the debate on the Supply Bill, the honorable member for Melbourne Ports (Mr. Holloway) stated that he had been assured by a number of people in the Northern Territory, that Dr. Cook, Chief Medical Officer and Chief Protector of Aborigines, was giving preference in employment to white men who promised to marry half-caste women, and that white men could not secure employment unless they agreed to marry half-caste women. The honorable member stated that he wished to arrest my attention, so that I would make some inquiries and deal with the matter.

The allegation contained in the honorable member’s statement was so serious that immediate inquiries wore instituted and a report has now been received from the Acting Administrator of the Northern Territory. It is pointed, out, in tho first place, that Dr. Cook has no power to make appointments, and, consequently, cannot, even if he desired to do so, give preference in any kind of government employment to persons who have married, or promised to marry, half-castes. All temporary appointments to the Northern Territory service are made by the Administrator, and all permanent appointments by the Minister. Appointments to the works branch are controlled from Canberra, and the railway authorities appoint their own men. Dr. Cook naturally has nothing whatever to do with appointments made by private persons or firms. It is therefore plain that Dr. Cook cannot give preference in employment. The whole case of the honorable member, therefore, falls to the ground, and it is apparent that he has been misled by some person or persons not favorably disposed to Dr. Cook. Reference was made in the honorable member’s speech to the “forcing” of white men to marry halfcastes. This would presuppose that the same force was being used on half-caste women. It can be stated definitely that it is, and always has been, contrary to policy to force half-caste women to marry any one. The half-caste must be a perfectly free agent in the matter.

It is suggested that the honorable member made his statement in all good faith, following tales told him by irresponsible persons in the Northern Territory, and that he should have considered it his duty to make inquiries to confirm or deny them whilst he was at Darwin. By first making his statement in Parliament, the honorable member has cast a slur on the reputation of a conscientious, able, and loyal officer, who is unable to defend himself. Therefore, after a full inquiry into the. matter, I consider it my duty, in fairness to Dr. Cook, to give an emphatic denial to the statement made by the honorable member.

Mr HOLLOWAY:

– by leave- I .atn glad that the Minister for tho Interior (Mr. Perkins) has so promptly ‘ inquired into the allegations that Dr. Cook was giving preference in employment to white men who promised to marry half-caste women, and that white men could not secure employment unless they agreed to marry such women. I assure, the Minister and honorable members generally that I brought the statements under the notice of Parliament at the request of persons in high positions at Darwin in municipal affairs, journalism, and other walks of life, and not at the request of irresponsible people. I did not bring forward uncorroborated statements. I was given definitely to understand that it was the general opinion throughout the Territory that Dr. Cook was acting in the way I described. When I returned to Melbourne, I consulted several Commonwealth Government officials in high positions who were in touch with the Northern Territory administration, because I realized the delicacy of the subject that I had been asked to ventilate. These gentlemen assured me in an unofficial way, of course, because they did not wish their names to be mentioned in . Parliament, that on the facts represented to me I was justified, if not in duty hound, to bring the matter under notice. If honorable members will refer to the Hansard report of’ my speech they will «ee that. I stated quite definitely that Dr. Cook was a splendid man in every way r did net question his qualifications, nor his sociability, but said that he was so enamoured of his theory that he could solve the half-caste problem by inter marriage in this way that he was prepared to do his utmost to put his ideas into operation. Some of the people who brought this subject under my notice have lived in the Northern Territory for long periods and are reputable citizens, not travelling unemployed men. It was suggested to me that I should write to Dr. Cook from Alice Springs or some other place farther south and ask him if he could find a position for a white man who was prepared, to marry a halfcaste woman. I was assured that if J did so, Dr. Cook himself would provide uie with all the evidence I needed that he was following this practice; but I do not believe in such tactics, and would not adopt them. I learned very soon after I arrived in the territory that half-castes were often appointed to positions as leading hands at railway sidings and elsewhere, and had eight, or niue white men under them. This naturally caused a good deal of bad feeling. In bringing this subject under the notice of Parliament, I did not. do so iu order to takesides against half-caste people, for 1 realize that half-castes have as much right to live as have other people. My object was to arrest the attention of the .Minister, and cause him to have inquiries made to see whether Dr. Cook was using economic pressure to induce white men to murry half -caste women against their will. I felt that, if that were being done it was unjust. Men should not be forced to do that sort of thing in order to obtain work. If I have made any reflections upon Dr. Cook I regret it. I think I said in my previous speech that he was regarded everywhere as an “ excellent gentleman “. I used those very words, T believe. I also said that I thought he was being carried away by his desire to solve the half-caste problem. I expressed the opinion that the problem would not be solved by the method that he was adopting, for more half-castes or quarter-castes would continue to be born, and the magnitude of the problem would steadily grow. I again assure honorable members that I had. no intention to cast any reflection whatever upon Dr. Cook’s character. I only desired that investigations should be made into the charges that were made to me. If the Minister is satisfied with the result of his inquiries, so am I.

page 1089

QUESTION

REPORT OF EASTERN MISSION

Export of Australian Flour to Eastern Countries

Mr LATHAM:
AttorneyGeneral · Kooyong · UAP

– by leave - When I submitted my report upon the Australian Eastern Mission, I referred to the practice of some Australian exporters of flour who marketed their product in bags containing less than 49 lb., which was the usual weight of bagged flour sold in the East, and which until recently had been generally recognized as the Australian standard bag. Since making those remarks, several questions have been asked on the subject in the House, and millers have stated that my remarks constituted a reflexion upon their integrity. I have, therefore, been asked to make another statement on the subject. I made no reflection upon the commercial integrity or honesty of the Australian millers. Their flour was exported in accordance with orders received, and the persons with whom they traded knew precisely what they were getting, aud paid for what they got. I wish to remove any impression that I reflected on the trading honesty of the Australian exporters. But the facts are as I then stated them to be. Only Australian flour is being exported in bags of less weight than those used by other countries which export flour to the East. Accordingly, the fact that Australian suppliers have yielded to solicitations to diminish the weight of flour in their bags is imperilling Australia’s trade in the East. The flour-millers have asked that regulations be issued to prevent, the export of flour in smaller bags; but they have associated with their request another that similar import regulations be issued in regard to exports from the Netherlands East Indies. It has not been possible to give effect to that request. Fears have been expressed in Australia that if the 49-lb. weight bag were made the standard bag by regulation, Australian exporters might incur the risk that exporters from other countries to which such a regulation did not apply reducing the weight of flour in their bags. Experience, however, has not shown that there is a risk of that nature, and the Department of Commerce is seriously considering the introduction of a regulation which will place Australian exporters of flour in this respect upon the same actual footing in the Eastern markets as the flour exporters of other countries.

page 1089

WINE EXPORT BOUNTY BILL 1934

In committee (Consideration of Senate’s amendments) :

Clause 3 -

The Wine Export Bounty Act 1930-1932 is hereby repealed:

Provided that bounty may be paid under that act on fortified wine exported. . . .

Senate’s amendment. - After “that” (first occurring) insert “.subject to the Financial Emergency Act 1931,”.

Clause 4 -

In this net, unless tha contrary intention appears- “ fortified wine “ means wine, . . . which is thu fermented juice of the grape, . . . “” minimum price “ means, . . . the minimum price determined by the Minister as the price to be paid, for grapes of that kind or fortifying spirit, as the case may be, . . .

Senate’s amendments. - Leave out “ the grape” in the definition of “fortified wine”, insert “fresh grapes”. Leave out “of that kind “ in the definition of “ minimum price “.

Clause 7 -

The rate of bounty payable under this act shall be a3 follows: -

Provided that, if it appears in any financial year that, notwithstanding the payment into tho Wine Export, Encouragement Account of the total amount specified in the proviso to sub-section (7.) of section five of this Act. there will not be sufficient money available in that account to pay full bounty in respect of all claims, the rate of bounty payable under this section shall be reduced proportionately and the bounty may be paid by progress payments as determined by the Minister:

Senate’s amendments. - Leave out “ it appears in any financial year that”. After “ Act “ insert “” it appears to the Minister that, in any financial year “.

Mr WHITE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · Balaclava · UAP

.Senate’s amendment No. i is designed to clear up any doubts as to the applicability of section 52 of the Financial Emergency Act 1931 to the amount of bounty paid or to be paid in pursuance of the act which it is proposed to repeal. The present rate of bounty, ls. 4.8d. a gallon, is not affected by this amendment. Senate’s amendment No. 2 is designed to give effect to a request from the Federal

Viticultural Council that no bounty be paid on vine made from dried grapes as such wine is of inferior quality, and would not enhance the prestige of Australian wines abroad. Furthermore, the use of dried grapes in wine-making is prejudicial to the interests of grape-growers. One ton of dried grapes used to make wine would take the place of about three and a half tons of fresh grapes grown expressly for wine-making purposes. An excise duty of 20s. a gallon has been imposed on wine made from dried grapes in order to prevent their use in the manufacture of wine for the domestic market. Amendment No. 3 is purely a drafting amendment, and is designed to bring the definition of “minimum price” into line with clause 14. Amendments Nos. 4 and 5 are necessary to make it clear that the Minister is the authority to determine whether sufficient money is or is not available in the Wine Export Encouragement Account for the payment of the bounty in full in any particular year. I move -

That the amendments be agreed to.

Mr GABB:
Angas

.The words “of that kind” were inserted in the definition of “ minimum price “ in order to tighten up the legislation. In respect of grapes used for the manufacture of wine for export there should be no doubt upon the point that the prices arc to be paid for grapes of a particular kind. I am not so greatly concerned about the domestic market, but I am concerned that we should not allow any loopholes in our legislation affecting grapes used for making wine for export. I fear that it may be possible for some “ slippery “ wine-makers to find a way of overcoming this difficulty by paying for, say, sharaz grapes the same price as is paid for mixed grapes. Why is it proposed to delete the words “ of that kind “ ?

Mr WHITE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · Balaclava · UAP

.- The amendment is purely a drafting amendment. As it is the practice to fix a price each year for each kind of grape, there is no possibility that the danger feared by the honorable member will be assisted in any way.

Motion agreed to.

Resolution reported; report adopted.

page 1090

EXCISE BILL 1934

Second Reading

Mr WHITE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · Balaclava · UAP

.- I move -

That the bill he now read a second time.

This bill, which originated in the Senate, is designed to insert a new section in the Excise Act 1901-1930, to remedy the present unsatisfactory position which exists in connexion with persons who have been convicted by a court for offences against any excise act, and who are released upon finding security for payment of the pecuniary penalty imposed. Section 147 of the Excise Act 1901-1923 at present provides that, where any pecuniary penalty is adjudged to be paid by any convicted person, the court may -

  1. Commit the offender to gaol until the penalty is paid: or
  2. Release the offender upon his giving security for the payment of the penalty ; or
  3. Exercise for the enforcement and recovery of the penalty and power of distress or execution possessed by the court for the enforcement and recovery of penalties in any other case.

In instances where a person having been convicted of an offence against the act is released upon finding security for the payment of the penalties, the giving of the security operates as a complete discharge of any order for imprisonment in default of payment of the fine, and no further action can be taken against the culprit. This has created a very difficult position for the department, particularly in connexion with cases, which are very rife, of illicit distillation of spirits. In most of these cases the offenders are released upon finding security for payment of the penalty. In some instances the sureties accepted by the court have been persons of small, or relatively small, means, and when the release of the offender has been secured strong representations have been made that no action be taken to enforce the security given in view of the hardship which will result for the surety. In one instance fines and costs amounting to over £400 were imposed on three persons for offences in connexion with the illicit distillation of spirits, and the court accepted as surety for the three persons a. widow who was possessed of small means. The fines were not paid, and the department was faced with the position of either inflicting great hardship on the surety or letting the offenders escape entirely from any penalty. It is considered that, in cases of this kind, where the enforcement of the security is impracticable, or would occasion real hardship to the surety, there should be some provision to enable the actual offender to be dealt with. The object of this bill is, therefore, to provide authority so that in cases of this kind the court may be approached for an order to commit the offender to gaol until the full penalty has been paid. It is also proposed that the provisions of section 149 of the Excise Act shall apply to the imprisonment of an offender for whose committal to gaol an order of this kind has been made. That section provides for the discharge of the defendant at the expiration of a certain period if the penalty remains unpaid, and in calculating such period any terms of imprisonment served by the defendant prior to his release upon security, and also any portion of the fine which may have been paid, will be taken into account.

Mr Makin:

– I presume that it is not desired to impose a penalty upon people whose circumstances are such that they are unable to comply with an order of the court in this connexion.

Mr WHITE:

– The department deals with all such cases on their merits, and leniency is shown in cases where it is warranted.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and reported from the committee without amendment or debate; report adopted.

Bill - by leave - read a third time.

page 1091

NAVIGATION BILL 1934

Second Reading

Mr STEWART:
Minister for Commerce · Parramatta · UAP

– I move -

That the billbe now read a second time.

The purpose of this bill is to amend the Navigation Act, and thus remove certain disabilities which have seriously retarded the development of tourist traffic to outlying portions of the Commonwealth, but mainly to the island State of Tasmania.

Subject to certain exemptions and permits that may be, and have been, granted, the Navigation Act prohibits the carriage of passengers coastwise between Australian ports by ships other than those duly licensed to engage in the coasting trade. Under the act, all ships, British and foreign, locally-owned and overseas, are on a footing of perfect equality in the matter of obtaining licences. The conditions attached to the grant of the licence - chiefly in respect of rates of wages and conditions of employment, manning and accommodation for crew - are, however, such that, in actual practice, the local vessels only have complied and become licensed.

Prior to the Navigation Act coming into operation, the Orient, and Peninsular and Oriental mail steamers, and a number of other large British passenger liners, participated in the tourist traffic to Hobart in the summer season in the course of their visits to that port for cargoes of fruit. Many holiday-makers made in them what was known as the “ apple trip “ ; that is, they proceeded from Sydney to Hobart and thence to Melbourne in the steamer, returning to Sydney by another incoming overseas boat or, alternatively, by rail or coasting steamer. The shutting out of these large, fast and comfortable boats from the trade, when the act came into effect in 1921, evoked protests from the people of Tasmania, who contended that one licensed ship running between Sydney and Hobart - at that time theRiverina, and more recently the Zealandia - was in point of size, speed and appointments, neither attractive to tourists nor adequate to accommodate the numbers which previously travelled.

To meet, as far as was then thought possible, the demand for re-admittance of the overseas liners into this tourist trade, the act was amended in 1926 by the insertion in section 286 of the following provision : - (6.) Where it is shown to the satisfaction of the Governor -General that the tourist traffic between any ports in the Commonwealth or in the territories under the authority of the Commonwealth is being injured or retarded, and the Governor-General is satisfied that it is desirable that unlicensed ships be allowed to engage in the trade, he may, by notice published in the Gazette, grant permission to unlicensed

British ships of such size and speed as arc specified in the notice to engage in the carriage of passengers between those ports subject to such conditions (if any) and for such period as are set out in the notice.

Under this new provision, orders in council were issued from year to year, permitting British ships of not less than 10,000 tons gross register, and a speed of 15 knots - subsequently reduced to 14 knots - to carry passengers to and from Hobart during the tourist season, without bringing themselves within the scope of the coasting trade provisions of the act.

For several successive seasons, however, the overseas shipping companies declined to avail themselves of the concession, but in December, 1932, by agreement among themselves, they commenced booking tourists for the Hobart run. There was an immediate response by the public, and during that season 4,000 passengers were taken from the mainland ports of Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne to Hobart by the overseas ships alone. For the next tourist season, ended on the 31st May last, the number of passengers carried to Hobart from the mainland, by overseas boats, under exemption, was approximately 3,500.

That the improvement in the tourist traffic to Tasmania as the result of the exemptions and permits granted under the provisions of the Navigation Act is substantial and has been sustained, is indicated by the following figures, showing the total arrivals in Tasmania for the six months from December to May of the tourist seasons 1932-33 and 1933-34, compared with those of the preceding season when the exemption was not availed of : -

This table is based on figures compiled by the Commonwealth Statistician from returns officially submitted by the shipping companies, and can, therefore, be taken as accurate.

An interesting feature is that, contrary to the anticipations of the owners of local steamers, the passenger traffic by licensed vessels has actually increased since advantage has been taken of thu exemptions to the overseas British ships. It is worthy of note, too, that, the number of passengers travelling from Tasmania to the mainland ports of Sydney and Melbourne by licensed steamers is considerably greater than the numbers arriving in Tasmania by licensed vessels from those ports. The extent of ‘ the benefit to the Australian licensed services from the passenger traffic returning to the mainland after having been conveyed to Tasmania by overseas vessels is indicated by the following figures: -

In assessing the value to Tasmania of these exemptions, it is necessary to remember, also, that a new travel feature, adverse to Tasmanian interests, has been developed during recent years in the form of cruises from Australian ports by some of the largest and latest of the overseas liners to Noumea, Norfolk Island, Suva, Papua, and New Guinea, all of which are competitive with Tasmanian tourist, business. Last season there were twelve such cruises. Among these, two vessels of the Peninsular and Oriental line alone each carried from 900 to 1,000 passengers on their cruises to these resorts. Tasmania has undoubtedly done remarkably well, not only to hold the traffic, but actually to increase it, as she has done, in the face of such competition. That she has been able to do so is directly due, without, doubt, to the exemptions granted. The fact that it is now possible to visit the State in luxurious liners contributes immeasurably to the attractiveness of the trip, and so long as facilities to do so are ensured there is every reason to hope for a progressively increasing tourist business. But the people of Tasmania, realizing as they do the benefits which have accrued from the operation of the exemptions, are desirous that the concession, granted at present by executive act only from season to season, should not depend upon the policy or whim of the administration of the day, but should be given a statutory basis, so that it could be withdrawn only by a specific amendment of tho Navigation Act, agreed to by Parliament. Relief on the present basis, while admittedly efficacious, is declared to be too uncertain, and too dependent on the caprice of the government or of a minister, to afford that degree of relief to which the State is entitled.

In order, too, that local interests may be induced to improve and develop the undoubted attractions and the tourist equipment and facilities of the island, including her hotel and other accommodation, it is absolutely essential, it is contended, that there shall be an assurance, not only of adequate, but also of permanent and attractive shipping facilities for their visitors. There is much point in this contention, for if tourists are to be specially catered for, as in other parts of the world, it is essential that there should be that guarantee. We cannot expect business people to go to heavy expense in improving accommodation, or tho State Government to spend money in tho provision of roads to the scenic beauties of the State, unless there is some assurance of an adequate return, necessarily spread over a lengthy period.

Successive governments, during the thirteen years the Navigation Act has been in operation, have considered the question of giving relief. The difficulty in the way, however, lies in section 99 of the Constitution, which reads -

The Commonwealth shall not, by any law, or regulation of trade, commerce or revenue, give preference to one State or any part thereof over another State or any part thereof.

With a view to overcoming this difficulty, proposals have been made from time to timo for amendments of the act which would have the effect of exempting the passenger traffic betwen Tasmania and the mainland ports from the coasting trade provisions of the act, but on each occasion the advice of the Commonwealth Solicitor-General was that as, in each case, the condition - whatever it may have been - laid down as precedent to exemption was notoriously applicable only as regards communication between ports in Tasmania, on the one hand, and those of the other States, on the other, and excluded traffic between any two mainland States, the proposed provision could not but be considered as an infringement of section 99 of the Constitution. Further careful consideration has recently been given to the matter, with a view to ascertaining whether the constitutional difficulty mentioned could not be overcome by some provision which, while affording to Tasmania the relief desired, would, at the same time, by its wider and more general application, benefit other isolated parts of the Commonwealth and thus bc free from any possible objection of discrimination or preference in favour of a single State. In this connexion, it is worthy of note that constitutional authorities, in considering the real import of the words “give preference “, as they appear in section ‘99 of the Constitution, have expressed the view that section 99 should be construed in a broad and liberal manner, with especial reference to the evil which the provision is intended to prevent, namely, arbitrary discriminations between States or localities; and th at, in determining what constitutes equality of treatment, recognition should be given to the practical necessities of thu case. In short, it appears, if a different; of treatment is arbitrary, or if its purpose is to advantage one State or locality to the detriment of another, it is undue and reasonable, and is, accordingly, a “ preference.” If, on the other hand, the difference grows out of the dissimilarity of conditions in one locality as compared with another, or if it is based on recognized and reasonable principles of administration, it is no preference to one over another. However, so far as the present proposed amendment is concerned, the view is held that it is not open to any suggestion of preference to any one State or part thereof. It covers any two ports not connected by rail. Thu3, in addition to permitting the carriage, by British ships of the class specified, of passengers from any Tasmanian port to the mainland and vice versa, travel by them would also be permissible between any mainland or Tasmanian port and such places, wholly dependent on sea communication, as Kingscote, Kangaroo Island, and Lord Howe Island, New South Wales. The exemption would have application also to travel between mainland ports in the northern parts of the continent. The northern rail-head in “Western Australia is at Geraldton, and in Queensland, at Cairns. Between these ports there are some 2,700 miles of coastline with ports which have no rail connection with any other port in Australia. Under the proposed amendment, therefore, passengers might also be carried without restriction, by any unlicensed British ships of the stipulated tonnage and speed - such, for example, as the new Blue Star liners - between any ports in that area, and between any port in that area and any port elsewhere in Australia, including Tasmania.

Mr GREGORY:

– No 10,000-ton boat could enter those ports in the north.

Mr STEWART:

– It is expected that before very long the vessels of the Blue Star Line will travel up that coast on their way to the United Kingdom. With respect to the ports along the coast mentioned, between Geraldton and Cairns, namely, the north-west ports of Western Australia, Darwin and Thursday Island, travel to and from these places by unlicensed British ships is already allowed, under exemption, so far as Dai-i win is concerned, and by means of continuing permits in regard to the other ports.

Theoretically, it is admitted, the proposed amendment would make it possible for unlicensed ships to compete in the Bass Strait service. In actual practice, however, the depth of water in the Tamar restricts the shipping to Launceston to relatively shallow-draught vessels, and overseas vessels call at the lower Tamar ports-Beauty Point and Bell Bay - or at Burnie, in the north-west, at very infrequent intervals. The passenger liners never do so, and the number of passengers carried by the cargo liners calling, if any, would never amount to more than a score or so, at the most, in a year.

It may be objected, further, that the proposed amendment would permit vessels of the Eastern and Australian Line - the Nellore, the Tanda and the Nankin - manned by coloured labour, which call at Hobart at monthly intervals,’ to enter into competition between Hobart and Sydney with the licensed vessel Zealandia, with damaging effects on the earnings of the latter. There is no danger of this, as tho vessels in question are of only 7,000 tons gross register, and accordingly, being under the 10,000 tons minimum prescribed, would be excluded from the exemption.

