Senate
29 June 1921

8^th Parliament · 1^st Session

QUESTION
- WAR SERVICE HOMES
QUESTION
- PUBLIC SERVICE
QUESTION
- SHIPBUILDING
WAR SERVICE HOMES COMMISSIONER VALIDATING BILL
COMMONWEALTH SALARIES ACT REPEAL BILL
SUPPLY BILL (No. 1) 1921-1922
ADJOURNMENT

The President (Senator the Hon. T. Givens) took the chair at 8 p.m., and read prayers.

page 9435

QUESTION

WAR SERVICE HOMES

Senator FOSTER:
TASMANIA

– I ask the Minister for Repatriation when we are likely to know what action the Government are taking in regard to “War Service Homes for which people applied at a. contract price of £700, but which are now being charged for at a higher figure.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– It is not pos- sible to name a definite date when the information asked for will be available, but I can assure the honorable senator that we shall not trespass upon his patience very much longer.

page 9436

QUESTION

PUBLIC SERVICE

Superannuation-Retiring Agefor TransferredOfficers

Senator SENIOR:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Leader of the Governmentin the Senate, upon notice -

Will he indicate if it is the intention of the Government to introduce the . Public Service Superannuation Bill in the Senate, or alternatively, in another place, during the present session?

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– A Superannuation Bill has been prepared, but has yet to be considered by the Sub-Committee of Cabinet which deals with Public Service matters. “Whether the Bill will be introduced this session depends on circumstances.

Senator SENIOR:

asked the Leader of the Government in the Senate, upon notice -

In view of the decision of the High Court in the case of Le Leu v. Commonwealth Government, what action does the Government intend to take in respect to -
1. Compensation to officers who were compulsorily retired on reaching the age of sixty-five years and are still living?
2. Compensation to dependants of officers similarly treated, the officers being deceased?
Will the Government indicate its ‘intentions with regard to those officers whose salaries and emoluments were reduced as a result of the Commonwealth classification?

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– The answers are -

The matter is at present under consideration.
This matter does not appear to be covered by the High Court’s decision in question.

page 9436

QUESTION

SHIPBUILDING

Facilitiesin Tasmania

Senator EARLE:
TASMANIA

asked the Leader of the Government in the Senate, upon notice -

Is the Government aware that Tasmania is capable of supplying almost unlimitedhydroelectric power at a minimum. of cost?
Does the Government think there is any place in Australia equal to Tasmania in climatic conditions for industrial enterprises; if so, where? 3.Isthe Government aware that Rear- Admiral Clarkson has expressed the opinion that Hobart, on theDerwent, is the best site in the Commonwealth . for federal, shipbuilding?
Has the Government under consideration the advisableness of establishing shipbuilding yards at the places recommended: if not, why not?

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– The answers are -

The Government understands that excellent facilities exist in Tasmania for the supply of hydro-electric power.
The Government prefers not to express an opinion on this matter.
The Government is aware of this from the public press.
No; and for the reason that it is not the present intention to increase the number of shipbuilding yards.

page 9436

WAR SERVICE HOMES COMMISSIONER VALIDATING BILL

Motion (by Senator E. D. Millen) agreed to-

That leave be given to introduce a Bill for an Act to validate certain acts performed by persons purporting to act as War Service Homes Commissioner and Acting War Service Homes Commissioner, and to validate the ap- p ointment of a person as Acting War Service Homes Commissioner.

Bill presented, and (on motion by Senator E. D. Millen) read- a first time.

page 9436

COMMONWEALTH SALARIES ACT REPEAL BILL

Motion (by Senator Gardiner) agreed to -

That leave be given to. introduce a Bill for an Act to repeal the Commonwealth . Salaries Act 1907.

Bill presented, and . (on motion’ by Senator Gardiner)read a first time.

page 9436

SUPPLY BILL (No. 1) 1921-1922

Senator E D MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– I move -

That this Bill be now read a second time.

Thisis an ordinary Supply. Bill, with the exception of one provision. When I say that it is an ordinary Supply Bill I mean that it provides for the continuance for one month of the ordinary services of the year upon conditions to which Parliament has already given its sanction. The exceptional provision is for. three instead of for two pay days. Public Service salaries, as honorable senatorsare aware, are paid fortnightly, but it happens on this occasion that the third pay day of the coming financial year will . fall on the 4th August, and unless the course proposed in this Bill were adopted, it would be necessary, before the 4th. August to ask for a further warrant to enable pay- merits due oil that date to be made. That is: the only way in which this. Bill is in any way an exception from the ordinary Supply Bills. There is, however, one item covered by the Bill : to which. I wish specially to refer. In. the votefor the Postmaster-General’s Department it will be observed that there is an unusually large amount providedfor. That arises from the fact that there is- included in the vote an amountof £200,000 payable to the Imperial . Government under these circumstances:. Prior to the war. Australian mails were carried under the contract with the Orient Company. With the outbreak of war shipping was dislocated, and, as honorable senators are aware, many vessels, were commandeered for war purposes., That applied particularly to boats of the Orient Line. Consequent upon that disturbance of facilities for the carriage of our’ mails, it became necessary that Australian mails should be shipped on any occasion which offered, and. they were frequently shipped, on vessels of the. Peninsular and Oriental Line, with which the- Imperial Government had their contract for bringing English mails here. Under an arrangement which exists under the Postal’ Union Convention we became liable to the Imperial Government, which had the contract with the Peninsular and Oriental Company, for certain charges in respect of the mails placed upon boats under contract with the Imperial authorities. Quite recently they submitted their account in conformity withthe Postal Union. Convention, and claimed. from us an. amount of £321,000.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– How many years did that cover ?

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– Without being particular to a month or two, I may say that the period it covered commenced immediately after the war broke out.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– Did we therefore pay proportionately less to the Orient Company? The reason I ask is that if that course were adopted it would account for some of the surpluses claimed by the Post and Telegraph Department.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– I am informed that the Orient mail contract was suspended, and, therefore, payments under it ceased.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– That would represent a saving of about £170,000 a year, and would account for a surplus.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– The amount provided for in this Bill covers a number of years, and the cost to Australia is less- than it would have been had the original contract with the Orient Company been fulfilled. I have said that the Imperial Government claimed £321,000, but after considerable negotiation between that Government and our own, they have agreed to accept the sum of £200,000, and that amount is in this Bill included in the vote for the Postmaster-General’s Department. It is rather interesting that when our facilities for the transport of letters’ became less the number of letters to be forwarded very greatly increased, consequent upon the fact that so many of our soldier citizens were in Europe. The percentage of mail matter to be carried increased tremendously; by 189 per cent. in one year, and by 529 per cent, in the year in which the maximum of. mail matter was carried. These figures show the great- effect on the weight of our postal matter which was consequent upon so. large a number of our citizens, being abroad, and the correspondence passing between them and. those whom they had left at home.

Senator Duncan:

– We sent a very large percentage of. that correspondence by transport.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– Possibly so, but I mention as a matter of interest the very large increase in the amount of postal matter carried during the war.

Senator Foster:

– As soldiers letters were carried free of postage, can the Minister tell us whether the Imperial Government or the Commonwealth Government bore the cost of their transport?

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– The Commonwealth Government have to pay it under the Postal Union Convention.

Senator Foster:

– The cost is included in the amount of £200,000.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– Yes; that is our contribution to the Imperial Government on that account, they, in turn, having provided the service. I do not know that there is anything else in the Bill to which I should refer. If, in the course of the debate, honorable senators submit inquiries,I shall endeavour to obtain the.information they desire.

Senator GARDINER:
New South Wales

– As under this Bill we shall commence the expenditure on public services for the new year, its consideration affords an excellent opportunity for the Economy League, which, I suppose, is represented in the Senate, to get to work on the reduction of expenditure right from the beginning. If we pass a sum of money for public services for the month of July, measured by last year’s votes, that will be a very good reason why, at the end of July, we should pass another Supply Bill based on last year’s votes for August, and so on for September, October, and until the end of the financial year. But as there is in Melbourne, which is the home of economy, a burning desire for retrenchment, that is being fanned into flame in certain quarters, I should like to see a development of that movement in the Senate. If there are any members of that League here sufficiently interested to try to bring about economy, I suggest that they move a reduction in the Estimates of each Department by 2½ per cent. They may think that is not enough, and declare for 5 per cent., and possibly some, even more enthusiastic, may declare for 10 per cent. If it is essential to retrench in any of the Departments, to my way of thinking the only people in a position to retrench effectively are the heads of Departments andthe Ministers concerned. I do not think the Senate can take up any item and say, “We will wipe this out,” or, “ We will reduce that.” I have a pleasant recollection of being connected with the Retrenchment party in the New South Wales Parliament thirty years ago. The Government and Opposition were very evenly balanced, and we sent the Estimates back to be reduced by 10 per cent. They were reduced by 10 per cent, accordingly. That stands as the highest -achievement in economy ever accomplished in any of the Parliaments in Australia. There are, of course, Governments so sensitive as not to stand that kind of treatment, and it may be that quite a number of gentlemen who manage the affairs of the Commonwealth Departments might refuse to carry on if they were treated so rudely as the Parliament of New South Wales in 1891 treated the Government of that State.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– Is the honorable senator going to move one of the. amendments he suggests?

Senator GARDINER:

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– Will you now withdraw your statement that a promise was made to redeem one-third of each individual bond!

SenatorGARDINER.- If the honorable senator admits that the head of a Government can distinctly promise returned soldiers that, irrespective of the necessitous cases, one-third of the total amount would be redeemed in May, 1921, and the remaining two-thirds in equal instalments later, and that that promise does not carry with it the implication that each bond-holder is to be treated equally, I shall know where I stand. When Mr. Hughes introduced the Bill he dealt with his pre-election promises, and quoted from the Brisbane Courier. Part of that quotation is as follows : -

Bonds to be cashed by the Treasury in cases of hardship, of special urgency, on the marriage of a soldier, or on the re-marriage of a soldier’s widow. Bonds not covered under the above heads to be redeemed as follows: - The Treasury to take up at least £500,000 per annum, in May, 1921, the whole of Australia’s share Of indemnity payable by Germany to the Allies, which may be estimated at anything between £7,000,000 and £15,000,000, to be earmarked for the redemption of gratuity bonds. If the indemnity actually received on or before May, 1921, does not reach £10,000,000, the Government to make good the deficiency up to £10,000,000. The Government is to redeem the balance of the outstanding - bonds after May, 1921, in not more than three equal annual instalments. The Government undertakes that if, after May, 1921, the financial and general outlook in the local or foreign market warrants raising the outstanding balance, or any part thereof, by loan, it will do so.

