Senate
18 December 1913

5^th Parliament · 1^st Session

QUESTION
- SECOND SESSION
QUESTION
- POLICY OF GOVERNMENT
QUESTION
- SAVINGS BANKS COMPETITION
QUESTION
- PREMIERS’ CONFERENCE
QUESTION
- KALGOORLIE TO POET AUGUSTA RAILWAY
QUESTION
- COCKATOO ISLAND DOCKYARD
QUESTION
- POST AND TELEGRAPH DEPARTMENT
QUESTION
- PAYMENT OF PENSIONS
PAPER
APPROPRIATION BILL
QUESTION
- NAVAL BOARD
SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION BILL 1911-12
SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION (WORKS AND BUILDINGS) BILL 1911-12
SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION BILL 1912-13
SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION (WORKS AND BUILDINGS) BILL 1912-13
PINE CREEK TO KATHERINE RIVER RAILWAY BILL
NORFOLK ISLAND BILL
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE BILL
- Second Reading
COMMONWEALTH PUBLIC SERVICE BILL
- Second Reading
COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS BILL (No. 2)
SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION BILL 1911-12
SUPPLEMENT ARY APPROPRIATION BILL 1912-13
BUREAU OF AGRICULTURE BILL
APPROPRIATION BILL
PINE CREEK TO KATHERINE RIVER RAILWAY BILL
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE BILL
COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS BILL No. 2
SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT
ADJOURNMENT
- Close of Session

The President took the chair at 11 a.m., and road prayers.

page 4658

QUESTION

SECOND SESSION

Senator NEEDHAM:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– In view of the statement in this morning’s newspapers that a meeting of his party has been held, is the Leader of the Government here in a better position to-day to inform the Senate when it is likely to be called upon to resume its labours!

Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Defence · NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– I am in the same position this morning in regard to this matter as I was in last night.

Senator FINDLEY:
VICTORIA

– Is it not possible for another meeting of the Ministerialists to be held, so that pressure may be brought to bear on some of the representatives of New South Wales, and an agreement arrived at as to the autumn session which the Government apparently are anxious to have )

Senator MILLEN:

– There may be some practical value in the suggestion of the honorable senator, and I shall communicate with the Prime Minister.

page 4658

QUESTION

POLICY OF GOVERNMENT

Senator LONG:
TASMANIA

– As varied opinions seem to have been expressed at the Ministerial meeting yesterday, will the Leader of the Government here tell the Senate which opinion prevailed, and whether the policy of the Liberal Government during the coming year is to be one of retreat or of advance?

Senator MILLEN:
LP

– The motto and the policy of the Government with which I am associated is “ progress all the time.”

Senator Long:

– Yes; into recess.

page 4658

QUESTION

SAVINGS BANKS COMPETITION

Senator CLEMONS:
Minister (without portfolio) · TASMANIA · LP

– The policy of the Government on this point has been clearly stated, and is, I think, quite thoroughly understood by the honorable senator. The chief point of our policy is that we object to the duplication that is going on. That question has yet to be considered. No decision, as the honorable senator is aware, has been arrived at.

page 4658

QUESTION

PREMIERS’ CONFERENCE

Senator O’KEEFE:
TASMANIA

– C - Can the Leader of the Government here give the Senate any idea as to the principal matters of Federal and State importance which they intend to bring before the proposed conference of State Premiers?

Senator MILLEN:
LP

– I speak with some reservation when I say that I believe that the matters on which a consultation with the representatives of the States will be sought are the competition between Savings Banks, the matter of joint action re- gardiag the better utilization of the waters of the River Murray, the question of a uniform railway gauge, and the transfer of the State debts.

Senator NEEDHAM:

– I ask the Minister of Defence whether, if the proposed conference between the representatives of the Commonwealth and of the State Governments is. held, a report of the proceedings of that body . will be printed and circulated amongst honorable senators.

Senator MILLEN:

– I do not think that I can give either an affirmative or negative reply to that question. In the past, when the State Premiers have met in conference, it has been the practice for some report of their proceedings to be issued. But when the heads of Governments meet to confer, the whole value of their consultations would be seriously minimized if their proceedings were carried on with shorthand reporters close at hand. I have no doubt, however, thatthe result jof the proceedings of any such conferencewill be supplied both to the Parliament and the country.

Later ;

Senator PEARCE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917; UAP from 1931

– The Leader of the Senate has intimated the subjects which will probably be discussed at the Conference between the Commonwealth and State Governments. I noticed that the honorable senator did not refer to the question of the establishment of a Federal Bureau of Agriculture. Is it not proposed to confer with the Governments of the States on that subject with a view to avoid duplication of effort?

Senator MILLEN:
LP

– I mentioned the subjects likely to be considered with some reservation and hesitancy. That referred to by Senator Pearce was not mentioned. I will submit the suggestion to my colleagues, and we shall consider whether it would be expedient to include it.

Senator FINDLEY:

– I ask whether the Government will favorably consider the advisability of discussing with the representatives of the States’ Governments the adoption of some means to secure that the same electoral rolls may be used for State and Commonwealth elections? Some arrangement should be entered into to secure, if possible., the adoption of the same boundaries for electorates, and a better understanding generally in connexion with the enrolment of the people, whether as citizens of the Commonwealth or of the State.

Senator MILLEN:

– In answer to Senator Findley I may say that there is a provision in our electorallaw which contemplates what he proposes, but it has; so far, remained a dead letter, owing to the difficulties which arise through the differences of the franchise and of electoral boundaries. The electoral authorities of the Commonwealth are only too anxious to give effect, so far as possible, to the idea referred to, and the present Government will do what they can to bring about what would clearly make for economy.

Senator RAE:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the Minister given consideration to the fact that it is not the difference of franchise or of electoral boundaries only, but the different representation in the various States which is the cause of the difficulty?

Senator MILLEN:

– These are the difficulties which, no doubt, have caused the State Governments to stand aloof up to the present in this matter. - All that I can say is that the idea of joint action is there, and the Commonwealth Government are endeavouring to steer towards it.

page 4659

– I shall be glad to do so.

Senator DE LARGIE:

– I wish to ask the Minister representing the Minister of Home Affairs whether it is not a fact that there is a greater supply of sleepers than there - is of rails at the Kalgoorlie end of the line? I understand that sufficient sleepers are on hand to construct 70 miles of line, whereas the supply of rails is sufficient only for the construction of 50 miles of line ?

Senator McCOLL:

– I cannot answer that question. To-day I have been in communication with the officer who controls this business, and I obtained from him the information which I have already given. I will endeavour to get further information during the course of the morning.

Senator DE LARGIE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– I wish to direct the attention of the Minister representing the Minister of Home Affairs to a very lengthy paragraph which appears in this morning’s newspapers touching upon what is practically party politics, and evidently inspired by the Consulting EngineerinChief. In- that paragraph, statements are made regarding the transcontinental railway with which I do not agree, and I ask the Minister whether the Government are going to permit the Consulting

QUESTION

COCKATOO ISLAND DOCKYARD

Senator McDOUGALL:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– I desire, to ask the Minister of Defence how far negotiations have proceeded in London towards the engagement of a manager for the Cockatoo Island dockyard?

Senator MILLEN:
LP

– I hope to be able to announce in the course of a few days that those negotiations have been successfully completed.

Senator RAE:

– Arising out of the reply which has just been given, I ask the Minister whether it is a fact - as is rumoured - that the services of the present acting-manager of Cockatoo Island dockyard ar.e practically at an end, and that he has been informed that his engagement will terminate very shortly?

Senator MILLEN:

– Literally the rumour is not correct, but as a matter of fact it is. Mr. Cutler understands that he will be . relieved from the per formance of the duties of the office to which he was appointed some time ago as soon as a new manager arrives to take up the work.

page 4661

QUESTION

POST AND TELEGRAPH DEPARTMENT

Inman Valley Telephone Line: Vacant Land

Senator SENIOR:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– I desire to ask the Minister representing the PostmasterGeneral if he has obtained the promised information in regard to a telephone line at Inman Valley, and also in regard to the vacant land adjoining the Adelaide Post Office?

Senator McCOLL:
LP

– In regard to this matter I wish to say that a telegram was despatched to the Deputy PostmasterGeneral in South Australia who was asked to furnish a reply as soon as possible. I expect that reply to reach me during the course of the day, and I shall be glad to let the honorable senator see it.

page 4661

QUESTION

PAYMENT OF PENSIONS

Senator MULLAN:
QUEENSLAND

– I wish to ask the Honorary Minister whether payments under the Invalid and Old-age Pensions Act and the Maternity Allowance Act, which I understand are due about Christmas Day, will be paid before Christmas ?

Senator CLEMONS:
LP

– It has been decided to pay them a little earlier than Christmas.

page 4661

PAPER

Senator CLEMONS laid on the table the following paper: -

Patents Act 1903-1909 - Regulations amended - Statutory Rules 1913, No. 310.

page 4662

APPROPRIATION BILL

In Committee (Consideration resumed from 17th December, vide page 4607).

– It was never in my mind to make any reflection upon him.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I may point out, however, that whilst this discussion is not actually out of order, Senator Lynch appeared to me to be travelling a little wide of the mark.

Senator LYNCH:

– I should like to put honorable senators right if they suppose that I intended to reflect upon Sir John Forrest. It worries me that I cannot properly imitate his style. Sir John Forrest, speaking in Western Australia in May last, indulged in several inaccuracies concerning the Labour party. He said -

The system they were following in finance was disastrous. £18,000,000 bad gone into the Federal Treasury during .the last two years, most of which would have gone into the States’ coffers. With this large increase of revenue, one .would have thought it would be an incentive to the Federal Government to” reduce taxation so that the States individually would have more money to build railways, and so open up and develop their country. His party was not in favour of this great taxation.

There was an intention, clearly revealed by the Treasurer, that if his party gained a majority in this Parliament, it would in some way reduce taxation. The electors of Western Australia and of the Commonwealth generally, were solemnly informed that that would be the result of a change of Government. They were told that when the Liberal party came into power there would be more money to hand over to the State Treasurers. If this Government has not reduced taxation, why not? Have they introduced any measure with the object of keeping faith with the electors? They have done nothing of the kind. On the contrary, their Budget shows that they have added 15 per cent, to the expenditure of the Commonwealth.

The CHAIRMAN:

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

– I have not the detailed information for which Senator Findley asked, nor could I well get it except in the nature of a return. When I tell him how the thing happens he will understand the position.. The Land Tax Act provides for the imposition of penalties which are set out, and have, to be primarily enforced. Senator Findley will probably remember that in that Act we adopted a procedure which is common to most Acts. We reserved to ourselves a discretionary power in. the administration of the Act to investigate cases in which a fine had to be imposed under the law,’ and to see whether there were any. extenuating circumstances which justified the remission of . the fine. Jt is a common practice to remit fines. In answer to the question put by Senator Turley, I wish to say that when the item to which he referred appeared previously, a special appropriation was necessary. Since then an Act has been passed which renders the adoption of that course unnecessary.

Proposed votes agreed to.

Attorney-General’s Department.

Divisions 27 to 32, £56,155, agreed to.

Department of External Affairs.

Divisions 33 to 39, £676,530.

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– This Department embraces the Northern Territory and its development, and while I am not disposed to offer anyunfriendly criticism of these estimates, , I wish to direct the attention of the Minister representing the Minister of External Affairs to the need which exists for encouraging on a systematic scale the mining industry in that Territory. Let me point to a case by way of illustration. There is the Tanami gold-field, which,, of course, is approached from the port of Wyndham. I have been in close touch with the men who discovered that field - with Mr. Laurie and others, who havebeen working there for the past eight or nine years. Tanami is, I suppose, the most outlandish part of this continent. These men, until quite recently, when the late Government granted them a two-monthly mail service, enjoyed absolutely no postal facilities. They havehad no assistance given them to determine what mineral wealth exists there. It is true that after a long tug-of-war I succeeded in getting the Government Geologist to visit the field with a view to ascertaining what are its mineral resources, and whether there are any prospects which warrant the encouragement, of deep sinking, and the erection of a public battery. Coming, as I do, from Western Australia, I have no hesitationin saying that the Commonwealth Government does not approach withinmeasurable distance of the WesternAustralian Government in the matterof the encouragement which it affords to the mining industry. I want specially to emphasize the fact that* the mining industry is always the pioneering industry in any country. When the mineral resources of any field become exhausted the people who have been getting; their livelihood there turn their attention to other pursuits, and thus help to populate the neighbourhood. At Tanami there are ten men working in the industry, without even adequate police protection. Quite recently the blacks came along and engaged in a tribal war on the sand plain just outside this place. A number of the combatants upon both sides were killed, and the blacks sent a message to Mr. Laurie that he and his mates would be the next victims. These !ten miners have been holding the fort for the rest of Australia for the past eight or nine years. They have been subsisting on the hardest of fare, and running the risks which are always attendant upon pioneering life in Australia. Only a little time back Mr. Laurie’s mate went out towards the Wave Hill station for the purpose of securing provisions, and perished on the track. That circumstance in itself is indicative of the heroism of these men, who, up to the present moment, have not even adequate police protection. The Government Geologist has recently been examining the field, and I am glad to say that the present Government have expedited that work very materially. We all hope that his inquiries will prove that Tanami is a mineral field of great promise indeed. Not only do its mineral resources need to be developed, but we require to settle a prosperous population in that neighbourhood. When we consider what the Government of Western Australia do to encourage the mining industry we must admit that the policy pursued by the Commonwealth Government in this connexion is not creditable to them. The men at Tanami are dollying sufficient gold to provide themselves with a livelihood, and to hold the fort there for the remainder of Australia. They are 250 miles distant from any other centre, of population. I say that they should’ have adequate police protection without delay, and that they should also be provided with better mail communication. I should like to see them supplied with a monthly service. Above all, the Government should not be niggardly in their encouragement of the mining industry. It would be well if we even borrowed money to encourage that industry in the Northern Territory.

Senator Maughan:

– It would be reproductive in every way.

Senator LYNCH:

– The men who go out into these remote areas are really the salt of our population. Their services cannot be too highly appreciated, and we cannot go too far in the direction of providing them with the conveniences of civilization.

Senator PEARCE:
Western Australia

– In regard to Papua, I notice in this division an item of £12,500 for the development of oil fields. I would like to ask the Minister representing the Minister of External Affairs whether the Government contemplate allowing private firms to obtain control of these oil fields?

Senator Clemons:

– Monopolistic control 1

Senator PEARCE:

– Any sort of control. I have information that syndicates are being formed in Melbourne to-day whose avowed object it is to obtain oil concessions in Papua. We know that oil has been discovered there. I say that if the Government barter away any of that oil land under the impression that they are reserving sufficient for themselves, they may afterwards discover that they have parted with the land which contains the supply. That has happened before in the history of oil fields. I understand that the Government have secured the services of an expert who ia making a geological report upon the subject. I would remind them that 14,000 tons of oil will be annually required for the Navy, and that the British Government are making most extraordinary efforts to secure control of certain oil supplies. This is not a question of party at all, but one of self-preservation. I trust that the Government will be able to give us an assurance that they have no intention of allowing any of this oil land to get into the hands of private enterprise.

Senator CLEMONS:
TasmaniaHonorary Minister · LP

– Whilst the Government are glad to have had thu warning by Senator Pearce, I can assure the honorable senator that their eyes are wide open to the possibility of the dangers he has referred to. They will allow no carelessness on their part which may lead to any development unfavorable to the interests of the Commonwealth. The possibility of the opening up of the oil-fields of Papua is being . very closely watched. Nothing in the shape of concessions has so far been,, or . is likely to be, given by the present Government. I can go further, and say with safety that until, in the opinion . qf. the Government, it is established asli5a fact that the oil deposits are of such an enormous extent as to provide an excess of supply over and above all possible requirements of the Commonwealth, there will be no mishandling of this question. The Government can be trusted not to relax their vigilance in the matter.

Senator Blakey:

– Provided the deposit turns out to be of value, does the Minister think that, without an alteration of the Constitution, it will be possible for the Government to sell oil to the people of Australia?

Senator CLEMONS:

– The Government have no doubt on that point. I represent in the Senate the Minister of External Affairs, and honorable senators will understand that, even though he had not a predilection in that direction, a Minister in the Senate representing a colleague in another place, would insensibly take an active interest in the Department he represents in the Senate. I may tell Senator Lynch that I have listened to his remarks with interest and sympathy. I very much dislike a reference to personal matters, but I can say that I come from a State where prospecting in difficult country has been going on for many years, and I may add that I am something in the nature of an amateur prospector myself. I know the difficulties well from intimate personal experience. I know the hardships which prospectors have to undergo in the development of the mining resources of Australia. I also know - and it is an instance of many injustices in this world which are beyond our control - that prospectors usually get a very poor reward for their labours. I take a great interest, as well as all do, in the difficulties presented in the development of the Northern Territory, and I coincide with Senator Lynch in the opinion that there is hope for the Commonwealth of some return from the Northern Territory if attention is specially directed to the .question of mining prospecting. _ I assure the honorable senator that I shall do all I can in the direction he has suggested.

Senator McDOUGALL:
New South Wales

.- I should like to have some information in connexion with items appearing in Division 36, covering the expenditure in the Northern Territory. Under subdivision 38, dealing with railways and transport salaries, there is a vote set down of £13,845. That seems to me to be an extraordinary amount for the upkeep of a railway on which three trips a week are made over 140 miles, which gives a train mileage of only 43,680 miles a year. I notice a vote of £300 for a draughtsman in the same subdivision. I recently had in my possession a drawing that came from, this office, through the assistant engineer, for the building of a bridge, and it might have been the work of an apprentice. It was not a drawing, but a pen scratching. I find that £11,000 is set down for riding ganger, foreman, drivers, guards, porters, and others. When I travelled by train up. there we had no porter or guard on the train at all. The extent of the vote required for this railway service is a proof that the railway and transport services in the Northern Territory need remodelling as quickly as possible. I do not wish to cast any reflections on the capabilities of the gentleman in charge, but I think that he might be better. I should like some explanation of what appears to me an extremely high vote for salaries.