The bill as drawn is considered to be free from constitutional objections. 1 1 will afford to Tasmania the guarantee as to tourist shipping facilities which the people of that State reasonably seek. Experience has demonstrated that it will have no adverse effect on local shipping, but will rather benefit it, and be the means of improving the facilities foi1 travel along our northern coast-line.

In all the circumstances, I have no hesitation in inviting honorable members to give the bill a speedy passage, and so help our friends across Bass Strait to develop their tourist industry and, at .the same time, facilitate travel to and from the more isolated parts of the mainland.

Debate (on motion by Mr. Holloway) adjourned.

page 1094

SALES TAX ASSESSMENT BILL (No. 1) 1934

Second Reading

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This is a machinery measure, the main purpose of which is to ensure the effective operation, in accordance with the intention of Parliament, of certain sales tax provisions which have recently given rise to doubt or administrative difficulties. Generally speaking, the proposed amendments do not introduce new liabilities or new rules of practice, but merely give expression to the accepted practice of the Taxation Department. The particular purposes of the remedial measures in the bill are - (1) To validate past taxation of certain foodstuffs which are now expressly exempt from sales tax ; (2) To ensure that taxable goods do not escape tax when sold together with exempt goods, or other property, for one inclusive price ; (3) To provide a clear basis of liability for merchants who procure the making-up of goods by other persons out of materials supplied to the merchants by their customers; (4) To give clearer expression to the intention of the amendment enacted in December last to provide a special sale value for goods manufactured by retailers from taxed materials; and (5) To prevent loss of revenue by reason of subterfuges adopted by merchants for whom goods are manufactured, who depress the real value of such goods by selling the raw materials to the manufacturers at fictitious prices. The hill also contains provisions to waive the priority of sales tax as a Crown debt over liquidators’ fees and costs in the winding up of companies, and to tighten up the penal provisions relating to false returns or information, and to fa lse or wrongful quotation of certificate.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2 (Definitions).

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– In consequence of a decision of the High Court, given in what is known as the fish-and-chips case, some doubt exists as to whether a person who engages in the processing of foodstuffs for human consumption can be regarded as a manufacturer. Although the law originally provided for the exemption of many of the principal foodstuffs as primary products, the exemption was expressly limited to such goods as had not been subject to any process or treatment resulting in an alteration of their form, nature, or condition. Persons who engaged in such processes as the cooking of meat, the roasting of peanuts, the polishing of rice, and the cooking and canning of vegetables, were accordingly required to pay tax upon their sales of such goods. The recent decision of the High Court indicates that such processes do not come within the definition of “ manufacture “ as expressed in the law, although it was clearly the intention of Parliament that they should be so regarded. The amendment now proposed is necessary, so that the action of the department in requiring payment of tax in those cases may be clearly authorized. It does not create any new liability, but merely clarifies the position in regard to tax already collected in respect of past transactions. All of the goods affected, namely, cooked meat, roasted peanuts, polished rice, and cooked and canned vegetables, are now specifically exempted from tax by reason of provisions introduced since the inception of the sales tax.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 3 (Goods deemed to be sold).

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– The purpose of this amendment is to clarify the position in regard to goods manufactured out of materials supplied by a customer to a manufacturer. In the tailoring trade, for example, a fairly common practice is that of customers supplying suit lengths to merchant tailors, who, in turn, pass on the material to manufacturing tailors to be made up. Under the existing law, doubt exists as to who is liable to pay the sales tax, the manufacturing tailor or the merchant tailor. In some cases, the man who buys the suit hears sales tax on the cost of the suit as supplied by the manufacturing tailor and, in other cases, on the cost as supplied by the merchant tailor. It is necessary to have uniformity. The law clearly intends that sales tax shall be paid on the suit as it is eventually sold to the customer by the merchant tailor, and the amendment seeks to bring that about. In the majority of cases, the intention of Parliament is being met, but doubt exists as to whether it can be enforced as the law now stands.

Clause agreed to.

Remaining clauses and title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment.

Motion (by Mr. Nairn) agreed to -

That the bill be now recommitted for the reconsideration of clause 2.

Incommittee: Recommittal.

Clause 2 (Definitions).

Mr NAIRN:
Perth

.- This clause seems to make the definition of “ manufacture “ extremely wide, and I desire an assurance from the Minister that it is less nocuous than it appears to be. I do not want to see a repetition of the litigation that occurred about three years ago in connexion with the imposition of sales tax on manufactured foodstuffs. The amendment is designed to cure that trouble; but it seems rather to widen the field of the tax-gatherer. It might appear to give him an invitation to go into any restaurant and levy a toll on any product there for sale.

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

[12.4 1 . - I give the honorable member and the committee the assurance that this extension of the definition of “ manufacture “ is not intended, nor will it be administered, to widen the field for the collection of sales tax. As I mentioned previously, this amendment arose out of the. fish-and-chips judgment in the High Court, which denied to the department the right to tax cooked or processed food as manufactured goods. These foods are now specifically exempt, but the department has quite properly collected tax in the past on a number of processed foods, such as polished rice and other articles to which I have referred. The bill validates the action of the department in ha ving collected the tax in past years.

Mr Nairn:

– Will this measure affect any decision of the High Court in any c!a.3s of cases which may have been affected by its judgment?

Mr CASEY:

– The full benefit of the High Court decision will be obtained by the fish-and-chips business or calling, not only by the person or persons who pursued this matter to the High Court, but also by the industry as a whole.

Clause agreed to.

Bill reported without further amendment; reports adopted.

Bill - by leave - read a third time.

page 1096

SALES TAX ASSESSMENT BILL (No. 2) 1934

Second Reading

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a-second time.

This is a very short measure, the sole purpose of which is to effectuate fully tho intention of Parliament that sales tax should not be payable in respect of goods produced by home manufacturers whose sales do not exceed £500 per annum. The existing law, whilst itexempts the sale of such goods by the manufacturer, doe3 not allow freedom from tax in respect of them when subsequently sold by a retailer who, by reason of other activities, is registered under the Sales Tax Assessment Acts. The proposed amendment will remove the liability to tax in such eases, and will obviateserious administrative difficulties which would arise from any attempt to enforce that liability. _ Mr. WARD (East Sydney) [12.10].- Although the gross income of a small confectioner who uses his residence for the manufacture and sale of confectionery is only about £600, he is required to register under the act, but I understand that, if he partly manufactures on the premises and partly obtains his supplies from other sources, the amount of the exemption is £1,000 ‘instead of £500. Should not the exemption be raised to £1,000 in both cases to prevent victimization?

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

.- s-The point mentioned by the honorable member does not really arise in connexion with this bill. The amount of the exemption has been debated at great length in this chamber, and the li ne has to be drawn somewhere. This bill merely provides that a small home manufacturer who makes and sells under £500 worth of goods shall be immune from the tax; but, under the existing law, if he sells them to another man who is registered, those goods in the hands of the second man, usually the retailer, may be subject to the tax.

Mr Ward:

– Why make a difference between the person who manufactures all his own stock and another who purchases some elsewhere?

Mr CASEY:

– That question does not arise under this measure, which is in favour of the small manufacturer. The bill will simplify the administration, and avoid, the possibility of the small man paying the tax on part or the whole of his output.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and reported from committee without amendment or debate; report adopted.

Bill - by leave - read a third time.

page 1097

INCOME TAX BILL 1934

In Committee of Ways and Means:

Motion (by Mr. Casey) agreed to -

That a tax be imposed on income at the following rates: -

Division A. - Rate of Tax upon Income Derived from Personal Exertion. (For the purposes of this Division: T = taxable income in pounds.)

If the taxable income does not exceed £6,900, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income shall be -

If the taxable income exceeds £6,900, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income up to and including £6,900 shall be -

and the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income in excess of£6,900 shall be 76.5 pence.

DivisionB. - Rate of Tax upon Income Derived from Property. (For the purposes of this Division: T = taxable income in pounds.)

If the taxable income does not exceed £500, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income shall be -

If the taxable income exceeds £500, but does not exceed £1,500, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income shall be -

If the taxable income exceeds £1,500 but does not exceed £3,700, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income shall be -

If the taxable income exceeds £3,700, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income up to and including £3.700 shall be -

and the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income in excess of £3,700 shall be 90 pence.

Division C. - Rates of Tax in respect of Taxable Income Derived Partly from Personal Exertion and. Partly from Property.

Division B if the total taxable income of the taxpayer were derived exclusively from property by the amount of the total taxable income.

Division D. - Tax Payable where Amount would otherwise be Less than Ten Shillings.

Notwithstanding anything contained in the preceding divisions, where the amount of income tax which a person would, apartfrom this division, be liable to pay is less than Ten shillings, the income tax payable by that person shall be Ten shillings.

Division E. - Rate of Tax Payable by a Trustee.

For every pound of the taxable income in respect of which a trustee is liable to be separately assessed and to pay tax, the rate of tax shall be the rate which would be payable under Division A, B, or C. as the caserequiries, if one individual were liable to be separately assessed and to pay tax on that taxable income.

Division F. - Rates of Tax Payable by a Company.

Division G. - Rate of Tax Payable by an Individually-owned Partnership.

Individually-owned Partnerships other than Trusts which are Partnerships -

For every pound of the taxable income of an individually-owned partnership, the rate of tax shall be determined as follows: -

Trusts which arc Individually-owned Partnerships -

For every pound of the taxable income of a trust which is an individually-owned partnership, the rate of tax shall be determined as follows : -

Division H. -Rate of Tax Payable by a Severally-owned Partnership.

For every pound of the taxable income of a severally-owned partnership, the rate of tax shall be determined as follows: -

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended ; resolution adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Casey and Mr. Stewart do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill brought up by Mr. Casey, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This is the annual Income Tax Bill to impose the rates of income tax payable for the current financial year. As the Government has decided that the rates shall remain the same as for last financial year, the only difference between this bill and the Income Tax Act 1933 is that the sixth and seventh schedules of that measure, which prescribed rates of tax payable by companies assessed under section 21a of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1922-1933 have not been repeated. This is duo to the fact that the Income Tax Assessment Bill now before Parliament provides for the repeal of section 21a of that act. Those particular schedules will, as a consequence, have no future application.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

Bill passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

page 1098

TRANSFERRED OFFICERS’ PENSIONS BILL 1934

Message recommending appropriation reported.

In committee (Consideration of GovernorGeneral’s message) :

Motion (by Mr. Casey) agreed to.

That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purposes of a bill for an act to provide for the payment of allowances to certain transferred officers, the rates of whose pensions or retiring allowances arc affected by financial emergency measures.

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended; resolution adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Casey and Mr. Stewart do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill brought up by Mr. Casey and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I move -

That the bill bc now read a second time.

This bill has been introduced to rectify an anomaly which exists in the calculation of pensions payable to officers who wore formerly in the employ of State services. Under the provisions of section 84 of the Constitution, the rights to pension of State officers transferred to the Commonwealth Service were preserved. The amounts of such pensions or retiring allowances are based on the average annual salary received during the last three years of service. The Financial Emergency Act 1931 reduced the salaries of Commonwealth officers. Consequently, the pension of any officer with State rights who retired subsequent to July, 1931, was calculated on a reduced salary. In these cases, the officers suffered; not only a reduction of salary, but also a permanent loss of pension. The officers with State rights who have retired since July, 1931, were formerly in the service of the New South Wales and Western Australian State Governments. The Governments of those States, made provision in their financial emergency legislation for the protection of pensions and retiring allowances which otherwise would have been affected by the reductions of salaries.

In view of the fact that reductions of superannuation effected by the Financial Emergency Act 1931 have now been fully restored, it is equitable that any disability in regard to rates of pension which officers transferred to the Commonwealth Service suffer should be removed. It is provided in the bill that where the rate of pension has been reduced because of salary reductions under the Financial Emergency Act 1931, the officers shall be paid an allowance to offset the loss of pension. In ascertaining this loss, it is not intended that such pensioners should receive any relief in respect of reductions of salary occasioned by the fall in the cost of living.

Seventeen officers who have retired are now in receipt of reduced pensions, and about 90 transferred officers who have State pension rights remain in the Commonwealth Service. The restoration of these rights will cost about £220 per annum at present, and it is expected that the maximum cost will ultimately be less than £1,000 per annum.

The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Scullin), and the High Council of the Commonwealth Public Service Associations have made strong representations for this restoration, and the Governmentis pleased to be able to make it.

Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra

.- I am glad that this bill has been introduced for it will correct an obvious anomaly. On two occasions I wrote to the Prima Minister (Mr. Lyons) at the request of the officers affected by this measure, and requested that the anomalous disability under which they were suffering should be removed. As the Assistant Treasurer (Mr. Casey) has explained, these retired officers who joined the Commonwealth Public Service on the condition that their State rights would be preserved suffered certain reductions of salary under the financial emergency legislation, and as their rate of pension was determined by the amount of salary they received in the three years prior to their retirement such reductions meant that they also suffered a reduction of pension. In view of the fact that ordinary superannuation payments have been restored to other retired Commonwealth officers for nearly twelve months, the transferred officers, who have retired on pensions are suffering an injustice in comparison with other retired officers, which 1 am glad the Government is taking steps to rectify. I should like the Assistant Treasurer to explain, in the committee stage, the reason for framing clause 4 of the bill in the following words : -

This act shall have effect in relation to any payment of pension or retiring allowance made after the commencement of this act: but, where any such payment is of a periodical nature, and relates wholly or in part to a period prior to that commencement, this act shall not apply to so much of the payment as relates to that period.

Iii view of the fact that ordinary superannuation payments have been restored for nearly twelve months it’ would be reasonable to provide that the restoration to be made under this bill should date from the beginning of the period from which the next payment dates.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

The bill.

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I may inform the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Scullin) that clause 4 provides that this bill applies in respect of the first pay day after which it becomes law. In no case will payment be made in respect of the period prior to this bill being assented to.

Mr Beasley:

– As I understand it, the bill intends to restore certain payments which were affected by the Financial Emergency Act. Is it intended to make thu payments retrospective?

Mr CASEY:

– The bill is not retrospective in its effect.

Bill agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 1100

MANDARIN-GROWERS RELIEF BILL 1934

Message recommending appropriation reported.

In committee (Consideration of GovernorGeneral’s message) :

Motion (by Mr. Stewart) proposed -

That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purposes of a bill /or an act to provide for financial assistance to States in the provision of benefit and assistance of growers of mandarins.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Bell).A bill will be brought in to give effect to the Governor-General’s message. No debate can take place at this stage as to the sufficiency or otherwise of the proposed appropriation.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended; report adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Stewart and Mr. Casey do prepare and bring m the bill to carry put the foregoing resolution.

Bill brought up by Mr. Stew abt, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr STEWART:
Minister for Commerce · Parramatta · UAP

– I move -

That the bill he now road a second time.

Honorable members will recollect that, in December, 1932, the New Zealand Government imposed an embargo on the entry into that dominion of fruits, including citrus fruits and mandarins. Up to that time a very valuable market existed in New Zealand for Australian mandarins, the average imports into that dominion for the three years immediately preceding the imposition of the embargo being in the vicinity of 45,000 cases. The imposition of this embargo affected very seriously the mandarin-growers of the Commonwealth because not only did it involve a. loss of a. valuable market, but it also had the effect of excluding the entry of other fruits into New Zealand, with the result that a correspondingly increased quantity of oranges was left on the Australian market. As a result, this Parliament decided to grant assistance to the citrus industry of Australia to enable it to develop markets in other centres. Honorable members will recall that Parliament approved of the Government’s proposal for a guarantee to orange exporters who desired to establish a market for their product on the other side of the world. It guaranteed to reimburse any exporter of citrus fruits who might suffer los3 as the result of an experimental shipment of citrus fruits over long distances. Directly resulting from the guarantee, the export of oranges to Great Britain last year rose from an average during the preceding decade of 10,000 cases to something like 110,000 cases. The total liability which the Commonwealth was obliged to assume last year in respect of the guarantee was £3,500, indicating not only that were we able to demonstrate that fruit can be carried to the United Kingdom successfully, but also that marketing results were extremely satisfactory. The position in regard to mandarins is not quite the same. Another form of assistance had to be evolved to assist this industry. Consequently, some months ago. the Government decided to approach the Government of New South Wales, in which State the great bulk of mandarins is grown, and an agreement was arrived at whereby the Commonwealth Government and the Government of that State should each contribute £10,000. The total sum. of £20,000 was to be placed in the hands of a Federal Citrus Committee, a body constituted by the Commonwealth and composed of representatives of both governments interested in the development of the industry together with representatives of the growers. It was suggested that this connnitt.ee should decide as to the best method of distributing among the growers of the Commonwealth the grant of £20,000. Some delay has been inevitable, but- no blame rests upon the Commonwealth Government. Eventually the matter was referred to the committee a few weeks ago, and certain recommendations were made, the principal one being that certain mandarin trees should be destroyed, and that compensation should be paid to the growers whose orchards wore thus reduced. This recommendation of the committee was opposed by several of the State representatives. The Government of Nev.’ South. Wales subsequently indicated that it was not prepared to contribute its share of the £20.000 if the distribution of that amount among the growers meant the elimination of commercial fruit trees. The Commonwealth Government, in keeping with its policy of refusing to countenance the restriction of production, has frowned upon all proposals of that kind. As it is not practicable to submit the matter to the Federal Citrus Committee, and receive its report before Parliament expires, the Government has decided to appropriate a sum of £10,000, and distribute it among the States in proportion to their acreage of mandarins. It is for that purpose that the present bill has been introduced.

The sums which each State will receive are set out in the bill, and it is evident, from the amount which is to be paid to New South Wales, that this is essentially a problem for that Stale. The Government of New South Wales has indicated its readiness to allot £10,000 for the assistance of the mandarin growers, so that a total of £20,000 will be available for this purpose. The money will be made available to the States without any conditions being attached to the grant. The Government believes that the various State authorities are fully conversant with the peculiar conditions of the industry, and can be relied upon to distribute tho money properly.

Mr Makin:

– What was the nature of the assistance given to the growers of oranges for the export, market ?

Mr STEWART:

– last year the’ Commonwealth Government guaranteed to reimburse any exporter of oranges for losses actually incurred in marketing overseas, with a limit of 13s. for each export case of 1^-bushels. The total cost to the Government under this guarantee was £1,300.

Mr BEASLEY:
West Sydney

– This bill is somewhat belated, having regard to the condition of the, citrusgrowing industry. The Minister himself mentioned the heavy losses which the growers had sustained, and the fact that the industry was in a serious plight was known to the Government long before last December. The growers have sustained losses from which many of them will never recover. The trouble in matters of this kind is that the Government has had to be practically whipped into taking action before it would come to the assistance of these people.

Mr LANE:
BARTON, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– The honorable member has himself just heard about the citrusgrowers.

Mr BEASLEY:

– Nearly two years ago I attended a meeting of citrusgrowers which was addressed by the Minister for Commerce.

Mr Stewart:

– And addressed very successfully, too.

Mr BEASLEY:

– Just for that interjection I shall relate “what occurred at the meeting, and if the Minister thinks he was a success at that meeting, his mandaringrowing constituents will effectively disillusion him at the next election.

Mr Stewart:

– As a matter of fact there are no mandarin-growers in the Parramatta division since the electoral redistribution.

Mr BEASLEY:

– No, the Minister took good care of that.

I have been interested in the welfare of the citrus-growers for some time past, because many of them, before they went into this business, were associated as workers in various industries around Sydney, and some have actually continued to be members of the trade unions covering their callings at that time. I am also interested in the industry because of the employment it provides for those engaged in transport work, and because the industry itself furnishes an outlet for residents of the more crowded parts of the city who arc in a position to take up these small holdings. I attended the meeting because I was anxious to learn whether anything was to be done to ensure to the growers a payable price for their fruit, so that they would be able to sell it instead of allowing it to rot on the ground, or burying it at the order of the State authorities in order to prevent disease. .

The Minister said just now that he handled the meeting successfully. As a matter of fact, he gave an exhibition of dodging and side-stepping that would have done credit to a performer in a stadium. He talked and talked, and said what the Government was doing for the orange-growers, until those present began to call out “What about the mandaringrowers?” I stayed until 6 o’clock hoping to hear something definite, but. the Minister held the stage till the last without settling the mandarin question.

Mr Stewart:

– I held the stage until a motion of congratulation was passed.

Mr BEASLEY:

– He held it until all the mandarin-growers had gone home. One of the best speeches made that afternoon was that of a lady engaged in the industry. She had put all her savings into it and, though she spoke very courteously, she “ lined up “ the Minister very thoroughly. The speakers reminded the Minister that, before the last elections, he had appealed to the people to elect business men so that business methods might prevail in the government of the country. They said that it was a strange business method to allow fruit to rot on the ground rather than to take measures to find a market. The Minister concluded by saying that he would consult with the State Minister for Agriculture in an effort to see what could be done. That was more than eighteen months ago, and ever since, we may presume, these authorities have been “ seeing what can be done “. Now, on the last day of the Parliament, this bill is presented. We must consider whether the steps proposed to be taken in the bill will really solve the problem from the point of view of the growers. If £10,000 would have been enough to meet the situation eighteen months ago, at least double that amount will be needed now.

Silting suspended from 1 to 2 p.m.

Mr BEASLEY:

– The Minister for Commerce has stated that the amount of £10,000, which is to be appropriated by this bill for the assistance of mandarin-growers, is to be made available to the States. Apparently, he is unaware of the methods which they will adopt in its distribution. Questions of this sort usually give rise to a good deal of difference of opinion. The wheat bounty had attached to it the condition that only those who were in necessitous circumstances should benefit from it. Is it proposed that there shall be a similar stipulation in this case?I cannot imagine this Government making available a portion of its funds without having some knowledge of the methods to be adopted in their distribution by the States. Wo can reasonably expect to be supplied with that information now, because we shall not have another opportunity to plead the case of those who feel that the conditions are unsatisfactory. It is not our intention to oppose the measure in any way. We have always urged the claims of these growers, and have been charged on that account with having attempted to obtain political kudos. I take the view, however, that as in this district and other districts a large proportion of the population supports the stand that we take in Australian politics, it is out duty to take advantage of every opportunity that presents itself to ventilate their grievances, and endeavour to obtain assistance where it is needed. Only within the last fortnight we have been prevented by the Standing Orders from moving in the matter of granting assistance to these growers. We are not able to say whether the amount proposed is adequate, because we have not the information that would guide us to a decision on that point. The Minister should indicate the basis on which he arrived at the amount of £10,000. What investigations were made by his department, which enabled it to fix that sum? If we were informed on that point we should bo in a better position to say whether the calculations are satisfactory We are anxious to give the hill a speedy passage.