That is a fairly definite statement. I have here also an even more definite statement of the Returned Soldiers’ League on the question whether the whole of the returned soldiers were promised that their bonds would be redeemable in three instalments, commencing in May, 1921.

SenatorFoster. - Was that a branch, or the Federal Executive?

Senator GARDINER:

– I am quoting from a report in the ‘ Sydney Morning Herald, which is headed “ War Gratuity” - “ Soldiers Demand Cash”-“ Mr. Hughes’ Offer “-“Returned Soldiers’ and Sailors-‘ Imperial League.” I am merely going back, on ‘this question, which- I raised yesterday, because an attempt has been made in certain quarters to prove that I misrepresented the position. According to the Sydney Morning Herald, Mr. Curtis, an official of the League, said that he had received a statement from Mr.. Hughes to read to the meeting in regard to the gratuity. According to this, Mr. Hughes promised -

Immediate distribution of bonds on the assembly of Parliament.
Bonds will be taken by banks and Repatriation Department as the equivalent of cash in purchase of land and houses.
Cash will be paid in all urgent cases, and where a soldier marries or a soldier’s widow re-marries.
The Government will redeem in cash, by May, 1921, not less than £12,000,000 sterling.

I desire honorable senators to be fair in this matter. I stated that a definite promise was made by the Government to redeem one-third of the bonds in May, 1921. I have quoted a definite promise by Mr. Hughes, which, according to Mr. Curtis’ statement at the meeting, was in Mr. Hughes’ writing, and given to him in the interests of Mr. Hughes and his Government. It was to the effect that, in addition to the special grants, £12,000,000 worth of bonds would be redeemed in May, 1921.

Senator Bolton:

– It does not say “ in addition.”

Senator GARDINER:

– Does it not? Then listen to this -

Mr. Hughes pointed out that the bonds cashed by the banks and the Repatriation Department would probably amount, by that date, to £10,000,000, so that the Treasury would have to arrange for the redemption of over £20,000,000 in this period.

SenatorFoster. - And if you increased the messengers’ wages it would not amount to much.

Senator GARDINER:

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– The officials or the officers?

Senator GARDINER:

– Officials, officers, and everything else connected with it. I am prepared, sir, to take your ruling as to whether, in proposing an amendment of that kind, it is not competent for me to say something about the absurdity of putting up a Customs barrier around Australia.

The’ PRESIDENT.- I think the honorable senator should not discuss the Tariff on the motion now before the Senate.

Senator GARDINER:

– I suggest as a circumstance in mitigation that there is about to be an election in Queensland,, and I may not have the privilege of being here when the Customs Tariff Bill- is before the Senate. However, I shall accept your ruling, and as the Bill provides for votes for the Trade and Customs Department, I can refer to that Department, when we are dealing with the schedule in Committee.

There are several other Departmentswhich can be dealt with more effectively in Committee. I might refer to the Department of Works and Railways; and I am doubtful whether that’ is- not a Department which might be abolishedwith advantage to the Commonwealth. Most of our Departments are top heavy. Their overhead charges are, far too great. I am not referring now to the salaries of individual officers, because, in my opinion, if there is one section of the community which more thananother is insufficiently paid in proportion’ to ability and service, it is the Commonwealth Public Service. In the State which I represent the salaries of the public servants have been reduced by the State Government by about 6 per cent. I mean to say that they have been effectively reduced by that amount by the decision of the State Government to tax those salaries to that, extent. I think there is only one thing left for the Commonwealth Government to do, and that is to make the reduction good to public servants in New South Wales.

Senator Senior:

– That would be tak-% ing the money from one pocket and putting it into another.

Senator GARDINER:

– What is done now is to take the money out .of the pocket of the public servant and put .it into the pocket of the State.

Senator Foster:

– We might give a grant to New South Wales.

Senator GARDINER:

– Tasmania is the only State that is in receipt of a grant, and New South Wales pays half the amount from a feeling of friendship towards the people of Tasmania. The interjections of honorable senators are tempting me to get away from. the principles of the Bill, to which my remarks should be confined, and I shall therefore reserve further remarks until we are considering the schedule of the measure in Committee. I should- like again, however, to suggest that the Works and Railways Department is one which should be given strict attention by the Cabinet, to see that we are getting value for the money spent on it. I am not commenting on the officials, their salaries, ability, or services, but on the undue overhead growth of various Public Departments. This will have to be attended to by the present or by - some other Government. When a Department is brought into existence, the staff grows and flourishes exceedingly, though whether the work is accomplished more effectively is quite another question. I again ask the Economy party, now that we are beginning the expenditure for a new year, to give us some indication of what .they mean .by economy. I suggest to them . again that this is the Bill in connexion with ..which they should start their campaign.

Senator EARLE:
Tasmania

.- The few remarks I have to make on the second reading of this Bill will be confined as closely as possible to one or two items covered by the measure. I should like, however, to say that I was” astounded to hear- Senator Gardiner advocate the abolition of the Customs system at this time, and on the ground of our war experience. I thought that if there was one thing which we learned during the war, it was the necessity of every country being self-contained and self-reliant. . Surely the experience which not only we, but the great centre of our Empire, had during the war brought home to us with irresistible force the necessity of having tho whole of our requirements provided by ourselves.

One other matter to which the honorable senator referred was the desire for economy. There -is one thing which those gentlemen who are so pronounced in their advocacy of economy overlook, and it is the fact that in Australia we have all the machinery of government necessary for governing a population ‘of 50,000,000. I do not see how we could have less, or how we could abolish any of our existing Departments. When we suggest to the advocates of economy that some Department in which they are particularly interested should be abolished they at once resent the suggestion, but they are always ready to advocate the abolition of Departments in which other persons are concerned. We have a population of only a little over 5,000,000, and consequently our cost of government is abnormally high, but if we had a population of 50,000,000- the cos.tof government would not be very materially increased. If our people are to be efficiently governed, I find it difficult to suggest anything in our machinery of government that we can do without.

Senator Senior:

– Is not the cost of sustaining a civilized being more than that of sustaining an uncivilized being?

Senator EARLE:

– Naturally the cost of government must be increased proportionately with the increased cost of other services. What I want to impress upon those who are clamouring for economy is that if we had five or tcn times the number of people we have at present in Australia, the cost of government would not be increased in any very great measure.

I wish to make a reference to the question of pensions for the blind. The case to which I intend to refer may be considered an isolated one, but that should not influence us. What is important is that a legitimate grievance should be remedied. It will be remembered that last year this Parliament carried an amendment of the Invalid and Old-age Pensions Act exempting blind pensioners from the ordinary disqualification attaching to pensioners generally. We made provision that blind pensioners should be permitted to earn up- to £4 5s. per week without any diminution of the . pension they receive from the Pensions Department. . It was intended that that should apply to all blind pensioners. Unfortunately - and I do not hold the Draf ting Department of the Government blameless in this matter - section 22 of the Invalid and Old-age Pensions Act was not amended as it should have been. That section reads - No person shall receive an invalid pension unless …. his relatives, namely, father, another husband, wife, or children, do not, either separatelyor collectively, adequately maintain him.

I am sure it was the intention of Parliament, and, I believe, it was the intention of the Government, when that amendment was passed, that this section should be also so altered as to allow a blind pensioner, although his father might be in a position adequately to maintain him, to receive the full amount of his invalid pension. I addressed the following letter to the Treasurer some time ago dealing with this specific case: -

Hobart, 19th May, 1921.

Right Honorable Sir Joseph Cook, Federal Treasurer.

Dear Sir. - May I present for your special consideration the case of a blind pensioner. He has been refused the pension on the grounds that his father is able to maintain him (section 22, Old-age and Invalid Pensions Act). His father’s income is approximately £518 per annum, and if his son Tom was his only dependant he might reasonably be expected to maintain him, but, unfortunately, he is not. His elder brother is a complete invalid, and his second brother has now developed blindness, and his sister, through illness, has had to relinquish a position by which she earned her own living; so you can imagine how far £518 would go with four invalids in the house. I know it was your intention, and the intention of Parliament, when the last amending Bill was passed, to pay the pension to blind persons, irrespective of what assistance they might get from friends; hut, unfortunately, section 22 of the Act was not amended, hence this trouble. Now the only way that I can see that justice may be done to blind persons, and the intention of Parliament given effect to, is by a more liberal interpretation of the Act. This son is over twenty-one years of age, and if the father turned him out the pension would have to be paid. However, I leavethe case to you with confidence that you will do the best.

I received the following reply: -

Department of the Treasury, 3rd June, 1921.

Senator the Honorable J. Earle, Parliament House, Melbourne.

Dear Sir. - With reference to your letter of 19th May, addressed to the Treasurer (copy attached ) , I have to say that the Invalid and Old-age Pensions Act provides that no person shall receive an invalid pension if his relatives, namely, father, mother, husband, or wife, adequately maintain him. Information in the possession of the Department shows thatTasmania, is being adequately maintained by his father. The Act does not provide for differential treatment in the case of children who are over twenty-one years of age, and under the circumstances the law will not permit of the payment of pension. I regret, therefore, that nothing further can be done in the matter.

– I have no doubt they could. I appeal to the Federal Government to take the initiative and, if necessary, to ask the States to do something to make the lives of these old people a little brighter than at present.