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

– I have not with me the details of the vote, but I remind Senator McDougall that the £11,000 to which he referred represents practically an aggregation of wages. Subject to the payment of proper wages to men working in the Northern Territory, the Minister, aided by the officials in charge, is doing his best to carry on the railway economically. The honorable senator knows that wages must be higher in the Northern Territory than elsewhere in the Commonwealth. I shall try to refer the matter to the Minister of External Affairs before we close, and may, obtain detailed information of the vote. The vote to which’ the honorable senator specially referred represents, as I have said, an aggregation of wages, and is based upon similar estimates which have been submitted all through.

Senator McDougall:

– I wished todraw attention to some things that want looking into badly.

Senator CLEMONS:

– They will be looked into.

Senator MAUGHAN:
Queensland

– This is one of those Departments which show a very considerable increase upon the figures of last year. The

Minister in charge of the Bill might inform the Prime Minister and other members of the Government that in spite of all the promises made to reduce expenditure in connexion with the great State Departments, in eight out of nine of them ‘ the expenditure proposed is considerably in excess of that proposed last year. The excess in the case of this Department amounts to £144,000. I direct attention to the vote of £50,000 for immigration, and also the vote of £24,000 for the High Commissioner’s Office. These votes are practically interwoven, since we know that the High Commissioner has supreme authority in regard to immigration affairs. It occurs to me as strange that, although this money is annually apportioned by Parliament, we are continually told by .distinguished visitors from the Old Land that a tremendous amount of ignorance prevails in the Old Country with regard to Australian, conditions. We are spending about £25,000 a year on the High Commissioner’s Office, and each of the States is represented by an Agent-General, involving considerable annual expenses to the taxpayers, and yet we have a visitor like Lord Emmott telling us in the Queen’s Hall here only lately of the tremendous amount of ignorance prevailing with regard to conditions in Australia. Who is to remove that ignorance if it is not the High Commissioner and the States Agents-General? We vote every year methodically and carefully large sums of money to maintain the High Commissioner’s Office in London, and the various State Parliaments do the same in connexion with the Departments of their Agents-General. Yet Lord Emmott, speaking here, said -

I am absolutely appalled by the stories I have heard of British ignorance with regard to your conditions. Ignorance of that kind is lamentable, and naturally Australians are sensitive about it.

Department of Defence.

Divisions 40 to 80, £2,817,714.

Senator PEARCE:
Western Australia

– I have rather an important matter to bring under the notice of the Minister of Defence. He knows that regarding the supply of ammunition there is a contract with the Colonial Ammunition Company. The Department, I think, provides the material out of which thecartridges are made. I hold in my hand a nickel cup which is imported in this shape, and dealt with at the factory.

This cup is, I understand, part of a consignment which has been brought out by the Department. But in any case, it shows already a flaw in the interior. It is supposed to have been inspected at the War Office in England, and to have been passed there along with a number of cups. The cup is drawn out to form the easing of the bullet. The effect of the flaw or lamination is to cause a lamination of the bullet itself. Here is a bullet actually taken from those manufac- tured at the Colonial Ammunition Company’s works, showing an outside lamination or split. It is, to all intents and purposes, a dum-dum bullet, which in international affairs is prohibited by the Articles of War. I am informed that these bullets are being manufactured by the Colonial Ammunition Company, and that some 50 or 60 tons of imported nickel cups, showing these laminations, have recently been condemned, owing to the flaws revealing themselves after the bullets had been made.

Senator de Largie:

– Does it matter very much whether a man is killed by one kind of bullet or another?

Senator PEARCE:

– I am not bringing up that point.

Senator Millen:

– It is a question of whether a man is mutilated, and not killed.

Senator PEARCE:

– If the Department is importing this material, which has been inspected for it by the War Office, fell© latter has been guilty of gross negligence in allowing faulty material to be sent out. I think that the Minister will find, on inquiry, that the Department is paying a substantial sum to’ the War Office for the inspection of warlike! material. I do not desire to labour the point, but ask the Minister to ascertain if the facts as related to me are correct? In connexion with this matter another point came under my notice. >. I asked, naturally, if there was not an inspector for the Defence Department at the works of the Colonial «Ammunition Company, and I was told that there was no such official there, and that the inspection takes place after the cartridges are fully made up and taken over to the Maribyrnong magazine. The cartridges are cased, and sent over there in packages, and there they are inspected by the officials. There should, I think, be an inspector at the Ammunition Works. I was always under the impression that there was. I intend to leave these samples with the Minister, who, I know, cannot be expected to reply off-hand. I ask him to sift the statements which have been made to me, and which I have repeated just as they were made, without, of course, vouching for their accuracy. I thought it was my duty to bring them before the Senate.

Senator BLAKEY:
Victoria

– A few days ago I asked a question regarding the apparent chaos at the Ordnance Stores at Queen’s-bridge. The Minister said that inquiries were being made into the matter, and though I have carefully examined a pile of papers laid on the table of the Library for another place, I do not. see that anything definite has been arrived at. I want to draw the Minister’s attention to what, to my mind, are two conflicting statements that have apparently been issued from the Auditor-General’s Department. On the 9th December, in a report to the Treasury, the Acting Auditor-General said -

No stock lists for the period ending 31st December, 1912, have been submitted to the Audit Office, and from the explanation of the Senior Ordnance Officer appearing in paragraph 11 of the attached report it is doubtful whether stock had been properly taken.

Clearly, the Acting Auditor- General was under the impression that no stock lists for the period ending 31st December had been issued to any of his officers for the purpose of checking these particular goods at the Ordnance Stores; but, in contradistinction to his report, I find, on consulting the file, that on the 8th December, Mr. James Gough, audit examiner, presented the Auditor-General with a report, in which he states, inter alia -

On the 2 1st May last it was pointed out to the secretary, Department of Defence, that the discrepancies between the actual stock and the ledger balances at the Ordnance Stores as at 1 st January, 1913, had not been ascertained up to that time by the ordnance officers, and although regular reminders were sent and further reports were also rendered to the Department (vide paragraph 10), no replies have been submitted, nor have the lists yet come to hand.

There is, apparently, a conflict between the Acting Auditor- General and the audit examiner. The former says that the stock lists had been examined, while the latter says that, although they ha’d repeatedly, since the 21st May last, asked the Secretary for Defence for these particular stock lists, they had not been obtainable up-to-date Can the Minister say why the Secretary to his Department has not replied to the Auditor-General’s communication regarding the alleged shortages of goods and irregularities that commenced as far back as the 21st May? I would like the Minister to try to clear up this question of the nonproduction of the stock sheets, because there seems to, be something wrong in the Ordnance Department. I do not suggest, or think, as some persons- imply, that there has been some deliberate pilfering of the goods which come under the control of the Defence Department; but the question has been raised by Mr. Mathews in another place, and given a good deal of prominence in the daily press. I feel sure that the Minister, like every other member of this Parliament, is only too anxious to learn that there has been nothing wrong as regards the keeping of the stocks at the Ordnance Stores. When I asked a question on the 9th December, he promised that an inquiry would be held. 1 feel sure that he will carry out his promise, as far as he is able to do so : but seeing that there is a conflict amongst the officers of the different Departments, and knowing that sometimes the Departments work hand in glove with each other, does he not think it is necessary that an independent investigation should be conducted by an auditor who has nothing to do with -Government Departments in any form ? I do not wish to labour this question. I know that the Minister is doing his best to elucidate this trouble. But I believe there is something wrong in the Department. This discrepancy ought not to exist, although I understand that when the Auditor-General made his second audit it had been materially reduced. Something is seriously wrong when he states that there is a discrepancy of 991 shirts, 1,174 hats, 936 hat bands, 3,984 -water bottles, 4,099 yards of hessian. and 1,542 targets.

Senator Gardiner:

– Is it not one of the main duties of a soldier to learn how to forage ?

Senator BLAKEY:

– I do not wish to see officers connected with the Defence Department placed under the stigma of -foraging. I feel sure that the Minister will give this matter his attention. Considering the varying aspects of the case which have been presented, I am of opinion that there should be an impartial investigation, with a view to discovering whether this stock has actually been stolen, or whether the discrepancies are merely bookkeeping errors.

Senator MILLEN:
New South WalesMinister of Defence · LP

.- Whilst I cannot speak definitely at this stage, -I feel quite convinced that there has been no fraud worth speaking of committed at the Ordnance Stores in question. Already we are beginning to discover that the apparent discrepancies are due to the incompetence of those who handle the stores. They are largely the result of bookkeeping errors rather than of any shortage of stock. Let me put before the Committee a case which actually occurred during the endeavours to trace these discrepancies. One list was presented to the Department which showed a deficiency of 3,984 articles. The ordnance officer was thereupon communicated with by telephone, and asked if he had any explanation to offer. He then stated that the number of articles missing was not 3,984, but 3,546 - a difference of 400. He was then asked to put his statement in writing. Apparently before doing so he made a recount, because lie then reported that there were 4,995 articles missing. Subsequently the Department sent other officers to investigate the matter, and they discovered that there were 4,746 articles in the store, making, not a deficiency, but a surplus of 500 over the ledger accounts. The trouble is that we had no regular staff there. The men comprising it are merely temporary employes, whose services cannot be retained long enough to efficiently train them. The fact that they are taken on for short periods means that the Department does not get the services of the best men. The result is that it is in a more or less chaotic condition. That is shown by the fact that some time ago Senator Pearce decided to secure from the Old Country an officer for the purpose of re-organizing the Department. I hope that from his report we shall gain some inspiration as to how we should proceed.

Senator Long:

– Is not the Minister going to discontinue the wretched system of bringing men out from Home?

Senator MILLEN:

– The honorable senator must recognise that there are certain things which can be learnt from men outside. When Senator Pearce decided to do what he did, in my judgment he did the right thing. We have been ‘running an Ordnance Department without trained men.

Motion (by Senator Millen) agreed to -

That so much of the Sessional Orders be suspended as will prevent the Senate from resuming its sitting at 2 o’clock.

Sitting suspended from 1 to 2 p.m.*

Senator Lt.-Colonel . O’LOGHLIN (South Australia) [2.1]. - I wish to explain the facts relating to a question which I put to the Minister of Defence a day or two ago. That question related to the Military Depot at Keswick, in South Australia. The claim of the Unley Corporation, within whose bounds the depot is, is that, owing to certain works which have been carried out by the military authorities, storm waters have been diverted, and these have caused considerable damage to the roadway in that corporation. It is also asserted that a pipe which has been placed in the drain running through the property is utterly inadequate for drainage purposes. I may say that on the site of this military depot there wa’s a natural creek which previously carried away all the storm waters. Portion of this creek has been covered over in the course of the works undertaken by the Military Department, which has put in only a 5-ft. pipe, that, it is contended, is inadequate to carry off the drainage. The reply which was given to a question which I put last week in reference to this matter reads -

There is no foundation for the statements as to the failure of the surface drainage at the Military Dep6t. On the contrary, complete proof of its efficiency is said to have been afforded during the recent abnormal downpour of rain.

NAVAL BOARD

Dismissal of Captain Hughes Onslow

Motion (by Senator Long) proposed -

That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would prevent me from moving forthwith the motion standing in my name in favour of the appointment of a Royal Commission to inquire into the administration of the Naval Board and the dismissal of the second naval member, Captain Hughes Onslow.

Question put. The Senate divided.

AYES: 12

NOES: 11

Majority … … 1

AYES

NOES

The PRESIDENT:

– There not being an absolute majority for the motion, aa required by the Standing Orders, the question passes in the negative. ‘

page 4678

SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION BILL 1911-12

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

page 4678

SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION (WORKS AND BUILDINGS) BILL 1911-12

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill read a first time.

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

– I move -

That this Bill be now read a second time.

This is a Bill dealing with works and buildings which were paid for out of the Treasurer’s Advance while the late Ministry was in office. The passing of the Bill is a purely formal matter.

Senator Rae:

– It is an indemnity?

Senator CLEMONS:

– It is, at any rate, a Bill to cover certain payments which were made under the Treasurer’s Advance, and by that term I mean the late Treasurer.

Senator PEARCE:
Western Australia

– I trust that this Bill will be allowed to pass without any discussion. Honorable senators surely remember the process. A certain amount is voted to the Treasurer in a year; but no Bill authorizing the particular items is presented to Parliament, because the Treasurer is not able to do so. At the close of the financial year, that is, in the succeeding session, a Bill authorizing the particular items on which the Treasurer has expended his advance is submitted. Of course, the money has been spent. This Bill merely indicates the way in which the late Treasurer spent his Treasurer’s Advance as regards works and buildings.

Senator MAUGHAN:
Queensland

– I have no desire to delay the passage of the Bill, but wish to call the attention of the Honorary Minister to the fact that, out of £46,876 which it appropriates, only £700 was spent in the State I have the honour to represent.

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– On the same ground, I have to object that, out of a total of nearly £4,000 spent on posts and telegraphs, there was not £1 spent in Western Australia.

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

– I shall take special care, if I have the opportunity to-day, that the remarks of Senator Maughan and Senator Lynch are conveyed to Mr. Fisher, the late Treasurer.

Senator Maughan:

– We do not object to that.

The PRESIDENT:

– Order ! The Minister has replied.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages.

page 4678

SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION BILL 1912-13

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

page 4678

SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION (WORKS AND BUILDINGS) BILL 1912-13

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill read a first time.

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

– I move–

That this Bill be now read a second time.

Honorable senators who listened to the Clerk reading the title know that the Bill deals with additions and new works for the financial year ending 30th June. 1913. It is in exactly the same position as the measure which we recently dealt with, except that it came originally in the form of Supplementary Estimates.

Senator Needham:

– Why do you want a further sum if the money has been spent ?

Senator CLEMONS:

– First, we have Estimates and subsequently Supplementary Estimates. With regard to both Estimates, the amounts are left to be paid out of the Treasurer’s Advance. With regard to the last Bill, the items were met by the Treasurer’s Advance, which was contained in the original estimate. The items covered by the present Bill are also items met by the late Treasurer’s Advance, which came in Supplementary Estimates. I ‘can assure the Senate that this is only a formal proceeding to satisfy the Auditor-General.

Senator STEWART:
Queensland

.- All that I wish to say on the second reading of this Bill is that it would greatly facilitate the conduct of public business if Ministers would speak so that honorable senators could hear them.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through . its remaining stages.

page 4679

PINE CREEK TO KATHERINE RIVER RAILWAY BILL

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

Clause 8 -

The Minister may provide all things necessary or convenient for the efficient construction and working of tie railway.

Senate’s Amendment. - Add “ and the railway shall be constructed by day labour.”

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendment disagreed to, because the Minister may find construction by contract the best method to be adopted, and it is undesirable to bind him to any particular manner of construction.

Motion (by Senator Clemons) proposed -

That the amendment be not insisted on.

Question put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 12

NOES: 10

Majority … … 2

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment not insisted on.

Senate’s Amendment. - Insert following new clause : - 14a. - (1) In the construction of the railway provision shall be made for the payment of not less than the prescribed minimum rates of wages and for the observance of the prescribed conditions of employment, and also for the recovery of penalties for non-payment of the prescribed rates of wages or for non-compliance with the prescribed conditions of employment.

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendment disagreed to, because the Government will provide for the payment of fair wages and the observance of reasonable conditions of employment, and it is not expedient to provide for the imposition by the Government of penalties on itself. . . .

Senator PEARCE:
Western Australia

– I desire to restore to this amendment the words which were previously struck out.

Senator Mullan:

– A proceeding of which the honorable senator has approved.

Senator PEARCE:

– That is very unfair.

Senator Mullan:

– The honorable senator voted for the proposal.

Senator PEARCE:

– I move -

That the amendment be amended by inserting after the word “ In,” in line 1, the words “ any’ contract relating to.”

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

– The object of the clause is to insure that the Government shall retain and exercise their control over any contractor, both with regard to the wages he is to pay and the conditions under which the work of the construction of this line is to be carried out. I have risen to say that, since that is the wish of the Government, they will accept the amendment.

Amendment of the amendment agreed to.

Amendment of the amendment (by Senator Pearce) proposed -

That after the word “payment,” line a, the words “ by the contractor “ be inserted.

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

– This amendment is consequential upon the last, and carries out the principle embodied in it. I rise to say that, inasmuch as the Government are determined to enforce these conditions, I gladly accept the amendment.

Amendment of the amendment agreed to.

Amendment of the amendment (bySenator Pearce) agreed to -

That after the word “schedule,” line 12, Mie words “ to the contract “ be inserted.

Senator PEARCE:
Western Australia

– With respect to sub-clauses 3 and 4 of the amendment, I should like to say that I have been looking up_ the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act, and find that the Judge of the Arbitration Court can delegate his powers. I have also seen .an Ordinance that has been passed which provides that these delegated powers may be exercised. In the circumstances, it seems to me that sub-clauses 3 and 4 will not bc necessary, because the Conciliation and Arbitration Act is, by the Ordinance, applied to the Northern Territory, and in the event of a dispute arising, the Judge can, by telegram if necessary, delegate his powers. I, therefore, do not intend to press subclauses 3 and 4 of the amendment.