Mr BLACKLOW:
Franklin

.- As one who is. associated with fruitgrowing, I am naturally interested in this measure. I shall not oppose it in any way, but, rather commend the Minister for Commerce (Mr. Stewart) for providing assistance where it is needed. Like the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley), however, I should like to know upon what basis the Minister arrived at the decision that £10,000 is sufficient to help this industry. The assistance which the apple industry in Tasmania received from the Commonwealth was totally inadequate. In that case the Minister based his calculations on. the quantity of fruit exported, and adopted the rate of 6d. a case. In that, he followed a well-defined principle. In connexion with citrus fruits, however, a totally different principle was adopted. Because the orange-growers lost their market in New Zealand, they were guaranteed against loss ou exports to Great Britain, with the result that 110,000 cases were exported to that market at a cost to the Commonwealth of something in the vicinity of £3,500. In that case, the Commonwealth guaranteed a price upon export. The Minister has said that the amount of £10,000 fixed in the present instance was arrived at on an acreage basis. That may, or may not, be a good method to adopt. The honorable member for West Sydney said that last year something like 45,000 cases of mandarins were lost. A simple calculation will show that the compensation for that loss amounts to 4s. 6d. a case, which is a very fair price. If we wish to compensate on a fair and an equitable basis, we must adopt a uniform plan or follow a general principle. If the losses of mandaringrowers are defrayed to the extent of 4s. 6d. a case, the orange-growers and apple-growers should receive equal treat- me7i t. Last year the plum-growers could not sell their output because no overseas markets were available, and thousands of cases of plums fell to the ground ; yet no assistance was given. The berry-growers will be in a similar position this year. Last night we had supper at the expense of the Government. The raspberry jam on the table–

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honorable gentleman has been allowed a little latitude, and has not abused the privilege, but I am afraid that he i3 now proceeding to enlarge upon something that has no reference to the measure before the House. I ask him and other honorable members to adhere strictly to the provisions of the bill.

Mr BLACKLOW:

– We should adopt sonic general method that may be applied equally and fairly to all primary industries. I do not oppose the bill in any way. Were it not necessary, the Minister would not have introduced it. Citrus fruit-growing is a well-established industry in the Parramatta district; and judging by the quality of the fruit sold on the streets of Sydney last year, this is a worthy measure of assistance which I hope will be agreed to.

Mr PROWSE:
Forrest

.- I am pleased to notice that in this case the proposed assistance is to -be given to a primary industry. Certain measures that came before this House last year insisted upon qualifications which made the administration of them almost impossible. The States will be able to distribute this money in a way that will best assist the industry concerned.

Mr Beasley:

– They may impose restrictions.

Mr PROWSE:

– The growers have more direct means of access to State Governments than they have to this Government. The honorable member for Franklin (Mr. Blacklow) spoke of other industries. In my opinion, either thi3 or any kindred industry can bc assisted sanely and economically only by a lowering of the cost of production. Grants of this sort are really only a palliative, a giving back of something that has been contributed to other industries. I congratulate the Government upon having seen the light, in that it proposes to assist the industry itself instead of individuals.

Mr GARDNER:
Robertson

.- I compliment the Government, and particularly the Minister for Commerce (Mr. Stewart), on the introduction of this measure. The honorable member for “West Sydney (Mr. Reasley) has suggested that this action is belated. There is a very good reason for that. The Minister has had the interests of the growers at heart. It is some time since a colleague and I suggested to him that something should be done for this particular section of the citrus industry. He, however, held the view that whatever assistance was provided by the Commonwealth should be supplemented by the States. Owing, unfortunately, to a matter over which neither the Minister nor the Government has control, action by the State authorities has been retarded; but I hope that this amount will soon be supplemented by a similar sum, so that the assistance initiated by the Minister for Commerce will amount to £20,000 instead of £10,000.

I arn glad that the growers have such a stalwart supporter in the honorable member for West Sydney. I attended the meeting at Galston, to which the honorable member referred, and at which there was complete vindication of the action of the Minister. The atmosphere at the gathering was admittedly warm, although I do not attribute that fact entirely to the honorable member or to the propaganda by the Labor Daily. When the Minister explained what had been done in the interests of the citrus industry generally, a wellmerited vote of confidence in him was passed. This is not the first action taken, by the Government for the special benefit of this section of citrus-growers. When the Ministry introduced the principle of a guaranteed price for citrus fruits for export, in order to relieve the Australian market, it also helped the mandarin- growers. I hope that the industry will soon enjoy an unrestricted citrus market in New Zealand. This bill affords another illustration of the fact that the Government is anxious to do all it can to assist the primary producers. Although under the electoral redistribution proposals, these growers may cease to have the Minister as their representative in this Parliament, I hope to have the honour to represent them, and 1 shall do my best for the industry.

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

.- Tho total sum to be distributed by way of assistance to mandarin-growers is comparatively small, and it seems that New South Wales is to have the lion’s share of it. The amounts to be made available to South Australia and Western Australia are so insignificant that they might, as well have been added to tho sum. allocated to New South Wales. I understand that it is proposed to guarantee 13s. a case to the growers of naval oranges for export. Considering the fact that the be3t naval oranges are being retailed at about ls. 6d. a dozen - and the growers, of course, receive considerably less than that. - there must be either a limited market for those oranges in Great Britain, or the amount of assistance proposed to be given is not sufficient to induce an expansion of the trade. It is claimed that the finest oranges in Australia are grown at Gingin in my electorate. I commend the Minister for Commerce (Mr. Stewart) for making a start to assist an industry which* was threatened with extinction owing to the embargo placed by New Zealand on our oranges. I have pleasure in supporting the bill, but, I shall have difficulty in persuading the growers in Western Australia that the industry is likely to receive much help from the sum of £208 which is to be paid to that State.

Mr STEWART:
Minister for Commerce · Parramatta · UAP

– The principles of the bill have been the subject of such favorable comment that there is not much to which I need reply. The honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley) suggested that I had taken good care to provide for the removal of the mandarin -growers of the Cumberland district from the electoral division of Parramatta. My interjection was made more in sorrow than otherwise. In the particular area in which the

The honorable member for West Sydney has criticized the measure because no conditions have been imposed by the Government as to the manner in which the grant is to be distributed. We believe that the State authorities are quite competent, to determine the best method of distribution. Had we imposed conditions, further delay might have arisen. Months of delay occurred in the distribution of the grant to apple-growers, because of difficulties complained of by the State administrations in interpreting conditions imposed by this Parliament.

I have been asked to explain the method by which the allocation among the States is to be made. It is impossible, of course, to apply to this industry those conditions which were applied in the case of the export guarantee on oranges, ‘or in respect of the assistance given to apple-growers. The honorable member for Franklin (Mr. Blacklow) has pointed out that the latter assistance was calculated on the basis of 6d. a case on the export volume of apples, whereas the guarantee on oranges was essentially a payment on export. Since we do not export mandarins, neither of those methods was available, and the Government was forced to choose the only practical scheme by adopting the acreage basis. The reason why South Australia and Western Australia are to receive only £126 and £208 respectively is that the former State has only 100 acres of mandarins, while Western Australia has only 16? acres. It will he noticed that Tasmania is excluded from the distribution. The honorable member for West Sydney said that the £10,000 which is to be paid should be doubled. As a matter of fact, it will be doubled because of the further subsidy of £10,000 to the New South Wales Government. As a direct result of the interest that the Commonwealth Ministry has shown in the citrus growers, the Government hopes to do something far more effective than the making of a grant

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2 (Payments to the States).

Mr BEASLEY:
West Sydney

– The Minister for Commerce (Mr. Stewart), in his reply to the speeches made on the second-reading debate on this measure, referred to a suggestion that I submitted that the amount to be provided in this hill should be doubled, and said that it would be doubled because the New South Wales Government was also providing £.10,000 for this purpose. I, however, was discussing the assistance that should be given by this Government, and not the assistance which should be provided by some other authority. It is now more than eighteen months since the mandarin-growers took the first step to obtain relief from their burdens. If the conditions at that time justified their request there is surely ample justification for my present, suggestion that the amount to be provided for their assistance by this Government should be doubled. For that matter, the amount to be provided by any other authority which has delayed action for eighteen months should also be doubled. I make this explanation in order that any misunderstanding about the true import of my remarks may be removed.

Mr BLACKLOW:
Franklin

.- I understand that the New Zealand market for mandarins is not closed to South Australia. Perhaps the Minister will clarify the position in regard to that State.

Mr STEWART:
Minister for Commerce · Parramatta · UAP

– The New Zealand market is not open, in a general way, to South Australia. Only limited quantities of citrus fruit have been allotted to that State by the sister dominion. As a matter of fact die allocation up to date is limited to 11,000 cases of oranges, but I hope that this will be increased. In view of the very small amount of the £10,000 that is being provided for South Australia, I do not think that we need fear that South Australia will bc treated in an unduly generous manner even if the potential New Zealand market is opened freely to it.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 3 (Application of moneys paid to States).

Mr BEASLEY:
West Sydney

– The references I made in my secondreading speech to the application of conditions to this grant were inspired by the opinion that the Minister for Commerce (Mr. Stewart) had very little, if any, knowledge of how the State Governments intended to allocate the money being provided by this bill. We approve of the money being granted unconditionally, but at the same time we arc not at all sure that there will be no delay in the distribution of it. Ithas been said that the State Governments arc more conversant with local requirements than this Government can possibly bc. That may be true, but we are none the less entitled to bc informed of any conditions that the State Governments may contemplate imposing upon the distribution of the money. If we knew those conditions we might be able to take steps to insert provisions in this hill to counteract any proposals that were not agreeable to us. The honorable member for Robertson (Mr. Gardner) said. in effect, that the belated provision of this assistance by this Government was due to the failure of the State Governments to deal with the subject. He also said that the State Governments must accept responsibility for any delay that has occurred. That statement is of interest, and value, particularly as we still have no guarantee that further delay may not be occasioned by the inactivity of the State authorities. It was to reduce the possibility of such delay that I sought information regarding the conditions likely to be imposed by the

State Governments. It may not be very agreeable to the Minister if I say that he is probably quite unaware “ of their intentions; but, in view of his failure to give us any information on the point, I may be pardoned for making such a suggestion. We may find after this Parliament prorogues that the State Governments will still remain inactive in this matter. If that is so, the mandaringrowers will undoubtedly have further cause for complaint.

Mr STEWART:
Minister for Commerce · Parramatta · UAP

– I declare definitely that’ the reason why the Government has refrained from imposing conditions upon the States in regard to the distribution of this money is to ensure that the grant will he distributed as rapidly as possible. The references of the honorable member for Forrest (Mr. Prowse) to “ this subject were relevant. Not until the last few days has one State Government applied for its share of the bounty provided for the apple-growers by the Commonwealth in the act passed last year. If restrictions were imposed by us on the payment of this money, the States might use that as an excuse for delay. The desire of the Commonwealth Government is that this money shall be made available to the mandarin-growers as soon as possible. I have reason to believe that the mandarin-growers of New South Wales, for instance, are in close contact with the State Government.

Mr Beasley:

– But according to the honorable member for Robertson (Mr. Gardner) they have been unable to get that Government to assist them.

Mr STEWART:

– Even after the passage of this bill, I shall remain interested in the steps taken by the State governments with the object of making this money available expeditiously to the people for whom it is intended.

Clause agreed to.

Preamble and title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 1107

EVIDENCE BILL 1934

Secondreading.

Mr LATHAM:
AttorneyGeneral · Kooyong · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this bill is to amend the Evidence Act 1905 in a certain particular. Recently proceedings were taken in Adelaide by the Operative Stonemasons Society to obtain the enforcement of an Arbitration Court award against a certain employer, who was alleged to be committing a flagrant breach of the award by underpaying his employees. The award was made in what may be regarded as the common form of Arbitration Court awards, and provided that rates of pay should be varied according to statistics published from time to time by the Commonwealth Statistician. At the time the award was made, such statistics were not in existence, and it was, therefore, impossible to incorporate them in the award by reference to any existing documents. Most honorable members know that the ordinary practice of the Arbitration Court is to provide that wages shall be varied fromtime to time according to variations in the statistics. In this particular case, the prosecution tendered the published Quarterly Summary of Australian Statistics as evidence, but it was held by the magistrate, after lengthy argument, that the document was not evidence, and could only be made evidence by bringing the officer who prepared the information, or the Commonwealth Statistician himself, from Canberra to Adelaide to prove it. The general adoption of that principle would make it almost impossible to enforce awards at any time after the statistics referred to in an award had been varied. Clause 2 of the bill provides that evidence of any statistics or abstracts thereof compiled and tabulated pursuant to section 20 of the Census and Statistics Act 1905-1930, may be given in all courts by the production of a document containing those statistics and purporting to have been published by the Statistician. The bill merely means that when any one wishes to proveany statistics submitted to a court, as, for example, figures showing the cost of living index number, he may do so by putting in one of these official statistical publications as evidence. The bill makes no other alteration. It does not change the method of assembling or dealing with figures used in the compilation of statistics, and it does not provide that the production of the book shall be final or conclusive evidence. It simply makes it possible to put in one of the Statistician’s publications as evidence of its contents. In dealing with matters which affect the industrial laws of this country we should be guided by the necessity for the protection of, not only employees, but also the fair employer, against the mean and ungenerous employer.

Mr HOLLOWAY:
Melbourne Ports

– I agree with the AttorneyGeneral (Mr. Latham) that this bill is essential, but at the same time I wish to point out that its introduction illustrates in some way the difficulties which present themselves in our Arbitration Court.

Mr Latham:

– The case which I mentioned was a prosecution in a police court.

Mr HOLLOWAY:

– The same thing would apply in the Federal Arbitration Court.

Mr Latham:

– No. The Federal Arbitration Court judges inform their minds from any source they desire.

Mr HOLLOWAY:

– For 20 years or more it has been customary to accept in the Arbitration Court the figures contained in the publications issued by the Commonwealth Statistician. Nobody has challenged them. When the Seat of Government was located at Melbourne, it was often more convenient to summon the Commonwealth Statistician before the court to give direct evidence, but it was never argued that the figures issued by him were not, evidence of fact. I have frequently discussed with the AttorneyGeneral, the appalling length of time it takes to have cases dealt with by the courts. Sometimes claims arc held up from twelve months to two years, with the result that the real issue before the court is lost sight, of. These delays are a frequent source of industrial disputes.

I take this opportunity to say that, in introducing legislation of this kind, the Government should have endeavoured to make a provision which would allay some of the dissatisfaction that exists in the community as to the correctness of the Statistician’s figures. For the last ten years complaints have been made that these figures do not represent the true position.

Mr Latham:

– This bill does not deal with that subject.

Mr HOLLOWAY:

– That may be so, but provision should have been made in the bill to ensure that correct figures are compiled. Those at present in use are so obsolete that nobody cares whether they are accepted or disregarded as a basis for tho adjustment of wages. For years we have blamed the Statistician, but he is not able to help us in the matter. Some better means of tabulating the figures should be evolved. I had hoped that the Attorney-General, who has been closely associated with arbitration courts, would have helped us in this matter. As an employee of the department when the first cost of living figures were compiled.. 1 know that the method of compilation then employed - and it has been continued - is useless to meet the needs of the present day. I agree to this measure begrudgingly because by passing it we are binding ourselves to a basis which is absolutely wrong. As I have said before, the Commonwealth Statistician was unable to help us.

Mr Latham:

– The honorable member is debating a subject very wide of that which is contained iu this bill.

Mr HOLLOWAY:

– What we have come to call the fodder-and-fuel method of adjusting the wages of the workers is completely out of date. The cost of living index figures in no way represent what we regard as the standard of living to-day when we have acquired different tastes and a different standard. The Government should give instructions to the Arbitration Court that the basis upon which wages are adjusted should be readjusted to suit present-day requirements.

Mr BEASLEY:
West Sydney

– The purpose of this bill is to amend the Evidence Act in order to compel a court to accept without question, as evidence, certain documents presented in the form of statistics. I desire to supplement the remarks which have been made by the honorable member for Melbourne Ports (Mr. Holloway) and to say that the provision should not limit the admissibility of such documents to publications issued by the Commonwealth Statistician.

Mr Latham:

– No evidence is excluded by the courts. The only point to be determined is: What are statistics? The figures compiled by the Statistician are the only official statistics. Whether they are true or false is quite a different matter.

Mr BEASLEY:

– A bureau of statistics may be set up by the Australasian Council of Trade Unions, and its figures published. I suggest that the scope of the bill should be widened to include the submission of these statistics as evidence. Under the law as it at present stands, if it were desirel to utilize the figures compiled by trade unions, it would be necessary for the general secretary of the Australasian Council of Trade Unions to appear before the court to state them. I know that at present a great deal of conflict exists between the .statistics of the Commonwealth Statistician and those of the trade union organization, but I say that if one set of figures should be accepted by the court equal opportunity should be given for the acceptance of the other.. There is no doubt that this sharp conflict of opinion which exists on the subject of the compilation of the cost of living figures will be accentuated in the future in view of the changing conditions upon which awards are determined. If my suggestion that the bill should be widened to include the statistics published by the Australasian Council of Trade Unions is not accepted, the workers will be left entirely at the mercy of the Statistician, and the court will only be able to base its decisions on such evidence as may be acceptable to it. My colleagues in another place endeavoured to bring this aspect before the Minister in charge of the bill, and it was expected that some amendment in this respect would he made to the measure after it had left the Senate. The bill has not made provision for that, as,we thought it would, and in the committee stage I hope, by an amendment, to test the feeling of honorable members on the point.

Mr LATHAM:
AttorneyGeneral · Kooyong · UAP

– I do not propose to deal with the very vexed question of the method of ascertaining industrial and other statistics. There is much difference of opinion about it, and one cannot help thinking that very often parties to industrial disputes regard the method of collecting and presenting statistics as satisfactory when their interests are favored, and unsatisfactory when their interests suffer. This applies to both sides in industrial disputes.

The honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley) is under a misapprehension regarding -proceedings in the arbitration court and in other courts. The arbitration court is able to inform its mind in any manner it thinks just. Even a newspaper article may be presented as evidence, and surely nothing could go further than that. Figures eoi’lected by the Australasian Council of Trades Unions, or by any other body, may bc used by the court if it is thought desirable. Having heard such evidence, the court then makes its award, and the practice in making awards has been to lay it down that wages shall vary .in accordance with the cost of living as revealed by official statistics. Courts other than tho arbitration court, when hearing cases alleging breaches of awards arc, therefore, bound to consider only the official statistics, because they alone are mentioned in the awards.

Mr Beasley:

– I see the AttorneyGeneral’s point, and do not propose to insist upon my suggested amendment.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and reported from committee without amendment or debate; report adopted.

Bill - by leave - read a third time.

page 1109

BILLS RETURNED FROM THE SENATE

The following bills were returned from the Senate without amendment or requests : -

Raw Cotton Bounty Bill 1934. Customs Tariff Validation Bill 1934. Customs Tariff (Exchange Adjustment)

Validation Bill 1934. Excise Tariff Validation Bill 1934. Customs Tariff (Special Duties) Validation

Bill 1934.

page 1109

DESIGNS BILL 1934

Second Reading

Mr LATHAM:
AttorneyGeneral · Kooyong · UAP

.- I move-

That the bill be now read a second time.

It is proposed in this bill to make two amendments to the existing Designs Act, the principal section of which act provides that any new and original design may, subject to certain conditions, b» registered in respect of articles included in the prescribed classes. The design to be registered must be both new and original. In Great Britain, the law provides that the design he “new or original”, and some doubt has arisen as to whether our law as to designs is, therefore, the same as that in Great Britain. It is important that a design should bo registered, as far as possible, on the same bases in various countries in which it is likely to be used.

It has been suggested by some that anything that is new must be original Designs apply to patterns, &c. If I make a blot df ink by dashing a pen towards a piece of paper, that is something new, but is there about it anything original in the way of intellectual invention? There is not. Therefore, it is new, but not original. In the case of Dover v. Number ger etc., Mr. Justice Buckley said -

The word “ original” contemplates that the person has originated something, that by the exercise of intellectual activity he has started an idea which has not occurred to any one before, that a particular pattern or shape or ornament may bc rendered applicable to the particular article to which he suggests that it shall be applied. If that state of things be satisfied, then the design will be original, although the actual picture or shape or whatever it is which is being considered is old in the sense that it has existed with reference to another article before.

You can have a design of a motor car placed on neckties, and it might be possible to register that. The application itself is original, although the picture of a car itself is not. It is believed that the Commonwealth act should he brought, into line with the British act, and to that end the provision requiring that designs shall be “new and original” is to he widened to cover designs which are “new or original “.

The second part of the bill deals with the subject of marking goods with registered designs. Section 9 of the act requires the owner of a registered design to cause each article to which the design is applied to be marked before delivery for sale with the prescribed mark to denote that the design is registered. It has been found very difficult, and in some cases impossible, to comply with that provision. A roll of cloth may be stamped with a certain design, but that roll is retailed in lengths of a few yards each, and it would be obviously impossible to have each of those lengths stamped with a registered design. Nevertheless, the sale of a length without the stamp is, technically, illegal. It is proposed therefore that, at the discretion of the Governor-General, regulations may be issued dispensing with or modifying the requirements of the act in respect of any class or description of goods to which it is thought they should not apply. This will bring the law into accord with that of Great Britain.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

Bill - by leave - read a third time.

page 1110

STATUTE LAW REVISION BILL 1934

Second Reading

Debate resumed from page 1076 on motion by Mr. Latham -

That thebill he now read a second time.

Mr BAKER:
Oxley

.- This bill deals with several hundreds of the acts of this Parliament, yet we are expected to pass it in the last few hours without giving even the most meagre consideration to that legislation. There is no justification for haste. This, I understand, is the first statute revision law that has been introduced into any Australian parliament. The Attorney-General (Mr. Latham) has explained that it is the custom for similar legislation to be introduced at regular intervals in the Parliament of Great Britain. Its nonintroduction in the Commonwealth Parliament during the 34 years of its existence proves that there is no need for urgency. In another place, Senator McLachlan, on behalf of the Government, said that for very many years he had hoped to see such a measure introduced into this Parliament. That statement of itself proves that there is no reason for its passage being hurried. I understand that the Crown Law officers were engaged on the work for twelve months, and that the Government expended approximately £2,000 on the preparation of the measure.

Mr Latham:

– The work upon it occupied a much longer period than that mentioned by the honorable member; it commenced during the administration of the last Government.

Mr BAKER:

– It is not my intention to belittle the excellent work that is done by the Crown Law officers, who are the equal of legal men outside the service, and perform their duties efficiently and well. I contend, however, that it is not their function to decide what amendments shall be made to acts that are passed by this Parliament. To legislate is the function and the responsibility of those who are elected.

The Attorney-General has given the assurance that this measure does not propose any alteration of substantive law. He is very much more definite than his colleague in another place, who first said that he thought there was no difference, and later expressed the belief that no alteration had been made. A member of his own party in that chamber pointed out that he was most indefinite, and did not seem at all certain on the point.