Another question which arises concerns the expenditure of nearly £750,000 a year on the maternity allowance. I spoke of this some time ago, and believed, from the Minister’s expressions, that my remarks met with considerable sympathy from the Government. We are not getting reasonable value for the money which is so expended. I am not advocating any reduction, and this is not an economy stunt on my part, for I would expend more money in advancing the object for which the vote was originally passed - that is, to increase the naturalborn population of Australia . If the system of public maternity clinics, nursing homes, and so on was extended-, a great deal better work would b’e accomplished. I have had an opportunity to observe the work carried on in Hobart by the Child Welfare Association, .where a number of enthusiastic ladies are associated with doctors, and meetings are held, at which prospective mothers receive advice as to the treatment of their children. Pure milk supplies are arranged for, where the mother may purchase milk at a standard price, or get it free if she is unable to pay. Children’s garments are provided by the association, and, generally, whereever necessary, advice is given and care expended on the upbringing of the child. In the method we have adopted of paying £5 on the birth of practically every child in Australia, we are rather misguided.

Senator Foster:

– It ought to be called the doctors’ and nurses’ bonus.

Senator EARLE:

– There is a great deal of truth in the suggestion that the mother in most cases acts only as an agent between the Commonwealth Government and the doctor or the nurse, but it is also true that in many instances the money is misapplied. I find, from sworn evidence taken before a Committee of which I was a. member, that for 99 per cent. of the births in Australia the bonus has been claimed. Practically in every case the maternity allowance has been claimed. If the institutions I have named were subsidized by the Government a great deal more effective assistance would be given to those people who require it, and those who do not need it would not suffer.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– It would be making paupers of some people.

Senator EARLE:

Notwithstanding anything contained in the Commonwealth Public ServiceAct 1902-15, the Governor-General may appoint William Burton Edwards, Esquire, Public Service Inspector, to be the Acting Public Service Commissioner as from the 4th day of May; 1916, to hold office as such Acting Public Service Commissioner until the appointment of a person to be Public Service Commissioner, or until the GovernorGeneral otherwise directs.

Under that Statute, during the past four or five years the Acting Public Service Commissioner might have been dismissed at a moment’s notice, without any reason being assigned for his dismissal. The’ inspectors who are associated with him occupy exactly a similar position. This is a very serious matter. The VicePresident of the Executive Council (Senator Russell), when moving the second reading of the Public Service (Board of Management) Bill, affirmed that the existing system had broken down. I differ from him. But that it has not broken down is certainly not the fault of the Government. Under our Public Service Act, even a messenger boy cannot be dismissed without reference to an Appeal Board. Similarly, a lettercarrier’* services cannot be dispensed with without quite a number of formali-ties having first to be complied with. When the Commonwealth Public Service Act was passed in 1902, the Public Service Commissioner was appointed for a term of seven years. His inspectors were appointed upon a similar tenure, and only the two Houses of this Parliament were empowered to remove them from office. The idea underlying that procedure was that these officers ought to be made strong and powerful. That was a very proper course to adopt. But for some years past these officers might have been called upon to resign at any moment. The term of Mr. Skewes, who is a Public Service Inspector, has expired-, and for some time he has held his position only in an acting capacity. This gentleman is frequently called upon to appear before the Arbitration Court to present the case of the Government to that tribunal. The ex-Public Service Commissioner, Mr. McLachlan, has properly pointed out that it is no easy matter for the Government to get evidence for their side of any case before the Arbitration Court. He says -

In the actual proceedings of the Court in connexion with the hearing of evidence, the interests of justice have been seriously prejudiced by the fact that while the claimant organizations were able to make a free selection of witnesses from the whole field of employees, on the side of respondents (the Commissioner and Department concerned), it has been a matter of the utmost difficulty to obtain witnesses from within the Departments, owing to the strong aversion of branch heads against appearing in the Court and subjecting themselves to be cross-examined and pilloried by their subordinate officers. One notable case which was brought before the Court occurred where a manager of a Telegraph Branch, who had submitted evidence on behalf of the Department, was the subject of an ‘ insulting resolution carried by the Association, and was made the recipient of an iron cross with an opprobrious epithet engraved thereon.

– That is so.

– I believe we are; but I want to be absolutely fair. The time has arrived whenwe must economize as far as we possibly can, while preserving efficiency; but it is not economy to have inefficient service in any Department. It is true economy to insist on obtaining full value for the money we spend. If we can keep our expenditure within reasonable bounds, and assure the people that we are getting value for it, thereis no room for complaint. Every one is forced to admit to-day that the prices of commodities are on the down grade. We shall find that many of the materials and goods required in our Commonwealth operations can now be purchased at much lower rates than a few ‘ months ago. The time is ripe, therefore, for the Government to consider the question carefully, and to show those who have to find the money that it fully realizes the seriousness of the financial position of Australia. With prices showing a falling tendency, there will be a corresponding decrease in the expenditure required to obtain the same results that were obtained with a larger expenditure last year. The public are keen enough to look at these matters from most points of view; but I do not think they have been as keen as they might have been in recognising the fact that the sovereign is no more valuable in the hands of the Treasurer than in those of the ordinary citizen.

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · NAT

-brockman. - You mean they are misled by the press?

Senator PAYNE:

– Very often they are.

Senator FOSTER:
Tasmania

.- Senator Gardiner spoke of the war gratuity bonds, and the promises made by the Prime Minister when the gratuity was first mooted to him by the Returned Soldiers’ League. I wish to state the promises which, in my opinion, were made to the men, and the belief which the majority of them held regarding the ultimate cashing of the bonds. I was present, not as the representative of one of theStates, but as a sort of adviser to the representative from Tasmania, when we first interviewed the Prime Minister regarding the bonds. After considerable discussion, it was felt at the time that it would be impossible for the Commonwealth to raise money to provide a gratuity payable in cash to the returned men. The Prime Minister put it to us very frankly that the only possible market then open to borrow the money required to pay the bonds was the American, market, and that, in view of the rate of exchange - at that time the £1 sterling ‘ was worth only ia little over three dollars - and the high rate of interest obtainable in America, it would be unwise to consider a cash payment. He then dealt rather fully with the fact that great sums of money would have to be raised for repatriation purposes, and finally it was put to him by one of our delegates that the soldiers would be . prepared to accept a gratuity payable in nonnegotiable bonds. The Prime Minister asked the representative of each State individually whether he would accept that suggestion on behalf of the soldiers of his State, and the men accepted it unanimously. The position, as I understood it - although I .admit that on this point I am at variance with one or two of my colleagues who were present - was as follows: - The Commonwealth guaranteed, in regard to necessitous cases, £500,000 a year from revenue. I think that wa3 all that was guaranteed at that time. That sum was to be . used for cashing bonds in necessitous cases, and where soldiers were married, after their return. In addition, any man applying for a “War Service Home, or for assistance in land settlement, or in any other .phase of the activities of the Repatriation Department, could cash his bond in repayment of his indebtedness in that direction. I was also clearly of the opinion that the total amount of the indemnity which the Prime Minister then hoped would be payable by Germany in May, 1921,. was to be used in reducing the amount owing at that date on the war gratuity bonds, apart from the amount which had been paid in necessitous cases or through the Repatriation and “War Service Homes Departments. It was further suggested that the banks might cash a certain amount. The Minister for Repatriation may not be aware qf ihe fact, but I know that, in the initial stages of the negotiations which the league conducted with the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister set his face very definitely against the banks cashing any of the bonds, because he said, “We are in the position of being able to say, - or of having to say, to the, banks, with regard to the loans which we are floating for repatriation purposes, that they must take up whatever amount is undersubscribed.” I think he also said, regarding a loan which the Government had recently floated, that” the Government had called on the banks to take up £4,000,000 or £5.000,000 compulsorily. I understood that, if the German indemnity was not paid when it became due, the Government was pledged to make good, to that extent at least, not less than one-third of the bonds then, remaining, by redeeming them in -cash. Some of my colleagues differ from my understanding of what the Prime Minister promised at the time, but in support of. my view I would point out that a various number of millions was spoken -of in computing the amount of money which would be. claimed from the War Gratuity Branch of the Treasury on account of soldiers who used their bonds to make payments to the Repatriation Department, and the strong point which the Prime Minister made, in my recollection, was that the loan which, would be floated for repatriation purposes would be relieved to the extent of the value of the. bonds which were paid over to the Repatriation Department. That is, if £10,000,000 were paid into the Repatriation Department in the shape of gratuity bonds, the repatriation loan of £20,000,000 or £25,000,000 would be relieved of the payment of that amount of cash.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– How?

Senator FOSTER:

– If a soldier was granted land on rental, as was the case in Tasmania, and the rent fell due, he could pay for.it with a gratuity bond. I admit that if the State Government was the landlord, and wanted the rent, it would look to the Commonwealth Government to cash the bond, but I understood at the time that the Prime Minister hoped that that would not be necessary. I believe that an arrangement was afterwards made by which a certain number of business people - I know some of them in Melbourne - were granted permission to cash war gratuity bonds, thus relieving the Treasury of the obligation to cash them in a certain number of necessitous cases, “But on the distinct understanding that those business people would not be able to demand cash for the bonds at the Treasury immediately. To that extent the Treasury would be relieved, but not entirely. I believe the Minister for Repatriation (Senator Millen) was about to interject that the Government had to find the money in any case. I was. under the impression that the amount expended for repatriation purposes, and that which was paid out from the Treasury, after exceeding the £500,000 per year, would be apart from the one-third which would afterwards be required. In justice to the Government I think it is fair to say that I know that the promised expenditure of £500,000 has been largely exceeded, and that very much better arrangements have been made by the Government than were contemplated in connexion with the permission given to business people to cash bonds in certain circumstances. As far as possible, I believe the Treasurer has done all he could to meet’ the position. Further, the Returned Sailors’ and Soldiers’ Imperial League of Australia, which has a mem.bership of over 150,000, has agreed that the present is not an opportune time to endeavour to raise a special loan for the cashing of bonds, particularly wh’en a number of the holders are not needing the cash, and in that way the soldiershave again shown that they have the interest of Australia at heart. I know of one man who has framed his bond, and has it hanging on the wall, which indicates that he never intends to cash it ; but that, of course, is an extreme case. . There are, however, thousands of men to-day who are in need of money; but, on the other hand, there are some whose immediate requirements are not pressing. From the information I have gathered from members of” the War Gratuity Board, there are few ex-soldiers in Australia who ave really necessitous and who have been unable to get their bonds cashed.