Senator Rae:

– Is the Minister agreeable to any portion of the proposed new clause ?

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

– I have agreed to sub-clauses 1 and 2, but I do not agree to the other sub-clauses for the reason which Senator Pearce has just given. The honorable senator has just explained that there is a section in the Northern Territory Act applying the Conciliation and Arbitration Act te the settlement of industrial disputes in the Territory. It provides -

The Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act shall apply to industrial disputes in the Territory as if from the definition of “ industrial disputes” in section 4 of the Act the words “ extending beyond the boundary of any one State” were omitted.

Senator PEARCE:
Western Australia

– If the Minister would move that the Committee insists on its amendment contained in paragraphs 1 and 2, as amended, but does not insist on paragraphs 3 and 4, that, I think, would be the best way of meeting the case.

Senator CLEMONS (Tasmania- Honorary Minister) [3.26J.’ - I will adopt that method. I, therefore, move -

Th:vt the Committee insists on the amendment as regards paragraphs 1. and 2 as amended, but does not insist on paragraphs 3 and 4.

Senator STEWART:
Queensland

– The Act just quoted provides that in the case of a dispute in the Northern Territory, a reference may be made to the Arbitration Court. But we know that the Arbitration Court is a very slow and unwieldy machine. It is already almost choked with work. It might take weeks to settle a dispute in the Northern Territory.

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

– Senator Pearce has already pointed out that the Arbitration Act gives the President of the Arbitration Court power to deal with such cases as this, and to appoint a substitute iri his place. He can make such, an appointment by telegram. What we desire is to retain the authority of the President of the Arbitration Court.

Motion agreed to.

Amendment, as amended, insisted on.

Senate’s Amendment. - Insert following new clause : 14b. In the supply and sale of stores to the men employed in the construction of the railway by the Government the prices charged shall not be more than the prices for such stores obtaining in Darwin, plus freights.

House of Respresentative? Message. - Amendment disagreed to, because it is not expedient to regulate the prices to be charged by both Government and private suppliers of stores to men employed in the construction of the railway.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– In view of the reversal of a vote formerly given, it will be necessary to amend new clause 14b by inserting the words ‘ ‘ or the contractor ‘ ‘ after the word “ Government.” I think that when the contract is being drawn up the Government can easily insert a clause in it carrying out the intention of this proposal. Surely we cannot be told that it is impossible for Parliament to compel the contractor or the Government to do such a thing as this. I am concerned to see that the men shall not be charged exorbitant prices for their stores while they are engaged in the construction of the railway. I know of cases where men have had to pay 20 and 30 per cent, more than they should have paid. I move -

That the amendment be amended by inserting after the word “ Government,” line 4, the words “ or the contractor.”

That the word “ In,” line i, be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “ The Government shall undertake “ ; that the words “ by the Government,” be left out, with a view to insert the word “ and.”

Question - That the amendment of the amendment be agreed to - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 21

NOES: 5

Majority … … 16

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment, as amended, insisted on.

Resolutions reported; report adopted.

page 4686

NORFOLK ISLAND BILL

Bill returned from the House of Representatives with a message intimating that it insisted on disagreeing to the amendments insisted on by the Senate.

Motion (by Senator Clemons) agreed to-

That the message be considered in Committee forthwith.

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

Clause 10-

The Governor-General, or any person authorized by him, may, in accordance with law, make grants or other dispositions of Crown lands in Norfolk Island.

Senate’s Amendments. - Leave out “ grants or other”; add “Provided always that no Crown lands in Norfolk Island shall be sold or disposed of for any estate in freehold except in pursuance of some contract entered into before the commencement of this Act.”

House of Representatives’ Message. - Disagreement to amendments insisted on.

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

– There are, apparently, two amendments which the other branch of the Legislature have . disagreed with, but, as a matter of fact, they both refer to the same subject. It will be recollected that an amendment inserted by the Senate some time ago had the effect of striking out the words “ grants or other.” The real object of that amendment was to prevent the possibility of the alienation in fee-simple of any of the remaining land in Norfolk Island. I hope that the Committee will not insist on that amendment. The Government are prepared to undertake not to deal in any way with any portion of this land until Ordinances providing for its disposition have been submitted to both Houses of Parliament. Seeing that nothing can happen with regard to its’ alienation without the consent both of this and the other branch of the Legislature, I move -

That the amendments be not further insisted on.

Senator Stewart:

– Is that the way the honorable senator voted?

Senator GARDINER:

– No. I voted for the leasehold- principle when it was put before honorable senators in a definite amendment. I should still vote for it if it were submitted as a separate proposal, but we are dealing with a measure for the taking over of Norfolk Island by the Commonwealth. I assume that it would be an advantage to New South Wales that the Commonwealth should take over this island, otherwise the New South Wales Government would not let us have it. As a representative of New South Wales in the Senate, I am prepared to help the Government of that State to let the Commonwealth Government have what they do not want themselves. I am satisfied that if the keen business men who are in charge of affairs in New South Wales believed that to maintain control of the island would be of any advantage to the State, they would continue to maintain it. I do not agree with Senator Stewart, my pre sent leader in the Senate, on this occasion, because I believe that the proper time to deal with the land question will be when an Ordinance is submitted on the subject next session. This amendment opens up the whole question of land nationalization versus freehold, but I should probably be ruled out of order if I were to try to discuss it ‘at length. When next session an Ordinance is submitted dealing with the land policy to be adopted for Norfolk Island, we can go into the question in a comprehensive manner. I hope there will be no further objection to the procedure which is being adopted by the Government to enable New South Wales to get rid of an island which she does not want.

Question - That amendments be not further insisted on - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 19

NOES: 7

Majority … … 12

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendments not further insisted on.

Resolution reported; report adopted.

page 4687

PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 17th December (vide page 4575), on motion by Senator Millen -

That this Bill be now reada second time.

– I merely said that suspicion had been generated.

Senator DE LARGIE:

– The honorable senator may have been misled by statements which were made.

Senator Gardiner:

– I am’ sure that they were not true.

Senator RUSSELL (Victoria) r4.33].I am quite in sympathy with this Bill, but wish to ask a question. I can see no clause in it which would prevent a Government from carrying out a large work in sections. In the State of Victoria, where there is a Parliamentary Committee similar to the one now proposed to be established in the Commonwealth, a certain Government, which was anxious to carry out a work, but not to have it investigated, brought down a proposal for carrying out a piece of the work, the estimated cost being a few pounds less than the sum which would have necessitated a reference to the Committee. When the first section was completed, another section was undertaken in the same manner. Have the Government given consideration to the possibility of that occurring?

Senator MAUGHAN:
Queensland

– This bill may be regarded as of a non-party character. I am in favour of it. I venture to say that, had there been a Public Works Committee in Queensland during the last twenty years, it would have saved the taxpayers hundreds of thousands of pounds - perhaps between £3,000.000 and £4,000,000. We know, as a matter of fact, that railways have been built in certain parts of the State under influences - that a Public Works Committee would have exposed. They never would have been sanctioned had they been inquired into. It is well known that the Public Works Committee of New South Wales has saved large sums of money to the taxpayers. Probably the same remark applies to Victoria. Senator Stewart has referred to the fact that the Government employs experts. But experts cannot do the work which a Public Works Committee will do. Experts simply do their own professional work, but the Committee will investigate before the experts commence. This is a step in the right direction. I am glad to think that the Commonwealth Parliament has seen fit to do what some of the States have done, and what others, which have had responsible government for many years, have, unfortunately, failed to do.

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

– I consider that there are advantages such as those which have been pointed out attaching to the appointment of a Public Works Committee, but I should not like it to be thought for a moment that, in my opinion, there are’ no disadvantages. I hold that there are. One of the disadvantages arising out of a measure of this , kind is that, as the Committee must be appointed periodically, so it will be found - for I have no doubt we shall have the same experience as has occurred in my own Stater- there will be a tendency to the demoralization of Parliament. For some considerable time before the appointments are made there are communications flying about, and influences brought to bear amongst members to secure positions on a Public Works. Committee.

Senator Millen:

– The same thing happens at an election.

SenatorRAE. - Does the honorable senator mean as to who shall get the position bf representative?

Senator Millen:

– Yes.

Senator RAE:

– It does; but not in the same way. In an election a seat is in the gift of the electors, and no man is able to bribe all the electors, or a majority of them, under the present conditions.

Senator Needham:

– Do you suggest that a seat on this Committee will be used as a bribe?

Senator RAE:

– I am not in the habit of making a suggestion when I can say a thing bluntly. Any man who thinks he is fit for the position, and who is open to take it, may be a little anxious as to what his chances are, and there are some men who will intrigue and bargain with each other; but that is not what I meant. I have noticed that when a position of this kind is in the balance sometimes men lose their independence of character. Men who have been great stalwarts, ever ready to take the field and fight to the bitter end, suddenly become the most amiable and amenable of creatures, even in the ranks of their own party, so as to secure nomination. I make that statement advisedly, because I know that it is an absolute fact that men who were prepared to be at sixes and sevens, and fight for everything that came within reach, very often became the most amenable creatures, and the most genial fellows, when they thought that by currying favour with their associates they might receive a nomination of that kind. That is the demoralizing element attached to every measure which helps to give paid positions to favoured individuals in the ranks of members of Parliament. I see no way of avoiding that. I believe that there are great advantages which would not be obtained by the mere employment of experts.

Senator Findley:

– You can. get over that by putting all the names in a hat and drawing them out.

Senator RAE:

– That may be. I think that there are big advantages to be secured by the submission of public works to a body which is not non-party, but composed of both parties, and, consequently, will keep a watch on works which otherwise might be dictated to some extent by political considerations. For that reason I intend to support the measure. I wished merely to point out a danger that does lurk in anything where emoluments are attached to positions which are hanging in the balance, sometimes for weeks before they are filled.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister of Defence · New South Wales · LP

– As the result of a conference with representatives on the other side, I am in a position to say that there will be no objection offered to the passage of the Bill provided an undertaking is given that the nomination of this Committee will not take place until after the recess. I am in a position to give an assurance that the Government will not take any steps at all in that direction until the resumption of public business in Parliament.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In Committee:

Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.

Clause 3 - (2.) Two of the members of the Committee shall be members of and appointed by the Senate, and six of the members of the Committee shall be members of and appointed by the House of Representatives.

Senator Lt.-Colonel O’LOGHLIN (South Australia) [4.45]. - I rise to submit the amendment which I outlined in my speech on the second reading. In introducing the Bill, the Minister of Defence admitted that there was an element of unfairness in the constitution of the Committee. We are willing to concede to the other House a larger proportion of members on a Committee of this sort, but when it comes to a proportion of three to one, I think that it is going a little too far. Were this Committee to consist of nine members, the same as the Public Accounts Committee, there would be no objection, I believe, to allowing six members to be appointed from the other House and three from the Senate. But the. point, I believe, in regard to the Public Works Committee is that there should be equal representation from both sides, and, therefore, an even number is required. I move -

That the word “Two” be left out. with the view to insert in lieu thereof the word “ Three.”

– I - It does not matter so long as there are four members on each side.

Senator MILLEN:

– The difficulty is to get four. It can be done in this Parliament, but take a normal Parliament, where we have a right to assume that the party dominant in one House would be dominant in both. In that case the party with a majority in the other House would elect three out of the five members, and the same party being in a majority in the Senate would elect two out of the three members. The result would be that that party would have five out of the eight members on the Committee in a perfectly legitimate way, to which no one could take exception. There is the difficulty to be overcome. No matter of principle is involved. It is a matter of expediency, in order to arrive at the best results.

SenatorRae. - Supposing that we leave the numbers equal, and give three to the Senate.

Senator MILLEN:

– Then we shall get an uneven number which means that one party will have a majority. The Government have thought over the matter in all its various bearings, with the one simple desire of getting a Committee which would represent both parties equally, and also both Houses. In these circumstances, I commend to the honorable senators the expediency of taking the clause as it stands, and we can, at any rate, see how it will work.

Senator Lt.-Colonel O’LOGHLIN (South Australia) [4.54]. - As regards the division of parties, I do not think that it would matter very much if the whole of the members of the Liberal party on the Committee were in one House and the whole of the members of the Labour party were in the other House. There will be a Joint Committee, and both parties will be equally represented.

Senator Millen:

– I tried to show the impossibility of insuring that representation.

Senator Lt Colonel O’LOGHLIN:

– I - I do not see that there is any difficulty. What the Minister seems to desire is that there should be an equal proportion of each party in each House, but that is no* essential.

Senator Millen:

– On the whole Committee; but you cannot do that under your proposal.

Senator Lt Colonel O’LOGHLIN:

.- I t I think it is as near as we can get to the fair division, and although our portion of the membership is perhaps a little more than it ought to be, it is far nearer to a just proportion than is that of three ‘ to one, which is proposed in this clause.

Question - That the word proposed to be left out be left out - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 18

NOES: 3

Majority……… 15

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment (by Senator O’Loghlin) agreed to -

That the word “ six,” in sub-clause 2, be left out, with a view to insert the word “ five.”

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 4 (Declaration to be subscribed by members).

SenatorRAE (New South Wales) [4.58]. - I should like to ask the Minister of Defence if there is any part of this measure which prevents the evasion of the Act by the Ministry?

Senator MILLEN:
Minister of Defence · New South Wales · LP

– I know of no provision which we can insert in a law which will prevent people from breaking it. I do notthink there is any possible form of words which will enable us to provide that safeguard. But I would point out to SenatorRae that no public work can be commenced until Parliament has made an appropriation for it. Therefore, if a work be brought forward which involves an expenditure of, say, £15,000, Parliament will be in a position to judge whether it is a bond fide complete work, or whether it represents merely the initial portion of a big work.

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

– If Parliament sees fit to authorize the construction of a public work, I desire to know whether it could be proceeded with in the face of an adverse decision of the Public Works Committee?

Senator Millen:

– It could be proceeded with only by the direct moving of the Governor-General. If the Public Works Committee reports adversely to any proposed work, its decision must be regarded as final for the time being.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 5 to 13 agreed to.

– The proposal should be referred to the Committee to see that the £5,000,000 is spent to the best advantage. The whole object of this Bill is to make provision to insure that public money shall be spent to the best advantage.

Senator Maughan:

– Would the honorable senator reveal the secrets of the torpedo boat. depot at Garden Island, Sydney?

Senator DE LARGIE:

– I do not know why politicians should not know them. If there are politicians in this Parliament who could not be as readily trusted to keep these matters secret as any officer in the employment of the Government, we should not pass such a measure as this at all. I am satisfied that everything involving the expenditure of public money should go before .the Committee.

Senator Lt.-Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD (New South Wales) [5.25].- The reason for keeping military secrets from members of Parliament is not because they are unreliable persons, but because if information of that kind were given to Parliament it would necessarily permeate through the public press. There are abundant reasons why defence secrets and matters relating to strategy should not be published. They should only be intrusted to a select few. We have experts appointed to advise the Government on defence matters. They are bound to secrecy, and cannot disclose the information in their possession except to properly-authorized persons. It would be wry unwise to depart from that rule. It would do no harm for the whole worlds to know about the evidence taken by the Committee with respect to an ordinary railway, but it would be mischievous to publish military information. The whole purpose of the Committee is that it shall take evidence and advise Parliament. The amendment made in another place affords a very happy solution. I agree with Senator Pearce that such matters as rifle ranges, the clothing factory, and so on, may very well be referred to the Public Works Committee. For instance, in the newspapers to-day, there is an account of a very expensive work at Maribyrnong for stabling. If that matter had been referred to a Public Works Committee it would probably have reported against an unnecessarily expensive design for the work.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 15 to 36 agreed to.

Clause 37 (Fees to be a charge on Consolidated Revenue Fund).

Senator DE LARGIE:
Western Australia

– Suppose that a particular

Government were not in accord with the Public Works Committee, and refused toput a sum of money on the Estimates for its purposes. That might prevent the Committee from travelling and taking evidence. A case of the kind occurred recently. The Senate has certain powers of investigation. It appointed a Committee to inquire into a matter of public importance. But the Government refused the Committee funds.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister of Defence · New South Wales · LP

.- The difference between the Public Works Committee and such a Committee as Senator de Largie has instanced is clearly marked. The purpose of the clause under review is to make it quite clear that, irrespective of any action which the’ Government may take, every member 1 of the Committee shall be entitled to a certain fee. The fees are made a charge on the Consolidated Revenue. The Government does, not come into the matter at all. It has no say once this measure has passed.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 38 agreed to.

Clause 39 (Proviso limiting total of fees and sum for expenses).

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– This clause appears to fix a rigid limit to the expenses which may be incurred by the Public Works Committee. A side note shows that there is a similar section in the New South Wales Act. If £2,000 be the limit of expenditure in New South Wales, it is short-sighted to expect that that amount will be sufficient for a Committee which will have the whole of the Commonwealth as its area of inquiry. We can imagine that a work will have to be inquired into in the Northern Territory, or in l&e north-west of Western Australia, or in North Queensland. In following the New South Wales example, it seems to me that we are fixing too ironbound a limit to the expenditure that may be incurred on behalf of the Committee.

Senator MAUGHAN:
Queensland

– This clause provides that the Committee shall not, during any one financial year, incur expenses in excess of £2,000. Possibly the difficulty raised by Senator Lynch may, be overcome in this respect1 - that when the Committee is dealing with public works to be paid for out of loan money, the expenditure in connexion with the inquiry may be met out of the Loan Fund.

Senator Lynch:

– This clause says that the total amount may not exceed £2,000.