I believe that there is no reason for the introduction of the bill at this particular time. An election is to be held within a few weeks, and it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that a different Government will be returned to the treasury bench. A considerable number of measures must be passed by this Parliament before it rises, and should there be a change of government many acts will be repealed, and a considerable quantity of new legislation will be placed on the statute-book. For these reasons, it would be far better to leave over the enactment of this measure until the new parliament is given an opportunity to bring it up to date. . When the bill was before another place a few days ago, the Minister in charge of it introduced nineteen amendments.

Mr Latham:

– I ask whether it is not out of order to refer to debates of the current session in another place?

Mr SPEAKER (Hon Or H Mackay:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND

– The honorable member for Oxley (Mr. Baker) is aware that he may not refer to debates of the current session in another place. I was waiting to see how far he intended to go. A passing reference is permissible.

Mr BAKER:

– In the short period that has elapsed since the measure was first brought before the other chamber, it was found necessary to make nineteen amendments to it, fifteen of which were concerned with legislation that had passed through this House within a few days. That shows how very rapidly changes occur. The other legislation, which is to be passed before this Parliament concludes its deliberations, will lead to a considerable amount of alteration. If the statutes ave to be revised, they should bo brought up to date; we should not merely remove the dead wood, but should also go carefully through every act aud repeal sections which probably no party would support to-day. Much of the legislation that was passed years ago would be unanimously repealed by this Parliament. Those acts which are more or less out of date and out of touch with present ideas ought to be repealed-

The third schedule of the bill repeals a largo number of acts, and the fourth schedule contains acts that are to be amended. One enactment is the Aliens Registration Act 1920. According to a statement that I have had supplied to me. this act provides for the registration of aliens entering Australia. In 1926, by the Aliens Registration Act, its operation was suspended until a date to be fixed by proclamation. That proclamation has not yet been issued.

Mr Latham:

– If the honorable gentleman roads the Aliens Registration Act he will see that it is quite impossible to conceive of any government reintroducing that legislation simply by means of a proclamation.

Mr BAKER:

– The right honorable gentleman, has stressed the point that I am making, that wo are dealing with’ legislation so rapidly that it is impossible for honorable members to go through the large number of acts referred to. He was certainly courteous enough to furnish me with notes concerning a number of the acts, so that I might have an outline of them.

Mr Latham:

– All of them.

Mr BAKER:

– Still, that does not affect the point that every member of this Parliament is responsible for this legislation. We are dealing with hundreds of acts, the majority of which, it may be agreed, are perfectly innocuous ; but we cannot decide that point until we have had time to go carefully through them. Admittedly, we have the assurance that the Attorney-General believes that there is no alteration of substantive law. All of us have a very high regard for his legal opinion; but we do no* attend this Parliament merely to accept assurances as to what is contained in legislation that we have not read. If, within the next few weeks, we are asked by our constituents to supply information with respect to certain legislation, it will not be sufficient for us to say that we had the assurance that that legislation was quite all right, and that we let it pass without looking at one word of it.

Mr Latham:

– The honorable member lias had three weeks in which to study this bill.

Mr BAKER:

– That has been our busiest period. Parliament was in recess for seven months, yet, within three or four weeks of its re-assembling, we are asked to rush through this legislation in its dying hours. That is not fair to the House, and we are entitled to use all its forms to ensure that the next Parliament will be given a fair opportunity to consider the matter.

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:
Darling Downs

– The honorable member for Oxley (Mr. Baker) has undue fears in regard to this matter. Much more far-reaching action has been taken in other legislatures. I remind him that immediately after its establishment the Commonwealth Parliament, by the Amendments Incorporation Act, made special provision for the incorporation of amendments in subsequent- reprints of the principal act, thus practically ensuring continuous consolidation. From time to time the statutes have beer issued in consolidated form. The work of consolidating the . statutes of Victoria was entrusted to Sir Leo Cussen, who at the time was Chief Justice of that State. The Parliament of Victoria accepted “his consolidation. Speaking from memory, I do not think there was any suggestion that it should revise the work, to see if he had done anything that was wrong or had incorporated anything that was out of touch with modern ideas. The Commonwealth has Crown Law officers whom we all trust. Having been associated with them, I can say that no more capable, conscientious or zealous officers are to he found anywhere in the Empire. The honorable member for Oxley suggested that, if we are to revise our statutes, we should see that they are made more in accord with modern ideas. I should like him to tell me how long it would take this House to examine every act that has been passed, to ascertain whether they give expression to ideas that may be in conflict with those that are now held, and to remove those which have ceased to have effective operation? If we were to delay the passage of this legislation on the ground that it may be altered by other acts that are to be brought forward, it would never be enacted. I understand that it is advisable to have the statutes in two or three volumes instead of in some twenty odd volumes.

Mr Beasley:

– They can now be obtained in two volumes.

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:

– The object is to have a reprint of the statutes, and not to include those acts which have fulfilled their particular mission. That would prove advantageous and would lessen the trouble to any private individual who wished to ascertain the existing law.

Mr Beasley:

– Supposing that that has already been done?

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:

– It will not be affected by this legislation. Because a man has published a work containing all the Commonwealth statutes, is that any reason why the Commonwealth should print a lot of dead matter if it desires to publish complete volumes of the statutes?

We may accept the assurance of the Attorney-General (Mr. Latham) and the officers of the department that the bill deals only with the matters that he has indicated. It will prove of great convenience to the Parliament, to the department, and to the legal profession, and should lead to economy in printing in the future.

Mr PROWSE:
Forrest

.- I compliment the Attorney-General (Mr. Latham) on the introduction of this measure. It must be manifest to honorable members generally that great trouble and inconvenience are caused, particularly to laymen, through having dead acts on the statute-book. I shall he glad to see this bill passed before the Attorney-General retires from politics. I prefer to have the measure piloted through the House by him than by any honorable member who is less qualified to do so.

Mr BEASLEY:
West Sydney

– Whatever may be said as to the necessity for this hill, the Government has approached the subject from an entirely wrong angle. The details of the measure have been prepared over a period of years. Both Labour and anti-Labour governments have been responsible for the various acts appearing on the statutehook, and, no matter what alterations may be necessary, the Attorney-General (Mr. Latham) is not warranted in suggesting that either he or his department can be regarded as competent to decide what deletions are necessary. Had the Government suggested to the House that certain honorable members who were competent to analyse the statutes, should constitute a committee to examine the acts and submit suggestions, a fairer course would have been followed. If the bill provides for the removal of useless legislation, this committee could be made aware of all the details. The honorable member for Darling Downs (Sir Littleton Groom) said that he had the utmost confidence in the gentlemen associated with the Crown Law Department; but my experience in this House, both as a Minister and as a private member, has shown me that before a bill has been read a second time half a dozen proposed amendments are sometimes hurriedly submitted by departmental officers.

Mr Latham:

– That happens in connexion with a very different kind of legislation.

Mr BEASLEY:

– I am not prepared to say that the Crown Law Department is infallible.

Mr Latham:

– Nor do I say that.

Mr Gabb:

– These alterations may be due to fault on the part of the Ministry.

Mr BEASLEY:

– Not always. I cast’ no reflection on those who draft the bills ; but, when they have prepared them, they sometimes discover that amendments of a more or less serious character are necessary. What has happened in the past in regard to other bills may be our experience in regard to the present measure. From the point of view of the Opposition, it seems highly desirable that we should retain on the statute-hook those provisions which the present Government, from a party political point of view, suggests should be exercised. The nature of the acts is determined chiefly by the political party in power’ when they are passed into law. The law officers themselves have political opinions - what man has not - and will no doubt be guided by their own inclinations in this matter. Therefore, we should not necessarily accept their proposals. The Attorney-General has brushed aside the opinions which members of this House may hold on this subject by adopting the method of introducing this bill in the dying hours of the Parliament. From his own point of view, the bill may be desirable, but he has strong political opinions, and always has had them. On matters concerning the law, I feel that his opinion will be guided by his politics, and I am, therefore, not prepared to support his contention in this matter. Suggestions which ho gives in regard to political matters are not acceptable to me ; nor, in fact, are they acceptable to any honorable member on this side.

Mr MAXWELL:

– Does the honorable member suggest that a committee such as that of which he speaks could have done the work in less time than was taken by the officers? This work has extended over more than two years.

Mr BEASLEY:

– Officers of the department have carried out the preliminary investigation, and have suggested which portions of the statutes should be excised.

Mr Maxwell:

– In order to criticize their work it would be necessary for a committee to go over precisely the same ground.

Mr BEASLEY:

– That is very desirable, for the reasons which I have stated. All the decisions which have been arrived at by Parliament over a long period of years reflect the political outlook of the various governments of the day.

Sir Littleton Groom:

– All the supply acts that we have passed have done their work and are no longer required.

Mr BEASLEY:

– That argument does not apply to all the provisions of this bill. Nobody can be regarded as infallible. If a person obtains a legal interpretation from one firm of solicitors, he can be told an entirely different story if he consults another firm further down the street. The House is at least entitled to an opportunity to appoint a committee such as that indicated by me. If it were agreed by such a body that certain statutes should be scrapped, much more confidence would be established in the minds of honorable members on this side of the chamber. We should have been given greater opportunity to study this measure. The bill has been submitted at the last moment in a most unfair manner; therefore, I oppose the second reading.

Mr. SCULLIN (Yarra) “3.43].- The Attorney-General (Mr. Latham), by way of interjection when the honorable member for Oxley (Mr. Baker) protested against the introduction of this bill in the dying hours of the Parliament, said that the measure had been before us for three weeks, but that is not the position.

Mr Latham:

– It has been before the Parliament for four weeks.

Mr SCULLIN:

– But not this clause. There were nineteen amendments to the bill in the Senate. Has the honorable member for Darling Downs (Sir Littleton Groom) had time to go thoroughly through the various schedules?

Sir Littleton Groom:

– Certainly not.

Mr SCULLIN:

– I am not prepared to agree to this bill without an opportunity to examine its provisions, and members of the Opposition generally share my view. Copies of the schedules might well have been sent to us during the six and a half months’ recess, to enable us carefully to investigate the proposals at our leisure. A consolidation of the statutes of Victoria has taken place in that State, and that was a work worth while’. Two thousand pounds have been spent on the present revision, which, at the best, will result in an economy in the matter of printing, hut will not touch the problem of the consolidation of the statute law of the Commonwealth. In any case I protest against Parliament being treated as a mere automaton. Honorable members should notbe compelled to pass without question every measure that the Government cares to submit to it, even though an undertaking be given that the drafting work has been carefully done. We have skilled men in our Attorney-General’s Department - as skilled as are to be found in any similar department in any other part of the world - and their drafting work is generally good, but we have found mistakes in it at times. Men would be infallible whodid not make mistakes in drafting. If honorable members desire to exercise their own responsibility and personally examine measures of this kind, they should be permitted to do so. This bill was not, introduced into another place until three or four weeks ago, and since then all honorable members who have attended to their duties faithfully have had a hectic time. My eyes are nearly burnt out in the endeavour to read all the bills and reports that have been submitted in the short period of rushed legislation that has succeeded nearly seven months of recess.

During my membership of this Parliament I have given close attention to taxation measures. I have never accepted the drafting of the officers of the AttorneyGeneral’s Department without carefully examining it, even though I have approved of the object they were seeking to achieve. We know very well that in the course of the years certain people have beenable to drive a coach and four through our taxation legislation. I believe that the recently introduced amendments of the taxation legislation are good, and I have supported them, but I shall watch very closely the effect of them. In this bill we arc being asked to agree to the repeal and amendment of various provisions in our taxation laws without having had any opportunity to examine them. We all know very well that sometimes the alteration of one word in a taxation measure involves a loss of thousands of pounds in revenue. In these circumstances, I want a little more advice, assistance and discussion in the examination of this bill before I can agree to it.

I direct the attention of honorable members to clause 3 which provides for the “ repeal of income tax acts “. It reads -

The acts set forth in the Fifth Schedule to this act are repealed: Provided that where the income tax imposed on income by any act specified in that schedule has not been paid, the rate of tax imposed by that act shall continue to apply to that income as if this section had not been enacted.

The effect of that provision is surely that in this bill we are imposing taxation.

Mr Latham:

– The right honorable gentleman is in error in that regard. The effect of this clause is not to remove the imposition of taxation. The taxation remains in force, as the proviso clearly shows.

Mr SCULLIN:

– Apparently, certain income tax acts are to be repealed, but it is being provided that the taxes shall remain in force. If this clause were agreed to without the proviso, certain persons liable to taxation might escape it. In effect, therefore, to use plain language in preference to legal and technical terms, this clause imposes taxation.

Mr Latham:

– It simply continues taxation. The words “ shall continue to apply “ were used deliberately.

Mr SCULLIN:

– I believe that if an attempt were made to collect taxes under this provision it would fail, for the courts of the country would find that this is not a proper method of imposing taxation. I do not speak as a lawyer, but as one who has carefully read almost every judgment that has been given by our courts in connexion with income taxation. We have a provision in our

Constitution that two forms of taxation may not be imposed in one measure. I do not know whether that provision would be infringed if we sought to impose several kinds of taxation under a provision of this description. Honorable members would need to consult hundreds of statutes to ascertain the real effect of the provisions of this bill. The honorable member for Darling Downs, a legal practitioner of long experience, has said that we may safely accept this bill; but I am not prepared to take that course.

Let me direct the attention of honorable gentlemen to the Fourth Schedule of the bill which provides, among other things, for the repeal of numerous sections of our Commonwealth Public Service Acts, and also for the elimination of such words as “ proclaimed organization “ which appear in our conciliation legislation. What is the effect of that provision ?

Mr Latham:

– I explained that particular point in my second-reading speech.

Mr SCULLIN:

– I did not have the opportunity to hear the right honorable gentleman’s speech. If he made the explanation I shall ask him to make it again. I have a good knowledge of what the words “ proclaimed organization “ mean. It is provided in the Fourth Schedule of the bill that sections 28, 32, 37 a, 96 of the Public Service Act, and sections 130 and 151a of the Customs Act shall be repealed. I should like to know how those sections affect the Public Service and our protectionist policy respectively.

Mr Latham:

– I am prepared to give that information when the bill is at the committee stage.

Mr SCULLIN:

– That is all very well, but I claim the right to examine these points for myself. I cannot understand why the Attorney-General should insist upon proceeding with this measure at this late hour in the session.

Mr LATHAM:
UAP

– This bill represents some of the most useful work that has ever been done in our law department, and I do not wish to see the value of it lost.

Mr SCULLIN:

– It will not be lost simply because we are provided with an opportunity to consider the effect of it. I protest against honorable members of this Parliament being regarded as mere figureheads. They are the representatives of the people and should be given a proper opportunity to do their work effectively. I also protest against the: attitude that the Government has adopted’ in connexion with this measure. In effectthe Attorney-General has said to us:p “ Good work has been done and you must1 accept it, even though it means rushing the bill through without proper consideration “. I am glad to know thatgood work has been done, but I do not think that responsible members of the various parties in this Parliament should’ be required to shed their responsibility in a matter of this kind. I am one of those responsible men, and I certainly do not intend to submit quietly to treatment like this. This bill seeks to amend more than 50 acts of Parliament. It deals, among other things, with rates of wages payable under bounty legislation. I should like to know the full effect of those provisions.

Mr Latham:

– And I am prepared to explain it at the appropriate opportunity.

Mr SCULLIN:

– How can the right honorable gentleman expect honorable members to appreciate the ramifications of explanations made under these conditions’? We want time to look at the subject for ourselves. I do not think that the second-reading speech of the Minister, in introducing this bill, was made until 3 o’clock this morning. I was not in the chamber at that hour. For once I showed a little commonsense in this respect. I went home at 2 a.m. and obtained a little sleep. The Government cannot expect honorable members to exhaust body and mind in listening to a speech by the Attorney-General on a subject like this at 3 a.m. In any case the right honorable gentleman would have made a better speech at 3 o’clock in the afternoon. I earnestly protest against the attempt that is being made to stampede Parliament. There can he no urgency about this bill. The honorable member for Oxley (Mr. Baker) has said that this is the first revision measure that we have had. I thought that one had been submitted to Parliament about 1911, when I was a member of it.

Mr Latham:

– That was not a revision measure of this kind.

Mr SCULLIN:

– If this is the first measure of this kind that we have had for 34 years we should surelybe given reasonable time to consider the various aspects of it. Any useful revision work must be comprehensive. Our statutebook is cluttered up with all sorts of provisions that would be a disgrace to a South American republic, and should be repealed. There is, for instance, in our criminal law a provision that defines an industrial dispute as a crime. That is a standing affront to the great Labour organizations of this country and is an illustration of the pernicious kind of provision that should be removed from the statute-book. In view of the fact that Parliament has been in recess for nearly seven months the Government cannot reasonably expect us to accept treatment of this kind. If a revision of the statutes is to be made, let us be given a proper opportunity to see that it is comprehensive and effective. I shall not support this measure in the circumstances in which it has been introduced.

Mr LATHAM:
AttorneyGeneral · Kooyong · UAP

– I have been rather surprised at the animosity that has been engendered against this bill, for it is absolutely non-political in character. No honorable member has suggested otherwise. The honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley) is apparently of the opinion that no politician who belongs to any party other than his own is to be trusted. I have some evidence to show that some of the statements made in connexion with this bill are not justified. The measure was introduced in another place on the 4th July. Since then, although honorable members have been working hard, there was at least one week in which there were no sitting days, and as they had possession of the bill at that time they could have given it some attention.

Mr Beasley:

– They had other bills to consider.

Mr LATHAM:

– That may be true, but I point out that not only honorable members, but also all sections of the community who are interested in the subject, have had the opportunity to examine this bill, for it is a public document and has been filed in libraries and submitted to political organizations, law institutes and other bodies concerned with political and legal matters. During the four weeks in which the measure has been public property no representations of any kind have reached the Government in connexion with it.

Mr Scullin:

– Certain representations have been made to the Government to-day regarding it.

Mr LATHAM:

– It has been said to-day that there may be some provision in the bill that is of a political character; but, as I have pointed out, not a single objection has been made to any of its provisions during the last four weeks.

Mr Beasley:

– At the committee stage we shall test whether there are any objections to it.

Mr LATHAM:

– If that is done in the manner suggested by the tone in which the honorable member has interjected, it will be mere obstruction.

Mr Scullin:

– That remark is unfair, and should be withdrawn.

Mr LATHAM:

– To save time I withdraw it; but honorable members generally may draw their own conclusion from what happens.

Mr Scullin:

– The right honorable member himself offered to explain every provision of the bill.

Mr LATHAM:

– And I am still prepared to do so.

Mr Scullin:

– Then how can it be said that we shall obstruct the passage of the bill if we ask for such explanations?

Mr LATHAM:

– When the bill was before another place not one honorable gentleman was able to point to a single line of it that was political in character, and some honorable members in that place are earnest defenders of the rights of the people ! I repeat that, in the four weeks that this bill has been public property, not a single objection has been taken to any of its provisions. In my second-reading speech I called attention, for instance, to the provisions giving power to make regulations and giving the Postmaster-General power to make air contracts and said that they were in a different class from most of the provisions of the bill. It is remarkable that honorable members should be apprehensive of this measure to-day when they have expressed no criticism of it in the last four weeks. There has been no justification advanced for the request that consideration of the bill should be postponed indefinitely. One would have thought that honorable gentlemen who desired the postponement of its consideration would have advanced at least some arguments in support of their view. If there is anything objectionable in the bill it has not so far been discovered.

Mr Scullin:

– Honorable members have not had a proper opportunity to consider the measure.

Mr LATHAM:

– They have had an opportunity to this extent, that it has been in their personal possession for four weeks.

Mr Scullin:

– But very few members have had sufficient time even to read the bill.

Mr LATHAM:

– Others interested in the bill have been in possession of it for four weeks, and I suppose copies may be found in every public library and trades hall in the Commonwealth for the information of those sufficiently interested in it. Honorable members know quite well that under all governments quite a number of bills are passed in two or three days. This is not one of them.

Mr Scullin:

– It refers to hundreds of statutes.

Mr LATHAM:

– Yes, but hundreds of them are supply acts and appropriation acts. The statutes affected are shown in the fourth schedule.

Mr Beasley:

– Did the right honorable gentleman say that it took the department two years to prepare this bill?

Mr LATHAM:

– Its preparation has been in progress for two years as a portion of the compilation of a new edition of the statutes, a most elaborate and intricate task. It ‘is needless for me to remind honorable members that it is easier to check a bill than to draft one.

I found sufficient time to check this bill over before coming to the House, although, as honorable members are well aware, I returned to Canberra only the other day. I did not have four weeks in which to study the bill. In committee, I am prepared to answer any question raised.

Question - That the bill be now read a second time - put. The House divided. (Mr. Speaker - Hon. G. H. Mackay.)

AYES: 33

NOES: 0

N oes . . . . . . 15

Majority . . 18

AYES

NOES

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and committed pro forma.

page 1117

PUBLIC SERVICE BILL 1934

Second Reading

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I move -

That this bill be now read a second time.

This is a bill for an act to amend sections 73 and 84 of the Commonwealth Public

Service Act 1922-1933. The bill, which I am sure honorable members will agree is a non-controversial measure, is designed to effect two amendments of that act, first, in respect of salary payments in lieu of furlough, and, secondly, in regard to the appointment of returned soldiers to the Public Service. The first amendment relates to the rate of salary upon which pay in lieu of furlough is computed in calculating the amount due to an officer on retirement or any payment to relatives of a deceased public servant. Under the law, as at present constituted, when an officer is due to retire from the Public Service the amount of pay in lieu of furlough which he is entitled to receive is based on the actual salary which he received during . the period equivalent to the furlough immediately preceding the date of his retirement, so that in the case of an officer in receipt of £300 per annum who received an increment three months before he was due to retire, and is entitled to twelve months’ furlough, a calculation would have to be made to determine the actual amount which was paid to him during the twelve months immediately preceding his retirement. This bill attempts to simplify the position, and provides that such payments will be based upon the rate of pay obtaining immediately before the date of retirement. Therefore, in the case which I have mentioned, if the officer’s salary were raised to £320 per annum immediately before his retirement, his pay in lieu of furlough would be based on £320, and not on some lower amount as in the past.

Mr Beasley:

– What would happen if the officer’s pay were decreased? Would his pay in lieu of furlough be computed on the lower amount?

Mr CASEY:

–Yes, it would workboth ways; but the bill is generally regarded as being ameliorative in its effect.