Following on the. question I submitted to the Minister for Repatriation as to whether, in the event of the death of a soldier his widowed mother, if she had children depending upon her, would receive a pension, I received the reply that if it could be shown that the soldier was the Support of the family, or that the mother had had children who were dependent upon her twelve months prior to the enlistment of. the soldier, a pension would be paid. My contention has always been that we have to consider what a soldier would have been doing if he had lived. A case might arise where a boy of nineteen had enlisted, and after going to the Front his father died. It is said by certain supporters of the attitude adopted by the

Minister or the Commission, that a boy of nineteen could not do much in keeping his mother, or brothers, or sisters- That may be so in some cases. A boy may have enlisted at nineteen, and have been killed when he was twenty, but if he had lived until he was twenty-three or twentyfour, he would have been the main support of his mother, and brothers, and sisters.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– I do not think that point is in dispute. What the Commissioners ask is why it is that the boy who . was killed was always the one supporting his mother, and not those who remained alive.

Senator FOSTER:

– I am glad to have that explanation. Notwithstanding the reply it was definitely and distinctly stated that in cases where it could be shown that a mother was dependent upon a boy twelve months prior to the enlistment, a pension would be paid. I think the Minister will give me credit for not attempting to push a claim where I have felt that the exsoldiers or their dependants were endeavouring to impose upon the Department. I know of a case where a man had received training at a vocational school, and was afterwards earning £4 18s. per week. Later, when he was out of work he submitted a claim for an allowance; but when inquiries were1’ made it was found that the total income of the four people with whom he was living, in addition to the £2 2s. he received, was £6 19s. per week. When I was asked to assist in obtaining an extra living allowance I said that I would not do anything of the kind. I was informed, I believe by the Board, that amending legislation was required to give it power -to pay pensions to the widowed mother or brothers and sisters of a deceased soldier, unless it could be proved that the soldier had been supporting his mother. ‘

I do not wish to weary the Senate by making lengthy references to the work of the War Service Homes Department, because the Minister has assured me this afternoon that my patience will not be tried much longer. But this question’ is one which concerns a great many widows of soldiers and widowed .mothers. Many took possession of houses on the understanding that they were to cost £700, but have subsequently been informed that the price was to be increased to £836. I introduced a deputation of women to the Assistant Minister for Repatriation (Mr.

Rodgers), many of whom went into homes costing £700, but six or seven months afterwards they received a notice from the War Service Homes Commission saying that the houses were to cost £836, and requesting that the additional amount be paid immediately.

Senator Earle:

– I know of similar cases where the soldiers have thrown up their homes.

Senator Wilson:

– And some have refused to take them at all.

Senator FOSTER:

– Yes. I believe it will be necessary for the Government to shoulder the responsibility, and I am hoping that when the Minister replies he will make a statement to that effect. When people such as those I have mentioned have agreed to purchase homes at £700, it is often an absolute impossibility for them to find an additional £136, particularly when many of them are receiving reduced pensions. The living allowance has been dispensed with, and the amount received in thousands of cases is 20 or 30 per cent. less than it was when the price was fixed at £700. They cannot possibly find the interest by way of rent for the larger amount. I think it is time those who are engaged in constructing these homes began to give the soldiers for whom the houses are being built a fair deal.I know of one instance where a Deputy Commissioner visited a building where a workman was tossing bricks about in a careless manner, and when he was asked how many bricks he was laying he replied, “ Do you know this is a War Service Homes job?” The officer replied, ‘ Yes, it is ; you put on your coat and go to the office for your wages.” I think some of those who- speak of our returned soldiers and of the sacrifices they have made, should endeavour to give them a fairer deal by rendering service in keeping with the money they receive, which would be the means of houses being built at a more reasonable cost.

Senator E D MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– I find myself in a somewhat difficult position this evening, because - without wishing to reflect on you, Mr. President, or on honorable senators - much of the debate this afternoon would have been more appropriate on the first reading of the Bill. It is impossible for me, at this juncture, to deal with many of the matters brought forward during the second- reading debate, because, I submit, on the second reading we should deal only with the principles of the Bill. To-day, topics ranging from the payment of a maternity allowance to the discovery of oil in Papua have been introduced.

Senator Earle:

– All of which are mentioned in the schedule.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– It is hardly to be expected that I should utter any remarks worthy of consideration upon such a variety of important subjects on the second reading of the Bill.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– Why can information be given on the first, and not on the second, reading?

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– One expects to have to answer inquiries when the first reading of a Supply Bill is under consideration, and departmental officers are available to supply the necessary information. If the points raised by some honorable senators are overlooked, I am sure they will not regard it as discourteous; that is the explanation.

A matter which attracts my interest is Senator Gardiner’s renewed claim to be the surprise creator among honorable senators. He surprised me yesterday, but the surprise caused then was nothing compared with that which he endeavoured to stimulate in my mind to-day. May I draw attention to the ease with which Senator Gardiner passed from quoting Hansard, in which appear the Prime Minister’s own words, to a newspaper report - obviously a curtailed one - of a report made by a gentleman, founded upon a statement made by the Prime Minister.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– The statement reads -

Mr. Curtis saidhe had received a statement from Mr. Hughes to read to the meeting in regard to the gratuity. According to this, Mr. Hughes promised -

Immediatedistribution of bonds on the assembly of Parliament.

Bonds will be taken by banks and Repatriation Departments, and the equivalent of cash in purchase of land and houses.

Cash will be paid in all urgent cases, and where a soldier marries or a soldier’s widow re-marries.

The Government will redeem in cash, by May, 1921, not less than ?12,000,000 sterling.

Senator Gardiner:

– Continue the statement.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– I am going to do so, because I am now coming to that portion of it which discloses the error of which I have spoken. Obviously, Mr. Curtis is giving his own interpretation of the document, or a newspaper is giving its interpretation of what Mr. Curtis said. The statement continues -

Mr. Hughes pointed out

It is quite clear, therefore, that this is not Mr. Hughes’s document, but merely somebody’s interpretation of it. It is a verbal expression of somebody’s opinion of what that document contained. The statement reads -

Mr. Hughes pointed out that the bonds cashed by the banks and Repatriation Departments would probably amount by that date to ?10,000,000, so thatthe Treasury would have to arrange for the redemption of over ?20,000,000 in this period.

– The standing order under which the Senate may exclude an honorable senator from its deliberations affords mean opportunity to make an explanation. But before doing so, I ask you, sir, to read that portion of the standing order which permits me to make an explanation.

The PRESIDENT:

– I have given the honorable senator an opportunity to make an explanation, but that opportunity does not mean an opportunity for him to repeat his offence. Standing order 440 reads -

When any honorable .senator has been reported as having committed an offence he shall be called upon to stand up in his place and make any explanation or apology he may think fit, and afterwards a motion may be moved -

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– I should not be inclined to take that view with regard to the operations in New South Wales. I think that the reason for the failure there was the reason which has been accountable for failure in the case of hundreds of mines in Australia. Gold mine after gold mine, because of mismanagement, has resulted in failure. Yet no one will suggest that the failure was due to the exercise of some sinister influence against the production of gold. Mistakes are always made, and will continue to be made.

Senator Thomas referred to the vote included in the amount set down for the Postmaster-General’s Department. I have managed to secure a little further information in connexion with it.I understand that the Imperial Government were entitled to charge £321,000 under the terms and conditions of the Postal Union Convention. The Commonwealth Government pointed out that to some extent the Imperial Government were themselves responsible for the disruption of the mail service by commandeering the Orient Company’s boats. In addition, there was some extra cost thrown upon the Australian Government in carrying out matters, if hot at the request of the Imperial Government, then in such a way as to assist and expedite undertakings in which the Imperial Government were concerned. They ‘were entitled, as I said, to ask for £321,000, but, taking a broad view of the matter in their usual and characteristic spirit, they agreed to com1 promise upon a payment of £200,000. If any matters of detail are referred to in Committee, I think I can promise to furnish honorable senators with the information they desire. , ^

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In Committee:

Clauses 1 to 4 agreed to.

Schedule.

Divisions 1-12 (Parliament), £5,866.

Senator GARDINER:
New South Wales

– I do not know whether it is competent for us to increase the votes set out in the schedule. We might send a request to another place to increase the amount proposed for the equipment of the Senate. I am perfectly satisfied from the -experience of the last few months, since the President has been wearing a wig at the request of a large number cf honor-able senators, that there are other things necessary to maintain “ the dignity of this Chamber. Why not a mace? In another place they have the mace as well as the wig, and the Senate would seem to be somewhat behind in this- matter., I think that, in order to keep up the dignity of the Senate, an officer carrying a mace should be required to bear it twice round the chamber before placing it at the head of the table, which is really the proper place for it, and not .at the foot, as is done in another Chamber.

Senator PEARCE:
NAT

– Our weapon - is the black rod.

Senator GARDINER:

– If the black rod will do the business as well, I do hot see why the officer. in charge of it should not carry it round the chamber in opening the sittings of the Senate. Since we last discussed the wig, I have been looking up history for information about it. I spoke of it as originating away back, in the very early days, but quite a number of people have since assured me that- 1 was absolutely wrong, and that the wig came into use in the middle of the seventeenth century. One gentleman quoted to me what that great diarist Pepys said when wigs were coming into general use in England. He stated that the wig came to England from the French Court. The then King of France, Louis the “umpteenth” - I am not sure which one it was - was a very vain man, and very proud of his hair. When it began to ‘fall out -he adopted the wig to cover up what he considered a deformity. The aristocrats of England after chat time all wore wigs. I am speaking of a period ‘ just following the real Revolution, when, for the first time, England had a republican form of government, which, I venture to say, proved itself the most effective form of government it ever had. Pepys spoke of wigs coming into general use in that country in .the middle of the seventeenth century, and added that he had just had his wig baked. I understand that the aristocrats in these days all wore their hair long, and were fairly “lousy.” When wigs came into general use, it was an easy way to get rid of the vermin to have them baked, and there were public places where that was done. Another place might accept a suggestion from me to provide an amount on the Estimates for the establishment of an oven in connexion with this Parliament. The presiding officer of -another place has worn the wig for some time, and now that it has been adopted in the Senate, I do not think we should have it by itself. If another place has the mace, we should at least have the black rod, and introduce more form and ceremony into the opening of the Seriate to give the proceedings the proper amount of dignity. There might be a parade twice round the chamber before the President took the chair in his wig, so that we might see him” to full advantage in his flowing robes, and admire him in the costume he has now adopted. I shall not quote again the statements he made in the earlier days to show how strongly he was opposed to- the wearing of the wig when he had not the job himself, or dilate on how strongly he hankered after the fleshpots of Egypt when he had not got them. The thing that was to him an abomination in the costume of the gentleman who presided over the Senate at that time took on quite a different aspect after he was elected to the position. He then found it necessary to adorn himself as his earlier predecessors had done. ‘

Senator Payne:

– What is the amount we propose to vote for the wig this year ?