Senator MAUGHAN:

– There is a good deal in what Senator Lynch points out. It is all very well to fix such an amount for New South Wales or Victoria; but take the case of works in the Northern Territory, or in North Queensland. An inquiry of that kind might absorb the whole £2,000. In some years the expenditure may not run into anything like that amount, while in other years a great deal more may be required. It seems to be a very rigid provision.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister of Defence · New South Wales · LP

– I quite recognise the force of the contention advanced by Senator Lynch and Senator Maughan, but it appeared to the Government, as I think it will appear to the Committee, rather desirable to put a limit there, if only as an assurance to people outside that we had not brought in a Bill for the purpose of scattering round recklessly large sums of money. I admit that the amount does look modest when we consider that the Committee will have to travel over a very wide area indeed, but I remind honorable senators that we have to eliminate from the item of travelling expenses the cost of railway fares, because that is already covered by the passes members carry.

Senator Lynch:

– Will this include clerical assistance?

Senator MILLEN:

– No, it will not include any of the officials who will necessarily be associated with the operations of the Committee. It is simply for the payment of fees to the members themselves and their travelling expenses. If we assume that half of the amount will be requisite for travelling expenses, that will still leave the necessary fees for a hundred meetings of the full Committee in a year. Looked at in that way, I think it is not an unfair proposition, at any rate, to make a start with, relying upon experience to show us whether it is necessary or not.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– I hope that the Committee will not alter the amount, though it may look small. There is a danger that if we were to alter the amount the Committee might ramble abroad, and incur expenses without limitation. At the same time, inasmuch as this is, to a certain extent, experimental legislation, I think that it is wise to set down an amount beyond which the Committee, no matter who they may be, shall not go. If it is found after experience that £2,000 a year is not sufficient to enable the Committee to conduct the inquiries into big works, it can be left to the Parliament, from time to time, to increase the amount which may be spent for that purpose. I hope that honorable senators will stand to the £2,000.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 40, schedule and title agreed to.

Bill reported with amendments; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 4697

COMMONWEALTH PUBLIC SERVICE BILL

Second Reading

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

– I move -

That this Bill be now read a second time.

– And whatever rights were accruing then will be continued ?

Senator CLEMONS:

– Dealing with the men, this Bill puts the exceptions on the same footing as the rest.

Question resolved in the affirmative!

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages.

page 4698

COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS BILL (No. 2)

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

– I move -

That this Bill bc now read a second time.

Honorable senators will recollect that this Bill has had a rather curious and devious history. When it was first brought to light it represented a desire on the part of the other branch of the Legislature to appoint from its own members a Committee of Public Accounts, and to give it enlarged powers. When the measure came before us, we decided that the Senate was entitled to proper representation upon that Committee. I was in favour of this Chamber being represented upon it, and I am still in favour of that course being adopted. When we returned the Bill to the ‘ other House, that Chamber resolved to cut out from it the power to appoint its own Committee to deal with public accounts. I will admit that our greed to share in the representation on the proposed Committee will prevent us from appointing our own Committee if at any time we desire to appoint it. Consequently, the Bill was withdrawn, and the measure which we now have before us was introduced in its stead. It provides for the appointment of a. Joint Committee, consisting of members of both branches of the Legislature. I believe that an effort was made in another place to come to an arrangement regarding the time when members who will form the Committee should be nominated. I regret to say that the other branch of the Legislaturewas npt able to agree to the appointment of the members of this Committee during the current session. Consequently, if the Senate passes this Bill, it will do so on the distinct understanding that no members will be appointed to the proposed Committee this session. In other words,, the measure will remain in abeyance just as will the Public Works Committee Bill,, with which we have just dealt. There was an idea that the members of the Committee should be appqinted during the present session. That idea has now been dropped, so that the Bill, if passed, will be a piece of machinery ready to come into operation when Parliament meets next session.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In Committee:

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2 -

As soon as conveniently practicable after the commencement of this Act, and thereafter at the commencement of the first session of every Parliament, a Joint Committee of seven members of the Parliament, to be called the Joint Committee of Public Accounts (in this Act referred to as the Committee), shall be appointed according to the practice of the Parliament with reference to the appointment of members to serve on Joint Select Committees of both; Houses of the Parliament.
Two members of the Committee shall be members of, and appointed by, the Senate, and five members of the Committee’ shall be members of, and appointed by, the House of Representatives.

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– Owing to the recasting of this measure, I notice that the Senate is not getting proportional representation on this Committee.

Senator Clemons:

– Not quite, but very nearly.

Senator LYNCH:

– There may be a lot of virtue in the old saying that “he who humbleth himself shall’ be exalted.” But I do not like the idea that the Senate should always humble itself in the hope that it will get something better. If honorable senators are to take any part in the scrutiny of the public accounts, we should have proportional representation on this Committee. I gather, from the -statements of the Honorary Minister, that he is very jealous of the status of this Chamber. I think we are indebted to him for the way in which he is prepared to stand up for its reasonable representation upon the Committee. But when he brings forward a proposal that the Senate shall be represented on the Committee by only two members out of a total of seven, I confess that the proposal does not appeal tome. I would like to see the strength of thisbody increased to nine members, and the Senate given representation on- it to; the extent of three members. If we are to have only two members out of seven upon it, the representatives of the other branch of the Legislature will be able to outvote us on every occasion.

Senator Pearce:

– Why not make the1 representation on this Committee similar to that which has been adopted in connexion with the Public Works Committee?

Senator LYNCH:

– That would be a better proportion still. Rather than accept a representation upon it of two members out of seven, I would prefer to see the Bill rejected. I move -

That the word “ seven,” line 4, be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the word “eight.”

My idea is that the Senate should have three members on the Committee, and the other branch of the Legislature five members.

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

– I would remind, Senator Lynch of a very old couplet -

In matters of commerce, the fault of the Dutch

Was in giving too little and asking too much. .

I am afraid that that is what the House of Representatives will say about us if we agree to this amendment. We know that another place has already refused to give us a representation on this Committee of three members out of nine, and yet the honorable senator is asking it to give us a representation of three members out of eight. In order that we may’ avoid the imputation which is conveyed in the couplet I have quoted’, I suggest that it would be wise to provide for a Committee of nine members, on which the Senate should have three representatives.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment (by Senator Lynch) agreed to1 -

That the word “ seven,” line 4, be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the word “ nine.”

Amendments (by Senator Clemons) agreed to -

That the word “Two,” line 12, be left out, with a. view to insert, in lieu thereof the word “ Three “ ; and that the word “ five,” line 14, be left out, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the word “ six.”’

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 3’ to 6: agreed to.

Motion (by Senator Clemons) agreed to-

That the following new clause be added : - “ 7. Every Committee of Public Accounts appointed under this Act shall hold office as such Committee, and may exercise all powers conferred upon it for the term of the Parliament during which it is appointed.”

Title agreed to.

Bill reported with, amendments; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 4700

SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION BILL 1911-12

The Prime Minister: Language used in Debate - Members of Parliament : Employment of Shorthand Writers and Typists - Stamp-selling Machine.

Motion (by Senator Clemons) proposed.

That this Bill be now read a first time.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– This motion affords me the only convenient opportunity I shall have to do certain work which I think is necessary to do in the interests of the whole community. A statement was read in the Senate, about a week ago, by the Minister of Defence regarding certain language alleged to have been made use of chiefly in another branch of the Legislature. The statement was signed by the Prime Minister - Mr. Joseph Cook - and has gone forth to the public in vindication of certain charges which he made against this branch of the Legislature. It was because the honorable gentleman’s charges referred to the Senate that exception was taken to them here, and that led to the statement to which I refer. I notice’ that in South Australia, during the last week or so, meetings have been held by the members of the Liberal party, and use has been made of this statement from the Prime Minister to show what a wicked lot of people we are in the Federal Parliament. Advantage has been taken of the statement, especially by the Premier of South Australia. He has addressed meetings, and has gloatingly quoted the utterances attributed to “those Labour fellows” in the Federal Parliament. If any person in South Australia now does anything out of the ordinary, he is told by the Premier of the State that “he is surely qualifying for a position in the Federal Parliament.” I am prepared to allow this Parliament to accept full responsibility for all that is said in these legislative chambers contrary to the ordinary conduct of debate. If honorable . senators do not object tohave it said that the language they use is “ not fit for a pothouse,” I am prepared to let it go, but I am anxious that both sides of the question should be placed before the public. The names appearing on the list read by the Minister of Defence from the statement submitted by the Prime Minister are the names only of members of the Labour party. I am anxious that the other side should be given. I have, therefore, gone to a little trouble in preparing a list of expressions used by Ministerialists to which some exception might be taken, and I intend to have it recorded in Hansard, so that members of the Labour party, when they enter upon the campaign, after the forthcomingdouble dissolution, will be able to put the two lists side by side. I am confident that when that is done the members of Liberal unions will be very glad indeed to- drop their references to the language used by members of the Labour party in another place. Whilst the Senate was charged with being the greatest offender in regard to the kind of languageused, only one member of this Chamber was mentioned in connexion with the matter. I intend to have my list recorded in Hansard, so that it may be conveniently available for reference.

Senator Lynch:

– The honorable senator may get his list into Hansard, but I doubt whether it will be published by the press as readily as was the other list.

Senator NEWLANDS:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– I undertake tosay that it will be published in some sections of the press, anyhow. I give Mr. Joseph Cook, the Prime Minister of the Commonwealth, pride of place at the top of my list. These are examples of thelanguage used by that honorable gentleman - “ If honorable members are going on like this, I shall not say a bloomin word. “ I stand corrected by the elegant gentleman, over there.” “Will the honorable member allow me to tell, him that he does not know what he is talking about?” “ The honorable gentleman should mind his-, own’ business.” “ A more infamous statement never came out’, of the mouth of any individual. It is nottrue.” “They are still the ‘screaming urchins’ drag,ged from the tart shop.” “‘Here again is the lie.” “ I think the honorable gentleman is a good judge of what is blooming strong.” “Do not be silly.” “What is the matter with this perky little man over there?” “ May I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to stop these insults, or I shall have to stop them myself.” “ I hardly ever rise now but I am met with insults from theoither side, and. if you, Mr. Speaker, do not protect me, I shall have to take steps to protect myself.” “ I do not suppose you have ever reversed yours; you have not the brains.” “ Why does not the honorable gentlemanhold his tongue?” “ And three ‘ wowsers.’ “ “A lot of dingoes over there; behave like men.” “A mean crowd to make a point of that sort.” “ If you were a man you would take a man’s denial.” “ That is a complete misrepresentation - an absolute and unqualified misrepresentation.” “ Another inaccurate statement.” “ I say that this is beneath contempt.” “ We prefer to let the ‘ squib ‘ fizzle out.” “A speaker’s feelings may be roused, especially if there are about1.000 savages in the hall.” “ I will ask you nothing ; learn how to behave yourself.” “ Docs the honorable gentleman think he is justified in wasting the time of the country with that ‘tripe’?” “ One word will describe the honorable . member’s tirade, and that is ‘ hogwash.’ “ “ This sneering and superfine member.” “ Chair ; you bully !” “ Will the honorable member hold his tongue - if he can?” “ Stop your impertinence.” “ An infamous misrepresentation.” “ Mind your own business.” “ Don’t you become idiotic.”

I got tired of looking through Hansard for these choice expressions by the Prime Minister, and closed his list at that. I made another list of a few expressions used . by Sir John Forrest. The right honorable gentleman said - “ Shut up ; this is a piece of impertinence.” “ That is not true.” “ That is an unfair statement ; the honorable member is dirty to make it.”

Mr. Kelly said “ A contemptible remark from an ex-Speaker.” “ The honorable member knows that what he says is not true.” “That statement is not true.” “ That is a barefaced statement.” “ That is absolutely without foundation, and the honorable member knows it.” “ Chair ! What about that for a contemptible insinuation ?” “ Like the honorable member, I am vulgar enough to glory in my ignorance.” “ This is a gross calumny.” “ The honorable member will make Ananias tura in his grave.”

I have one sample from Mr. W. H. Irvine, who said - “Absolutely untrue.”

Colonel Ryrie said - “Put him out.” “ I made use of the expression,’ put him out,’ and had I been in your place, Mr. Speaker., I should have had him put out.” c “ These interjections from a supercilious and elongated- “ “ Honorable members opposite are a lot of blathering hypocrites.” “ You miserable body-snatcher.” “I would like- to have that matter set at rest, quietly and dispassionately. I suggest to honorable members that if they would select six of the biggest or the best men they have, and come quietly- “

Mr. Boyd said “ That is a lie.” “ The honorable member is like a rooster on his own midden.” “ The honorable member is the lineal descendant of Scotch savages.”

I quite recognise that in my list I have omitted a great many similar expressions used in another place, but, seeing that one list has already been published, I thought it as well to put another alongside of it, and, in fairness to the Prime Minister of the Commonwealth, I have paid him the special attention of giving him pride of place and the longest list of them all. I am confident that my statement will be received with gratitude by people who have taken considerable notice of the one-sided statement that is before the public at the present time. AH who appreciate fair play will admit that it is only fair that each side should be represented. I wish to say, in conclusion, that members of Parliament are just like other people, and, before they commence throwing stones at each other, they should remember that it is a very dangerous practice, and one which they should be the last to adopt, because none ofus is so perfect that some one else cannot find some fault with the other.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– I wish to direct the attention of the Honorary Minister to a request made in another place, that honorable members of that House should he supplied with the assistance of shorthand writers and typists to enable them to cope with their voluminous correspondence. I realize that such assistance should be given, but I wish to know whether it is to be confined to members of the House of Representatives? If given at all, it should be given to members of both branches of the Legislature. Whilst the correspondence of members in another place is, no doubt, voluminous, the correspondence of honorable senators is just as voluminous, and their duties as arduous. When I was in the Western Australian Parliament, the practice was instituted of providing shorthand-typists to assist members in their correspondence. I am of opinion that that practice should, be introduced here. I wish to refer again to the stamp-selling machine which has been placed outside the Town Hall, Melbourne. A change has taken place since I last called attention to it. To-day I put a penny in seven times. The penny came back to me every time, but I got no stamp. I suggest thatthe PostmasterGeneral should be informed that it would be better to put that stamp-selling machine on the scrap-heap. It is absolutely a delusion and a snare.

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

– I can assure Senator Needham that whatever arrangement is made for members of the House of Representatives in regard’ to providing typists, -I will see that a similar arrangement is made for senators. As for the “ thieving “ machine to which he has referred, I think that the sooner this Government dissociate themselves from it the better. Otherwise we shall be accused of resorting to corrupt practices. I will bring the subject under the notice of the Postmaster-General.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a first time and passed through its remaining stages.

Sitting suspended from 6.30 to 8 p.m.

page 4702

SUPPLEMENT ARY APPROPRIATION BILL 1912-13

Senator MILLEN:
New South WalesMinister of Defence · LP

– I move -

That this Bill be now read a first time.

This Bill resembles others that have been previously passed, and is intended to legalize payments made by the Treasurer for commitments prior to the 30th June. Xo say more would merely be to duplicate remarks made by Senator Clemons in submitting the previous Bill.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a first and second time, and reported without request.

Motion (by Senator Millen) proposed -

That the report be adopted.

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– Is there no means of obviating the practice of bringing before Parliament four or five Bills to cover expenditure up to about £1,000,000? Surely it would be more creditable to our methods if all Treasurer’s Advances were covered by one comprehensive measure. I do not blame this Government in particular. I suppose that the same course has been adopted by previous Governments.

Senator Pearce:

– It is always done.

Senator LYNCH:

– I think we might improve on the method. It ought not to be necessary to occupy time by using the forms of Parliament to pass a number of Bills, when one ought to be sufficient.

Senator MILLEN:
New South WalesMinister of Defence · LP

– I sympathize with the view Senator Lynch has put, but I think that it would not be possible to give effect to it. Parliament makes advances to the Government of the day in order that payments may be made to meet contingencies from time to time. The Treasurer then submits his accounts for the money spent, and Parliament has to give its sanction to the expenditure.

Senator DE LARGIE:
Western Australia

– I take advantage of the opportunity to say that something ought to be done during the recess to help members of Parliament to lessen the burden of correspondence with which they have to deal. It is well known that the time of members of Parliament is greatly taken up with writing letters. A suggestion to meet the trouble has been made in another place, and I venture to hope, sir, that you, during the recess, will give your support to any steps that are taken to provide typists to do this work.

The PRESIDENT:

– I shall do my part to keep this matter alive. I will discuss it with the Government, with a view of enabling honorable senators to secure that assistance which I have always been of opinion that they more than deserve.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a third time.

page 4702

BUREAU OF AGRICULTURE BILL

Bill received from House of Representatives, and (on motion by Senator

McColl), read a first time.

page 4703

APPROPRIATION BILL

In Committee (Consideration resumed from this day, vide page 4677) :

Defence Department.

Divisions 40 to 80, £2,817,714.