The second amendment refers to section 84 of the act, and, in effect, provides that a returned soldier may be appointed to the Commonwealth Service, although not free from physical defects due to war service which are likely to prevent continuance of efficient service up to the age of sixty years. At the present time there are some men who cannot secure admittance to the Public Service because they are unable to pass the medical examination by reason of war injuries. There are others who, though temporarily employed in the Service, are unable to secure permanent appointment for the same reason. This amendment provides that if the Commonwealth Medical Officer certifies that any physical defect of a soldier is likely to prevent continuance of efficient service up to the age of 60 years, the soldier shall not, if appointed to the Commonwealth Service, bc deemed to be an employee within the meaning and for the purposes, of the Superannuation Act 1922-1934. This will enable the permanent appointment of a returned soldier, if he is otherwise qualified, even if he is suffering from a war disability, subject to the stipulation that he may not enjoy the benefits of the superannuation provisions.

Mr Ward:

– What is the position of n returned soldier at the present time?

Mr CASEY:

– Under the present act, if the soldier has a disability which debars him from entry to the Service, be cannot be appointed, because he would have to. be given the privileges of superannuation. Of course, if he has a Avar disability or some disability arising out of war injury, although he cannot get the benefit of the superannuation, he would probably be receiving a war pension.

Mr Ward:

– What is the objection to giving the soldier the benefit of the Superannuation Act?

Mr CASEY:

– Because he might become so ill as to be unable to continue his duties and become a charge upon the superannuation fund.

Mr Beasley:

– The disabilities suffered by these men were caused in a struggle in which they took part, and in which the country was involved.

Mr CASEY:

– It is considered that the superannuation fund should not have to bear what might more properly be a charge on the appropriation for war pensions. If siu; men come within certain medical categories they may be admitted to the Service. The number affected would be very small, probably not more than a dozen altogether.

Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra

.- I support the bill. It was certainly an anomaly that the widow of an officer who dies should receive less in respect of payments in lieu of furlough than the man would have received had he lived. I am glad that the act is to be amended so that the widow shall receive payment at the rate the officer was receiving on his death, instead of on his average salary for the preceding twelve months.

The hill also provides for returned soldiers who have become eligible for appointment to permanent positions in the Public Service, but who, because of physical disabilities, could not be admitted to the superannuation scheme. It is now proposed to allow such officers to be made permanent, but they will not become eligible for superannuation benefits. This is only reasonable, because the fund was never intended to carry _cases of that kind, and to make it do so would be unfair to the other contributors. Such men should properly be a charge against the war pensions vote.

Mr HAWKER:
Wakefield

.- I also support the bill. I agree that the anomaly in regard to payments in lieu of furlough should be removed, but” I am more particularly concerned with the appointment of wounded soldiers to the Public Service. Of that section of the bill, which deals with such men, I express my particular approval. There are many men in the Service suffering from the effects of serious wounds, which have prevented their being placed upon the list, of permanent officers. They have continued year after year to occupy temporary positions, and when retrenchment has been the order of the day, they have been in danger of having their services dispensed with, while permanent officers of perhaps less capacity and shorter service are secure. When I was a Minister, a case came under my notice of a returned soldier who had received serious war injuries to his knee. He had been working in one of the government departments for more than ten years without losing a day, and though he was an efficient, and capable officer, lie did not enjoy equal claims with permanent officers in the matter of promotion, and was likely to be thrown out on the street at any time when retrenchment became necessary. Therefore, it is particularly gratifying that the Government has found time, even under the present pressure of business, to bring in a bill to correct this injustice.

Mr GREGORY:
Swan

– I endorse the remarks of the honorable member for Wakefield (Mr. Hawker). I wish, however, to make particular reference to the breach of contract between the Government and members of this House regarding the order of business. Only a little while ago the Minister furnished me with a list of bills to be passed, and in the order in which they were to be introduced. I have to leave by the train to-night, and I very much wanted, before I went, to say something in regard to the measure providing for grants to the States, but consideration of that bill has been postponed in order that the present one may be dealt with, lt is not right that I should be thus denied an opportunity to speak on a measure of particular concern to my own State.

Mr E J HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944

– In common with other returned soldier members of this House, I congratulate the Government on introducing this bill, and also convey the approval of various returned soldiers’ organizations in my State. From time to time I have placed before Ministers cases of returned soldiers who, though they have rendered good service in their departments, have failed to secure permanent appointment. I refer particularly to neurasthenic cases in which the complaint is being aggravated by the constant fear of dismissal. I commend the Minister in charge of the bill (Mr. Casey) upon having introduced the measure, and for his attention to this important detail.

The Minister referred to the right of returned soldiers under the Public Service Act to apply for permanent appointment in the Service. Recently I led a deputation to the Postmaster-General (Mr. Parkhill) consisting of delegates from returned soldiers’ organizations and employees in his department, asking that certain officers should be made permanent. Section S3, sub-section 9; of the act says that in the making of appointments to positions in the Commonwealth Service of a non-clerical nature, the order of pre,ference to returned soldiers shall be as follows : -

Returned soldiers who have been temporarily employed continuously for not less than two years, but have not passed the prescribed examination, and in respect of whom the Chief Officer certifies that their duties have been performed in a satisfactory manner: Provided that any such appointments shall be to a position the duties of which are similar to those which the returned soldier has been performing.

There is at present in the PostmasterGeneral’s Department a group of 32 men occupying the position of cleaners. They have been employed for periods varying from five to fourteen years, and have applied again and again to be placed on tho permanent, staff. Every application, however, has been turned down under the discretionary powers exercised by the Public Service Board on the ground that there was no reason why the men should be placed in permanent positions. I ash the Minister to look into the matter to see whether he can give any relief to the mcn concerned.

Mr. CASEY (Corio - Assistant Treasurer; [4.26]. - In reply to the complaint of the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Gregory) against the alteration of the order of business, I have to inform him that the bill we are now considering came to us from the Senate, and the practice is to deal with such bills as they arrive. Without, relying altogether on that point, however, I can assure him that the measure in which he is interested will be very little delayed by the consideration of this non-controversial bill. I thought, that I had informed the leaders of all parties in the House of the proposed alteration in the order of business, and I regret that the honorable member was not advised.

The remarks of the honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. E. J. Harrison) will be placed before the Postmaster-General (Mr. Parkhill) and the Public Service Board, and consideration will also bp given to the remarks of the honorable member for Wakefield (Mr. Hawker).

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In commit lae:

Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.

Clause 3 -

Section eighty-four of the principal act is amended by adding at the end of sub-section (8.) the following proviso: - “ Provided that if, in addition, the medical practitioner certifies that any physical defect of the returned soldier is likely to prevent continuance of efficient service up to the age of sixty years, the returned soldier shall not, if appointed to the Commonwealth Service, be deemed to be an employee within the meaning, and for the purposes, of the Superannuation Act 1022-1034.”

Mr LANE:
Barton

.- While I commend the Government for introducing this bill, which is designed to render a measure of justice to a considerable section of returned soldier^ employees in the Public Service, there is one direction in which it can be improved. Quite a number of men who have not qualified by examination for appointment to the permanent staff have rendered service efficiently and well for periods ranging from ten to fifteen years. A few years ago those who had given lengthy service in the Customs Department were promised that they would be made permanent officers after a further two years, but they were dismissed in consequence of the« retrenchment that followed the passage of the financial emergency legislation. In order to qualify for compensation, some of them had to pass an examination which was practically the equivalent of the Public Service examination. Five of these men are still living. One who had given fifteen years’ service was recently employed as a temporary hand, but was afterwards supplanted by the holder of a leaving certificate. He was riddled with bullets at the front, but his disabilities are not sufficiently great to entitle him to draw a pension. Every employer should stand by efficient employees who have given from ten to fifteen years’ service. Thi.matter has been considered by Ministers, and I understand that one Minister assured these men that, only a short bill was needed to meet their case. One of the recent appointees to the Customs Department in Sydney who went to England on a travel scholarship displaced a man who had been doing the work for up to fifteen years. Lengthy service in certain grades is equivalent to the passing of examinations. I move -

That the following words bc added to the . clause : “ where a returned soldier has rendered efficient service for a period of ten years, such soldier shall be eligible for employment on the ‘permanent staff “.

I appeal to the Minister to accept this amendment, ft would not be necessary to make an immediate permanent appointment in every case, and the cost would not be very great.

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

” 4.38]. - This is a short bill to effect two definite purposes, which arc clear-cut and self-contained. The amendment i3 quite outside its scope, dealing as it; does with an entirely different subject. It would need a great deal of consideration, and I ask the honorable member not to press it.

Mr LANE:
Barton

– I should like to comply with the request of the Minister, but find myself unable to do so. No member of the Government party knew that this measure was to be brought forward. Surely honorable members . have the right to influence legislation that is placed before this chamber. The Minister’s reply does not meet the case. Although I am not a member of the Returned Sailors and Soldiers Imperial League of Australia I have certain responsibilities in regard to the returned soldiers in my electorate. I hope thathonorable members will support the amendment

The CHAIRMAN (Mr Bell:
DARWIN, TASMANIA

If the Government were prepared to accept the amendment, it would have to be drafted differently. It is relevant to the bill, but I consider that it should bc moved as a new sub-clause.

Mr LANE:
BARTON, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– I am prepared to move it as n-new clause. [Quorum formed.]

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I suggest that the amendment submitted by the honorable member for Barton (Mr. Lane) goes beyond the” scope of the bill, and cannot be added to a clause which sets out to amend subsection 8 of section 84, which deals with another subject. Any honorable member could move to widen the benefits which the Government is attempting to give, but that could be done, probably, only at the expense of other sections in the Service. Paragraph c, of sub-section 9, of section 84, refers to the permanency of employment of returned soldiers who have been temporarily employed continuously for not less than two years, but have not passed the prescribed examination. If these men had been in the Service for not less than two years, provision is made for them. On the other hand, men who have been temporarily engaged but have lost their employment would, under the amendment, be given privileges over returned soldiers who have not been fortunate enough to get even temporary employment. The Government, I regret to say, is unable to accept the amendment.

Mr E J HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944

– I drew the Minister’s attention to this matter in connexion with the position of a group of men in the Postal Department who made application for permanent rank, but failed tq receive consideration, although they had served, in some instances, for from five to fourteen years. If a returned man has passed the examination, and the Public Service Board exercises its discretion, it can refuse to grant him a permanency. It seems to me that, in view of the Minister’s statement, the provisions of the act should be applied to the returned men who make application for permanent appointment. If the Government does not intend to give them this consideration, that provision should be expunged.

Mr LANE:
Barton

.- The Minister has not stated the case correctly. When the act was passed, men who had been in the Service from ten to fifteen years were asked to serve for another two years.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr Belli:

– The honorable member has already spoken twice to the question before the Chair. His amendment cannot be accepted in its present form, but, if drafted as a new sub-section, it would be relevant to section 84, which this bill amends.

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– Even though the Government cannot at short notice accept the amendment as it stands, this matter will be revived, and willreceive proper consideration.

Amendment negatived.

Clause agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.

Bill - by leave - read a third time.

page 1122

AUSTRALIAN SOLDIERS’ REPATRIATION BILL (No. 2) 1934

Bill returned from the Senate with amendments.

page 1122

BILLS RETURNED FROM THE SENATE

The following bills wore returned from the Senate without amendment or requests : -

Mandarin Growers Relief Bill 1934.

War Pensions Appropriation Bill 1034.

Sales Tax Assessment Bill (No. 1) 1934.

Sales Tax Assessment Bill (No. 2) 1934.

Income Tax Bill 1934.

Transferred Officers’ Pensions Bill 1934.

page 1122

SOUTH AUSTRALIA GRANT BILL 1934

Message recommending appropriation reported.

In committee (Consideration of GovernorGeneral’s message) :

Motion (by Mr. Casey) agreed to -

That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purposes of a bill for an act to grant and apply out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund a sum for the purposes of financial assistance to the State of South Australia.

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended ; resolution adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Casey and Mr. White do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill brought up by Mr. Casey, and read a first time.

Mr SPEAKER (Hon G H Mackay:

– Following the usual practice, the Chair, at its discretion, may allow a debate to cover several bills, but each of them must be taken through its respective stages.

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

I propose in view of your statement, Mr. Speaker, to make my second-reading speech on the South Australia. Grant Bill and include such references as are necessary to the Western Australia Grant Bill and the Tasmania Grant Bill. Immediately after the conclusion of this speech I shall introduce the Western Australia Grant Bill and the Tasmania Grant Bill, and with the assistance of honorable members, take them to the second-reading stage. That will permit a general discussion of the three bills in the one debate.

These measures are intended to provide special grants for South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania for the current financial year. I do not think it necessary at this stage to describe in detail the efforts of this Government and its predecessors to arrive at an equitable basis for determining the amount of the grants to necessitous States. In recent years the three States that I have mentioned have regularly sought assistance from the Commonwealth Government. I shall not occupy time in rehearsing the extent to which grants have been made by the Commonwealth to these States year by year, as the whole of the facts are set out clearly in the following table : -

It will be seen that the grants have increased continuously until last financial year they amounted to £1,150,000 in respect of South Australia, £600,000 in respect of Western Australia, and £380,000 in respect of Tasmania, making a grand total of £2,130,000. The three bills to authorize grants to these States this year provide for the following amounts to be paid to the respective States: -

It can honestly be claimed that this Government has adopted a most sympathetic attitude towards these claimant States.

About twelve months ago a bill was passed, through Parliament which provided for the appointment of the Commonwealth Grants Commission to give careful consideration to the whole subject. Subsequently the following gentlemen agreed to act as commissioners: - Mr. F. W. Eggleston, Victoria, chairman; Professor Giblin, University of Melbourne, and formerly of the University of Tasmania; and Mr. J. W. Sandford, South Australia. The commission has now furnished its first report. In the course of its inquiry it examined more than 100 witnesses and travelled very great distances. The report has been printed and is now in the hands of honorable members. It is a most valuable document and attacks the subject sincerely and, I think, more scientifically than it has been attacked in the past. Honorable gentlemen who read the report will be forced to the conclusion that it is a logical, fair and comprehensive statement of the position. The basis adopted for grants is, I think, novel. The commission has estimated the average actual deficits, not necessarily the published deficits, of all the Australian States and has recommended that, subject to such adjustments as in its wisdom seem desirable, the grants shall be of such amounts as will place the finances of the three claimant States on an equal basis with those of the three non-claimant States. The Government had hoped that the commission would have recommended the amount that should be granted to the States for a longer period than the current financial year. It is well known that the Premiers of the three States concerned are anxious to obtain a security of tenure of these grants for a longer period than one year in order that the

State Treasurers may forecast the financial position of their States with some degree of accuracy for more than one year. The commission has decided, however, that in view of the changing circumstances of the world at large, and the effect of these changes upon the prices obtainable for our export commodities and also having regard to the changing internal position, it would not bc justified in recommending grants for more than the current financial year. However, as it has indicated the basis of the grant for this year, the State authorities will be in a somewhat better position than formerly, to make at least a rough approximation of the amount that is likely to be granted to them in subsequent years by the Commonwealth. I do not say that these grants can be estimated with great certainty; but at least some idea may bo formed by the State authorities of the amount of the grant from the trend of their own financial position and that of the other States.

It would be quite impossible for me at this stage to cover the ground adequately in a speech that honorable members would be content to listen to, and I shall therefore be brief in my remarks. The only criticism that I offer of the report of the commission is that it is ineffectively indexed, by reason of the fact that the commission has seen fit to collect into each chapter the facts it has gathered and the conclusions it has formed in respect of all three States, instead of dealing with each State separately. This will mean that honorable members who desire to understand the position of any one State from the point of view of the commission will be required, to read the whole report. That, however, will have one good effect, for it will give honorable gentlemen who study the document an appreciation of the difficulties of each of the three States. Itwould be impossible for me, in a brief Speech of this character, to examine adequately the various findings of the commission ; but I direct the attention of honorable members in particular to a. summary of the report, which appears on pages 128 to 134. That statement gives a fairly adequate idea of the general line of reasoning followed by the commission.

The Government has decided to adopt the recommendations of the commission that grants be made to the three States of the amounts that I have already indicated. The commission will pursue its inquiries again this year in the same spirit as has actuated it in the last twelve months. Copies of its report have already been made available to the State Premiers, and it is proposed to provide a copy for every member of each State Parliament and not only the members of the Parliaments of the three claimant States.

Debate (on motion by Mr. Makin) adjourned.

page 1124

WESTERN AUSTRALIA GRANT BILL 1934

Message recommending appropriation reported.

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

Motion (by Mr. Casey) agreed to -

That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue he made for the purposes of a bill for an act to grant and apply out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund a sum for the purposes of financial assistance to the State of Western Australia.

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended; resolution adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Casey and Mr. White do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill brought up by Mr. Casey and read a first time.

page 1124

TASMANIA GRANT BILL 1934

Message recommending appropriation reported.

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

Motion (by Mr. Casey) agreed to -

That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purposes of a bill for an act to grant and apply out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund a sum for the purposes of financial assistance to the State of Tasmania.

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended; resolution adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Casey and Mr. White do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill brought up by Mr. Casey and read a first time.

page 1124

SOUTH AUSTRALIA GRANT BILL 1934

Second Reading

Debate resumed.

Mr MAKIN:
Hindmarsh

.- I support this bill to grant South Australia the sum of £1,400,000 in order to enable it to meet the various disabilities under which it is labouring; but a grant of that amount will not adequately compensate the State for the disabilities under which it is suffering in consequence of federation and other circumstances. The amount provided under this bill for assistance to South Australia may appear a substantial amount compared with the hopelessly inadequate provision made for Western Australia and Tasmania, which in no way meets the rightful claim of those States for recognition of the disabilities under which they are labouring. But. the time has arrived, I think, when an effort should be made to deal with the problem of State disabilities in a practical way in an endeavour to find some solution which will remove them. Power should be given to the Commonwealth Parliament to enable it to make a more equitable adjustment of the burdens imposed on different sections of the Commonwealth.

The Commonwealth Grants Commission admits that South Australia has imposed considerable burdens on its citizens to balance its budget. But the effort to achieve financial stability has caused great hardship to be inflicted, particularly upon public servants of that State. They have been called upon to bear much heavier burdens than those imposed upon public servants of other States and of the Commonwealth itself. In certain branches of the Service further reductions have been made affecting principally officers on lower salaries.I regret that in its report the commission has not seen fit to make some special reference to the injustice done to them. Certainly their claims deserve sympathetic consideration from this House. Under the special emergency legislation of the State they have suffered a 20 per cent, reduction of salaries; and a 16$ cut lias been made in the superannuation payments. Additional burdens compared to those in the Public Service in the other States are placed upon them in the payment of State taxation, which is exceedingly heavy. It is a wrong principle to impose further wage and salary cuts when restorations are being made in other States.

As I previously have said, the time has long passed for a wide revision of our Constitution as it affects the several States and the Commonwealth. During the last seven months, when this Parliament has been in recess, the time might have been occupied to great advantage by the setting up of an Australian convention to deal with the whole matter of the constitutional relations between the Commonwealth and the States.

Mr White:

– The Commonwealth Grants Commission has been engaged during that period examining the financial position of three States.

Mr MAKIN:

– The Commonwealth Grants Commission is not clothed with the necessary authority to remove the anomalies which exist. The commission was appointed only to arrive at some basis of compensation for the disabilities suffered by the States. A more scientific system of adjusting these matters should be evolved. I regret that the manner in which this commission was expected to carry out its task seems to suggest that the States making application for financial assistance were to be regarded as mendicants. Because I want to remove that stigma of mendicancy from States that certainly have suffered severely as a result of federation, I want to see a system of assistance evolved under which citizens of any one State will not be called upon to carry a heavier load than they are able to bear, so that public servants of South Australia, for example, would not be required to bear burdens heavier than those imposed on public servants in any other State of the Commonwealth. A federal convention could deal with all the ramifications of government. in Australia. It could eliminate much of the duplication which now imposes additional burdens on the taxpayer of Australia, lt could also inquire into the method of apportioning the various fields of taxation. I have no hesitation in saying that I would clothe the Commonwealth with full and supreme power of government, leaving the settlement of purely domestic matters to what might be called provincial councils. I would abolish the offices of Agents-Genera] and closely inquire into all instances of Commonwealth and State duplication. In that way a more equitable distribution of the taxation burden would be made possible and many of the injustices which now prevail would be removed. Why should the citizens of South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania be required to levy heavier imposts than are imposed upon the citizens of the other States? The taxation burden in the several States should be exactly the same. However, this bill is welcome in that it makes provision in some small way for the unfortunate position which exists in South Australia. In the future we shall expect the Commonwealth Government to adopt a broad national outlook embracing the whole of Australia, and to give full rights and even-handed justice to all. The tendency to regard the small States as mendicant States is without justification and should not be encouraged by those living in States more favorably circumstanced than South Australia, Western Australia, and Tasmania.

Mr GREGORY:
Swan

– I am surprised that the Assistant Minister (Mr. Casey) should have eulogised the work of the Commonwealth Grants Commission.

Mr Casey:

– Eulogised? All I said was that it had presented an able report and that the Government, had adopted its recommendations.

Mr GREGORY:

– That it has presented an able report is a matter of opinion. If the Minister will examine it. he will see that the exports per head of population for each of the States are not set out, although that aspect is one of the most salient, that could be examined in dealing with a claim by Western Australia for compensation. The report also ignores another important factor - this country’s attempt to establish industries manufacturing goods at the highest cost in the world and trying to sell goods at open competition in the world’s markets at any price the world will give for them. I do not intend to criticize the recommendations of the commission in regard to the provision of financial assistance to any other State, but if the commission can say that South Australia should obtain £1,400,000 and Western Australia only £600,000 as compensation for the disabilities suffered under federation, its report can well be ignored as unreliable. Western Australia is absolutely a primaryproducing State. The figures showing the value of exports per head of population should have been given by the commission. The Commonwealth YearBoole does not show the export rate per head of the population for each State. They are shown in the Cast;’ for Secession. The commission has recommended a grant of £1,400,000 to South Australia, owing to disabilities suffered under federation. If it can be shown that South Australia has suffered from federation to that extent, then Western Australia has undoubtedly suffered a great deal more. The report of the commission mentions the marvellous progress that has been made in Western Australia since the discovery of gold in 1892. It touches upon the growth of the wheat and butter industries, and other branches of primary production. It is admitted that we have not in Western Australia the rich soils that are to be found in parts of Victoria, New ‘South Wales, and along the coast of Queensland. On the other hand, we have a rainfall which, if not very heavy, is one of the finest in the continent, because it can be relied upon during the growing season. If costs of production were kept down to a reasonable level, we should be able to sell our primary products overseas in competition with the world. However, because of embargoes and high duties, the people of the West have to pay on an average S per cent, to 10 per cent, more for everything they use than is necessary. Judge Powers stated in a recent award that -the freight on certain classes of goods was as much from Melbourne to Adelaide as from Melbourne to London. It is this fact, together with the high cost of commodities due to the tariff, that is responsible to a great extent for the disabilities suffered by the people of Western Australia.