Senator GARDINER:

– I do not know. That was the point which troubled the President when he was a private member.

In those days he reckoned that one of the expenses which Parliament would have to meet would be the varnishing of the black rod occasionally, and I take it that his wig will have to be brushed, or powdered, oi combed, or even baked now and then. Now that we have begun to dignify the proceedings of Parliament by the wearing of a wig, we ought seriously to lay ourselves out to see whether we cannot go further. Imagine the President, preceded by the black rod and followed by the other officials, majestically parading round the chamber, and honorable senators standing bareheaded, and with heads bowed, as they passed ! What a splendid commencement that would be for the session ! Having taken one step, the President should take a few more.

Senator Wilson:

– What do you suggest for the Leader of the Opposition?

Senator GARDINER:

– It would be quite in keeping with the views of his opponents if the Leader of the Opposition were to lie down, and permit the President to walk over him. That, I presume, is one of those matters that will be left to honorable senators to decide. Probably it can be arranged to their satisfaction, if not to mine. I do not know that the President would desire to wipe his feet on me. I think he is satisfied with the authority he exercises in the Chamber. I know that I am more than satisfied. I thought it right to express . these few thoughts regarding Parliament on an occasion when Mr. President, being present on the floor of the chamber, has the opportunity to reply to them.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Divisions 13 to 19 (Prime Minister’s Department), £18,877.

Senator KEATING:
Tasmania

– I understand that the amounts provided for salaries and contingencies in the High Commissioner’s office are on the basis of previous expenditure, but will they cover the whole of the payments in connexion with the High Commissioner’s office, not only in London, but also in Paris? Further, is the Minister aware that considerable dissatisfaction is expressed regarding Australia’s representation in Paris through the branch of the High Commissioner’s office established there? I have had communications from people who have visited that office, and am informed by them that the provision for Australia there is not merely inade quate, but of such a character as seriously to reflect upon this country. One. item referred to by a correspondent was the non-provision of a London Directory and an Australian Directory. I am informed that the only directories available’ in the branch were several-years old, and that, on attention being drawn to the fact by my correspondent on more than one occasion, he was informed by the officer in charge that he was absolutely afraid to ask the London office for a more uptodate Directory, because of the reception which a request of that kind had met with when it was made some months previously.

The Minister for Repatriation (Senator Millen) was in France not long ago. I wonder if he took the opportunity to see this office in Paris. If he did, he probably saw how inadequately it was provided. If it is necessary for us to establish trade relations with continental people, Paris is the centre from the continental point of view where most of the exchange is done, and any representation we have there ought to be appropriate, or we should have none at all. My information has come, not from one, but from several correspondents, and from Australians who have gone to France since the war to visit the battlefields. Ordinarily, they would not have gone to France on business; but, having gone there, they have called at the office of the High Commissioner in Paris, only to be astounded at the most inadequate representation of Australia that obtains there, and the very few opportunities there are even for Australians to get from that office information regarding Australian activities on the, other side of the world. If that office is inaptly and inappropriately equipped, it is time the Government woke up to the fact, and either disestablish it, or make it more in keeping with the dignity and position of the Commonwealth. In the years to come a much larger number of Australians will go to France than ever went before, because of the hallowed associations that some of the fields of France have for the relatives of those who fell there in the great war. When those people are passing through Paris, if they know the Commonwealth has an office there, they will call at it .for information or advice. I earnestly hope that the Government, mindful of these facts, will see that whatever branch of the High Commissioner’s Office is established in the French capital is suitable and serviceable.

SenatorE. D. MILLEN (New South

Wales - Minister for Repatriation) [6.27]. - The divisions now under discussion do not cover the amount for which the Commonwealth Government is responsible in connexion with the office to which Senator Keating has referred, but his remarks are just as pertinent here as they would be elsewhere. I had an opportunity to visit the office,and must admit, with a considerable amount of regret, that I largely indorse what Senator Keating has said. The representation of Australia in Paris is not nearly on a sufficiently pronounced scale. The gentleman who is there, probably, does as well, and perhaps even better, thau he might be expected to do with the facilities provided for him. If it is worth our having representation in Paris at all - as I think it is - it is worth having it done properly. I do not blame the High Commissioner. The gentleman in Paris, who is an Australian by birth, is allowed quite a modest amount per year for his office and other expenses. I think it is about £500 a year.If Australia wants effective representation on the Continent, she can give up all idea of getting it for £500 a year. I would almost go so far as to say that, unless we are prepared to make that office effective, we might as well close it. At present all it does, and all it can do effectively, is, in the case of Australian and other travellersj to furnish the little information that they require; but to say that it is a trade centre in the interests of Australia is to misuse terms. I cannot indicate to the Senate any definite action which the Government have in view, but the reorganization of the office is under consideration. I hope at no distant date to be able to tell the Senate what the Government have decided. I am sure that the majority of the people of Australia would say that this is a thing that ought to be done, and I hope the Government will do it, and I am certain that as soon as they do there will be a howl against increasing the cost of government. In Australia, as in any other country, we cannot have omelettes without breaking eggs, and if Australia is worth advertising and pushing, as she is, we must incur the necessary expense, and take the ordinary business risks in order to do it.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Divisions 25 to 33 (Department of tha Treasury), £92,880.

Senator PAYNE:
Tasmania

.- Is the Minister for Repatriation in a position to make a statement regarding the intentions of the Government in connexion with the maternity allowance? Do they intend to reorganize the whole matter in accordance with the views that have been expressed by myself and other honorable senators ?

Senator E. D. MILLEN (New South

Wales - Minister for Reparation) [6.30]. - Senator Payne cannot expect me to make a definite statement at this stage on a question of Government policy. I shall see, however, that his remarks, and the remarks of all other honorable senators bearing on questions of Government policy, are brought under the notice of the Cabinet.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Sitting suspended from 6.30 to8 p.m.

Divisions 37 to 43 (Attorney-General’s Department), £8,384; agreed to.

Divisions 44 to 55 (Home and Territories Department), £58,265.

Senator KEATING:
Tasmania

– With respect to the items having to do with the Northern Territory, of which there are six, aggregating £8,920, I wish to ask whether, in view of information concerning recent occurrences in the Territory, the Government can furnish the public with any idea of their intentions ? When may a statement of policy be expected ? It would appear that in the course of their administration the Commonwealth officials at Darwin have experienced considerable difficulty in collecting taxes. A number of residents have refused to make payment, and have been imprisoned. By certain of their fellow citizens these people are regarded as martyrs. According to press reports today, a large meeting was held at Darwin last night, and among those present was a gentleman who took part in prosecuting an offender. Presumably he had been engaged by the Commonwealth to conduct the case against a person who had refused to pay his taxes ; but the circumstance of his presence at the meeting would seem, to indicate that, in his opinion, there was justification for the gathering.

Several-resolutions were agreed to concerning the future attitude of residents and having to do with the representation of the Territory in the Federal Legislature.

Earlier this session the Government introduced a Bill into the Senate which contained a proposal to grant a certain degree of representation in this Chamber. It failed to pass, however. Since then there has been some indication that the claims of the residents of the Northern Territoryto modified representation elsewhere would be considered.

The Minister for Home and Territories (Mr. Poynton) has recently visited the Territory, and perhaps upon his return some definite announcement may be made. That extreme northern part of Australia has been the cause of considerable embarrassment to the Commonwealth Administration, and, whatever may be said concerning the merits or demerits of the situation, the obvious fact remains that the administration has not been very satisfactory. In so commenting, I do not refer merely to the present Government or to any particular Government or Minister. Apart’ altogether from the feelings of the residents, there is strong apprehension on the part of the community generally regarding the future of the Territory, where much Commonwealth money has been, and is being spent. I do not expect that the Minister (Senator E. D. Millen) will be able, or is prepared, to make a comprehensive reply at this moment ; but it is due to the public and particularly to citizens of the Northern Territory, that as soon as possible the Commonwealth authorities should indicate their intention to make an exhaustive pronouncement of policy. Meanwhile, trouble at Darwin is becoming intensified, and is likely to grow worse until the Government shall have broken their long silence. I do not expect any statement, however brief or lacking in definiteness, before the return of the Minister for Some and Territories, but it should tend to restore norma] conditions if the Government took the earliest practicable occasion to indicate their future line of action.

Senator E D MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

. -The Government are aware of the generally unsatisfactory conditions prevailing in the Territory, but as hasbeen shown by the departmental administration, while Ministers have no desire to be harsh to citizens disposed to take the law into their own hands, we are determined to maintain the law, whether that law be good or bad, and whether the grievances of the residents be well or ill founded. In a country such as the Commonwealth, with constitutional means of redress always available, and with a Parliament ever alert to probe complaints regarding public grievances or disabilities, the Government cannot find justification for any individual citizen defying the law-. Senator Keating has suggested the importance of making a definite statement. The Government are not indifferent to what is transpiring in the Territory. The Minister directly responsible has recently visited that region, and will shortly return. We propose to await his return in order to obtain a first-hand account of his impressions and a direct statement relative to the condition of affairs. As soon as possible after the return of’ the Minister for Home and Territories the Government will address themselves to the problem of the Territory, with a view to arriving at some final and definite policy, and will then announce that policy in the interests alike of Australia as a whole and of residents of the Territory in particular.