Senator MCDOUGALL:
New South Wales

.- Under the’ head of “ Naval Establishments, Sydney,” is an item of £400 for “ Inspector of boilermakers.” I want to know what an inspector of boilermakers means. Is he a medical gentleman, or is he a man who carries the weights and scales with him? I speak very feelingly on this matter, because I belong to this honorable profession, and, in the ordinary course of events, it may not be long before I shall have to tackle it again . In these circumstances, I should like to get a little information concerning this item. I know that there is an inspector of boilermakers at Garden Island. When I was honorary secretary to my union, they rang me up by telephone one day, and said that they wanted some boilermakers. I sent down two men, one, being an athlete, a sculler, and a footballer, and the other a fellow who had been suffering from infirmities all his life - one of those lady-like gentlemen we see. There was an inspector of boilermakers at the island, because they returned the athlete to me, saying that they could not take him, and took the other man-why, I do not know. I desire to ascertain the duties of an inspector of boilermakers. I should like to take the billet on at £4.00 a year. It seems to me that there is something wrong in the wording.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

.- At an earlier hour in the ! day, Senator Lynch referred to the question of night drills for the trainees. I think that, as far as possible, night drills should be abolished, for more reasons than one. In the first place, the boys are trained to fit themselves for military service, but we do not want to interfere with their education in any way. I think that their nights might be better occupied in equipping themselves for the trade or calling which they intend to follow. We ought to give the trainees a chance to attend a technical school for that purpose. Again, I think that in the case of any boy who is employed, the employer should allow him leave of absence, and pay him for the hours which he has to put in at drill. Senator Lynch also referred to the total amount which we are asked to appropriate for the defence of Australia. I am not one of those who wish to cut down the amount. So long as the nations of the world are arming must we prepare to defend our own household. If the invitation of the Right Honorable Winston Churchill to the nations of the world to take a naval holiday were accepted, there might be some reason for cutting down our expenditure on naval armaments. But so long as the nations are arming, it is absolutely imperative for Australia to keep pace in preparing, not only to defend our own household, but to assist the Empire to protect itself against any invasion or any attempt to wrest from it the supremacy it holds today. That being so, I cannot see any logic at all in any of the arguments which have been adduced for cutting down the defence expenditure. We are compelled, despite ourselves, to keep pace with other nations. We have promised the Mother Country that we will assist her in . the defence of the Empire, and so we must keep up this expenditure unless other nations agree to what has- been proposed..

Senator Stewart:

– Are we to take part in this mad race of armaments ?

Senator NEEDHAM:

– I agree with the honorable senator that it is a mad race of armaments, but while it continues’ it is essential that we should keep our place in the race. I regret, with other honorable senators, that there is a necessity for a mad race, but it is staring us in the face, and it will be futile to attempt to cut down the total amount for defence expenditure until such time as there is an understanding amongst the nations who might be aggressive towards ourselves to cut down their expenditure. These are the two matters I wish to mention. The Minister, I know, will agree with me generally in re- gard to the latter matter, and I “think that he might endeavour to evolve a scheme whereby the Area Officers could De instructed to, as far as possible, have the drills in the day-time. If it comes to a question of the employer having to .give* a trainee leave of > absence, I think that he ought to bear the expense of the time which might be so used, because the boy is training, not only to defend Australia, but to help to defend the interests of the Empire. T do not expect the Minister to evolve such a scheme to-night, but I think that he might give due consideration to my suggestion, with a view to abolishing night drills.

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

.- I have not taken up any time in discussing any items of the Estimates, but 1 desire to say a few words on the subject of defence. I regret very much that the forms of parliamentary government only give to Parliament a nominal control over the Estimates. As a matter of fact, in the best of times, we get very little real control, but, with the practice which seems to have grown up under every Government of leaving the Estimates for discussion to the dying hours of the session, it is impossible for us to devote that time and attention to die various items which their importance demands. The people of the country do expect that items in which sections of them take a special interest should receive criticism at the hands of their representatives. Yet, owing to this unfortunate habit of always leaving the consideration of the Estimates until the last possible moment, and then rushing them through with all kinds of appeal to us to let honorable senators get home,4 we cannot give proper attention to them,’ and so it is just as well to let them go through without discussion, because the little consideration which can be given is futile. The Ministers, of course, must take on themselves the responsibility for the Estimates submitted and carried through Parliament. I wish to say a few words on the points raised by Senator Needham, and also by Senator Pearce, whom we all look upon as somewhat of an authority en Australian defence. I agree with them that whilst this mad competition amongst the nations of the world exists we must have a Naval and Military Force. More particularly do I consider that our Military Force is our first line of defence in this country, although the reverse is the case at the heart of the Empire. But whilst holding that belief, and giving my cordial approval to the compulsory military training system - and I have evidenced that by doing all I could to get my own sons brought under the provisions of the Act - I do not see that our recognition of these facts necessarily leads us to devote the same proportionate expenditure to our armaments as may be the case in Europe or the United Kingdom. It is all very well to say that while the mad race of armaments continues we must be in the front of the race. I chink that the different conditions that pertain justify us in taking on a lower scale of expenditure than may be necessary in th« case of European countries.

Senator Findley:

– What do you mean by that general statement?

Senator RAE:

– If Germany finds it necessary to increase the number of her troops France immediately responds by providing that for the conscripts there shall be a three-yearly service instead of a two-yearly one. In like manner, when Great Britain builds so many Dreadnoughts Germany decides that she must build so many more. Consequently, the nations in Europe are each intently watching the other, not merely to see whether a particular nation has as many troops, or as many ships, as the other, but whether it keeps up its relative strength, and whether, by any possible combination with its allies, it may be able ‘to hold the position should it ever be seriously attacked. We should take a secondary position to that altogether. To say that because the annual expenditure per head of the people of Great Britain or France, or Germany, may be so much justifies us in going to the same annual expenditure per head does not seem to me to be warranted by the facts of the situation. The fact that Great Britain is within practically a stone’s throw of France, Germany, and Italy, and that those countries are next-door neighbours to each other, compels them, if they mean to keep in the race at all, to keep up their relative strength, if not to try to make it better. But with us there is no occasion to go to anything like the proportionate length that they do, because of the vast distances that separate us from the fighting nations of the world. It is all very well to say that modern inventions have annihilated time and space. That is a poetic expression; it is not a literal fact. Notwithstanding all the improvements in locomotives - steam, oil fuel, and so on - -there is still a big handicap against any European nation that would attempt to invade Australia. It is idle to contend that we should expend anything like the amount per head on our protection that it may be necessary for European nations to expend on their protection. To look forward to the time when there will be peace between the nations of the earth is merely to look forward to the realization of a pious aspiration. I am not going to indulge in any speculation as to when that aspiration will be realized. There is no need for us to think tbat we are going to play a principal part in any drama which may be enacted in those countries of Europe in which a huge military and naval expenditure is being incurred. When we talk of the rapidly expanding naval armament of Germany menacing the naval superiority of Great Britain, we should remember that it is merely idle speculation to say that this or that country, by securing a majorityof ships, will necessarily be able to wipe out another country. Owing to the alliances which take place, no man can say that the mere fact of one nation being numerically stronger than another will give it the victory if a conflict should take place. When we recognise that the constant alliances and understandings between the different armed nations of the earth may at any time change the situation, we need not watch every little move on the part of those nations. We should content ourselves with providing a force that is reasonably sufficient to repel any attack that may take place on our shores. We should not attempt to rival other nations whose armaments are being built up, not merely for defensive, but for offensive, purposes. For this reason we should be satisfied with a small force, provided that it is trained up to the highest point of efficiency. We should aim at efficiency, but not at a huge and constantly growing expenditure, and neither the reports of Lord Kitchener nor of Admiral Henderson will in any way affect my feelings in that matter. We should set a limit to our expenditure, and within that limit we should secure, as nearly as possible, perfect efficiency. We should not allow this Frankenstein monster to grow and grow until our defence expenditure proves more disastrous to the community than would even the risk of a conflict. We can so overstep the bounds of prudence in this matter as to put such a grievous burden on this young community, which requires so much of its surplus wealth for developmental purposes, as will lead to nothing but chaos and disaster in the near future. For that reason I wish to sound a note of warning to those who think that because Europe is armed to the teeth we must necessarily emulate her example. The condition of nations which may at any time be called upon to take the offensive is vastly different from that of a community which is separated by thousands of miles from the storm centre, and which may never be drawn into a conflict other than one to repel an invasion by the coloured races which are settled to the north of this continent. If we take that as pur ideal, we may very well incur any risk that may result from any complications that may arise.

Senator Senior:

Senator MAUGHAN:
Queensland

– I wish to make a few brief remarks in connexion with this vote. It is obvious that every member of the Committee has his own ideas as to the best means of defence for Australia. But I think we are all agreed that, as compared with the systems in existence under the old rlgime of the States, of which many of us have had experience in the State Parliaments, the Commonwealth system of defence is vastly superior. Under the Commonwealth Defence Act, for the first time in the history of Australia, we have been able to organize our defence in such a fashion as will at least command respect. Honorable senators will remember that the defence systems under the old State régime were a disgrace. I can leave other honorable senators to speak for their own States; but I know that Senator Stewart will agree with me that in the nineties, when we sat together in the Queensland Parliament, and ridiculed the defence proposals year after year, the fortresses throughout Queensland were a perfect farce, the military discipline was rotten, and the encampments ridiculous. I think that the same remarks might be applied to the defence systems operating in all the other States at the time. I think I am right in saying that we have to-day under the Commonwealth a fairly efficient Force, which is of far more value to Australia than the systems that were in vogue in years gone by. Twenty-nine members of the Senate are here pledged to a certain policy. As a matter of fact, the Liberals of Australia, as well as the Labour party, are pledged to what may be called a national defence system. But the Labour party have no escape. The fourth plank of their platform is -

A citizen defence force with compulsory military training and an Australian-owned and controlled Navy.

Honorable senators know that that programme cannot be carried out without money. A Citizen Defence Force means money. I agree with many of the arguments advanced by Senators Bae and Stewart. There is no answer to some of them. We all hope for the day when, throughout the world, the emblems, of war will be displaced by. the emblems of peace. But that time has not yet come. The question of expense is certainly very important. As a new member of the Senate, I may say that it occurs to me that our naval authorities will have to be very careful in regard to expenditure. I rose particularly to refer to the policy which seems to have been adopted by some of our naval experts in Australia, of adding the larger type of battle-ships to our Australian Navy. In this connexion, I should like to call the attention of honorable senators- to the fact that during the recent manoeuvres around the British coast some remarkable deductions were drawn by naval experts in the Old Country, more particularly in connexion with the rivalry which has been going on for months in the Old Country between the battle-ship system and the system of submarines and destroyers. On the 10th November, there appeared in the Melbourne newspapers the following cablegram -

London,10th November.

The Standard, in commenting on the statement that the report of the recent naval manoeuvres has not been issued owing to the fact that Vice-Admiral Sir John Jellicoe’s so-called “ German “ Fleet caDtured four British bases on the east coast, and landed a force of 60,000 men without meeting with disaster, says - “According to German information the Teal lesson of the British manoeuvres is that a raid of any importance is doomed to failure. . Owing to the astonishing superiority of the submarine over the Dreadnoughts, the havoc was so great that the Admiralty ordered the submarines to cease.”

I do not say that that is a clinching argument, but time will not permit me to advance further arguments in favour of my contention. The point I wish to direct the attention of the Minister of Defence to - and I am not vain enough to believe that the honorable senator has not already considered the matter - is that we ought to be particularly careful in connexion with our naval policy, and should go thoroughly into the question of the relative superiority of Dreadnoughts and big battleships, as compared with submarines and destroyers. This is a matter which I am sure will not only command the attention of the Minister and our naval authorities, but also of men who takean intense interest in defence questions, like Senator Pearce and others in this-. Chamber. As I said this afternoon, in connexion with railway construction, defence is not with me a party question, and it will be a bad day for Australia when it is made a party question. But layman though I may be, I hope I shall be pardoned for calling attention to the factthat there is a marked difference of” opinion amongst the most able experts in. Great Britain as to which class of naval craft is most suitable for defence purposes under modern conditions. The Minister probably has more information on that point than I have. No doubt it is to be found in the pigeon-holes of the Naval Board. At the recent naval manoeuvres the battleships seem to have been nowhere with the torpedo and the destroyer. I understand that the policy of the late Government was largely directed to encouraging the construction of the smaller class of vessels, the torpedo and the submarine, in preference to the larger type, those of the Dreadnought class. I speak as one who twenty years ago was chairman of the first meeting called in Queensland to form a naval brigade, and as one who was a member of that brigade. Though not an expert, I have studied the subject, and I may be pardoned for saying that any one who studies the river system of Australia and its coast-line must come to the conclusion that we cannot have too many vessels of the Warrego and Tarra type. We cannot have too many submarines to defend our coast. But I am inclined to think that we need to be particularly careful with our future policy in reference to the construction of Dreadnoughts of the Australia type. With regard to a matter brought forward a few nights ago by you, Mr. Chairman, I cannot help thinking that it is wise policy to keep the naval and military branches of the Defence Force as far apart as possible. In the Old Country it has always been deemed expedient to keep Admiralty and Army administration entirely separate. I have heard it whispered that in this country old jealousies, no doubt introduced from England, between the Navy and the Army persist. If the Minister thinks that it will conduce to peace to proceed with the construction of head-quarters for the Navy alongside the Military Department in St. Kilda-road, I venture to tell him that he is making a mistake. From the point of view of economy, it seems bad policy to go in for permanent works in Melbourne, in view of the fact that within a few years buildings of a permanent character will be required at the Capital centre of the nation. I wish, also, to mention that a large amount of money is provided in these Estimates for instructional schools. I cannot understand why it is necessary for young men who submit themselves for the Area Officer examina tion to be brought all the way from North Queensland, Central Queensland, and even South Queensland, to Sydney to go through their instructional course. Surely vc have efficient officers in Queensland to make it unnecessary for our young men to go all the way to. Sydney for this instruction. I am not speaking from a parochial point of view. I should not mind if it were necessary to bring them to Melbourne or to any other place. But I find that an enormous sum of money is provided for the administration of the Military Department in Queensland. I have no objection to that. But as this money is provided, it hardly seems necessary that young officers should have to go to Sydney for their instruction. I have examined with interest the items of the Estimates dealing with rifle clubs. Whatever our political creed may be, we are all agreed that the rifle clubs of Australia have done splendid work in connexion with the defence system. I firmly believe that they should be encouraged in every way. In years gone by the rifle clubs were not regarded with much favour by the military authorities. I am not prepared to say that that is the case now. In my own State I believe that there is a most friendly feeling between the commandant, the permanent officers, and the rifle clubs. But though the money provided on the Estimates this year for rifle clubs may be said to be fairly liberal, I think, nevertheless, it might be still more liberal. I trust that every attention will be given by the Minister and his officers to the rifle clubs of Australia, because, as Senator Bae and Senator Stewart have pointed out, in spite of the fact that our Navy may do good service, and no doubt will, yet the great defence of Australia must in the main depend upon the land forces. Our rifle clubs, in an emergency, can be depended upon to give a good account’ of themselves. Most of the men constituting the clubs have been through the ranks. They are trained soldiers. I know any number of men who have served with me at sea, and who have been through the ranks in connexion with naval brigade work. They are now to *be found in the rifle clubs, which constitute a ‘ most efficient and important arm of the defence of Australia. In conclusion, I desire to say - and I say this- in view of certain statements which have appeared in one or two newspapers, not only of late, but for some years past - that when’ we are- dealing with ideals and ambitions of foreign nations it is just as well that we should be careful of our language. There is a great deal of talk about the eyes of Japan being on Australia. Only the other day a certain member of this National Parliament, who, thank goodness, is not a member of this branch of the Legislature, actually, in connexion with his own business, circulated placards all over New South Wales of a most insulting character against the great Japanese people. I say that that sort of thing is most reprehensible. As a matter of fact, any - one who has read any of the recent magazine literature must have come to the conclusion that Japan is not only a great and conquering nation - a nation which shows a determination to adopt Western ideas - but she is also, if t may use the words of one of her great statesmen, a nation whose earnest desire is to be the best of friends., not only with the nations of the Old World, but with the rising nations of the Pacific.

Senator Needham:

– All the more rea- son why we. should be om the alert.

Senator MAUGHAN:

– Quite so; but surely there is no occasion to hurl, insults at a great and rapidly progressing, nation ? I would make one remark in conelusion in answer to those who say that they take little interest in our defencesystem because they have no property todefend. I take- the view that, even supposing some of us may have- no property to defend, there are the women and children of Australia to defend, and if that is not enough to animate those who do not agree with me on this question, all I can say is that they had better go to a better country than Australia is.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister of Defence · New South Wales · LP

– Several questions have been submitted, and perhaps I may take this opportunity of answering them. Senator McDougall has asked for information in regard to the Gunnery School. His grievance was that the school appeared to be maintained in the interests of. the permanent officers, and that the militia officer had no access, thereto. The fac? is that the school is? open both for militia and permanent officers. But the trouble is that the necessary course of three months is too long for many of the militia officers. They cannot take advantage of it, because they cannot leave their ordinary occupations for so long a term. Senator McDougall also asked a question about the officer who is set down as inspector of boilermakers,, Garden Island. I am not going to defend the title. I am not responsible for it. That officer came over when the Admiralty transferred Garden Island to the Commonwealth. Probably he would be more properly described as overseer of boilermakers. But we took the title with the man. A question has been asked by Senator Needham as to the possibility of minimizing night drills and substituting drill’s in the day-time. When I went to the Department, I found that an effort had already been made to give effect to that idea. Wherever it is found convenient, the change has been made.

Senator Rae:

– Has the Minister- provided any funds which may be necessary to facilitate the change from (night to day drill?

Senator MILLEN:

– No, I have not, because the change is only made where it is found to be convenient. It is made to suit the convenience of the majority of those who attend the drills.

Senator Rae:

– You will never do it unless money is provided.

Senator MILLEN:

War preparations, intelligence, ordnance, Fleet exercises, manoeuvres, gunnery, and torpedo exercises, &c, naval works, advice as to senior appointments.

The second naval member’s duties are as follow : -

Personnel and reserves, discipline, stores, victualling, medical.

The duties of the third naval member are -

Construction and engineering of ships, repairs, control of naval dockyards and bases.