Most of the present session has been devoted to the passing of measures designed to keep various industries in existence. We are now travelling in the vicious circle with a vengeance. The people of Western Australia will not allow their State to be destroyed, and if the Commonwealth Government thinks that we in the West will continue to be satisfied to be hewers of wood and drawers pf water, it ‘is mistaken. Those who insist upon maintaining the present inequitable arrangement are the worst enemies of federation.

Mr PROWSE:
Forrest

.- The Assistant Treasurer (Mr. Casey) referred to the gradual growth of Commonwealth grants to the States. I remind honorable members that there must be cause for this; it must indicate that there has been a gradual growth of the disabilities suffered by the States. I have read as much of the report of the royal commission as I have been able, and. I observed that much stress is laid upon the rate, of taxation paid by the people of Western Australia. When the grants have been received by the Government of Western Australia, the money has been largely devoted to reducing taxation. That undoubtedly helped those who paid taxes, hut was of no great assistance to those who suffered real disabilities, namely, those who were compelled to pay high prices for materials needed for the development of the land. The average production for export per head in the Commonwealth is £15, whereas the average production for Western Australia is, £37. This shows that Western Australia is essentially a primary-producing State, and must have markets overseas. Unfortunately, the cost of production is so high as a result of the Commonwealth’s fiscal policy, that many markets have been lost, and others have been retained only with the greatest difficulty. I can assure the Government that, in the report of the royal commission, Western Australia has not been assessed with the full amount of the disabilities which that State suffers under federation.

Sitting suspended from 5.40 to 7.S0 p.m.

Mr BLACKLOW:
Franklin

– I naturally support the grant to Tasmania of £400,000, which is greater than hasbeen given previously, although I have no doubt that the people of that State are not altogether satisfied with it. That applies also toWestern Australia, and possibly to South Australia, although the latter State appears to have received the most generous treatment.

The Commonwealth Government saw fit to set up a commission to inquire into the disabilities of the States. So far,I have not had an opportunity to study the report of that body, but I have been struck with the fact that, having made a fairly general survey of the position, it has seen fit to recommend an increase of the grant. Such a recommendation from a body which is divorced from politics justifies the applications for Commonwealth assistance, which, for a number of years, have been made by the smaller States.

What are the guiding principles upon which the commission arrived at its conclusions? Doubtless, its task was a difficult one. When we were discussing its appointment, I said that, on account of the nature of the work it would have to do, the services of the best men obtainable should be procured. I am confident that the Commonwealth exercised wisdom in the selection of the men chosen. The commission may have to decide whether the position of a State is due to maladministration, or has been contributed to by wasteful expenditure. Any State againstwhich those charges could be proved would have no right to look to the Commonwealth to restore its revenues. It seems to mo that it is necessary to establish as a guiding principle whether a State is a primary and a secondary producing State, or one that has to rely principally upon primary production. Tasmania, South Australia, and Western Australia are very largely primaryproducing States, and their taxable capacity is below that of the other three States, the reason in the case of Queensland being, not so much that it is a manufacturing State, as that it has the great sugar industry, which can be regarded as both a primary and a secondary industry. If the taxable capacity of primaryproducing States is below that of

States whichare favoured with secondary industries, they must have a lower standard of social services and of living. Action must be taken to remedy that position, otherwise their population will drift to the larger States, which, being wealthier, are in a position to offer greater advantages. If they are to retain their population, they must raise the standard of living and of social services, irrespective of whether their taxable capacity is adequate to the situation or falls short of requirements. If the State of New South Wales were to find that the taxable capacity of Eden-Monaro was lower than that of the Northern Rivers district, and on that account, decided to differentiate in the social services and educational facilities provided, there would be an outcry. The State spreads its revenues over the whole of its area, so that the standard of living is maintained at a uniform level throughout. Likewise, the Commonwealth Government., being the National Government, must spread its revenue fairly and equitably over the whole of Australia, so that the people of all the States will enjoy equal privileges and the same standard of living and of social services. The tariff plays an important part in the matter, in that it favours those States which have manufacturing industries. New South Wales and Victoria are the principal manufacturing States of the Commonwealth, and on that account have the highest taxable capacity. But South Australia, Western Australia, and Tasmania contribute proportionately just as much to their wealth.

I sincerely hope that when I have an opportunity to study the report of the commission, I shall receive enlightenment from it. Those who have perused it say that it is a very fine work. Only by means of an interstate commission can the difficulties of the States be satisfactorily adjusted. If interstate matters were made a political issue, goodness knows what the result would be.

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

Honorable members who represent the smaller States derive no pleasure from airing the disabilities of those States; they would be much happier if considerable revenues were obtained from manufacturing industries, as is the case in the

Eastern States. The sole function of the Commonwealth Grants Commission was to examine the applications that had been made for assistance by certain of the States, lt was no part of its duty to draw up a scheme that might prove more equitable to the three States concerned. The making of grants cannot be regarded as a final solution of the problem; something more than an annual dole is needed to right the position of the less prosperous States of the federation. It may be necessary so to alter the Constitution that it will be possible to settle the question for all time.

It is to be regretted that before his appointment to this commission one of the gentlemen selected had made certain derogatory remarks with respect to the State of Western Australia. I do not question his impartiality, but lie became a member of the commission under the- impression that Western Australia had little of which to complain.

The people of that State generally have no desire to grumble, but would like the financial difficulties of the State settled over a period of years by a constitutional method. It is not for me to suggest how the financial problems, of South Australia and Tasmania should be solved, but. Western Australia has a number of difficulties for which federation is not responsible. That State comprises onethird of the total area of Australia, and has only one-fifteenth of its population. Its northern portion is probably less productive than any other part of Australia excepting the interior of the continent. Honorable members will recall that the Northern Territory formerly constituted a portion of South Australia, but the Commonwealth Parliament took over the territory and relieved the State of the heavy task of developing it. Western Australia, however, is still responsible for that portion of the State lying north of the Tropic of Capricorn. That vast area has a population of only 6,000, and an attempt is being made to develop it by a State with a population numbering only 450,000. It may eventually be necessary to obtain assistance from the Commonwealth Government in the settlement of the northern portion of the State. The debt per head of the population is higher in ifr. .4. Green.

Western Australia than in any other State. One of the signs of the heavy load which its people have to carry is found in the fact that the cost of railage per head of the population is three times greater than the average for Australia as a whole. This disparity is due to the sparsely populated condition of the State. The farms are situated at considerable distances from the seaboard. The nearest wheat-farming land to Perth is at Northam 66 miles inland. Being a primary-producing State, the position with regard to the wheat industry is responsible for a good many of the present difficulties of Western Australia. It has 10,000 wheat-farmers, and they are in a sorry plight. No fewer than 1,200 have gone off their land in the last two year3.

The. protectionist policy of the Commonwealth does not suit, our State. I recognize that no matter what its parliamentary representatives may think of the protective system of the Commonwealth, the fact remains that it 13 the accepted national policy, and, in my opinion, the correct policy for Australia as a whole ; but, as it imposes difficulties on Western Australia means should be adopted by which the State could receive the assistance it sorely needs. I can well understand why most of the representatives of farming districts in the eastern. States are at least moderate protectionists. It gives the man on the land a local market for his products, and that, of course, is the best market he can have. A glance at the import and export figures for the various States shows that the balance of trade is very much against Western Australia. In 1932-33 it imported from the eastern States goods valued at £8,021,000 and exported to those States goods valued at £958,000, or less than one-eighth of the value of the imports. Western Australia is thus placed at a serious disadvantage. While protection is helping the eastern States. Western Australia must remain a primaryproducing State, even when it has considerably increased its population. When attempts are made to establish industries there upon even a minor scale, goods from manufacturers in the eastern States are dumped in the west for the purpose of killing those enterprises. Of course, this is regarded in some quarters as a sound business policy. My State is in the position of the frogs referred to in Aesop’s Fables. When the boy was stoning the frogs they asked him to desist, and when he replied that it was very good fun for him, the frogs rejoined, “What is fun for you is death to us.” I have no doubt that, in the course of time, however, the population of Western Australia will be sufficient to justify the establishment of secondary industries there.

Honorable members should give careful consideration to the proposal which has been advanced on former ‘ occasions that Western Australia should be granted fiscal autonomy over a period of years. At the inception of federation the State was allowed to retain control of its own customs tariff for a period. But as people of Western Australia were not Little Australians, and had no desire to impose hampering restrictions upon the Commonwealth, in their patriotism, they did not ask for a sufficiently long period. They now recognize their mistake. If this power were granted to them nothing more would be heard of the cry for secession. I am convinced that, as a result, the States as a whole would be brought into more friendly relations. It is impossible for Western Australia to develop its great resources with its present limited population; but, with control of its own tariff a few years would see the establishment of many secondary industries. A fresh . fiscal arrangement could then be made, and a contented population in Western Australia could march forward, side by side with the people of the sister States.

Mr NAIRN:
Perth

.- I - am concerned mainly with the proposed grant to Western Australia. In drawing attention to the fact that that State is to receive only £600,000, compared with £1,400,000 for South Australia, I do not complain that the neighbouring State has fared better; yet these figures set out in bold relief the extraordinary view which the commission took as to the needs of Western Australia. The people of that State feel that they have received a bad deal from the commission. The appointment of a commission cannot be cavilled at; but in the personnel of the commission - I refer particularly to the chairman - a most unfortunate choice was made. Not only had he expressed views, prior to his appointment, strongly adverse to those generally held in Western Australia, but on his arrival in Perth, almost at the outset of the proceedings of the commission, he again delivered himself of very pronounced opinions in the same strain. He became embroiled in a bitter controversy with the press, and the inquiry by the commission was commenced, and, indeed, continued almost throughout in an atmosphere of controversy. Judging by the report of the commission, it appears that that spirit has not altogether disappeared. Perhaps the chairman feels that he has had the last word on the subject.

Mr Casey:

– That is very unfair.

Mr FENTON:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA · ALP; UAP from 1931

– He is a man with a high reputation.

Mr NAIRN:

– It is most unfortunate that a person should have been selected to act as a judge when he had already expressed pronounced views upon the very subject with which he had to deal. [Quorum . formed.] Everybody holds the other two members of the commission in the highest respect; but it was unfortunate, in respect of their appointment, too, that they came from two of the claimant States. The third claimant State was Western Australia, and the third member of the commission was not a Western Australian, but one who had already expressed views adverse to it. I suggest that an examination of the commission’s report lends considerable support to the belief that it had not forgotten hat had occurred in Western Australia. The commission set itself, first, to’ ascertain the amount necessary to give what it called a standard budgetary position toWestern Australia, and determined that it was £1,090,000. But because the State Government had discharged some responsibility in the north-west portion of the State which was admittedly the moral responsibility of the Commonwealth Government, an allowance of £200,000 was made to Western Australia. That allowance was immediately cancelled, however, on the ground that

Western Australia had made certain errors in its soldier land settlement policy. lt might be mentioned, by the way, that such errors were committed by every other State Government. After the figure of £1,090,000 had been restored by this calculation, the commission decided ihat £130,000 should be deducted on the ground that additional economies to that extent should be made by the administration. It was then resolved that the State could reasonably be expected to impose additional taxation to the extent of £400,000. That, I submit, was a most unjustifiable conclusion. It is not clear from the report whether the commission paid any regard to the fact that the Government of Western Australia had recently imposed a financial emergency tax of 9d. in the £1. It would be really impossible for the State Government to contemplate increasing taxation in the State by a further £400,000. Still another criticism I have to offer is that although the commission decided,’ after reaching certain calculations in regard tq the finances of the three claimant States, that 10 per cent, should be added to the sums which it concluded would bc reasonable grants, it reduced that figure to 7£ per cent, in the case of Western Australia. That brought the amount of the grant to that State down to £600,000, which was the amount granted by the Commonwealth Government in the previous year. It is extraordinary that the commission, after having investigated tho State’s finances and its prosperity indications with the most scrupulous fineness, should have recommended a grant of exactly the amount as that provided in the previous year. My greatest complaint is that the commission paid no adequate regard to the effects, of the tariff and the Navigation Act on Western Australia, although these are generally regarded as the principal causes of the disabilities of that State. It is indicated in the report that the commission did not attempt to make any computation of the adverse effect of the tariff on Western Australia. Other bodies have been able to make calculations of that description. A committee appointed by the Commonwealth Government in 1926 had no difficulty in making a precise estimate of the effects of the tariff on Western Australia; but this commission has seen fit to shut its eyes to this serious disability. It has also been blind to the disability imposed upon that State by the Navigation Act. Two points emerge clearly from a consideration of the commission’s report: first, that the chairman of the commission showed by his public declarations that his point of view was distinctly adverse to Western Australia ; and, secondly, that the adverse comments on Western Australia, which pervade the report, make it doubtful whether the commissioners applied themselves purely to the issues that they should have considered. This Government cannot, of course, do other than accept, for the present, the recommendations which have been made, but a final settlement of the difficulties of Western Australia will not be reached until this Parliament restores to that State the tariffmaking power that it enjoyed in 1900. As the claims of the necessitous States are to be reconsidered during the next two years I request that the claim of Western Australia bc not submitted for reconsideration to a commission consisting of the same personnel as the present commission.

Mr BELL:
Darwin

.-The people of Tasmania* are dissatisfied with the amount of the grant proposed for that State for the current year. They have always been dissatisfied with the amount of the special grants made to the State by this Parliament. I realise that this is a very vexed question and admit that 1 have not had time to study closely the various findings of the commission. . It would be unfair for me, therefore, to make final comment upon them. The first grant made to any State by the Commonwealth Government was that of £250,000 made to Western Australia in 1910-11. Tasmania received its first grant in 1912-13, the amount being £95,000. The amount of the grant was reduced to £90,000 in the next year and continued at that figure for the following seven year3. For the three succeeding years a grant of £85,000 a year was made. In 1924-25 the amount of the grant was increased to £146,000, but in the following year it was reduced to £68,000. In the next two years grants of £378,000 a year were made. In 1928-29 the grant was £220,000. In the next three years it was £220,000 a year. In 1932-33 it was £330,000, and in .the last financial year it was £380,000. The amount proposed for thi3 year, £400,000, is the largest grant that the State has yet received.

The circumstances of Tasmania have been inquired into frequently, but in only one or two cases have the recommendations of the investigating body been adopted by the Government of the day. The best report on Tasmania, in my opinion, was that submitted by the late Sir Nicholas Lockyer, and it provided for the largest amount of assistance to be granted to the State. But, unfortunately, certain conditions were recommended which the State government, .being a body with sovereign rights, would not accept. It is unfortunate that necessitous States have not been assured of definite grants from the Commonwealth for a period of years. This has meant that the State Premiers have been unable to estimate the taxation requirements of their States or to prepare budgets with a long-range view. I have never been satisfied with the methods adopted in the endeavour to arrive at an equitable basis for determining the financial needs of necessitous States. I admit that my remarks in this connexion are confined chiefly to Tasmania, for I have not studied the peculiar difficulties of cither South Australia or Western Australia. I believe that if two representatives of each of the States concerned were empowered to consult with each other and* set down their honest opinion of the financial needs of their particular States they would reach a more satisfactory conclusion than that of a commission, which merely visits the States and takes evidence from persons whose object is to present a ‘case along particular lines. I have not yet read closely the report of this commission, but a study of the reports of previous tribunals reveal to those who know that the difficulties of Tasmania were not fully understood. When the present Government appointed the Commonwealth Grants Commission I hoped that the first steps had been taken to formulate a definite basis for the making of grants to States which laboured under disabilities. I regret that the commission has not been able to make recommendations covering a period of years. It is only to be expected, in all the circumstances, that the States concerned will be dissatisfied, because the proposed assistance, whether it is admitted to be adequate or otherwise, is to be provided for only one year. I agree with the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Makin) that the only satisfactory way of dealing with- this subject is to remove -the causes that bring disabilities on the States concerned. For many years it has been advanced that one of the chief disabilities of Tasmania .is its isolation, its lack of adequate means of communication, including shipping services, telephonic communication, &c. ; and when considering this question it is therefore only fair to take into account what the Commonwealth Government has done to remove this particular disability. It has recently entered into a contract for the purchase of a modern ship for the Bass Strait service; it has, during the last two seasons, so far relaxed the coasting provisions of the Navigation Act as to allow overseas ships to carry passengers to Tasmanian ports. In addition it has brought down a measure to repeal- certain sections of the Navigation Act. In addition to the ships to be provided, I am informed by the Postmaster-General that tenders have been called for the laying down of a submarine cable to enable a telephonic service to be maintained between Tasmania and the mainland. The lack of that facility has been a tremendous drawback to people engaged in business in the island State as well as to those who travel to Tasmania during the tourist season. Provision has also been made for the establishment of a daily air mail service each way. A contract has been entered into as a subsidiary service to the British air mail contract. I arn assured by the Minister for Defence (Senator Pearce) that the machines to be placed on this subsidized passenger and mail service will be the finest in the southern hemisphere. When all the3e considerations are taken into account it will be seen that Tasmania will no longer have a claim for the same measure of assistance on account of isolation and lack of means of communication. As a Tasmanian, I had hoped that the commission would have recommended a larger grant to that State, but at the same time I must admit that the improvements effected in our communications with the mainland have largely off-set any disappointment I may have felt in this regard.

As the honorable member for Kalgoorlie (Mr. A. Green) has said, no honorable member representing a State with a small population wishes to come to this Parliament year after year pleading for financial assistance. While a federal parliament, legislating for a continent such as Australia, with its varying climatic conditions and varying types of land suited to all manners of products, may achieve excellent results for the Commonwealth as a whole, some disability must be suffered by some portion of it. The question, therefore, arises: what compensation is to be allowed to that portion of tho Commonwealth which is detrimentally affected? Even under a unified system of government this question would still arise, although it would be easier for the National Parliament to arrive at a decision as to what compensation should be paid. To arrive, however, at a fair and equitable basis presents a tremendous difficulty, and I wish that the critics of the parliaments of the Commonwealth who have to decide this question would realize it. I hope that this issue can be definitely settled in the near future. But, in the circumstances, this tribunal which the Commonwealth Government has set up to inquire into the question of providing financial assistance to the States, has, at least, served a useful purpose. Although it is not for me to criticize those who presented the case for the State, I think that some of the evidence it gathered was irrelevant; but I do not agree with the honorable member for Perth (Mr. Nairn) that any of the commissioners “were’ biassed. In 99 cases out of 100, if a commission is set up to carry out an important work, that work will be done conscientiously, though the determinations arrived at may not always be satisfactory. It is unfair to refer to these commissioners as having been biassed before commencing the inquiry. If we take up that attitude we shall never arrive at a settlement of any of these questions.

I hope that another effort will be made and a determination arrived at. It must be made if we are to govern this great country to the satisfaction of the people of Australia. The smaller States are at a disadvantage in many respects to-day. In years to come the position may be reversed. But we have to legislate in the interests of all States, whether large or small, and must approach the consideration of the question completely unbiassed and untrammelled by party political considerations. Naturally, as a representative of Tasmania, I am concerned with the interests of Tasmania, _and I had hoped the commission would recommend a larger grant for my State. I atn especially disappointed at the inability of the commission to suggest a basis for determination of future assistance, but it is recognized that conditions ‘ change. The commission says, in its report, that it is not in a position to determine what the grant should be for coming years and that it will have to continue its inquiries. I have not much faith in an inquiry such as this where the commission has to arrive at a conclusion based on evidence which it has ‘really had no opportunity to sift to determine whether it is good or bad. If the Commonwealth Ministers and the Premiers of all the States came together, recognizing that some States may suffer because of legislation introduced into the Federal Parliament whilst other States benefit by it, some means could be devised to determine for a period of years a fair allocation of the revenue as between the Commonwealth and the States. That the Commonwealth should levy taxation and pay it to the States is not altogether a satisfactory arrangement. To my mind the only tax that the Commonwealth is justified in collecting and distributing among the States in general is the petrol tax. It is the fairest tax to impose on motor transport, but because the States have not the constitutional power to impose it, its collection must be left to the Commonwealth. Every penny of that tax should be banded to the States for the upkeep of roads.

Tasmania and the other States must accept the recommendations of this tribunal for the current financial year. The present Commonwealth Government has done more than any other government for Tasmania probably because it is better informed as to the position of the State. It has done a tremendous lot for Tasmania. Although there is disappointment I think that fair-minded people will recognize that the commission made an impartial recommendation and that the Government could not do otherwise than act on its report for this year, at least.

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:
Darling Downs

– I desire to approach the consideration of this question from an angle slightly different from that from which other honorable members have viewed it. When the States are making big claims upon the Commonwealth, the financial position of the Commonwealth itself must be considered, also its ability to concede the requests made. The Commonwealth this year is budgeting for a surplus of £13,810, yet some honorable members claim that more should have been conceded to the States. Obviously, if the grants had been made larger, a considerable change would have had to be effected in our budgetary position. At the present time, by way of grants from revenue, the States are receiving from the Commonwealth something like £15,500,000, including the special grants proposed this year. The budget discloses that the grant to the States for federal roads amounts to £2,200,000 that we are paying towards the sinking funds of the States, £1,340,000, and towards interest, £7,585,000, making a total of £11,125,000. Adding the proposed grants included in the three bills under discussion, this total is increased hy £2.400,000. Iti addition, the Commonwealth is appropriating this year another £2,000,000 for the States. The whole, of this money is raised by Commonwealth taxation and is distributed among the States, and after providing for its own expenditure the Commonwealth is left with an estimated surplus of £13,810. Thus practically half of the total estimated customs and excise revenue of £34,600,000 collected by the Commonwealth is handed over to the States.

Mr Nairn:

– Under the Constitution the Commonwealth was to pay threequarters of the customs revenue to the States until Parliament otherwise provided.

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:

– Yes.

For ten years, before we relieved the States of various forms of expenditure, the Commonwealth paid three-fourths of the customs revenue to the States. The Commonwealth pensions bill amounts to something like £11,000,000 a year. The States have been relieved of that expenditure. Section 96 of the Constitution provides that the Commonwealth may grant financial assistance to the States, but it was not intended to be construed as a permanent provision that some revenues of the Commonwealth should be handed over to the States. This section was not intended io create a charge on the revenues of the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth has to exercise its judgment under this section. So far as the Commonwealth is concerned, it is the duty of this Parliament to construe that section in the most favorable light. Whenever financial assistance is necessary for a State, it is the duty of the Commonwealth, in justice to the people of Australia, to grant it. Coming from Queensland as I do, I have a sincere sympathy with the ,State of Western Australia. The conditions prevailing in Western Australia and Queensland are very similar. Both States have relatively small populations, and enormous territories to be developed. The great distances make the cost of government heavier than in Victoria, or, possibly, South Australia. I agree with the suggestion that the Commonwealth has a moral obligation to assist in the development of the northwest, of Western Australia, which is necessary from the point of view of defence, if from no other.