Senator GARDINER:
New South Wales

– The Minister appears to think that those citizens of Darwin who have refused to pay their taxes are lawbreakers, and, as such, must be punished. That may be a sound view, but it should not be forgotten that these people are called upon to obey laws which they have had no hand or voice in making, and to pay taxes at the behest of a Legislature in which they have no representation. I trust that when the Government may be considering their policy, upon the return of the Minister for Home and Territories (Mr. Poynton), they will not deal with the Territory as though it were a portion of Australia which has its direct representatives in the Federal Parliament. Rather, they should apply themselves to the situation as the British Parliament would deal with a Crown colony.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– The Territory has been dealt with as the British Government deal with a Crown colony wherein the local residents are given opportunities to elect their own members to a council. I am not saying, of course, that that is sufficient, but the analogy holds.

Senator GARDINER:

– Rightly or wrongly-and, I think, rightly - these people maintain that they are being unfairly and illegally penalized. The familiar saying,” No taxation without representation,” is perfectly sound in its application to the Northern Territory.

Senator Wilson:

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator Payne:

– I asked for the direction of the Chairman.

Senator GARDINER:
Now South Wales

– When my time expired I was about to say that when the Minister for Home and Territories (Mr. Poynton) returns, and the Government are considering the question of representation, I hope they will not be unnecessarily harsh with those residents in the Northern Territory who are fighting for a great principle. They should be regarded as unselfish patriots, willing to sacrifice their personal liberty in order to bring prominently before the people of Australia the unjust manner in which they have been treated.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Divisions 66 to 79 (Department of Defence, Military), £112,875.

Senator DUNCAN:
New South Wales

– I notice that the amounts proposed to be appropriated in connexion with the Clothing Factory, Harness Factory, and the Woollen Cloth Factory, namely, £250, £150, and £250, respectively, are, in each instance, to be paid into the credit of a Trust Fund. It seems, therefore, that there is some special method of dealing with the various Factories under the control of the Defence Department. I would like the Minister to explain why a Trust Fund has been established in connexion with each of these Factories, and why the supply granted by this Parliament has to be paid into those funds ?

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · Western Australia · NAT

– I am rather glad that .this question has been raised. because, it affords me an opportunity to point out the unfortunate position in which these Factories find themselves. Take, for example, the Clothing factory, which provides the uniforms for our Forces. That Factory has no funds of ite own, because, although there is a vote for the cost of the uniforms, that vote is not paid over to the Factory, but is paid into a Trust Fund. The salary of its staff and the wages of its employees are paid out of that fund, as is also the COSt of the materials which it uses. In the case of the uniforms, the money for material is paid from the Trust Fund in question into the Trust Fund of the Woollen Mills, which supply the cloth. The proceeds, therefore, from these Factories find their ‘ way into the Consolidated Revenue, and there is. .a vote from the Consolidated Revenue into the Trust Funds to keep the Factories going. If any of these Factories make, a profit,, as most of them do, that profit is not shown, except in their balance-sheets. The Woollen Cloth Factory made a profit of upwards of £6Q,000 one year, but that profit did not go into the Trust- Fund. It was paid into the Treasury, and the Treasury month by month pays into the Trust Fund -.sufficient to keep the-. Factory solvent, and to enable it to -pay its operatives as well as to pay for the material which it requires.

Senator Crawford:

– - Are the earnings of the Factories, treated as ordinary revenue?

Senator PEARCE:

– Yes.

Senator Crawford:

– And those earnings go through the ordinary accounts ?

Senator PEARCE:

– Yes.

Senator Duncan.Is the balance paid over monthly!

Senator PEARCE:

– Yes; it is paid into the Trust Account. The only payments into the Trust Account are made direct from the Treasury. All the receipts from each Factory are paid into the Treasury. That fact explains the votes which are proposed under this Bill. They do not imply that the Factories have made a loss.

Proposed vote agreed to. (Divisions 80 to 95 (Department of the Navy), £240,643.

Senator BOLTON:
Victoria

.- There is one matter connected with this Department which was brought under my notice some time ago, when I embraced the opportunity of placing it before the Minister. It relates to the Royal Australian Naval College. Whilst the Minister acknowledged that the statements then made were correct, he said that the reason for the complaints was that no funds were available. I have seen the honorable gentleman in reference to this matter, and he has no objection to .my bringing it before the Committee. Some time ago I had the privilege of visiting the Naval College, and the impression which it made upon me was that it is the finest educational institution in Australia.. -Its administration is excellent in every respect. As honorable senators are aware, its students are required to undergo a very severe physical test, and it may be assumed, therefore, that they represent the finest physical type of youth to be found in the Commonwealth. Yet several of the parents of these .students approached me not long since and stated that they could not, understand why it was that the boys during vacations exhibited every symptom of imperfect health. A few of the parents had had their lads medically examined, and in two cases I was- informed that the doctors’ opinion was that their illness was largely due to poorness of blood, which probably could be traced to the dietary scale provided at the College. Upon inquiry I ascertained that it had been the’ custom for the College to receive weekly supplies of vegetables from Sydney. These vegetables towards the end of the week were naturally very stale and altogether undesirable as articles of food. I learned, also, that it was very difficult to procure fresh meat, as the College is situated 25’ miles from the nearest railway station. The supply of freshmilk, too, had to be carried daily a distance of from 12 to 14 miles. It is evident, therefore, that the illness of these lads was. due to the deficient dietprovided at the College. Upon communicating with the authorities there I was: told that the students are continually suffering from boils. It is true that quite. recently a bi-weekly supply of vegetables has been provided. But the whole position is summed up in the final reply given by the Minister in regard to the supplies of fresh meat, milk, and vegetables. He said that “The necessary funds and staff for this purpose were not available, and, as the present supplies are considered adequate and satisfactory, no change is considered necessary.” It seems to me to be a foolish policy to prejudice the success of this institution by endeavouring to effect such a small economy. It would be a good thing if the College produced its own vegetables, meat, and milk. There are 300 acres attached to the institution, and an expenditure of a few hundred pounds would remove the only defect which I can find in it.

– I think that the Minister has only to ask that a vote to give it effect be placed on the Estimates.

Senator Keating:

– Some naval official probably says, “ It is not done.”

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– If the authorities at the College can show that vegetables and milk could be supplied more economically in the way proposed than under, the . present method, I have no doubt thatattention will be naid to their representations. The important point at present isthat, in the opinion of the authorities, the supply of vegetables and milk to the boys is adequate and satisfactory. I should not like the impression to go abroad that they wereinsufficiently or improperly fed.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 97 (Air Services), £34,000, agreed to.

Divisions 98 to 113 (Department of Trade andCustoms), proposed vote, £81,889.

Senator KEATING:
Tasmania

– Some time ago, we passed a Bill which altered the practice in existence until then with regard to the calculation of tho value of goods for the purpose of assessing duty payable in the case of goods coming into the Commonwealth from countries with a depreciated exchange. As a result of the passing of that measure, or rather of a decision of the High Court then recently given, it was anticipated that there would be claims made upon the Customs Department for the refund of excess payments made under the previous system of calculating prices for duty. I should like to ask if, in the course of the administration of the Customs Department, claims of this kind have been dealt with, and if any are still outstandiug. Can theMinister give us any idea of the amount already refunded to importers because of the altered practice? I am given to understand that claims have been sent incontinuously since the alteration was made, and have been met, though to what extent I am not aware.

Senator E D MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– I am afraid that I cannot supply the information asked for, but I sent for it as soon as the honorable senator referred to the matter. I can only tell him that, following the decision of the High Court, which was the starting point for these claims, they did come in, and many of them have been met. It seems to me that it is natural to assume that some should be pending, but it is impossible to say whether any more will be presented. I ask the honorable senator to permit the vote to pass now, and at a later stage I will give him the information for which he asks, if, in the meantime, I am able to obtain it from my colleague, the Minister for Trade and Customs (Mr. Greene).

Senator DUNCAN:
New South Wales

– It is now a considerable time ago since it was decided by the Commonwealth to take over the State Departments of Navigation. Officers were appointed at fairly substantial salaries, and, although the war has intervened, it was anticipated that long before this navigation, with the exception of minor matters, would be entirely controlled by Comonwealth authority. It is some years ago since the. first Director of Navigation was appointed for the Commonwealth. Since then one or two gentlemen have bfien appointed to succeed each other in that very important and well-paid office, but so far the Department has not done anything in the direction of organizing for future development which would warrant the expenditure already incurred, or warrant us in continuing to pay money for its upkeep.

Senator Keating:

– The Navigation Act has only just been brought into operation.

Senator DUNCAN:

– It was proclaimed in operation a month or two ago, but the organizing work of the Navigation Department is supposed to have been going on all the time. There has been a Director of Navigation, and a Deputy Director wasappointed some six or eight months ago. Various other officials have been appointed, but very little is known to honorable senators, or to the commercial public,concerning what is being done by the Department, or what it proposes to do. I think that we should have some information as to the work of the Department, and whether it is proposed to take over from the State Governments at leait those sections of their Departments which it will be necessary to take over if the Commonwealth is to run the Navigation Department in a proper way. The position at present is very unsatisfactory. State officials are like Mahomet’s coffin, suspended between earth and Heaven. They do not know whether they are to remain State officials or become Commonwealth officials. The sooner the matter is cleared up the better it will be for the Navigation Department, and for the commercial section of the public.

Senator PAYNE:
Tasmania

.- I should like to have some information as to the actual position of the vessels constituting the Commonwealth line of steam-ships. Some time ago a Ministerial statement was made, showing that the operations of the Commonwealth line of steamers had. been eminently successful last year, but recently I noticed a paragraph in the press in which it was reported that business had fallen off to a considerable extent, and very great difficulty was experienced in securing freight. Coming up the Bay the other day I noticed at Williamstown and Port Melbourne five vessels lying idle, which I assumed were Commonwealth steamers,because they were identical in appearance. If the Minister could make a statement regarding the immediate or near possibility of freights being secured for these vessels, it would be very satisfactory to the taxpayers. I do not know whether the crews have been paid off or not, or whether the vessels are lyingthereawaitingfreightswhichareavailableat

Williamstown; but from their general appearance I should say the vessels are at rest until the opportunity arises for them to be put in commission again. I shall be glad to hear from the Minister whether there is any likelihood of trade reviving, and whether every effort has been made by the Government to obtain freights from some partof the world to keep the boats in commission. I should think their capital value was atleast £250,000, and I am naturally exercised in my mind as to how long this valuable asset of the Commonwealth is likely to remain idle. I do not know if the Department is offering special inducements to obtain cargoes, but it will be. far bettor to run the boats at a small loss than to let them lie idle, because idle assets deteriorate very rapidly.