The duties of the finance and civil member are declared to be “ finance, contracts, and legal questions.” The second and third naval members of the Board are men of wide knowledge and experience, and of considerable skill in their departments. Yet, at all times, Che”y have been made subservient to the authority of the finance member, who has never had experience outside of an office either in the Australian or the Imperial Navy. I do not say that Mr. Manisty is not an excellent officer within his particular sphere, but I do say that he is not qualified to veto the advice of the other members of the Board, who are charged with very important duties. It is because Mr. Manisty has been able to do that under the present constitution of the Board that friction has arisen, and still exists, thus rendering the Board worse than useless. It is common knowledge that to-day the members of the Board are not on speaking terms with each other. Consequently, it is impossible to hold a meeting for the purpose of discussing and administering the naval affairs of the Commonwealth, for which the Board was created.

Senator Bakhap:

– Then it is not a debating society?

Senator LONG:

– No. Its members are not on speaking terms with each other, and the removal of Captain Onslow has not improved the position one iota. The Minister is about to go into a peaceful recess with the knowledge that the Board will continue its useless existence for another six months until attention is again called to it in this Parliament. That the Board is unable to render the service which was expected of it is well known. The ex-second naval member some time ago addressed a memorandum to the other members of the Board in which he set out suggestions, which, .if adopted, would have placed that body on a satisfactory working basis. All the other members of the Board, with one exception, agreed with him that such a reformation was absolutely essential to its proper working. Yet nothing has been done, save to dismiss the man who was responsible for the only practical suggestions which have ever been made for the effective working of the Board. I think I am perfectly justified in reading that document, although it is a very lengthy one. Afterwards, I shall quote the remarks of the other members of the Board in reply to the suggestions which it contains.

Senator Millen:

– Does the honorable senator say that the document is a copy of an official minute?

Senator LONG:

– I am not in a position to say that. But the Minister will be able to compare notes, and ascertain whether it is a copy or not. Captain Onslow, under the heading, “ Naval Board Administration : Duties and Responsibilities of Members,” wrote -

Having now held my appointment for four months, and there have ample time to e. perence and reflect on the above subjects, I desire to bring my views before my colleagues, as it appears to me that great congestion exists, producing unnecessary delay with damaging results to the service.

Senator Millen:

– There was a good deal the Minister did not read which he might have read. I regret to say that he read a good deal that suited himself, and left out a good deal which would have told very much in favour of Captain Hughes Onslow. The memorandum proceeds -

It would be in accordance with Government policy to displace Imperial officers by Commonwealth directly the latter are trained and thoroughly, competent. This measure would not only at once relieve all congestion, but give welcome opportunity for advancement in the secretarial department. Another relief measure that should at once be carried out is the complete turning over of the personnel department to the second naval member,’ including appointments, provision of officers, &c, as a great deal of work in connexion with the personnel has originated with the finance member. It has never been properly turned over to me, and if it had I could not have attended to it, as I have no time myself and no assistant. Mr. . Davies works here every night till late, and I am writing this past 12 midnight for want, of other time to do it ; so I suggest, with the cast relief that will be afforded the finance member under these proposals, that Mr. Spurgeon be turned over to me, with whose assistance I could perfectly well carry out my assigned duties in their entirety. I think that with the proposed, redistribution of duties it will be seen that this is a fair proposal, as I shall have at least as much as the finance member to attend to, and thts equalizes the staff, giving two to each. I desire to point out that with officers drawn from many different sources and who enter the service at widely different ages and under many diverse conditions, that the work of keeping officers’ registers will be difficult and complicated, and much will depend on the accurate keeping of the registers, &c.

I have given examples of delay and other defaults in administrative routine, and these are by no means exceptional or isolated cases, but represent the general state of, affairs, brought about entirelyby the office of secretary being vested in one of the members of the board, with consequent terrible congestion of business. One has only to visit the secretary’s room at any time to realize the truth of this - where there is usually to be seen a bewildering mass of documents, not to mention those in the next room, apparently awaiting Ministerial consideration. If one visits the naval members’ rooms, a reasonable number of documents are seen there, and the contrast is brought about by the process already described of the secretary closely overhauling all the work of the naval members. This constantly produces delay in regard to important documents, while at the same time not preventing serious mistakes being made, as in regard to the inauguration of the system of lodging allowances, which, in the opinion of every officer I have spoken to, is having disastrous results in regard to the discipline and morals of the service. There can be no doubt that the finance member will have ample work to do when relieved of the irksome duties of secretary, and if the separation of officers is not carried out before the arrival of the Fleet Unit the congestion and confusion will become indescribable.

In rough outline, the system I suggest is that the naval secretary receives and distributes all papers, marking them, to members concerned, either in order of seniority or of relative importance ; if a conflict of opinion has arisen it is referred back again by the Naval Secretary to the senior member concerned, who will confer with the other member or members, and endeavour to arrive at a consensus on the point, failing which it becomes a matter for board consideration. These conflicts of opinion do not often exist, and when they do a reasonable accommodation can usually be arrived at as the result of a short conference between the members concerned. In this connexion it will be remembered that on more than one occasion minutes have been withdrawn by common consent and dockets reconstituted and sent round for signature. There should at once be drawn up a document showing all the usual routine matter that has to go before the Minister, and the dav before his attendance at the Navy office, the secretary should circulate, for information of members, all the extra routine work it is proposed to lay before the Minister, so that any member may attend who feels inclined in regard to any particular question; also a list of subjects that it is proposed to bring before a general board meeting before the Minister arrives.

It will, of course, be recognised that this memorandum is a severe criticism of the duties, responsibilities, and constitution of the board; but it is hoped it will also be recognised that it is absolutely free from any personal bias. However, I should not like to lay down my pen without paying a tribute to each and every one of my colleagues, from the Minister to the finance member, as I have nothing but admiration for the single-hearted and chivalrous way in which the business of the board has always been conducted. This very grateful acknowledgment, however, does not require one to sacrifice on the altar of sentiment one’s own proper professional position, or the interests of the service. The present system cannot possibly be allowed to exist, as it will bring the most serious trouble hereafter ; indeed, that it has not done so alreadv is simply due to the exceptionally high qualifications and characteristics of the present Naval Secretary. He has been the involuntary and unconscious victim -of a system, and, I am perfectly certain, has never voluntarily arrogated to himself one iota of control that was not conferred upon him by the system. That system, however, makes him in every respect the mentor and supervisor, if not dictator, of every written thought and action of each member of the board, and is absolutely bound to cause mental distortion as to the relative capabilities and responsibilities of himself and the other members of the board. It moy be said that the present system was necessary for the inauguration of the business of the board, and however much truth there may be in that as the finance member was the only one. who had previous experience of board administration, it does not alter the fact that the time has now come when the separation of the secretariat from membership of the board is a crying need. The present situation may or may not have been forseeable, but we may rest assured that it was neither foreseen nor intended to be brought about when the system was inaugurated.

SenatorRae. - What else?

Senator MILLEN:

– His personal demeanour; his attitude at the Board as “witnessed by myself; the impossibility of carrying on any business at the table owing to his excitable temperament, unless I was prepared to spend half my time in trying to prevent a row.

Senator Bakhap:

– Senator Millen referred to the officer’s temperament, and not to his reputation.

Senator NEEDHAM:

– I am not concerned about Captain Hughes Onslow’s temperament any more than about the temperament of Senator Bakhap. Here is .a gentleman -who came from the Old Country to engage in the service of the

Commonwealth, and no evidence has been placed before the Committee to justify his dismissal. We have only the statement of the Minister of Defence as to the reasons why he’ considered that this officer’s services should be dispensed with. He has said that he thought that by dismissing Captain Onslow he would convert the Naval Board into a happy family. The honorable senator was faced with the direct question whether, since the removal of Captain Onslow, the Board has been a happy family, but he does not give a direct reply. He cannot assure the Committee that the Naval Board is a happy family to-day.

Senator Long:

NOES: 13

Majority … … 11

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Senator LONG:
Tasmania

.- T think that this would be a convenient time to report progress, and I therefore move -

That the Chairman leave the chair and report progress.

– Is not all this information in the reports ?

Senator MILLEN:
Minister of Defence · New South Wales · LP

.-All this information has been given to the Senate, previously. According to the last report I have received, the factory has turned out 1,000 rifles. I can give noassurance as to the rate of output from this time on, but one may reasonably anticipate that it will improve.

Senator LONG:
Tasmania

Senator LONG:

– The life of the Navy offers many opportunities for smart boys, but I do not think the wisest means have been adopted to induce them to take up a seafaring life. In Tasmania, particularly on the north-west coast, the authorities have been very active for some considerable time in inducing boys to enlist, but I do not regard the methods of the recruiting agents as altogether commendable. Those officials ought to put the facts of the position fairly and squarely, not only before the boys, but also before their parents; and it has come under my notice that tactics not altogether desirable have been resorted to. If there was a Minister here who had the decency to listen to the requests I have to make, I would suggest, with some personal knowledge, that the recruiting agents be instructed to adopt different and better methods. I think we ought to have a quorum present. [Quorum formed.’]

Sitting suspended from 12.20 to 1 a.m. (Friday).

Senator LONG:

– I would like to have a quorum present. [Quorum formed.”] It. is rather refreshing to again see the Minister of Defence in his place in this chamber. Possibly he will extend to me the courtesy of a reply, so that I will ;not be obliged to again employ the -strong terms which I used a few minutes ago towards another individual who accidentally occupies a position in the Ministry. Seeing that the Minister of Defence is present, I feel compelled to repeat some of the arguments which I have already presented in reference to the recruiting of boys for the Australian Navy. We ought to have some assurance from the Minister that only bond fide representations will be made by the agents of the Commonwealth when they are attempting to induce lads to enter our -naval service. It has come to my knowledge that these agents have not put the position before the boys as fairly and fully as they ought to have done, nor have they taken the parents of the lads into their confidence as they should have done. Before youths are permitted to sever their home connexion, they ought to know exactly the conditions under which they are required to serve in the Australian Navy. Recently considerable heartburning has been experienced by Australian engineers in the service. Our Australian officers are not getting a fair deal in the matter of promotion. Complaints have reached this Parliament from young men occupying positions as engineers in our naval service who have declared their intention, if they do not. get a fair deal, of severing their connexion with it. Unless the Minister insists upon merit being rewarded, discord will be created, retirements will follow, and ultimately the service, instead of being popular with young and capable men, will become very unpopular indeed. It is because Captain Hughes Onslow insisted upon bare justice being done to Australian officers -that he made himself unpopular with the other members of the Naval Board. I hope that the Minister of Defence will give particular attention to this matter during the recess. If I can get an assurance from him to that effect, I shall be satisfied, because I know that any promise made by him will be faithfully kept. I must insist upon having a quorum present. [Quorum formed.] Reference was made this evening by Senator Rae and others to the rapidity with which our defence expenditure is growing. When we “ . examine the figures contained in these Estimates, we are justified in asking whether we are getting a quia pro quo for the money that is being expended. Is the greater portion of that money being devoted to the payment of high salaries or to the equipment and training of our Naval and Military Forces? If honorable senators will look at the Bill they will find that high salaries are the order of the day. For instance, under the heading of “ Naval Establishment,” subdivision 1, they will find a number of officers who participate largely in the huge expenditure upon our defence system. Amongst these they will observe the following : -

Captain-in-Charge, £1,000; Naval Store Officer, £750; Victualling Store Officer, £750; Chief Engineer, £700 ; Deputy Naval Store Officer, £7$n ; and Naval Ordnance Officer, £450.

I do not say that these salaries are too high, because I do not know anything of the duties which their recipients are called upon to perform. But there does seem to be an undue proportion of highsalaried officials under the CaptaininCharge. If honorable senators will turn to page 94 of the Bill, they will see the reverse side of the picture. There, under the heading of “ Naval Establishments,” they will find that an armourer is in receipt of £156. per year. Now the duties performed by an armourer are of a very skilled character indeed. I would ask the Minister to look into the matter, with a view to seeing if the occupant of this office cannot be paid a salary which will be more proportionate to the services which he is rendering the Commonwealth. It is a disgrace to the Government to put a salary-of £156 on the Estimates for an armourer; but it is in harmony with the repeated declaration of the present Government to reduce expenditure in connexion with the lower-paid servants of the Commonwealth. On page 97, votes’ are set down for the Flinders Naval Base, Victoria, Naval Bases in New South Wales, and the Henderson Naval Base in Western Australia. Dealing with the vote for the Flinders Naval Base, I want to say that what appears to me to be a very gross injustice has been inflicted on one of the staff clerks,- a Mr. Bailey, who, in keeping with the policy of the present Government, has been summarily dismissed. Notwithstanding repeated applications for an inquiry into the cause of his dismissal, that modicum of justice has been denied him, as it has been denied Captain Hughes Onslow. I do not profess to know anything of the circumstances that brought about the dismissal of Mr. Bailey; but I do know that the EngineerinCharge recorded an emphatic protest against his dismissal, and asserts that he rendered skilled and trustworthy service. It is useless to ask the Minister of Defence to take any action in this matter, because his gods, so to speak, on the Naval Board, run the show. The Minister is only a figure at the end of a string, and when the Board pulls the string the figure moves. That has been our experience of the honorable senator ever since he has occupied his present office. In connexion with the establishment of

Proposed votes agreed to.

Department of Trade and Customs.

Divisions 81 to 92, £469,575.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– I wish to make an inquiry about the conditions under which our lighthouse employes are engaged. They should be treated better than they have been hitherto. I have already mentioned that they have no opportunities of educating their children as persons employed on the mainland have. I have also mentioned that it is necessary to have supply vessels calling at stated periods at the lighthouses,that uniforms should be supplied to the keepers free, and that the general conditions of employment need to be improved. These lighthouse men lead lonely lives, and have very little chance of social intercourse. We have passed a Lighthouse Act, but it will not come into operation until it is proclaimed. When will the proclamation be issued, and when will the Commonwealth assume responsibility for the Department?

Senator McCOLL:
VicePresident of the Executive Council · Victoria · LP

– I cannot reply categorically to the honorable senator’s questions, but I can inform him that the lot of the lighthouse keepers will be considerably improved when they become employes of the Commonwealth. The matter is not yet ripe for the issue of the proclamation. Negotiations with the States have been proceeding, and a conclusion will soon be reached. A considerable amount of work is going on around our coasts. I have made inquiries as to when the proclamation will be issued, and have learnt from a responsible official that it cannot be done immediately. The subject is, however, under special consideration.

Senator Rae:

– Will the lighthouses be treated as transferred properties, and taken over as such ?

Senator Needham:

– What responsible officer has been consulted by the VicePresident of the Executive Council, and what reason is given as to why the time is not ripe for the issue of the proclamation?

Senator McCOLL:

– I have sent round to the Minister to ask if he can tell me when the proclamation will be issued, and I hope to be able to furnish a reply to the honorable senator before the sitting terminates.

Senator LONG:
Tasmania

– It is more than a pleasure to have elicited a courteous reply from the VicePresident of the Executive Council. Indeed, it is quite refreshing to get an answer at any time. This is a favorable moment for moving -

That progress be reported.

Question put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 2

NOES: 13

Majority … … 11

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Senator LONG:
Tasmania’

– - Honorable senators will have noticed from the official returns that this year there has been a considerable decrease in the Customs and Excise revenue. As far as I can learn, the Government have not yet submitted an opinion as to the cause of that reduction, amounting to something like £600,000. Have the Government any information to give to the Committee on the point?

Senator McCOLL:
VicePresident of the Executive Council · Victoria · LP

– I have no information as to the cause of the decline, but, of course, a reduction of revenue occurs when there is a decrease in the importation of goods.

Senator MAUGHAN:
Queensland

– I would like to know what the Government have in view in regard to the extension of the system of lighting on the Queensland coast? It will be remembered that, at considerable expense, the Fisher Government employed an expert, in the person of Commander Brewis, R.N., to examine the lighting facilities on the coast line of Australia. I leave honorable senators to look after their own States in the matter. I merely wish to call attention to the fact that Commander Brewis, in his report to Parliament, said that there is any amount of room for improvement with regard to the lighting on the Queensland coast. Had we had. more time to deal with this matter, it would have been my pleasure to have gone into it pretty extensively, but I shall content myself by quoting one extract from page 3 of the report of Commander Brewis on the lighting of the north-east coast, which says -

The proportion in Queensland at the present time is one coastal light to each 51 miles, including the western approach to Torres Strait. This is exclusive of “ local “ or “ leading “ lights. The proportion, if the recommendations contained in this report are adopted, will be one coastal light to each 23.6 miles of coast line.

Then he goes on to point out that the proportion in France is one light to every 5.5 miles, and in the United Kingdom one light to each 16.4 miles. Queensland is perhaps one of the most dangerous coast lines in Australia, by reason of the fact that there is a tremendous coral reef extending almost from north to south for 1,200 miles. In the interests of humanity, life, shipping, and property generally, I call the attention of the Minister to the fact that the sooner something is done to give effect to the recommendations of Commander Brewis in regard to that portion of our coast the sooner will the people of Queensland appreciate it.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– The lighting of our coast is a very important matter, and so is also the survey of it. I hope, when the Minister is replying, he will also tell us what the Department, is doing in regard to the survey of our coast. The lighting and the survey of the coast are inseparable. We must have a good survey, as well as good lights, to guide our mariners in negotiating our waters. I understand that Senator Maughan meant his remarks to apply to the Australian coast generally.

Senator Maughan:

– That is so.

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

– I suppose that the lighthouses, when transferred to the Commonwealth, will be treated as other transferred properties^ - that is to say, we must provide for the interest charges upon them. If that is so, I would like to know whether the adjustment between the States and the Commonwealth in regard to this matter has been the cause of delaying the proclamation of the Act. If not, will the Minister indicate what has caused the delay?