The Grants Commission was appointed in the hope that it would evolve a better system of helping the States than has been followed in the past. Some time ago, when Sir ‘ Nicholas Lockyer visited Tasmania to conduct an investigation into its claims for assistance, the idea was that the State might be helped by furthering the development of its resources, but other ideas now prevail. States are finding it hard to balance their budgets, and are looking to the Commonwealth for assistance. It was found difficult to evolve principles for universal application to the problem so that the Commonwealth might determine what should be given to the States, over a period, instead of having investigating bodies each year. The Grants Commission was appointed in the hope that such principles would be worked out.

The commission is deserving of the highest praise for the manner in which it has carried out its work. It has tried to analyse the claims of the States, weigh the justice of them, and evolve a measure by which they can be compensated for their disabilities. It has been found extremely difficult to determine just what are the losses of the States under federation. The commission admits that the tariff has had a prejudicial effect upon the outlying States,’ and that it raises costs of production in primary industry for the benefit of the sheltered secondary industries. The report states -

The commission cannot find any measure by which if cun estimate the net burden on State finances of the tariff combined with interstate freetrade. It is probably considerable for South Australia, still greater for Western Australia., doubtful for Tasmania. The adverse effect of the tariff appears to bo exaggerated by the claims stated.

The commission has invited the States to criticize the bases on which the grants are made, to point out the defects, and to suggest improvements. It seems to me that the commission has done its work fairly and justly, and has tried to hold the balance evenly between the States, while at the same time conserving the just interests of the Commonwealth.

In view of the fact that we so frequently hear the Commonwealth Government charged with extravagance, it is refreshing to find that this semi-judicial body has not found any definite evidence of extravagance by the Commonwealth. The commission points out that, as the total Commonwealth expenditure on ordinary services is only £2,500,000, the field for administrative economy is not large. Any one who makes a careful examination of the matter must come to the same conclusion.

The commission examined the effects of the Navigation Act and of the Arbitration Act upon the finances of the States, and has given its opinion in regard to them. It also dealt with another question of which we have not heard so much : Should the Commonwealth he responsible for the legislative and administrative mistakes of the States? The report raises the question of losses arising out of schemes of settlement - not soldier settlement - in Western Australia, irrigation measures in South Australia, and expenditure on railways in that State. If the Commonwealth is to foot the bill for such mistakes, State administration will be weakened in its responsibility, and the safeguards of ordinary prudence will bc swept away. The commission apparently takes the view that the Commonwealth should not be responsible for such losses. However, in certain circumstances the Commonwealth might give sympathetic consideration in determining what assistance a State ought to receive.

The Commonwealth Government has done the only thing possible in the circumstances; it has accepted the recommendations of the commission. It is grossly unfair that the Prime Minister (Mr. Lyons) should have been criticized unjustly in connexion with this matter by persons who have probably not even read the report of the commission. The Prime Minister has always shown his sympathy with those States that arc in financial difficulties, and has always been ready to respond to proposals for their assistance. I was pleased that the honorable member for Darwin (Mr. Bell) referred to the services which are provided for Tasmania. We who come from other parts of the Commonwealth are always pleased to support grants to a particular State when they can be justified, and* to remove injustices under which it may he suffering. We realize that any such injustice reacts against the whole Commonwealth, because we are all part of one nation.

I may mention some of the benefits Tasmania has received during recent years, apart from the special grantLast year, a special rebate of £45,000 was made to the State in connexion with the operation of the flour tax. A further sum of £63,800 was granted for assistance to fruit-growers, and this year the amount has been increased to £70,231, out of a total grant to the whole Commonwealth of £250,000. Before that, assistance was granted to berry fruit-growers, and it is now proposed to spend £180,000 on laying a submarine telephone cable between the mainland and Tasmania. A subsidy of £61,000 over a period of five years is to be made for the establishment of a new air service, and a new regional wireless station is to be erected. In addition, shipping freight rates have been reduced, a new Bass Strait steamer has been provided, and an all-the-year shipping service is to be provided between Sydney and Hobart. It is also proposed to amend the Navigation Act so as to assist the tourist traffic to Tasmania, and in addition grants have been made. I am not asserting that Tasmania has received too much, but she has at least received justice. The fact3 do not bear out the charge that Tasmania has been subjected to unfair treatment.

There is in the commission’s report a table showing the revenue collected by the Commonwealth from each State, and the manner in which it is expended in the various States. The table indicates that Commonwealth revenue is being spent in as fair a manner as possible among all the States of the Commonwealth.

I should like to see Western Australia receive even more generous treatment, and if that State inaugurates a forward policy for the opening up of its northern areas, the Commonwealth should assist it. Some years ago, a special commission reported upon the development of the North-west, and it was revealed that that part of Western Australia is a part of the continent with valuable resources, though it is sparsely occupied and undeveloped. We must realize that, in the interests of the Commonwealth as a whole, those parts cannot be allowed to remain undeveloped. Development has been more rapid in Queensland, because the people of that State have not been afraid to build railways from the coast into the interior. Sooner or later the undeveloped parts of the continent will have to be opened up by the same means. I support the bill, believing that when the representatives of the various States concerned study it carefully, in conjunction with the report of the Grants Commission, they will realize that their States have been fairly treated, and, indeed, have no strong grounds for complaint. In the meantime, they might read the report carefully, criticize the principles laid down, and then make constructive proposals to the Government regarding possible improvements.

Mr HAWKER:
Wakefield

.- I express gratitude to the honorable member for Darling Downs (Sir Littleton Groom) for his patronizing generosity, and endorse what he has said in regard to the thoroughness, fairness, and1 painstaking manner in which the Commonwealth Grants Commission has conducted its investigations, and made its report. Any one who reads the report must be struck with the great advance which it represents upon any previous investigation into the financial relations of the Commonwealth and the States.

After a most careful investigation and analysis, the commission has recommended in the case of Western Australia a grant equal to the largest made in the past, while in the ease of the other two States, it- has actually recommended an increased amount. It has eliminated as a ground for compensation or help certain wasteful expenditure incurred in South Australia and Western Australia. As a South Australian I want to make it quite plain that that State at no time wished to be compensated for blunders or for losses due to incompetence in its representatives. The analysis has been so thorough and fair that, not only has South Australia the relief of a larger grant than it has ever been given previously, but there is also the satisfaction of knowing that the stigma of mendicancy . is completely removed from these payments. The financial relations of the Commonwealth and the States are lifted off the dole basis and placed on one which has in it the prospect of justice and stability in the future.

I would only add that I have found with some surprise that the grant to

Western Australia is not larger. On page 70 of its report, the commission says -

We conclude, then, that the net adverse effect of federal trade policy on the finances of the States is considerable for South Australia, still greater for Western Australia, but doubtful for Tasmania.

In the light of such a conclusion, it is rather astonishing to find that the grant to Western Australia is not larger. I do not hazard a definite opinion as to why that is so; hut I am quite convinced that it is not due to any bias, or to the adoption of an unfair attitude towards Western Australia as a State or the Government as its administrators. My opinion is that the commission has not made sufficient allowance for the way in which the adverse effect of a trade policy is masked when it is incurred by a community that is vigorously developing. The manner in which the adverse effect of a trade policy may lead to the retarding of development, as distinct from curtailment and retrogression, was pointed out in the inquiries that were made some years ago into the tariff. As the honorable” member for Darling Downs has stated, the commission invites criticism, and the production of evidence that may help it to improve its findings next year. I have no doubt that the ability and intelligence which are available in the citizens of Western Australia will be directed usefully and successfully to the production of evidence that will bring the recommendation of the commission completely into line with the opinion held and expressed in that State as to the adverse effects of federal trade policy.

I conclude by welcoming the bill, and in a general way expressing the opinion that this procedure, although it may not be perfect, is a considerable advance upon any previously adopted for the adjustment of these financial relations.

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– This problem has been a vexed one for very, many years. In the past, governments have attempted in a political atmosphere to evaluate the amount of the grant to which the three States concerned were entitled. I think that all honorable members will agree that a political atmosphere is not a fruitful one in which to arrive at an unbiassed judgment as to what each State should receive. For this reason the Government appointed the Commonwealth Grants Commission. It aimed at the creation of an impartial, non-political tribunal that would be able to hammer out all the facts of the case, uninfluenced by party political considerations, and arrive as nearly as possible to a fair and reasonable conclusion. I believe that all honorable members who have had an opportunity to study the report will agree that at least the members of the commission have made an honest and a worthy attempt to arrive at a conclusion based on objective premises.

I was rather disturbed to-night when I heard at least one honorable member cast some doubt on the impartiality of one or more of the members of this commission. The Government very definitely deprecates any suggestion of partiality in connexion with these three men. Any one who is acquainted with the character, the writings, and the achievements of Mr. Eggleston must resent the casting of any slur on him. He has endeavoured to the fullest extent of his high intellectual capacity to reach a right conclusion. Those who know something of the very early history of Tasmania are aware that the name of Giblin has always been an honoured one in that State. I believe that the intimate and prominent association of the Giblin family with the history of Tasmania, the smallest, and, it may be said, the most claimant of the States, is almost an unique circumstance in the Commonwealth. Throughout three or four generations many members of that family have played a prominent and an honorable part in its development. I venture to say that any one who would suggest that Professor Giblin is other, than completely sympathetic with the claims of Tasmania and the other States would find little support in either this Parliament or this community.

I know of no point raised to-night which the commission has not, to the best of its ability, taken into account. In the judgment of one or another, it may have given a wrong evaluation. It does not itself pretend to have reached a final conclusion. But after twelve months of hard work it has reached conclusions, which, off hand, it is most difficult to fault. Within the next twelve months, it may have an opportunity to re-cast some of its considerations, evaluating them differently. I think, that we have every reason to expect that the next report will be more closely reasoned than the last. The State Governments will have an opportunity to see what is in the mind of the commission, and will know what factors have been taken into account, and the weight which has been attached to each.

Few voices have been raised to-night on behalf of the non-claimant States. It is clear that any grants to the smaller States are necessarily made at the expense of the other three, and particularly the more populous States of Victoria and New South Wales. I believe that the commission has held the balance fairly and loyally as between the three claimant States, the receivers, and the three Eastern States, which iu an almost exclusive degree pay these grants through the medium of their taxpayers. If honorable members read the report with close concentration, they will see that the amount finally recommended is built up piece by piece. Having decided the amount which it considers is the maximum amount that can logically be paid to the smaller States, the commission added a percentage for good measure. That is the figure which the Commonwealth has accepted. It does not either attack oi defend the report. The commission was set up with the object of avoiding the determination of the facts in a political atmosphere, and the Government has accepted its recommendations. It cannot be placed in the position of accepting them with either enthusiasm or reluctance. They are accepted because the Government considers that they are the best estimate of the disabilities which have been suffered. In that spirit, I commend the bill to the House.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

1393

page 1137

WESTERN AUSTRALIA GRANT BILL 1934

Second Reading

Bill (on motion by Mr. Casey) read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

page 1137

TASMANIA GRANT BILL 1934

Second Reading

Bill (on motion by Mr. Casey) read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

page 1137

STATES GRANTS BILL 1934

Message recommending appropriation reported.

In committee (Consideration of GovernorGeneral’s message) :

Motion (by Mr. Casey) agreed to -

That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purposes of a bill for an act to grant and apply out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund sums for the purposes of financial assistance to the States of the Commonwealth.

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended; resolution adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Casey and Mr. Latham do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill brought up by Mr. Casey, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this measure is to grant financial assistance amounting to £2,000,000 to the States, as announced by the Prime Minister (Mr. Lyons) in the budget speech. As is well known, depression finance adversely affected both Commonwealth and State Governments, the latter more so than the former. During the last three years the aggregate deficits of the States were -

For the last three years . the excess receipts of the Commonwealth Government were -

making a total for the three years of £6,160,000. As against this excess, it must not be forgotten that there is an accumulated deficit of £17,216,000 which accrued in the four years to 1930-31, and this must be suitably dealt with at an opportune time. Under normal conditions the right course to take would be to apply the full amount of the excess receipts of £6,160,000 in reduction of the accumulated deficit. We are, however, passing through a period which is ‘still abnormal, and, in all the circumstances, the Government considers that it would be reasonable to apply these moneys, collected from taxpayers and others since 1931, for present requirements. In view of the budgetary difficulties of the States, this Government feels that some assistance should be granted to them, and it therefore proposes to make the grant of £2,000,000. The intentions of the Government were communicated to the State Premiers at the recent meeting of the Loan Council, and the Prime Minister stated that the Government did not propose to a’ttach any conditions. In these circumstances no conditions are provided in the bill. It is proposed that the £2,000,000 shall he allocated on the basis of population, and on that basis the amount for each State will be - .

It should be clearly understood that this amount of £2,000,000 is a non-recurring payment. It will be drawn from a fund resulting from fortuitous excess receipts of the past, and it cannot in any way be taken to be recurring.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 1138

STATUTE LAW REVISION BILL 1934

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2 (Repeal and amendment of acts).

Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra

.- This clause takes effect after the repeal of certain validating acts. If one act validates customs duties and another excise duties, would this clause have the effect of imposing two different forms of taxation ?

Mr LATHAM:
AttorneyGeneral · Kooyong · UAP

– These provisions have been carefully drafted so as not to impose taxation, but to leave unaffected the original provisions of certain statutes which impose taxation; that is to say, the repeal is made subject to the proviso that it shall leave unaffected certain things. The Acts Interpretation Act provides generally in section 8 that where an act repeals, in whole or in part, a former act, that repeal shall not affect the rights accrued or obligations incurred under the former act. In the case of the repeal of validating acts, it Avas thought to he safer to incorporate this special provision in the bill. It Avas considered that it might be contended that the section of the Acts Interpretation Act, to which I have referred, being a preserving provision, might not apply in the case of a validating act, and accordingly this proviso has been inserted. Similar provisions are included in other clauses for the purpose of making clear the intention of the Parliament that the repeal shall be a limited repeal, and that the repeal effected by these clauses shall not go so far as to affect the imposition of the taxation imposed under the original acts. My remarks apply also to clause 3.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 3 to 8 agreed to.

Schedules 1 to 3 agreed to.

Schedule 4.

Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra

.- I ask the Attorney General (Mr. Latham) to explain the effect of the proposed omission of the words “ proclaimed organizations “ from the Conciliation and Arbitration Act.

Mr LATHAM:
AttorneyGeneral · Kooyong · UAP

– The Conciliation and Arbitration Act originally provided that plaints might he placed before the court by organizations registered under the act and also by proclaimed organizations. The Governor-General was empowered to proclaim an organization which could then lodge a plaint with the court. It could also have a plaint lodged against it. Those particular provisions were repealed by the Scullin Government in 1930, but the heading was inadvertently left in the act. It is the heading that is now being repealed. The reference to “ proclamation “ is alsobeing removed from section 68 of the act.

Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra

.- I ask the Attorney-General (Mr. Latham) also to explain the effect of the proposed repeal of sections 130 and 151a of the Customs Act 1901-30, and sub-section 3 of section 1 of the Customs Act 1934.

Mr LATHAM:
AttorneyGeneral · Kooyong · UAP

.- Section 130 of the Customs Act granted exemption from certain duties that were payable under the act, but as it was a purely transitory provision which has long been exhausted there is no need to retain it in the act. Section 151a validated statutory rule No. 29 of 1925, as from the date of making until the passing of the Customs Act 1925. The Customs Act 1925 included substantially the same provisions as those contained in the statutory rule, and as those provisions have now been given statutory form the rule is no longer needed. The repeal of sub-section 3 of section 1 of the Customs Act 1934 merely affects the mode of citation. If this amendment is made it will be possible to cite the Customs Act as Customs Act 1901-34.

Schedule agreed to.

Schedules 5 and 6 agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment ; report adopted.

Bill - by leave - read a third time.

page 1139

INVALID AND OLD-AGE PENSIONS APPROPRIATION BILL 1934

Message recommending appropriation reported.

Incommittee (Consideration of GovernorGeneral’s message) :

Motion (by Mr. Casey) agreed to -

That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purposes of a bill for an act to grant and apply out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund a sum for invalid and old-age pensions.

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended; resolution adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Casey and Mr. Latham do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution. .

Bill brought up by Mr. Casey and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this bill, which contains only two clauses, is to provide £10,000,000 out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund for the payment of invalid and old-age pensions. The measure has nothing whatever to do with the rates of pensions or conditions under which they are payable. It is customary to ask Parliament to appropriate £10,000,000 at a time from the Consolidated Revenue Fund, and the money is placed in the trust account from which the pensions are paid fortnightly. Up to the present, a total sum of £161,250,000 has been voted by Parliament for this purpose. The actual expenditure to the 30th June last was £153,658,512, leaving a balance of £7,591,488 to meet future expenditure. As our expenditure for the current year for these pensions is estimated at £12,000,000, the amount now available is only sufficient to cover payments for portion of the year. Parliament is therefore asked to make a further appropriation of £10,000,000.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 1140

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES 1932-33

Messages from the Governor-General transmitting Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure, and Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for Additions, New Works, Buildings, &c, for the financial year ended the 30th June, 1933, and recommending appropriation accordingly, reported.

In committee (Consideration of GovernorGeneral’s messages) :

Motions (by Mr. Casey) agreed to -

Supplementary estimates 1932-33.

That the following further sums be granted to His Majesty to defray the charges for the year 1932-33, for the several services hereunder specified, viz. : -

Supplementary Estimates foe Additions, New Works, Buildings, etc., 1932-33.

That there be granted to His Majesty to the service of the year 1932-33 for the purposes of Additions, New Works, Buildings, &c, a further sum not exceeding £86,584.

Resolutions reported.

Standing Orders suspended; resolutions adopted.

Resolutions of Ways and Means founded on resolutions of supply reported and adopted. Ordered -

That Mr. Casey and Mr. White do prepare and bring in bills to carry out the foregoing resolutions.

page 1140

SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION BILL 1932-33

Bill brought up by Mr. Casey and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr CASEY:
Assistant Treasurer · Corio · UAP

[9.30 J. - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The Supplementary Estimates which have been tabled cover the excess expenditure during the financial year ended tho 30th June, 1.933, which has been made under the authority of the vote for Treasurer’s Advance. As honorable members are aware it is the practice each year to provide on the Estimates the vote, “Advance to the Treasurer “, the purpose of which is to enable the Treasurer to make advances to Commonwealth departments to meet expenditure not provided for under the ordinary divisions of the Estimates. Particulars of such expenditure must always be included in a parliamentary appropriation. Parliament has already been fully informed in regard to the expenditure which is now submitted for a covering appropriation. Full details of the expenditure were furnished when the Estimates and budget papers for 1933-34 were presented to Parliament. In addition, details are also sot out in the Auditor-General’s Report and the Treasurer’s Finance Statement for 1932-33.- The passing of the covering appropriation thus becomes, more or less, a formal matter. Copies of the Supplementary Estimates arc being circulated among honorable members and I, therefore, 3o not propose to refer at length to any of the items of expenditure which will now come up for approval. The vote for Treasurer’s Advance for 1932-33 was £2,000,000. The expenditure amounted to £762,180, as follows: -

Full details of this expenditure are included in the Supplementary Estimates which are now before honorable members for consideration.

The Treasurer’s Statement for the year 1932-33, as required by the Audit Act, was sent, to the Auditor-General on the 9th November, 193$, accompanied by a statement of amounts to be included in Supplementary Estimates, lt is the practice to await the report of the AuditorGeneral before submitting those Estimates to Parliament. This report was not received until the 28th February, 1934, while Parliament was in recess. Parliament did not resume its sittings until the 28th June, 1934. I commend the bill to the House.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 1141

SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION (WORKS AND BUILDINGS) BILL 1932-33

Bill brought up by Mr. Casey, and passed through all stages without amendment or debate.

page 1141

AUSTRALIAN SOLDIERS’ REPATRIATION BILL (No. 2) 1934

In committee (Consideration of Senate’s amendments) :

Title-

A hill for an act to amend . . . the Australian Soldiers’ Repatriation Act 1920-31, . . and to amend that act in relation to pensions payable to returned soldiers suffering from tuberculosis.

Senate’s amendment - Before “ tuberculosis “ insert “ pulmonary “.

Clause 6-

After section thirty-one of the principal act the following section is inserted: - “31a. - (1.) The rate of pension payable under this act to a member of the forces in respect of incapacity caused by tuberculosis shall not be less than the rate specified in column four of the First Schedule opposite to the rate of pay to the member.

Senate’s amendment - Before “tuberculosis” insert “ pulmonary “.

Clause 13 - (1.) The Fifth Schedule to the principal act is amended : - (2.) The amendments effected by paragraphs (»). (6) and (e) of sub-section (1.) of this section shall bc deemed to have commenced on eighteenth day of October, one thousand nine hundred and twenty-two.

Senate’s Amendment - Leave out “ (ft) and (c) “, insert “and (6) and paragraph (et) inserted in the proviso to the Fifth Schedule to the principal act by paragraph (e) “.

Mr MARR:
Minister for Repatriation · Parkes · UAP

– I move -

That the amendments be agreed to.

Under a misapprehension or a misunderstanding of the position, the Government, in its anxiety to make the provision ai liberal as possible, accepted an amendment, the effect of which was to delete the word “ pulmonary “ from the long title of the bill as well as from clause 6. This deletion goes beyond the promise of the Prime Minister (Mr. Lyons) to obtain parliamentary approval of the policy enunciated by Cabinet in August, 1925, when the late Sir Neville Howse promised a pension at the full rate for life to those suffering from war-caused pulmonary tuberculosis. Successive governments have continued the benefit as promised, but the Government feels that extension of the provision to other kinds of tuberculosis goes beyond its intention. Tuberculosis affecting parts other than the respiratory system may be seriously debilitating and incapacitating, and where such incapacity is full, total pension is unhesitatingly granted. On the other hand, tuberculosis of, say, one joint of a finger, or any other joint, may cause the sufferer very little incapacity, or possibly no pensionable degree of disablement. In such a case it is not the intention of the Government to pay a full pension for life to the soldier, his wife, and children. Honorable members will, I am sure, agree that when such a minute affection is present, and when it does not cause the restriction of employment and social activities, caused by tuberculosis of the lungs, it is unreasonable to expect any Government to pay full pension for life.

So that honorable members may under stand thoroughly the nature of the problem presented, I quote the following cases : -

Amputation of a limb entitles the sufferer to a pension at the rate of 75 per cent., if the loss is below the hip or shoulder, and at the rate of80 per cent. if the loss is at the joints mentioned. In addition, an allowance to bring the pension to approximately the full rate is granted. A man who has tuberculosis of one joint would receive 100 per cent. of the pension. This being regarded as unduly liberal, and a discrimination against more severely injured men, the Government desires to insert the word “pulmonary “.