Has anything been done to carry out a promise made to me some time ago by the Trade and Customs Department to appoint an officer, who is at present residing at Devonport, to act as Customs officer for Devonport and Burnie? For some years we have had no Customs officer operating on that coast. Both those ports are important, and many business people there import their merchandise direct from the Old Country, and have been put to the inconvenience of passing their entries at Launceston. Some years ago both Devonport and Burnie were ports of entry. The appointment of a Customs officer would be very welcome to the importing section of the community on that part of the Tasmanian coast.

Senator E D MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– It is impossible for a Minister to have at hand detailed information regarding minor administrative matters in the Departments, but I will communicate with my colleague in the morning regarding Senator Payne’s observations about the appointment of a Customs officer for Devonport and Burnie. I cannot say on the spur of the moment whether such an appointment has beenmade.

Ican assure Senator Payne that the Government does not keep its ships idle because it wants to. There is an unfortunate dearth of freight to-day, but that is not peculiar to Government ships. Every paper records idle tonnage all the world over, owing to what we all hope is merely a temporary depression in trade. As there islesstrade to do, fewer boats arerequired to do it. I cannot give the honorable senator any indication as to when brisker times may be expected. I wish I could. I hope that the present conditions will be of short duration so far as a country like Australia is concerned. If Providence is reasonably kind to us, and the good season we have now continues, it will not be long, I trust, before these clouds will pass away, and we. shall be basking againin the sunshine of full prosperity.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Divisions114to123 (Department of Works andRailways). £60,820.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– Some time ago I raised the question of the break of gauge, and Iunderstand that the Government has appointed a committee of experts, ofwhom the chairmanwas to be brought from England or America, while the other members were to be Australian railway engineers. I saw in the press some timeago that the chairman had arrived, and that the Committee had begun their work. I do not expect the Minister to have the information at his finger-tips ; but I should like him to ascertain for me howfar the Committee have gone, and when there is a probability of getting their report. I have no doubt they are doing their work well and expeditiously, and I know that it is of great importance. I understand that when they do report they will practically tell the various Governments what the gauge should be for all the Australian railways. I trust that when the report is available, the various. Governments will make up their minds to adopt the gauge recommended by the Committee, because it would be of great advantage to the whole Commonwealth for the gauges of the railways in Australia to ‘be made uniform.

Senator KEATING:
Tasmania

– An item of £50 is provided for the “ Federal Territory railway (Queanbeyan- Canberra).” Are we to understand that this represents the working expenses of that line for the period covered by the Bill? An amount of £29,000 is provided for the working expensesof the KalgoorliePort Augusta railway for the sameperiod, and £3,100 is set down for the working expenses of the railway from Darwin to the Katherine River, in the Northern Territory. A small item of £75 appears in connexion with the Port

Augusta-Oodnadatta line, but that is to meet the Commonwealth’s proportion of the charges in connexion with the Port Augusta, railway station. If this item of £50 covers the working expenses of the line in the Federal Capital Territory, is it to be taken as a manifestation of great economy, or is it that the railway is not operated very frequently?

Senator DUNCAN:
New South Wales

– There is a vagueness about some of the items, particularly in this Department. I would understand from the item of £29,000 for the working expenses of the Kalgoorlie-Port Augusta railway that it represented the monthly loss on the working of the line. I notice that it is not a payment to a trust fund, as in the case of previous items to which I drew attention. So far as my knowledge goes, the £50 for the Queanbeyan-Canberra line is not for actual working expenses. I understand, that a few: men. are at work carrying the line further into the Territory, and the item is intended, I think, to meet expenses in that connexion. . The other items for the working expenses of Commonwealth railway lines total £32,100 for the month, which is at the rate of £385,200, or nearly £400,000, per year.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– It is not all loss. It represents the working expenses, which have to be voted by Parliament; but there is also revenue coming in.

Senator DUNCAN:

– That is the point I want to have made quite clear. The income Of the lines is, I presume, paid into the Consolidated Revenue. Are the working expenses also paid from theConsolidated Revenue, or is any attempt made to meet them from the receipts of the lines? Can the Minister give the Committee any informationas to what loss the Commonwealth railways are making?

Senator E D MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– I am under the impression that the Uniform Railway Gauge Commission is at work,and has made some progress. I cannot say how much, nor am I in a position to tell Senator Thomaswhenwe may expect its report. If the honorable senator reminds me of the matter next week, I shall endeavour to obtain more definite information for him.

Regarding the Queanbeyan-Canberra line, about which Senator Keating spoke, an arrangement exists between the Commonwealth Government and theGovernment of New South Wales, by which the State of New South Wales runs that section. For this it is paid a lump sum per year, and the £50 in this schedule represents one-twelfth of that amount. With respect to Senator Duncan’s question, it is necessary for Parliament to authorize the Department of Works and Railways to appropriate money to meet working expenses; but that item is quite distinct from any revenue which may be made, for thelatter goes into the Consolidated Revenue. The line under consideration does not, as a matter of fact, incur the loss shown in working expenses; the amount should be reduced by the total of receipts standing to the credit of the system. I may . remark, in this connexion, that if one were to call upon all the accountants in the world to devise some system of presenting Budget particulars in order to reveal public accounts in the worst possible light, no more perfect method could be suggested than that which is in operation. The Minister for Defence (Senator Pearce) has referred to a specific example. He pointed out that it would appear that a pertain factory under the control ofthe Defence Department cost so much to run - that is to say, that therewas a loss ofa specified amount in maintaining it. As a matterof fact, the factory generally makes a profit. It certainly earns a large proportion of the money charged against it. Yet, from the method of presentation of the facts in the Budget files, it- would appear that the factory is debited with the whole amount ofits working, costs as an absolute loss. I shall cite another instance from the affairs of my own Department. Certain people have been so patriotic as to leave varying sums of money to the Repatriation Department. These gifts total at present,I think, about £150,000. Thesum has been put out at interest, and £12,000 has accumulated. That amount, however, has been made to appear as a debit against my Department, under the system of bookkeeping employed in the Treasury. The £12,000 has to be paid into the Treasury in order that it may be paid back to the Repatriation Department, and, so that this transactionmay take place, the Treasurer has to ask Parliament for authority to pay the sumover; Thus it is made toappear as an item ofexpenditure debited against repatriation, whereas, in fact, the £12,000 is an asset earned by my Department. The system may be all right from the point of view of the Treasury, but it does not command my respect.

Senator PAYNE:
Tasmania

.- I am glad that the Minister has referred in such frank terms to the difficulties surrounding one’s understanding of the exact financial status of any Department or branch. I would suggest, as is done in the State Parliaments, that an indication be given on the Estimates of the Departments which are revenue producing, and of the estimated revenue therefrom which would give the necessary information to honorable senators.

I desire to make one or two references to postal matters, and to ask that my representations shall be brought under the notice of the Postmaster-General. A considerable time ago the Department of Works and Railways was requested to effect some alterations and additions to the Burnie post-office. The proposal remained in abeyance for a long while, but last year tenders were invited for alterations to the front of the building in order that urgently necessary accommodation might be afforded the public. However, the departmental estimate was very little more than half the sum of the lowest tender received; consequently, no tender was accepted. At that important seaport, which has been accurately described as the front door of Tasmania, absolutely inadequate postal facilities exist. Burnie is a busy - place, having not only the interests of the town itself, and also those of its maritime connexion; but it is the centre also of one of the finest agricultural districts in the northern portion’ of ‘ the island.. The post-office has a counter which is 8£ feet long. At that space must he transacted the business of a post-office, a money order office, a Savings Bank, . and a Pensions Branch, together with all the other activities associated with n post-office building. Inevitably, business becomes congested, and public and . staff are greatly inconvenienced. Some time ago, when urging the PostmasterGeneral to speed up the alterations aud additions, I was informed that the project had been temporarily abandoned, and that a report was being obtained regarding the purchase -‘of a site” for the erection pf a new postal building. I urge .-Watt ‘ the Department concerned should make haste. I nave been told that’ during the past year at least fifty additional applications have been lodged for private letter-boxes. The Department is losing revenue. A sum of money was voted last year for the erection of a new postal building at Ulverstone. It is necessary that ‘that work also should be put in hand as speedily as possible.

Senator GARDINER (New South

Wales) [9.24]. - I am surprised and disappointed at the lack of “any reference to Canberra by Victorian economist members of this Chamber. As Leader of the Opposition it is my duty to prepare myself with data upon which to debate any matter of public interest likely to arise here. It would seem that all my painfully prepared ammunition concerning the Federal Capital is to be wasted. . I had expected a determined attack, but the threatened - or, at any rate, naturally anticipated - offensive has not developed. It is the responsibility of my Victorian economist colleagues, of course; and I can only presume that they now unanimously favour the transfer of Federal governmental and parliamentary activities to Canberra.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Divisions 125 to 135 (PostmasterGeneral’s Department), £S9 8,425.

Senator KEATING:
Tasmania

– I notice two items having to do with this Department, the first of which mentions a sum of £100, “ New South Wales Postal Institute,” and the other, £300, » Victorian Postal Institute.” Some timeago, the. cx-Postmaster-General (Mr. Webster) established a Postal Institute in Melbourne. On several occasions subsequently I inquired whether the Government intended to confine- the novelty to this city, or to extend it to other capital cities. A similar institution is now in course of establishment in Sydney, and the item here appearing is the first, I think, which Parliament has been asked to approve for that work.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– No; the first grant was authorized last year-

Senator KEATING:

– Is’ it- intended to confer the privilege of possessing Postal Institutes to other cities and country centres? If only employees in the larger capitals are to be benefited in this manner, the question will arise whether some system of interchange should not be established, so that officials in the country may serve a term at headquarters in order that they, too, may. avail themselves of the establishment of Postal Institutes.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– Some time ago, a regulation was issued by the Postmaster-General’s Department to the effect that no one would be permitted to charge more than 2d. for the use of a telephone. What is the purpose behind this regulation ? I can quite understand that where people have had a telephone installed for public convenience it would be wise to intimate that the charge for its use should be not more than 2d. per call. But if one has a telephone connected with a private residence, one is not bound to make it available to persons outside tho household.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– Does the honorable senator suggest that private subscribers should be allowed to be profiteers if they desire?

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– Yes. I may have a private telephone, and a neighbour or a stranger may call at my residence late at night, after I have gone to bed, and request the use of the telephone. I may object, whereupon he may urge that his need is so great that he is willing to pay ino half-a-crown. Why should I not be permitted to charge more than 2d. in the circumstances? In a boarding establishment where a telephone has been installed, the proprietress may deem it necessary to make a charge, say, of 3d. She may know that numbers of calls are made for which she receives no payment, and she may come to the conclusion that, in order to cover such losses, a charge of more than 2d. is necessary. Every Postmaster-General desires to institute some great reform, and up to the present moment this is the greatest I have seen during the present administration.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– I trust the honorablesenator does not expect me to give the reasons which influenced the Department in coining to that decision.

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– Certainly not.

When in the Blue Mountains some time ago, I visited the post-office at Wentworth Falls, and found to my surprise’ that the office and the telephone cabinet outside is lighted by kerosene lamps, although the electric light cables which supply the electricity to the town are outside. The kerosene lamp in the telephone box is not always burning, and consequently considerable inconvenience is experienced by those who desire to make calls. I drew the attention of the Department to this matter, and have received a letter from the Deputy PostmasterGeneral to the effect that inquiries were being made, but owing to the lack of funds the request could not be granted. It is particularly difficult for those who have to do business at a country post-office on a winter’s evening; when the only light available is that provided by kerosene lamps. As the installation of electric light in the post-office and telephone cabinet would be of great convenience to the people at Wentworth Falls, I trust the Minister will bring the matter under the notice of the PostmasterGeneral.

Senator E D MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– In regard to the question raised by Senator Keating concerning postal institutes, I replied, partly by interjection, that one in New South Wales had been in existence for some time, as a vote for that purpose appeared in last year’s Estimates. As to the future operations of the Department, the PostmasterGeneral (Mr. Wise), with whom I have communicated during the last few minutes, has sent me a memorandum to the effect that it is the intention of the Department to extend postal institutes as funds and circumstances will permit. Accommodation for this purpose has already been provided in the new postal buildings at Perth.

Senator Thomas’ inquiry, as he himself admits, is one to which he, as a reasonable man, would not expect an answer to-night. Even if I furnished the reason which animated the Department in coming to the decision to which he has referred, I am not at all certain that it would prove sufficient and satisfactory to the honorable senator. The matters, however, to which he has referred will be submitted to the Department.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Divisions 147 to 151 (War Services), £304,000 .

Senator GARDINER:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP; PROG LAB from 1928

.- Some months ago I asked the Minister for Repatriation (Senator E. D. Millen) a question concerning the number of houses erected by Messrs. J. and H. G. Kirkpatrick for the Commonwealth Bank, and by the. War Service Homes Department. . By the answers submitted,, the Minister appeared to resent the question, because I suppose he thought I was desirous of proving that the Bank authorities had been constructing houses more successfully than the Department. An inquiry has been proceeding in connexion with this matter, and the Melbourne Age of the 16th June, 1921, reported as follows: -

At yesterday’s sittings’ of the Federal Public Accounts Committee Mr. H. G, Kirkpatrick, of Messrs. J. and H. G. Kirkpatrick, architects to the Commonwealth Bank War’ Service Homes section, continued his evidence, commenced in Sydney.

Witness (Kirkpatrick) drew the Committee’s attention to some adverse comment by a Sydney newspaper of the work of the Commonwealth Bank War Service Homes section..

The chairman stated that the great majority ofcomplaints related to the houses built by the War Service Homes Commission, and not by the Commonwealth Bank.

Witness. - It is very gratifying to hear you say that, because people are always confusing the two bodies.

The Chairman:

– We certainly have had a few complaints with regard to the Commonwealth. Bank houses, but there have been no complaints whatever regarding the great majority of the houses built by the Bank. That tact is worth putting onrecord.

Witness then gave particulars regardingthe number of War Service Homes built by the Commonwealth Bank. Up to the end of June, 1920, the Bank had built 731 out of a total of 767 erected in Australia.

On the following day the same newspaper contained this paragraph -

A. Henderson, President Royal Victorian Institute of Architects, said that the scale of charges of the British Institute of Architects was only applicable to the group system,and would, therefore, bc applicable to houses built by the War Service Homes Commission, and not to those erected hy the Commonwealth Bank. The Bank’s architects were not overpaid if the work was well done.

There was not sufficient information in thesecondreport, and I therefore obtained from Messrs J. and H. G. Kirkpatrick additional information, which I desire to place on record. It reads -

It will be noted that the chairman, Mr. Fowler, of the Federal Public Accounts Committee, stated that, “There have been no complaints whatever regarding the great majority of the houses built by the Bank, and that the fact isworth putting on record.” It is also interesting to note the architects of Australia are now stating that the Bank architects were not overpaid, notwithstanding the fact that there was a lot of criticism about this matter some time back. At the Committee’s request we have forwarded them a statement of our expenses. The statement was prepared in detail, and showed that our total expenses to datewere £38,062 17s.5d., while the amount due was £45,065 6s. 6d. We may state that the work is not completed, and until it is completed will cost us a further £4,000; therefore, making our total expenses approximately £42,000 odd. The following is the amount of work carried, out and completed up to 31st May, 1921 : -

It will be noted by the above figures that thereis a further 114 homes to complete. It will also be noted by the above that 1,877 contracts have been entered into, at a total cost of £1,165,537 3s. 5d. The average cost per home, has been £620.95. This average cost shows that we have worked within the £700 limit, as originally provided by the Act, and this has been, done by a large margin, as can be seen. We wish to state that this average amount includes fencing, path making, and in nearly every instance sewerage, besides the erection of thehome.

Ihave taken the trouble to put this further information before the Committee, because it is information which should have been vouchsafed, had a complete reply been given to. my question.

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– That is not the full information.

Senator GARDINER:

-I am satisfied that the facts which I have quoted put in a fair way what has been done by the Commonwealth Bank in the matter of building homesforour soldiers. I am very glad to have been afforded this opportunity of placing those facts upon record.

Senator E D MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– SenatorGardiner has come here, as he himself admits, with a carefully prepared brief, by the firm of Messrs. Kirkpatrick. I am not in a position to check his figures, nor do I wish to do so. I am not going to engage in a controversy as to whether the Commonwealth Bank made more mistakes than did the late War Service HomesCommissioner. But I confidently submit that the number of complaintswhich reached him are no true indication of the number of imperfect houses which have been built by the Commonwealth Bank. Of course, when a Government Department is concerned, there is a great tendency for people to be more vocal about it than they would be if a private institution were concerned, There is only one matter in the statement read by Senator Gardiner to which I wish specifically to referMessrs. Kirkpatrick give the number of contracts which they have let, the amount involved in them, and the average cost perhome. They alsoclaim that they have constructed these houses within the limit of expenditure imposed by the Act. But they say not a word about who provided the land. I know that, in a very large percentage of cases, the men themselves found the land, Consequently, the comparison which they institute is not a fair dne. The value of the land would require to be added to maketheir statement of cost comparable with any statement of the cost of the houses which have been erected by the late War Service Homes Commissioner. That is why I interjected that the statement presented by Senator Gardiner was not a full one. When I see it in Hansard I shall have an opportunity of looking into the figures which he has submitted. But, in the meantime, I thought it was necessary for me to inform honorable senators of one great discrepancy in the statement of Messrs. Kirkpatrick.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division35 (Refunds of Revenue) (£70,000) and Division 36 (Advance to the Treasurer) (£760,000), agreed to.

Preamble and title agreed to.

Bill reported without request; Standing and Sessional Orders suspended; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 9481

ADJOURNMENT

Motion (by Senator Millen) proposed -

That the Senate do now adjourn.

Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

– That set down on thenotice-paper for to-day, preceded by the second reading of the War Service Homes Commissioner Validating Bill. Then there is the little measure known at the Public Service Bill.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senate adjourned at9.56 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 29 June 1921, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1921/19210629_senate_8_96/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate29 June 1921

QUESTION

WAR SERVICE HOMES

Senator FOSTER:TASMANIA

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

QUESTION

PUBLIC SERVICE

Senator SENIOR:SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator SENIOR:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

QUESTION

SHIPBUILDING

Senator EARLE:TASMANIA

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

WAR SERVICE HOMES COMMISSIONER VALIDATING BILL

COMMONWEALTH SALARIES ACT REPEAL BILL

SUPPLY BILL (No. 1) 1921-1922

Senator E D MILLEN:Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator THOMAS:NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator THOMAS:NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator THOMAS:NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator Duncan:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator Foster:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator Foster:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator GARDINER:New South Wales

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator GARDINER:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator GARDINER:

Senator Foster:

Senator GARDINER:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator THOMAS:NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator GARDINER:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator GARDINER:

Senator THOMAS:NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator GARDINER:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator GARDINER:

Senator Bolton:

Senator GARDINER:

Senator PAYNE:TASMANIA

Senator GARDINER:

Senator FOSTER:

Senator GARDINER:

Senator THOMAS:NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator GARDINER:

Senator THOMAS:NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator GARDINER:

Senator THOMAS:NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator GARDINER:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator GARDINER:

Senator Duncan:

Senator GARDINER:

Senator Duncan:

Senator THOMAS:NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator GARDINER:

Senator Duncan:

Senator GARDINER:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator THOMAS:NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator GARDINER:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator GARDINER:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator GARDINER:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator GARDINER:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator GARDINER:

Senator E D MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senate
29 June 1921

Senator FOSTER:
TASMANIA

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator SENIOR:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator EARLE:
TASMANIA

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator E D MILLEN:
Minister for Repatriation · NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator GARDINER:
New South Wales

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator PAYNE:
TASMANIA

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator THOMAS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

Senator E D MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913; NAT from 1917

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon T Givens:
QUEENSLAND