Senator McCOLL:
VicePresident of the Executive Council · Victoria · LP

– The “lighthouses will be treated as transferred properties. A special investigation regarding them has been completed, printed, and circulated, and a Lighthouse Branch has been formed, and is now preparing to take over control from the States. I understand that a survey of the west coast is now being conducted by the Imperial Government, under highlyskilled officers, the Commonwealth bearing the cost. The delay in regard to taking over the lighthouses has been caused through the late appointment of Mr. Ramsbotham. Though the position was advertised early in the year, the Director was not appointed until September. The coast has been divided into four districts - first, the North -West Cape to Torres Strait, with head-quarters at Darwin, a distance of 2,300. miles; second, from Torres Strait to Cape Moreton, a distance of 1,500 miles, with head-quarters at Townsville; third, Cape Moreton to Cape Northumberland, embracing the coast-lines of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, and the islands of Bass Strait, a distance of 2,500 miles; and fourth, Cape Northumberland to North-West Cape,’ ‘with head-quarters at Albany, a distance of 2,900 miles. Two officers have been appointed to take charge of districts - Captain Hood and Captain Bolger - and two others have still to be appointed. It is intended to treat the light-keepers liberally. All the leave conditions of the Commonwealth Service will apply to them. All public holidays will be added to their annual leave of three weeks, and when the light-vessels are obtained they will have stores conveyed to them free of freight charges.

Senator Needham:

– What about the education of. the children of the lighthouse keepers?

Senator McCOLL:

– I have no note about that, but I shall bring the question under the attention of the Minister to see if we can make provision in that regard. Mr. Ramsbotham has not yet had time to go thoroughly into matters.

Senator Rae:

– Have you had a valuation of the lighthouses made?

Senator McCOLL:

– No. Senator LONG (Tasmania) [2.9 a.m.]. - I undertook to delight the Committee with a few observations on Defence until 2 o’clock. I have nothing to add in regard to the Customs Department.

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– Commander Brewis, in his report on the western coast of Australia, says that to thoroughly survey that coast will take at least twenty years, and seeing that there is only one ship engaged in the work - that is, H.M.S. Fantome - I would ask. the Minister to take into serious consideration the wisdom of employing two vessels. Showing the danger confronting shipping and the need for urgency, I wish to refer to the wreck of the s.s. Pericles on a rock just outside Cape Leeuwin. I travelled over that portion of the ocean three or four months after the wreck, and the navigating officer of the Orient boat on which I travelled assured me that on his previous trip his boat had passed over almost the identical spot where the Pericles was wrecked.

Senator de Largie:

– It did nothing of the kind.

Senator LYNCH:

– I am only repeating what I was told. The reason why the Orient boat did not strike the rock was that she did not have the same draught as the Pericles, which drew 28 feet, and in consequence struck the pinnacle of rock, knocked it off, and went down inside half-an-hour. That is an example of the unknown dangers of the Western Australian coast. The same applies to the coast from Perth to Cambridge Gulf. To get through in safety the people who travel over that part pf the ocean have to depend on the skill of the navigators We. do not know how many more rock’s there may be of the same kind as t1’ ‘t on which the Pericles came to grief, and so I suggest to the Minister the wis-, dom of expediting the survey. There is no reason why we should wait for twenty years. Let us have two ships, so that we may bring the completion of that work within a reasonable time. We cannot, afford to lose further shi “<s -. particularly we cannot afford to los° lives of Australians; and as the expenditure will have to be undertaken sooner or later, I trust that the Minister will approach the Imperial authorities with a view to getting another survey ship so as to press on with the survey at a fair

Tate. I hope the Minister will pay particular heed to the note of warning I am ;sounding.

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

– I notice in this morning’s Argus a short article which deals with a very important matter. It is as follows -

Aliens in Sugar Industry.

Brisbane, Thursday. - The Minister for Agriculture (Mr. White) said to-day that he had signed 512 certificates of exemption as provided for under the Sugar Cultivation Act, permitting -aliens to engage in the sugar industry. No one had received an exemption certificate unless he had resided in Queensland for over 10 years. Some of the applicants have been 30 years in the State. Many of them were Hindoos (British subjects) and kanakas, who had been exempt under the Federal Act of 1902.

Negotiations were entered into between the Fisher Government and the State Government to abrogate the Excise and bounty provisions conditionally upon legislation being passed by the State Parliament to abolish the employment of aliens in the industry, and to provide industrial conditions that would be acceptable to the white labour employed therein. What negotiations, if any, have taken place between the present Federal Government and the State Government in respect to those matters, and have any arrangements been entered into between them to vary the agreement made by the Fisher Government with the State Government ?

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– Before the Minister replies on the question of the survey of the coastline of Western Australia, I desire to read a passage from the report of Commander Brewis in order to bring the matters more vividly before his mind.

The coast-line of Western Australia, from Eucla to Wyndham, amounts to approximately 3,130 nautical miles. From Eucla to Port Darwin is a distance of 3,300 miles-, of which fully 2,400 miles must be considerably imperfectly charted, and in parts entirely unexamined. Accurate charts are obligatory for trade and navigation, and this is a most important coastal requirement. If two vessels proceeded steadily with this work, it would take at least fifteen years, and probably twenty years, to complete.

The position is really worse than I described, because, on the authority of Commander Brewis, it will take two vessels from fifteen to twenty years to do the work. I trust that the Minister will take an active interest in seeing that it is pushed along more rapidly than it has been.

Senator McCOLL:
VicePresident of the Executive Council · Victoria · LP

– I have not seen the paragraph in the Argus read by Senator Findley, but I can say, with certainty, that no variation of the agreement has been made by the present Government. I shall have an inquiry made into the matter he has referred to, and find out exactly how it stands.

Senator Findley:

– The Queensland Government have not kept faith with what they promised us.

Senator McCOLL:

– I quite recognise the importance of the matter which Senator Lynch has brought up. I shall bring it before the Cabinet without delay to see if the survey cannot be expedited in some way or other.

Proposed votes agreed to.

Department of Home Affairs.

Divisions 93 to 101, £459,349.

Senator PEARCE:
Western Australia

– Is the Vice-President of the Executive Council how in a position to give me the information” I asked for earlier in the sitting regarding a statement by a member of the Western Australian Government that the Federal Government had asked the State Government to ease off the supply of jarrah railway sleepers. The State Government have two contracts running, namely, one for powellised karri sleepers, and one for jarrah sleepers, and a State Minister said that the Federal Government had asked the State Government to ease off the supply of jarrah sleepers, indicating that there was a surplus on hand at the time.

Senator McCOLL:
VicePresident of the Executive Council · Victoria · LP

– There are two contracts for the supply of jarrah sleepers, namely, one for 100,000, and one for 200,000. The contracts with the Western Australian Government are for the supply of 1,700,000 sleepers. There is no trouble about the supply of jarrah sleepers; the trouble has been in regard to the other kind. With regard to the matter referred to yesterday by Senator Needham, I have made an inquiry, and the following information has been supplied -

The trouble with the Western Australian Government is only in regard to powellised karri sleepers. The first contract of jarrah sleepers was 100,000 sleepers, and the deliveries were reasonably satisfactory. The second contract is for 200,000 sleepers at Port Augusta ; 50,000 were due 1st December instant, but have not been delivered. It is understood that the bulk of them are on the road, and nothing has (so far) been said about late delivery. Nothing is known of any request to the State to delay any deliveries of jarrah sleepers.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– The Western Australian Government are desirous of fulfilling, and will fulfil, the contracts into which they have entered, and I want to ask the Minister whether he will review the whole matter, and give the State Government a chance to fulfil the contract which they have not been able to do owing to the fact that certain conditions intervened over which they had no control.

Senator McCOLL:
VicePresident of the Executive Council · Victoria · LP

– I can assure Senator Needham that, personally, I am in sympathy with the State Government in the trouble they have got into. I understand it has not been due to their fault. We have, of course, to see that the work is carried on, because we do not wish the work of construction to be stopped, and a number of men knocked . off. On behalf of the Cabinet, I can assure the honorable senator that in the circumstances every consideration will be given to the position of the State Government.

Proposed votes agreed to.

Department of Postmaster-General.

Divisions 102 to 111, £4,834,757.

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

– I would like the Minister to give any information he has in reference to the contract referred to in the item on page 196, “Remission of fines for noncompliance with contract.”

Senator McCOLL:
VicePresident of the Executive Council · Victoria · LP

– There is a typographical error; the word “ contract “ ought to have been printed in the plural. A number of contracts were entered into by the Department withvarious parties.

Senator Findley:

– That will do. I thought that it was one contract.

Senator McCOLL:

– I thought so, too. I have made an inquiry, and find that the same thing happened in regard to other States. A number of contracts were entered into by the Department with various parties, but were not complied with. There were extenuating circumstances, and, consequently, the fines were remitted

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– On behalf of Senator Russell, who is unavoidably absent at this early hour, I rise to ask the Minister representing the Postmaster-General the following questions, which he, if present, would have asked, and which I may mention follow on some questions that he asked yesterday : -

Is it the intention of the Government to carry out Arbitration Awards, applying to the Public Service, in their entirety?
Do they intend going beyond the decision of the Court by granting any increases secured to non-applicants?
If the reply to No. 2 be in the affirmative, will they stipulate that non-unionists shall pay a proportion of the costs?
Will the Government consider the advisability of paying all the costs of such cases?

As Senator Russell ventilated this matter yesterday, and I supported him in doing so, the Minister is in possession of the facts. A certain award was given on the 12th September, 1913, in connexion with the Postal Electricians Union ; an attempt was made to evade the award, and the. Union had to approach the Court to get an interpretation of it, but even now they are denied the benefit of the award.

Senator McCOLL:
VicePresident of the Executive Council · Victoria · LP

– The honorable senator is scarcely correct in saying that an attempt was made to evade the award.

Senator Needham:

– I do not say that it was made by you.

Senator McCOLL:

-I know that when the award was made the Government gave an instruction that it was to be carried out, and that instruction was sent to every State. The award was varied afterwards. The replies to the questions which the honorable senator has put on behalf of Senator Russell are as follow : -

It is the intention of the Government to. carry it out.
The award will be paid to every one who is doing the work, whether he is a unionist or a, non-unionist. That is the instruction which has. been given by the Public Service Commissioner.
I am not in a position to state whether the Government can do this or not, but I will bring it before the Postmaster-General.
This is a question to which I cannot reply, but I will bring it before the Minister.

Senator Russell intended to ask meanother question to-night, and, as he is. not here, I will give the information now. There were a number of temporary - employes who did not get at first the full award. The award was afterwards varied in order to include them. The question then arose as to dating the payment back a considerable time. This matter has been before the Postmaster-General, and was discussed by the deputation which waited upon him last week from the branches of the service. He made them an offer, and it . is now under consideration.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– I made a statement about an attempt to evade the award. I did not impute that attempt to the VicePresident of the Executive Council, or to the Government. I believe that the Commissioner’s Department really attempted to evade the award. I was present in Court when Mr. Justice Higgins gave his interpretation of the award. If the whole of the costs that the union was put to cannot be refunded by the Government, they should defray at least the cost of securing an interpretation of the award, seeing that it was necessitated by the action of the Commissioner.

Senator McCOLL:
VicePresident of the Executive Council · Victoria · LP

– I think that there is something in the honorable senator’s contention, and I promise to bring it before the Cabinet for consideration.

Senator Needham:

– The honorable senator will let me have a reply ?

Senator McCOLL:

– I shall communicate with the honorable senator. As to the Postal Electricians’ case, I may say that when it came up the other day I made inquiries into it, and have received from the Secretary of the Department the following letter, dated 12th inst., which may be interesting to honorable senators -

Postmaster-General’s Department,

Melbourne, 12th December, 1913-

Dear Senator Mccoll, -

Referring to your inquiries this morning respecting the Arbitration Award in the Postal Electricians’ case, I beg to inform you that the original award of the Arbitration Court came into operation in accordance with the terms of the award thirty days after it had been laid before both Houses of Parliament. Thus, it took effect from the 12th September last. Copies of the printed award have been forwarded to the different Deputy Postmasters-General, and on the 12th September a notification was sent to them, reminding them that it came into operation on that date, and instructing them to make payment accordingly. Subsequently, a difference of opinion arose regarding the interpretation of the award as regards temporary employes, who made a further application to the Court. The award was varied in a judgment delivered on the11th October,1913, and instructions in regard to it, and that payment was to be made in accordance with it, were issued to all Deputy PostmastersGeneral on the 14th idem. Complaint having been made that the mechanics in Queensland were not receiving the award rates, the Deputy PostmasterGeneral, Brisbane, was asked, on the 13th ult., for report, and on the following day a reminder was sent to him. He replied, on the 17th idem, as follows : - “ Files of papers re permanent officers have been passing backwards and forwardson urgent business connected with decisions, conveyed re temporary employés, and as a result settlement of the question of increased pay to staff-men has been delayed. List of payments as per award now approved, and funds made available for payment. Temporary employés have been paid at increased1 rates for current periods.”

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– I wish to draw the attention of the Vice-President of the ExecutiveCouncil to the necessity for improving; our postal service in the direction of giving notice to the public of approaching storms or changes in the weather which might have an injurious effect upon growing crops, fruit, and stock. The Commonwealth postal service extends all over the continent, and we have a huge army of mail carriers. But at present those engaged in growing cereals, fruit, and other primary products are placed at a serious disadvantage for want of warning as to approaching weather changes. Their only source of information is the daily press. Many people in the country, however, do not subscribe to the daily newspapers, while many others who do, are unable to obtain them until two or three days after their publication. If they were warned through the Postal Department of approaching changes in the weather, a great deal of valuable produce would be saved. In the United States of America the Postal Department distributes every year something like 20,000,000 pamphlets, issued by the Meteorological Department, which works in conjunction with it in notifying the people throughout that vast country of approaching weather changes. So far, nothing of this kind has been done in Australia. There are a comparatively small number of stations in each State which are notified of changes in the weather, and those stations, in turn, have to depend upon the daily press to communicate to the people the information they have so received. That is not enough. We should utilize the postal service in the direction I have suggested.

I hope that the Minister will see that the excellent example set us in this respect by the United States of America is copied, at least to some extent, by the Commonwealth. If the Meteorological Department were to co-operate with the Postal Department, valuable information as to approaching changes in the weather could be disseminated from time to time. Such information would be of great service to producers of cereals, fruit-growers, and those engaged in raising stock.

Senator Pearce:

– And also to those engaged in fishing.

Senator LYNCH:

– If the fishermen along our coast could be warned of approaching storms, a great deal of property, and sometimes life, would be saved. We have towns on the northwest coast of Western Australia where “ willy- willys “ come down so suddenly that the residents, unless forewarned, have barely time to close their doors before they are upon them. I have been in communication with Mr. Hunt, the Government Meteorologist, who tells me that he can give warning of the approach of a storm. Steps should be taken to enable the information which he can supply to be distributed amongst the people through the medium of the Postal Department. I mention this matter in the hope that the Minister will see the wisdom of taking early action in regard to it.

Senator McCOLL:
VicePresident of the Executive Council · Victoria · LP

– I am very much obliged to the honorable senator for having brought this matter before me. I can assure him that I am in full sympathy with this proposal. When I was in the United States of America in 1909, I spent half a day in the Meteorological Bureau, and am able, therefore, to indorse, all that Senator Lynch has said as to the value of the work done by it. We cannot hope, for a long time, to achieve the perfection which that Department has reached, but we might very well make a start in the way suggested by the honorable senator. The Meteorological Bureau of the United States of America receives communications twice a day from Canada in the north, Mexico in the south, Honolulu in the west, and Portugal in the east; so that it is able to give ample warning of approaching storms from every quarter. As the result of these warnings millions of pounds’ worth of property have been saved. Accurate information is also obtained by the bureau as to the rainfall all over the States. It is advised of the number of inches of rainfall in the mountains, and, upon that information, can tell the people what will be the height of the floods in the valleys. It also gives warnings of approaching frosts, and, in various parts of California, the receipt of such information has enabled farmers and others, by lighting fires, or covering up their plants, to protect them from the frost, and so to avoid much damage. I shall have great pleasure in pressing this matter on the Postmaster-General, and requesting him to arrange for his Department to co-operate with the Meteorological Department, with a view of taking action in the direction suggested by the honorable senator.

Proposed votes agreed to.

Second schedule agreed to.

Postponed clauses 2 and 3, abstract, preamble, and title agreed to.

Bill reported without request, and passed through its remaining stages.

page 4742

PINE CREEK TO KATHERINE RIVER RAILWAY BILL

Bill returned from the House of Representatives, with a message intimating that the House had agreed to part of an amendment insisted on with amendments by the Senate and disagreed to the remaining amendment as amended.

Ordered:

That the message be taken into consideration forthwith.

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

Senate’s Amendment.- Insert the following new clause : - “ 14b. In the supply and sale of stores to the men employed in the construction of the Railway by the Government the prices charged shall not be more than the prices for such stores obtaining in Darwin, plus freights.”

Amendments of the Senate in such amend, ment -

Line1, leave out “ In “ (first occurring), insert “ The Government shall undertake “, leave out “ by the Government “, insert “ and “.

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendment as amended disagreed to.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister of Defence · New South Wales · LP

.- The Committee will recollect that, in connexion with this Bill, we had a somewhat lengthy list of disagreements with the other branch of the Legislature. Those disagreements have been gradually reduced, till, on the previous message from another place, there remained only two points of difference between us. One of these amendments, the authorship of which rested with Senator Pearce, has now been accepted. The other amendment consists of a new clause, which was inserted at the instance of Senator Needham, and which throws upon the Government the obligation of supplying goods to the men who will be engaged upon this railway under certain conditions. That amendment has not been accepted by the House of Representatives. In view of the fact that we have reduced our differences to so narrow a point, I ask the Committee not to insist upon the amendment. Honorable senators may take it for granted that, whatever Government may be in power when the construction of this railway is undertaken they will adopt a reasonable and humane view of the requirements of the men employed upon it. I move -

That the amendment be not further insisted on.

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

– In connexion with the supply of stores to the men who will be engaged on this line I would like a more definite assurance than that which has been forthcoming. I believe that the Minister of Defence himself would see that stores were supplied to these men at a reasonable price. But Ministers come and go. If the employes on the line are to be protected, that protection should be embodied in this Bill. It is all very well for the Minister to assure us that they will not be charged extortionate prices, but I fail to see why the Minister should argue that we ought not to insist on our amendment. I admit that the question of how stores should be supplied, and who should supply them, has been a somewhat vexed one. But in that connexion I accepted the proposal of ‘Senator Rae, that the Government should supply the stores at the price obtaining at Port Darwin, plus the freight. My only desire is to safeguard the men from victimization. I fail to see why the Committee should go back on its amendment.

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

– The Government must recognise that, in the far north and tropical country, where it will be difficult to obtain supplies in any circumstances, those supplies can be conveyed to ‘the workmen on this line in a regular manner, and at fair prices, only by means of organization. The conditions under which these men are to be employed should be defined in this Bill. Under the contract system it is absolutely impossible to compel an unsympathetic contractor to provide stores for his employes. Consequently, there is no body in existence that can cater for these workmen as well as can the Government. I, therefore, ask the Committee to insist on its amendment.

Senator Lt.-Colonel O’LOGHLIN (South Australia) [2.54 a.m.]. - There has been a series of compromises effected on this Bill, and I think that most of the Senate’s amendments have been agreed to. In regard to this proposal we have the assurance of the Minister of Defence that every endeavour will be made to see that the workmen employed upon the line are not victimized in any way. Moreover, the contractors will have to treat their employes well, or they will be unable to obtain labour in that country. In these circumstances I think we may accept the assurance of the Government, and allow the Bill to pass.

Question - That the amendment be not further insisted on - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 10

NOES: 5

Majority … … 5

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Resolution reported.

Motion (by Senator Millen) proposed -

That the report be adopted.

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

– I am exceedingly sorry thatI have to oppose the adoption of this report. An attempt was made at an early stage of the consideration of this Bill to secure -decent treatment for the men who will be engaged in the construction of this railway by insisting upon the day-labour principle. I was associatedi with a number of other honorable senators who, after mature consideration, thought that this plank of the Labour platform should be upheld. We found then that the Government brought to bear that pressure which Governments alone can exercise, by threatening practically to throw over the railway if their ideas with regard to the contract system were not consented to. Subsequently many honorable senators who voted for the daylabour principle, professing to believe, as I do, that it is part of the accepted Labour platform on which all on this side were elected, reversed their votes, and the contract system was accepted.

The PRESIDENT:

– Order ! The question of day labour is not involved in the message, the report upon which is now before us.

Senator RAE:

– I bow to your ruling, sir, and I shall refer now to a matter that is dealt with in the message. Another provision which the Committee of the Senate made to safeguard the interests of those who will be employed on this railway has been thrown overboard. We were informed by Ministers that it would be impossible to carry out what was embodied in a former proposed amendment, and compel the contractor to supply. his employes with stores. So it was decided, after much deliberation by the Committee of the Senate, to insist upon the Government providing stores for the men. That decision was sent in the form of an amendment upon the Bill to another place. It was again returned to us, and we were asked not to insist upon it. No promise or offer of any kind was made by the Minister of Defence that the system we advocated would be adopted voluntarily ; but we were assured, in a general way, that carried no weight, that efforts would be made to treat the men on humane lines. That is a pious sentiment, which might appropriately be incorporated in a prayer, or petition, or something which would mean nothing. I beg now to offer my protest against the action of honorable senators in having eaten their professions and abandoned this provision, which was very necessary in view of the fact that the Government had seen fit to give their adherence to the principle of contract labour, and to assure the Senate that, if it is possible to carry out the construction of the work by contract labour, that will be done. That last safeguard .in the interests of the men has been deliberately abandoned by those who evidently prefer the railway at any cost to health or life. I take this opportunity - even though it is 3 o’clock in the morning - to enter my emphatic protest against this shameless abandonment by honorable senators of the only safeguard possible in the interests of our fellow Australian citizens who will be employed in the construction of this line. I say it was a shameless abandonment of principle.

The PRESIDENT:

– Order ! The honorable senator must not use that language to describe the action of members of the Senate.

Senator RAE:

– I withdraw it. Perhaps I will be allowed to use the word “ shameful “ ?

The PRESIDENT:

– No, that is not in order.

Senator RAE:

– I, abandon that, as some honorable senators have abandoned their principles, and I shall simply say that what has occurred has been most discreditable to all concerned. .b’or the mythical value of this proposed railway, honorable senators have given up the only possible safeguard which, in the exceptional circumstances that have arisen, the men would have against deliberate exploitation by those employing them. On these grounds I enter my emphatic protest, and I say that I am very sorry to be associated with those who have seen fit to abandon all their principles in order to secure what, after all, is a very mythical advantage in the shape of this railway.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Report adopted.

page 4744

PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE BILL

Bill returned from the House of Representatives, with a message intimating that the House of Representatives had agreed to one amendment made by the Senate, and disagreed to the remaining amendment, but had made a consequential amendment.

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

Clause 3 - . . . a Joint Committee of nine members …. shall be appointed. . . (2.) Two of the members of the Committee shall be members of and appointed by the Senate, and six of the members of the Committee shall be members of and appointed by the House of Representatives.

Senate’s Amendments. - (i) Leave out “ Two,” insert “ Three “ ; (2) leave out “ six “, insert *’ five.”

House of Representatives’ Message. - (1) Agreed to ; (2) Disagreed to, and the following consequential amendment made in the clause, viz., omit “eight” and insert “nine.”

Senator MILLEN:
Minister of Defence · New South Wales · LP

.- The Committee will remember that when this Bill first made its appearance here, it proposed to constitute a Committee of eight members, six representing another place, and two representing the Senate. The Senate did not consider that a fair apportionment of representation, and amended the Bill to provide for three representatives of the Senate and five of the House of Representatives. The House of Representatives has sent the Bill back, again, and has submitted what I think is a very fair compromise, proposing three representatives for the Senate and six for the House of Representatives. In order to give effect to that proposal, a consequential amendment has been necessary in the earlier portion of the Bill to provide that the Committee shall consist of nine instead of eight members. The proposal now made brings this Bill into conformity with the allotment provided for in the Public Accounts Bill, and gives the Senate exactly the numerical representation to which it is entitled by the proportion which its numbers bear to the numbers of the House of Representatives. In the circumstances, I move -

That the amendment disagreed to be not insisted on, and the consequential amendment made by the House of Representatives be agreed to.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Resolution reported; report adopted.

page 4745

COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS BILL No. 2

Bill returned from the House of Representatives, with message intimating that the House of Representatives had agreed to the amendments made by the Senate.

page 4745

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Motion (by Senator Millen) agreed to-

That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn until Wednesday, 31st December.

page 4745

ADJOURNMENT

Close of Session

Senator MILLEN:
Minister of Defence · New South Wales · LP

– I move -

That the Senate do now adjourn.

I take this opportunity to extend to honorable senators the very best of good wishes for the coming Christmas season and the future New Year. I may be permitted to express my regret that my old friend, and long-standing opponent, Senator McGregor, is not in his place to-night to reciprocate, as I am sure he would, on behalf of the party he represents, the sentiments I express. I wish, in addition to offering good wishes to honorable senators opposite, to say that I personally appreciate very much indeed the measure of assistance extended by the Opposition to-night to the Government in order that the business of the Senate might be completed.

Senator Maughan:

– Only to-night?

Senator MILLEN:

– I do not wish to limit it to that, but I have said to-night because we have been under a special obligation to our political opponents, who have stopped here throughout the evening and kept a quorum in order that we might complete our business. That is assistance of a peculiar character, which I very much appreciate.

Senator Needham:

– It is customary, not peculiar.

Senator MILLEN:

– It is peculiar in the sense that while a Government may ask their friends and supporters to remain during an all-night sitting in order to keep a quorum, we have been under an obligation to our political opponents, who have rendered us loyal assistance, which I acknowledge. I am sure that honorable senators generally will join with me in expressing appreciation of the services of the officers of the House. I need not labour the point, as I am sure every member of the Senate recognises the faithful and loyal service they have given us during the session. Honorable senators will join with me also in extending to them the good wishes of the Christmas season and New Year, which, on behalf of the Government, I have extended to honorable senators opposite.

Senator PEARCE:
Western Australia

– When Senator McGregor was leaving he asked me, on his behalf, to make the customary supplementary remarks on this occasion. I do so with pleasure, and say that honorable senators on this side reciprocate every word that the Minister of Defence has uttered. The circumstances of the session led on, occasions to keen fighting, but I think there is no sting left. We part personal and good friends, though politically we are as opposed to each other as ever. We on this side of the Senate reciprocate everything that has been said in regard to the officers of the House, the Hansard Staff, and the general staff of the Senate, who have rendered members every possible service. We also express our thanks to you, Mr. President, and to the Chairman of Committees, and we wish our friends on the Government benches, you, Mr. President, and the Chairman of Committees, the Hansard Staff, and officers of the Senate a very merry Christmas and a happy New Year.

SenatorRAE (New South Wales) £3.19 a.m.]. - I join with those who desire to tender their appreciation of the services rendered by you, Mr. President, and the officers of the House. I wish particularly to congratulate the Government on their debt of gratitude to honorable members, once associated with me in the Labour party, for the very kindly assistance rendered by them. We are told that we have put up many fights in this Senate, but I am convinced that the old days when an Opposition really opposed have passed away. I find that by adhering to those old principles which I absorbed in my political youth I am left on the rocks, as it were, and that the so-called fighting, which used to be real at one time, is now only shadow-sparring. It is a matter of regret to me that I have to congratulate the Government on having met with such signal success in defeating every principle which the party with which I am associated once held dear. I am only sorry that the two measures, the Postal Voting Restoration Bill, and the Government Preference Prohibition Bill, which in a spasm of virtue were rejected by the Senate, cannot be again introduced by the Government, sp that their duly submissive following might pass them, and thus make them completely happy in realizing that we are quite willing to oblige them by throwing over all our principles, so long as we have a happy ending, a long recess, and a safe conduct through the next two sessions, which will normally end the life of this Parliament. I congratulate the Government on the happy end of their labours, seeing that all the fighting we, of the Labour party, once put up for our principles has been so much shadow-sparring, and that at the last moment, after putting up the pretence of being Labour men, we have given Ministers all the assistance we could in passing some of the reactionary legislation that has come before us this session.

Senator LONG:
Tasmania

– I wish to join the Minister of Defence and Senator Pearce in expressing sincere thanks for the kindness and attention honorable senators have always received at the hands of the officers of the Senate and the attendants, but I would remind Senator Bae that, while it is all very well to rebuke other honorable senators for having, in his opinion, departed from their principles, he gave an exhibition to-night of abandonment of principle that I did not expect to see when I invited his assistance and that of other honorable senators in an endeavour to secure just bare, ordinary justice done for a man who, I think, has been unfairly, not to say meanly, treated.

The PEESLDENT. - I ask the honorable senator not to pursue that subject. It has already been fully discussed and dealt with.

Senator LONG:

– In deference to your request), I shall not pursue the subject further. I would only say to Senator Rae that in using nice language in calling the kettle black, it is. well to remember that one is not always too white himself. All the same, I feel disposed to join with Senator Rae. We have formed a new party, and it is a solid party.

Senator Findley:

– I guarantee the party breaks up in two days.

Senator MAUGHAN:
Queensland

– As a new member of the Senate, I wish toexpress my appreciation of the sentiments uttered by the Minister of Defence, and indorsed by the Acting Leader of the Opposition. At the same time, I cannot help thinking that the Minister of Defence at the closing hour of the session should have been a little more generous to the Opposition. It is quite true, as he pointed out, that he acknowledges the services we have rendered to-night; but he could have gone further and quite magnanimously ventured the remark that the Opposition had throughout the whole of the session assisted the Government as far as they could in a good deal of their legislation without sacrificing principles to expediency. However, I have no desire to introduce discord on the eve of what, I hope, will be a merry Christmas . and happy New Year to every one in the Senate. I cannot sit down without epressingthe hope that the Minister, who . is absent from the chamber, I am sorry to say, on account of illness, will soon recover and be spared to occupy his accustomed place with the great ability he has always brought to play in discharging his duty. I wish, also, to add my testimony as a new member to the fact that, though we came from State Parliaments, where we learned a good deal, we were practically men untried in Federal politics, and had to learn a good deal here, and we thank you, Mr. President, the Chairman of Committees, the officers of the House and attendants, for their uniform courtesy, which has been demonstrated on many occasions to men who, like myself, came down here not altogether as strangers, but as pil-. grims, willing to learn. I thank you, Mr. President, as an old colleague, for the very kind advice you have frequently extended to myself and other new senators.

Senator MILLEN:
Minister of Defence · New South Wales · LP

.- I very keenly regret that, owing to the limitation of my language, or to some perverted method of thought, I have said anything to-night that has left in the minds of honorable senators a sense of there being something wanting on my part. I rose with no other idea but that the few words I might say would enable us to part without . one lingering ill thought or thought of regret.

Senator Maughan:

– There was no such thought on my part.

Senator MILLEN:

Senator O’Keefe:

– E - Even if it is . against the Standing Orders, I would like to take this opportunity of expressing the gratitude I feel to al! new senators for the very cordial assistance they have given me in the chair.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senate adjourned at 3.33 a.m. (Friday).

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 18 December 1913, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1913/19131218_SENATE_5_72/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate18 December 1913

QUESTION

SECOND SESSION

Senator NEEDHAM:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator MILLEN:Minister for Defence · NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

Senator FINDLEY:VICTORIA

Senator MILLEN:

QUESTION

POLICY OF GOVERNMENT

Senator LONG:TASMANIA

Senator MILLEN:LP

Senator Long:

QUESTION

SAVINGS BANKS COMPETITION

Senator CLEMONS:Minister (without portfolio) · TASMANIA · LP

QUESTION

PREMIERS’ CONFERENCE

Senator O’KEEFE:TASMANIA

Senator MILLEN:LP

Senator NEEDHAM:

Senator MILLEN:

Senator PEARCE:WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917; UAP from 1931

Senator MILLEN:LP

Senator FINDLEY:

Senator MILLEN:

Senator RAE:NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator MILLEN:

QUESTION

KALGOORLIE TO POET AUGUSTA RAILWAY

Senator LYNCH:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

The PRESIDENT:

Senator LYNCH:

The PRESIDENT:

Senator McCOLL:Vice-President of the Executive Council · VICTORIA · LP

Senator de Largie:

Senator McCOLL:

Senator Bakhap:

Senator McCOLL:

Senator de Largie:

Senator McCOLL:

The PRESIDENT:

Senator McCOLL:

Senator BAKHAP:

Senator McCOLL:

Senator NEEDHAM:

Senator McCOLL:

Senator de LARGIE:

Senator McCOLL:

Senator PEARCE:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator McCOLL:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator McCOLL:

Senator DE LARGIE:

Senator McCOLL:

Senator DE LARGIE:WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator McCOLL:

Senator de Largie:

Senator McCOLL:

Senator de Largie:

Senator McCOLL:

Senator DE LARGIE:

Senator McCOLL:

QUESTION

COCKATOO ISLAND DOCKYARD

Senator McDOUGALL:NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator MILLEN:LP

Senator RAE:

Senator MILLEN:

QUESTION

POST AND TELEGRAPH DEPARTMENT

Senator SENIOR:SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Senator McCOLL:LP

QUESTION

PAYMENT OF PENSIONS

Senator MULLAN:QUEENSLAND

Senator CLEMONS:LP

PAPER

APPROPRIATION BILL

Senator MAUGHAN:Queensland

Senator CLEMONS:Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

Senate
18 December 1913

Senator NEEDHAM:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator MILLEN:
Minister for Defence · NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

Senator FINDLEY:
VICTORIA

Senator LONG:
TASMANIA

Senator MILLEN:
LP

Senator CLEMONS:
Minister (without portfolio) · TASMANIA · LP

Senator O’KEEFE:
TASMANIA

Senator MILLEN:
LP

Senator PEARCE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917; UAP from 1931

Senator MILLEN:
LP

Senator RAE:
NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator LYNCH:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator McCOLL:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · VICTORIA · LP

Senator PEARCE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator DE LARGIE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator McDOUGALL:
NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator MILLEN:
LP

Senator SENIOR:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Senator McCOLL:
LP

Senator MULLAN:
QUEENSLAND

Senator CLEMONS:
LP

Senator MAUGHAN:
Queensland

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

Senator ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

Senator MAUGHAN:
Queensland

Senator CLEMONS:
TasmaniaHon.orary Minister · LP

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

Senator TURLEY:
Queensland

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

Senator ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

Senator PEARCE:
Western Australia

Senator CLEMONS:
TasmaniaHonorary Minister · LP

Senator McDOUGALL:
New South Wales

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP

Senator MAUGHAN:
Queensland

Senator NEEDHAM:
Western Australia

Senator MAUGHAN:
Queensland

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

Senator CLEMONS:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · LP