Similarly, if a soldier had his eye removed by a bullet on active service, he would get a pension of 28s. 6d. per week. If he had a tubercular lesion of the eye, he would, unless the amendment is accepted, get a pension of £2 2s. per week. In the event of severe facial disfigurement, a pension at the rate of80 per cent. is granted. If a man had tuberculosis of the skin of his face, even though the lesion were so small that recognition was difficult, the incapacity negligible, and the disease very slowly progressive, he would obtain a pension at the rate of 100 per cent. for life. This would be unfair to the man suffering from facial disfigurement. To avoid anomalies, the Government wishes to insert the word “pulmonary “. Pulmonary tuberculars will thus receive full pension for life unless fraud or impersonation is proved. Sufferers from other types of tuberculosis will receive pension in accordance with the degree of incapacity revealed by medical examination.

Motion agreed to.

Resolution reported; report adopted.

page 1142

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Arbitration (Public Service) Act - Determinations by the Arbitrator, &c. - 1934 -

No. 16. - Amalgamated Postal Workers Union of Australia; and Commonwealth Telephone Officers Association.

No. 17- Amalgamated Postal Workers Union of Australia.

No. 18 - Arms, Explosives and Munition Workers Federation of Australia; Amalgamated Engineering Union; and Australasian Society of Engineers.

Northern Territory Acceptance Act and Northern Territory (Administration) Act-

Ordinance of 1934 - No. 14 - Roads.

Encouragement of Primary Production Ordinance - Regulations.

Seat of Government Acceptance Act and Seat of Government (Administration) Act - Ordinance of 1934 - No,l7 - Court of Petty Sessions.

War Service Homes Act - Arrangement between the War Service Homes Commissioner and the State of Western Australia.

Silting suspended from 9.45 to 11.20 p.m.

page 1142

BILLS RETURNED FROM THE SENATE

The following bills were returned from the Senate without amendment or requests : -

South Australia Grant Bill 1934.

Western Australia Grant Bill 1934.

Tasmania Grant Bill 1934.

States Grants Bill 1934.

Invalid and Old-age Pensions Appropriation Bill 1934.

Supplementary Appropriation Bill 1932-33.

Supplementary Appropriation (Works and Buildings) Bill 1932-33.

page 1142

AUSTRALIAN EASTERN MISSION

Debate resumed from the 6th July (vide page 338), on motion by Mr. Latham -

That the paper be printed.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 1142

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Motion (by Mr. Lyons) agreed to -

That the House, at its rising, adjourn until a date and hour to be fixed by Mr. Speaker, which time of meeting shall be notified by Mr. Speaker to each member by telegram or letter.

page 1142

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Motion (by Mr. Lyons) - by leave - agreed to -

That leave of absence be given to every member of the House of Representatives from the determination of this sitting of the House to the date of its next sitting.

page 1143

ADJOURNMENT

Valedictory: Retirement of Mr. Speaker - Nationality of Married Women

Mr LYONS:
Prime Minister and Treasurer · Wilmot · UAP

– I move -

That the House do now adjourn.

I take this opportunity to express to you, Mr. Speaker, our very deep appreciation of the manner in which you have conducted your duties during the time you have occupied the chair. Your courtesy, impartiality and ability have created a deep impression on all honorable members of the House. I feel that I am speaking, not only for those honorable members who are present, but also for those who are absent, when I say that we regret very sincerely that, when the House meets again, you will not occupy the position that you have filled with so much credit to yourself, and so much advantage to Parliament, for more than two and a half years. On behalf of all honorable members, I wish you, during your retirement, every success, and a long life with happiness.

I also wish to express my appreciation of the courtesy that has been always extended to myself and the other members of the Government by the members of this Parliament. We shall go out from this Parliament still retaining our political differences, but with no personal differences whatever. I specially appreciate the courtesy that has been shown to me and other members of the Government by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Scullin). The right honorable member has established a reputation for his ability in the discharge of his duties. He fights hard, but he fights fairly. While it is the duty of the Leader of the Opposition to oppose, it is also his duty - and the present Leader of the Opposition has recognized it - to assist in the conduct of the business of the House. I therefore wish to express my thanks to him for what he has done. He has helped considerably to maintain the fine personal feelings which exist between all parties in this House. What I have just said applies also to the leaders of the other sections in the chamber, and to all the members of this Parliament. We cannot express the hope that success will come during the impending election to our opponents politically, but we hope that personal success will be theirs, not only immediately, but during the rest of their lives.

I also desire to place on record our appreciation of the fine services rendered by the officers of this chamber. I make no distinction between them - all have been faithful and diligent in the discharge of their duties. Indeed, without their assistance, it would be difficult for the Government, or for the individual members of Parliament, to carry out their duties. In particular, I do not wish to overlook the services rendered by the Hansard staff. On a previous occasion, before Parliament adjourned at the end of a session, we unfortunately placed too great a strain upon the members of that staff. On this occasion, though we have had long sittings, we have, fortunately, not had to place the same strain upon them. We particularly appreciate the fine work that they have done during this short session, and others that have preceded it.

I take this opportunity, too, to thank the members of my own party for the loyalty that they have shown towards me and the help that they have given to me. Particularly do I thank the members of the Ministry for their loyalty and assistance.

Before the Parliament re-assembles we shall engage in a conflict that perhaps will be keener than those that have been waged on the floor of this House. I hope that it will be fought on political grounds alone, and without the intrusion of personal bitterness.

Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra

.- I appreciate the remarks of the right honorable the Prime Minister (Mr, Lyons). I hope, however, that he will not emphasize too strongly the assistance that the Opposition has given to the Government. I hasten to assure him and the country generally that we have assisted the Government only on the rare occasions when it has been right to do so, and that on many other occasions we have endeavoured to correct its faults. I hope that on the next occasion when speeches of this nature are being made in this chamber, I may be the one to congratulate another honorable gentleman upon the success of his efforts to help the Government.

I join with the Prime Minister in expressing appreciation of the manner in which you, Mr. Speaker, have conducted the affairs of this Parliament during the last two and a half years. The success of the parliamentary institution depends upon the conduct of its business, and that in turn depends very largely, indeed, upon the personnel of the presiding officers. You, sir, have displayed such wonderful fairness, courtesy, and consideration, that very few men could find it in their hearts to ignore your rulings, because they have always been right and just. As you have said at another gathering of honorable members, you have been guided by an excellent staff of clerks. But the aptitude with which you fitted yourself for the position within a few days of your election to it won the admiration of every one who has been privileged to witness the manner in which you have discharged your functions. I join with the Prime Minister in expressing regret at the fact that we shall not again have the pleasure of welcoming you as a member of this Parliament. I hope that, in your retirement, you will enjoy the rest that you have richly earned after many years of faithful service on behalf of the people of this country.

I also express appreciation of the work of the Clerks of the House. We are thankful for the fact that we have’ such efficient, officers. The machinery of Parliament would not run smoothly if there were not efficiency in the ranks of its staffs. The standard of our Hansard staff is still maintained at a high level, and I congratulate the present Principal Parliamentary Reporter upon the smoothness with which the important instrument that he controls has run, and the excellence of the work that has been done during his first Parliament in that position. We are indebted also to the messengers of the House, who are ever prompt to respond to the call of honorable members. I personally thank them for what they have done for me. I take this opportunity, too, to voice my appreciation of the staff of the Parliamentary Library, for their wonderful efficiency and the very obliging way in which they have undertaken research and other work for honorable members. Their assistance is greatly appreciated.

I have been asked by the ex-Speaker, the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Makin), who had to leave at an earlier hour, to express his personal appreciation of your courtesy, Mr. Speaker, and his admiration of the ability that you have displayed in the Chair. He speaks with a personal knowledge of what is entailed by the duties of your high office.

In these, the concluding moments of this Parliament, I say to all honorable members, some of whom I may not again meet in this chamber, that whatever has occurred during the last two and a half years, or in others that have preceded them, even in the heat of debate and the storm of contest, no personal enmities have been made by me. It would be a poor cause that aroused such enmities. We shall go into the next election with the gloves off, but we will not hit below the belt. Let the best men and the best party win.

Mr NAIRN:
Perth

.- I crave the indulgence of the House to refer briefly to the question of the nationality of women. I understand from the Prime Minister (Mr. Lyons) that the Government is not prepared to introduce, at all events as a government measure, a bill granting equality of the sexes in connexion with nationality. Will he be prepared, should a favorable ‘opportunity occur, to facilitate the introduction by a private member of a bill embodying the principle of equality ?

Sir LITTLETON GROOM:
Darling Downs

– I am sure, Mr. Speaker, that your colleagues from Queensland would join with me in expressing sincere regret that they will not. have the pleasure of seeing you again in the chair. They appreciate your kindliness and courtesy, and, above all, your loyalty in friendship. May I personally congratulate you on the manner in which you have presided over the proceedings of this House? You have acted with fairness and impartiality. You have added dignity to the Chair, for you have endeavoured to uphold its best traditions, and you are leaving the Parliament with the goodwill of all members of the House.

Mr DENNIS:
Batman

.- On this, the last meeting of the present Parliament, and as one of tho new members of the House, I express my thanks to you, Mr. Speaker, for the uniform courtesy extended by you to all honorable members, and for the impartial way in which you have directed our proceedings. We express the hope that you may be long spared, with your good wife, to enjoy the rest to which you are well entitled.

On behalf of the rank and file of the party to which I belong, I express appreciation of the thoughtful consideration which the Prime Minister (Mr. Lyons) lias shown to us throughout the life of this Parliament, and I desire to convey similar sentiments to the members of the Cabinet generally. We have to recognize, as I am sure the right honorable gentleman does, that he is the Prime Minister, and that those associated with him on the treasury benches are his Ministers. It is the duty of all Ministers to serve the people and work in their best interests. Similarly honorable members generally should act in such a way as to serve the best interests of their constituencies. I have enjoyed my experiences in this Parliament in doing the best I could for the people who sent me here, and I have no doubt that I shall be a member of the new Parliament after the 15th September next. It is gratifying to the Prime Minister and the members of his Cabinet generally to know that the main object for which we have assembled here during the period of this Parliament has been achieved. The financial position of Australia has been greatly improved, and at least a percentage of those who were unable to obtain employment are now at work.

Mr LYONS:
Prime Minister and Treasurer · Wilmot · UAP

– I thank the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Dennis) for his kindly remarks about the members of the Cabinet and myself, and for his expressions of confidence in us. I can assure the honorable member for Perth (Mr. Nairn) that, on a future occasion, if I have an opportunity, I shall facilitate the submission to this Parliament by a private member of a bill on the lines indicated by him in regard to the nationality of married women.

I regret that in moving the adjournment motion, I omitted to express the appreciation of the Government and of honorable members generally of the services of the Chairman of Committees (Mr. Bell). It may be that as a fellow

Tasmanian I found it somewhat easy to overlook this duty that I find pleasure indischarging. We all deeply appreciate the ability and courtesy with which the Chairman of Committees has carried out’ the duties entrusted to him, and also the impartiality that has characterized his conduct in the chair.

Mr SPEAKER:
Hon. G. H. Mackay

– I appreciate the references that have been made to myself on my imminent retirement from political life. I shall leave the Parliament with a great deal of regret. My record in parliamentary life covers two and a half years of service in the Queensland Parliament, and seventeen years of service in .this Parliament. During such a long period one makes so many friends that the breaking off of such associations is difficult; but all things must come to an end. Although I shall terminate my political career with the dissolution of this Parliament, I hope that, on some later occasion, I may have the privilege of occupying a seat in one of the galleries in this House, and watching it at work. The associations that I have made during my political life will always be a happy memory to me. My voluntary retirement from what may be regarded as a safe seat has excited a degree of curiosity in the press and elsewhere. Some people find it difficult to understand why an honorable member should wish to vacate a seat for which he has been returned undefeated over such a long period of years. All I can say is that I think that one may remain in Parliament too long. I express my thanks to the electors of the division of Lilley for their loyal support for so many years. I am sure that the electorate will be well represented by the gentleman who is likely to he chosen to succeed me as its representative.

I appreciate the remarks that have been made regarding the work of the officers and staff of the Parliament, for they were well deserved. I am glad also that the Prime Minister (Mr. Lyons) made reference to the work of the honorable member for Darwin (Mr. Bell) as Chairman of Committees. That honorable gentleman has been most industrious in the discharge of the duties of his office, and has been of great assistance to mc. I wish now, personally, to thank all the members of the House for the help they have given me in the discharge of my duties. They have all been courteous, and obedient to the direction of the Chair. No Speaker could wish for more than that. I wish every honorable member good health, a long life, and happiness. “Question resolved in the affirmative. “House adjourned at 11.40 p.m. (Thursday) until a date and hour to he fixed by Mr. Speaker.

page 1146

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

The following answers to questions were circulated : -

Census Unemployment Figures

Mr Scullin:

n asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

What is the reason for the delay in publishing the figures showing the number of unemployed in Australia as revealed at the census ?

Mr Lyons:
UAP

– The compilation of the figures showing the numbers of unemployed in Australia is being executed as part of the compilation of all matters of inquiry on the census schedule. There has been no delay in this work. The direct results of these compilations for Australia will be published as soon as they are available.

Mr Lyons:
UAP

s. - On the 25th July, the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley) asked me the following question, without notice : -

Is the Government prepared to make available figures showing the total number of unemployed persons of all grades in the Commonwealth, youths and otherwise, as disclosed by the recent census?

I am now in a position to inform the honorable member that the compilation of the figures showing the numbers of unemployed in Australia is being executed as part of the compilation of all matters of inquiry on the census schedule. The direct results of these compilations will be published as soon as they are available.

Loans : Commonwealth Bank Flotations

Mr Makin:

n asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

  1. What are the amounts of loan (separarately stated) arranged and floated through the Commonwealth Iiank?
  2. What is the amount charged in brokerage, commission, under-writing and other flotation expenses on such loans, showing the actual charges to each loan?
Mr Lyons:
UAP

– The answer to the honorable members questions is as follows : - 1 and 2. The particulars of the loans floated through the Commonwealth Bank in Australia since the national debt conversion loan in 1931 are as follows: -

These loans were underwritten except the loan df the 22nd May, 1933, for £8,462,000. Full details of the first three of these loan raising! may bc found on pages 128 and 131 of the budget papers 1933-34, and page 127 of the budget papers 1934-35. Final figures for the June, 1934, loan are not yet available.

Invalid and Old- Age Pensions.

Mr Lyons:
UAP

s. - The information is being obtained from the Deputy Commissioners of Pensions in the several States, and a reply will be furnished as soon as possible to the question asked by the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Makin) regarding claims upon relatives of pensioners.

Public Service - Furlough Payments on Retirement.

Mr Gander:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Will officers of the Commonwealth Public Service who, during the current year, have retired, and have received their salary in a lump sum in lieu of furlough not taken during their service, be paid the 5 per cent. restoration to salary?

Mr Lyons:
UAP

s.- No. The officers were paid salary in lieu of furlough under the conditions applying at the time of retirement.

International Postal Congress, Cairo

Mr Gardner:

r asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

  1. Who comprised the members of the delegation to the Postal Congress at Cairo?
  2. What was the total expenditure involved?
  3. What were the individual expenses of each member of the delegation?
Mr Archdale Parkhill:
UAP

– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follows : -

  1. Delegate, the Postmaster-General, the Hon. R. Archdale Parkhill. Also accompanied by Mr. A. J. Odgers as secretary, and Mr. M. B. Harry, officer of the Postmaster-General’s Department.
  2. The total expenditure brought to account in Australia is £2,637, excluding Loudon expenditure not yet brought to account, and estimated at approximately £.300.
  3. The Hon. Archdale Parkhill, £1,01416s. 10d.; Mr. A. J. Odgers, £570 12s.; Mr. M. B. Harry, £414 15s.10d. The balance of expenditure brought to account £627 15s. 4d., was incurred by incidental expenses, such as payment to interpreter, loss on exchange, &c. The expenditure of £2,637 includes expenditure incurred in connexion with the visit to London and subsequent return to Australia.

Value of Banking Premises

Mr Lyons:
UAP

s. - On the 24th July, the right honorable member for Yarra (Mr. Scullin) asked the following questions, upon notice: - 1. (a) What is the improved capital value of the banking premises shown in the returns sent in for land tax purposes by the following individual banks : - Bank of Australasia, Union Bank of Australia Limited, English Scottish and Australian Bank, Bank of New South Wales, Commercial Banking Company of Sydney Limited,National Bank of Australasia Limited, Queensland National Bank, Bank of Adelaide, (b) What is the total for the banks mentioned ?

  1. What is the unimproved value of the banking premises of these companies assessed by theland tax branch?

The answer to the honorable member’s questions is as follows: - 1 and 2. While the information contained in land tax returns is not obtained under “secrecy” provisions, as is the case with income tax returns, it has never been the practice to make public in this House the private affairs of any taxpayers disclosed in their land tax returns. Under the existing practice of the department, an intending purchaser of a block of land may obtain certain information from the Comissioner of Taxation on payment of a search fee. It is not considered, however, that such a practice warrants information being made public regarding individual taxpayers of such a character as that which is embodied in the question. It would establish an undesirable precedent, which would necessitate similar information being supplied in the case of any person or company concerning which any honorable member might ask for information. It is regretted for these reasons that the information sought cannot be made available.

Tennis Courts, etc., in Federal Capital Territory.

Mr Perkins:
UAP

– Yesterday the honorable member for East Sydney (Mr. Ward) asked me the following questions, upon notice: -

How many (a) tennis courts, (b) golf links, and (c) bowling greens, have been constructed, or arc in course of construction, at Canberra, and what is the total “cost of each?

I now desire to advise him as follows: -

  1. Seventy-nine. In some instances courts were included in other development, as at the Military College, the Hotel Canberra, and at various camps, and costs are not available. Some of the courts, also, were constructed wholly or partly by voluntary labour, the value of which has not been assessed. The total cost, as recorded, is £16,875.
  2. Two. The total cost is shown as £14,257). This does not cover the value of work done by voluntary labour, but it includes the cost of a survey and expert report upon sites for future development upon the provision of the lake scheme.
  3. Five, including one under construction. The total recorded cost to date is £4,607. This, however, does not include the value of voluntary labour or work paid for by the clubs themselves, and, as in (a), certain costs are not available, the work having been included as part of other development.

Vessel for Australian Coastal Trade.

Mr Lyons:
UAP

s. - On the 13th July, the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Ward) addressed certain questions to me, without notice, in connexion with a statement in the Melbourne Herald newspaper to the effect that £500,000 was to be expended by McIlwraith, McEacharn Limited in the purchase in England of a new motor ship of 10,000 tons for the Australian coastal trade. In fulfilment of my promise I brought his inquiries to the notice of the shipping company mentioned. The managing director of the company, in reply, has made reference to the Tariff Board’s report and recommendation on vessels exceeding 1,000 tons gross register, dated 16th February, 1932, and has intimated that, apart from the technical difficulties involved, the cost of building a passenger vessel of 10,000 tons in Australia would be prohibitive.

Export of Stud Sheep

Mr White:
UAP

e. - On the 29th June, the honorable member for Cook (Mr. Riley) asked the following questions, upon notice: -

  1. What was the total number of stud sheep exported from the Commonwealth for the years 1931- 32, 1932-33, and 1933-34?
  2. How many permits to export stud sheep have been issued for the year 1933-34?
  3. To whom were the permits issued for the year 1933-34, and (a) what were the names of the owners and of the exporters, and (b) what number of sheep was exported to each country ?

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

  1. Year 1931-32, 273 stud sheep; year 1932- 33, 1,007 stud sheep; year 1933-34, 3,700 stud sheep. The 273 stud sheep exported in 1931- 32 consisted of 41 merino rams, of which 35 were exported to New Zealand, and six to New Hebrides, and 232 stud sheep (twelve rams and 220 ewes), of breeds other than merino, exported to various countries. The 1,007 stud sheep exported during the year 1932- 33 consisted of 64 merinos (55 rams and nine ewes), of which 52. were exported to New Zealand and twelve to New Hebrides, and 943 stud sheep (102 rams and 841 ewes), of breeds other than merino, exported to various countries. The 3,700 stud sheep exported in 1933- 34 consisted of 229 merinos (219 rams and ten ewes), of which 215 were exported to New Zealand and fourteen to the New Hebrides, and of 3,471 stud sheep (321 rams and 3,150 ewes), of breeds other than merino, exported to various countries.
  2. Twenty-seven permits.
  3. Particulars of the number of sheep exported to each country during the years 1931-32, 1932-33, and 1933-34 are-

I regret that I am unable to furnish information as to whom the permits for the year 1933-34 were issued, and the names of the owners and exporters of sheep in that year, as it is not the practice of the department to divulge information regarding the business of individual concerns.

Federal Capital Territory - Unemployment Relief

Mr Perkins:
UAP

s. - Yesterday, the honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley) asked me the following questions, upon notice : -

  1. Is it a fact that the problem of the relief of unemployment in the federal territories is the exclusive responsibility of the Commonwealth Government?
  2. Is it a fact that married men with families are now receiving only one week’s work in three on relief work in the Federal Capital Territory ?
  3. Is it a fact that single men receive only one week’s work in five and even six weeks?
  4. Is it a fact that married men with families receive in some cases a net return of as low as 25s. per week after deductions have been made?
  5. If so, is it the intention of the Government to make available sufficient work for the unemployed to enable them to pay their way and buy clothing?

I now desire to advise the honorable member as follows: -

  1. This is a matter of opinion, but the view of the Commonwealth Government is that governments should assist in the relief of unemployment.
  2. Early in 1931, the Scullin Government introduced the system of giving married men one week’s work in three. Under the present Government, in addition, full work for married men is provided in the months of June and December. During November, 1933, the allotment of work to married men was one week in two.
  3. In December, 1931, the Scullin Government introduced Hie system of giving single nien one week’s work in Ave. Under the present Government, in addition, full work for single men 1b provided ia the month of December, mid the amount of work provided is increased during the month of June. During November, 1D33, the allotment of work to single men was one week in four.
  4. Wages earned oil relief work are subject to deductions for current rent and as. per week for electricity. In some instances, the wages earned are also subject to garnishee orders obtained by creditors. Thus the amount left varies in proportion to the wages earned mid tins amount of rent paid by an employee. The amount of rent deducted from relief workers is credited to them for assessing their eligibility for ration relief additional tu relief work. This is a continuance of the policy of the previous Government.
  5. The Government proposes to continue the more liberal policy which it has introduced.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 1 August 1934, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1934/19340801_reps_13_144/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant